The country’s goal setting for moving towards a knowledge-based economy and a set of policies for supporting the companies active in this area has resulted in a rather quantitative growth of such companies. On the other hand, since the overall objectives of such sponsorship has mainly been on addressing the domestic needs of the country, the export-related dimensions of the technology-based products have been by far ignored or not received decent attention. For bridging this gap, the following question was raised:
How, and using what policy instruments, could we put the export promotion of knowledge-based products on the top of the agenda?

The present project aims at shedding light to various aspects of this subject, in order to propose a concrete framework for it. To achieve this, firstly, the literature for various aspects of policy cohesion and integrity was reviewed. Then, a comparative study was carried out on the policy instruments applied in other countries especially South Korea and India for export promotion of high tech products. 

Moreover, to raise the awareness and have a much clearer picture of the business environment, where the knowledge-based, export-oriented companies operate, some measures were taken. Firstly, the institutions involved in the export context in the country (including the rules, regulations and organizations) were investigated. Then, six export-directed knowledge-based companies (three of which in the line of biotechnology and the rest in the area of nanotechnology) were selected as case studies in order to get more acquainted with the various aspects of exports for theses businesses. Finally, via questionnaires, the proposed instruments for export promotion of knowledge-based companies were selected by 57 companies in a process of voting for the best instruments. 
The research findings have revealed that like many other industries and sectors, the export challenges of knowledge-based companies are to a great extent caused by a much broader range of technology and trade policies, such as the problems with international financial transfers, sanctions and a rather poor image of “Made in Iran” to name a few. In other words, being a knowledge-based company or product can help competitiveness, in terms of quality improvement, but the problems related to political environment surrounding them have still remained which are critical parameters why they cannot achieve the expected results in exporting such products. 
It is also worth considering that domestic policy-making processes have always encountered these companies to be more focused on or satisfied with the internal market. Such policies have prepared the ground for the domestic sales of their products which in turn have left little room for them to be export-oriented. 
Moreover, the lack of an integrated institutional structure for policy-making, execution and performance monitoring of exported, knowledge-based products has resulted into creation of rather varied and somewhat parallel institutions in the country that are exporting their products in an isolated and unsystematic way.
Eventually, the structural weaknesses inside these companies in addition to somehow passive marketing at the national and international levels could also be considered as other reasons for poor exportation of mid and high tech products of the country. 

To cope with these weaknesses, the present study offers three scenarios for the institutional division of work which are as follows:

1- In the first scenario (first best and the most desirable), TPO (Trade Promotion Organization) shall avoid any direct intervention in terms of assistance to knowledge-based companies for exporting their products. This organization will serve as a supervisory institution for the Higher Council on Export and will also play a part as the Center for International Affairs and Technology Exchanges under the Scientific and Technological Department of President Office which in turn is the responsible department for the export promotion of knowledge-based companies.
In this scenario, all resources at TPO, Scientific and Technological Department of President Office, Innovation and Prosperity Fund are synergistically exploited for promoting high tech export products (both knowledge-based and non-knowledge-based companies).

2- In the second scenario (which usually happens in the country, (but can rationally be reviewed with a critical approach) TPO, as a responsible institution for export promotion of the country, will establish a new institution parallel to export promotion corridor and technology exchanges, in which case will start service provision and support for knowledge-based companies.

3- In the third scenario (considering all conditions and situations has the greatest possibility for execution or implementation) in a smart division of work between TPO and the Scientific and Technological Department of President Office, an export clinic will be established under TPO to support those companies which produce high tech products but lack the knowledge-based permit or title granted by the Scientific and Technological Department. Consequently, they cannot be literally backed up or sponsored by the Center for International Affairs and Technology Exchanges or Innovation and Prosperity Fund. 
In the third scenario, the companies referring to gain support based on their “organizational competencies” and “product competencies” will be thoroughly evaluated and classified into four categories:

1- A Superior Exporter
Those companies which have enjoyed decent levels of exports over the recent years and are having outstanding potentials to penetrate into new markets.

2- A Capable Exporter
The companies which have decent corporate and product capabilities and potentials, but over the past years have enjoyed little and irregular exports.

3- A Potential Exporter 
These are companies which have potential competitive competencies in terms of structure and product qualities for breaking into international markets. However, they have not seriously entered this process and global market arenas. 

4- An Incompetent Exporter 
These are companies which are not matured enough to enter international export markets. 

Identifying and assessing these competencies are among the responsibilities of the export clinic as an intermediary or broker for TPO. 

In order to back up these companies, some support packages in the form of the export clinic of TPO have been proposed for the first three categories of companies. But, the fourth group of companies is not on the agenda for receiving support or any special services. 
As an example, in the proposed package for the Superior Exporters, special emphasis has been placed on penetrating into new markets or fostering their R&D capabilities (such as providing them with 90% of the research costs of market intelligence for new export markets, or offering them R&D grants against 20% of their export values, while for a Capable Exporter, promoting their export potentials has been of the highest priority (such as providing them with a 50% of the costs for employing talented international marketing workforce). Eventually, for Potential Exporters, offering services and support as a prerequisite for export, have been considered (such as providing them with 50% of the costs for industrial design of their products).