Document

Transcript Document

Creating a University Ecosystem to Accelerate Commercialization & Energize Startups

Collaborative Initiatives Symposium Mayaguez, Puerto Rico 19 October 2012 Diane Palmintera, President Innovation Associates [email protected]

www.InnovationAssociates.us

GOOGLE

GROUPON SUN MICROSYSTEMS SILICON GRAPHICS NETSCAPE CISCO SYSTEMS BIOGEN YAHOO LYCOS MAPINFO

What do all these companies have in common?

Slide 2

They are all spinoffs from universities

The universities created an internal and external ecosystem that promoted technology transfer, commercialization, entrepreneurship and economic development.

Slide 3

Commercialization activities at U.S. universities have sky rocketed

 From FY1996-2011, U.S. universities and research institutes:  More than tripled the number of active licenses.

 More than doubled the number of licenses executed each year; in 2011, there were 4,899 licenses executed, up 14% from the previous year.

 And 591 new commercial products were created.

Slide 4

Startups at U.S. universities are rapidly increasing

 From FY1996-2011, universities more than tripled the number of startups launched each year.

 In FY 2011, there were 671 startups formed (of institutions reporting to the AUTM survey).

 Almost three-fourths of the startups had their primary place of business in the licensing institution’s home state.

Slide 5

Startups are of growing importance as an economic development tool

 Startups represent a growing share of university commercialization activities.  Startups stemming from formal technology transfer activities

represent only a small portion of the total enterprises

spinning off from academic institutions. Facebook and Google are good examples.

Slide 6

Why are startups an important economic development strategy?



Startups are more likely than licenses to corporations

to remain in the community.  The extent to which startups remain in the community depends on many factors including the regional ecoystem, personal ties to the community, access to capitalization, proximity to potential customers, and others.

Slide 7

Valley of Death

(courtesy: U.S. DoE)

Slide 8

Why is the Valley of Death important?

 Lack of early-stage capital – increasingly risk-adverse, and geographically concentrated VC & angel investments.

 Lack of staged investment capital.  Often insufficient understanding and capacity to build business management.

 Critical time lapses between idea and commercialization when sufficient resources are not available. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 9

University commercialization as an economic development strategy

 Academic institutions increasingly anchor economic development in communities and regions.

 Knight/Gallup “Soul of the Communities” survey shows that universities are important in creating community ties.

 Policy makers and community leaders are increasingly viewing academic institutions as a source of entrepreneurs and economic growth. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 10

University commercialization as an economic development strategy

(cont’d)

 Spinoffs are more likely to remain in the community where there is an active entrepreneurial ecosystem.  University commercialization and entrepreneurship are not just for the “big and famous” institutions. University of Northern Iowa, Brigham Young U., Rensselaer Polytechnic, and the University of Akron are actively developing startups.

Slide 11

Community Colleges are engaged in entrepreneurship

 Community colleges are increasingly engaged in entrepreneurial development and startups creation, and are actively developing linkages with research universities.

 Ivy Tech in Indiana and Loraine County Community College (LCCC) in Ohio have created workforce and entrepreneurship linkages with research universities, and LCCC has a nationally recognized seed fund for entrepreneurs.

Slide 12

Successful tech transfer and entrepreneurial outcomes are built on substantial, excellent and focused research

 Many universities successful in spinning off startups have identified and targeted core research strengths, and developed strategic plans to build and leverage those core strengths.

 This is particularly important for universities that have modest research expenditures. Universities such as Brigham Young U., U. of Akron (polymers), and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (engineering) have been successful despite modest budgets.

Slide 13

Multiple internal factors affect the institution’s success in technology transfer and entrepreneurship

 Leadership from the university president is often seen in universities successful in technology transfer (T2).  Hiring and reward systems, especially tenure credit for T2, impacts the “entrepreneurial culture” and related outcomes.  Universities that are responsive to corporate differences in missions, timeframes and communication styles are more likely to have successful T2 outcomes.

Slide 14

Internal factors that affect success

(cont’d)



Building solid, on-going relationships between

universities and corporations is more productive than focusing on short-term licensing gains.

 Positive corporate relationships can benefit the university through contributions that may be substantially higher than licensing revenue. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 15

Internal factors that affect success

(cont’d)

 Administrative structure – A separate non-profit organization, such as a research foundation, can provide an arms length legal distance that benefits the university and tech transfer.

 Tech Transfer is a “Contact Sport” – Software and other tech transfer tools help support collection and processing of invention disclosures, legal and management processes but do not replace personal contact and the face time needed with researchers.

Slide 16

Entrepreneurial-engaged universities provide or facilitate access to a full range of services

 Successful universities understand that engineers and scientists often make poor business people and address this weakness.

 Successful universities provide, or facilitate access to capital,

build management capacity, accelerate innovations, incubate entrepreneurs and support networking.

Slide 17

Accessing capital

 Successful entrepreneurial universities have close linkages to private seed/venture capital. They facilitate linkages between researchers and startups, early in the process.

 An increasing number of universities have internal seed capital funds and angel networks that invest in faculty/student entrepreneurs. Effective funds not only provide capital but also build management capacity.

Slide 18

Accessing capital

(cont’d)

 Entrepreneurial universities sponsor or encourage linkages to enterprise forums or springboards that screen, mentor and showcase promising academic entrepreneurs to potential investors. (MIT Enterprise Forum one of the first.)  Alumni networks often provide a good source of angels, mentors and “Fellows” – a surprising number want to “give back.” copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 19

Building management capacity

 Often the major weakness of university startups is inexperienced management. Hiring experienced CEO’s and other top managers and providing experienced management advice can be key.  Entrepreneurs-in-residence and mentors, especially experienced serial entrepreneurs, provide invaluable input and guidance to startups.

Slide 20

Building management capacity

(cont’d)

 Business plan competitions mentor and showcase university entrepreneurs to potential investors. Their value comes more from mentoring than financial rewards.

 Business School/Entrepreneurial Center/Law School student interns and teams can address marketing, intellectual property and business issues, benefitting both startups and students.

Slide 21

Accelerating innovations

 Acceleration funds/programs are increasing. These programs such as VentureLab, MIT Deshpande and USC Stevens Institute provide funding and help move research from an idea to a commercialization stage.  Challenge grants that require or encourage university industry partnerships and commercialization plans facilitate research translation to the market.

Slide 22

Accelerating innovations

(cont’d)



Critically important are industry involvement and

university-industry partnerships of all types, including:      Industry participation on academic boards, Faculty/researcher exchanges and student internships, Corporate research laboratory and/or incubation facilities on university premise, Corporate data centers, and Shared research & production facilities.

Slide 23

Accelerating innovations

(cont’d)

 Increasingly inter-disciplinary research and acceleration programs contribute to innovative startups.  Creating solid connections with external sources for beta testing and clinical trials are important linkages to establish.

 Developing student teams to move the innovation to prototype stage and beyond provide invaluable learning experiences as well as acceleration.

Slide 24

Incubating startups

 Effective incubators and research parks provide a platform for entrepreneurial services beyond the physical infrastructure. Venue counts; services and external connections count more.

 Research parks that effectively support entrepreneurs develop linkages to the university and to external sources of funding and business assistance. A good example is UWisc-Madison.

Slide 25

Networking

 Networking opportunities may be the most important element. They should facilitate interaction between entrepreneurs, and between entrepreneurs and     Service providers, Potential investors, Potential partners, and Customers – private, govt. procurement, and global. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 26

Connecting the dots

 Internally – R&D, entrepreneurship programs, capitalization, acceleration, incubation and networking should be connected within the institution.

 Externally – Between the institutional innovation and entrepreneurship operations and local, state and private ones.

Slide 27

Connecting the dots (cont’d)

 Regionally – Across borders; dictated by natural growth of clusters and entrepreneurial activities, not by artificial geographic or political boundaries.  Globally – Connections dictated by potential benefit from R&D collaboration, production, and outreach to customer base.

Slide 28

University commercialization is part of a larger regional ecosystem Courtesy of the University of Akron Research Foundation

Slide 29

From Core Capacity to Regional Impact

Core Capacity

• R&D Funding & Expenditures • Science, Engineering & Medicine Faculty & Students • • Inter-Disciplinary Research • Research Centers Laboratory Facilities • • Corporate Linkages Physical Infra tructure

Initiatives

• Tech Transfer & Commercialization • SBIR/STTR & Other Grant/Contract Assist.

• • Mentoring Investment Capital • • Student Internships Entrepreneurial & Mgt. Capacity Building • University-Industry Partnerships • Univ.-Govt/ Philan. Partnerships

Impact

• • • Startups Launched High Wage Jobs Created & Retained • • Increased Revenue Increased Mfg. & Production • • Increased Exports Diversification Expanded Supply Chain • Mushrooming Cluster Development • Greater Community Ties & Satisfaction copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 30

National Translational & Entrepreneurship Models

 Coulter Translational Research in Biomedical Engineering now has transitioned to TP2 involving 6 universities (in addition to first 9).

   Increasing collaborations between biomedical engineers and clinicians, moving promising technologies to clinical application, and developing sustainable processes.

$580,000 each year for a period of five years.

Oversight Committee includes the BME Dept. Chair, Medical School reps, OTT, entrepreneurs, local Venture Capital, and the Business school. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 31

National Translational & Entrepreneurship Models (cont’d)

 Deshpande Center:   Since 2002, MIT’s Deshpande Center funded 90+ projects with over $11 M in grants, spinning out 26 projects that collectively raised over $350 M in outside financing. The Deshpande Center employs several approaches: • Grant Program – up to $250,000 for projects that have established proof of concept and identified an R&D path and IP strategy. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 32

National Translational & Entrepreneurship Models (cont’d)

 Deshpande Center (cont.’ed): • • • Catalyst Program – Catalysts, a vetted group of individuals with experience in innovation, commercialization, and entrepreneurship work with faculty. Innovation Teams (i-Teams) – student interns work in teams to develop “go-to-market” technical & business strategies.

Events – The IdeaStream Symposium and other events showcase MIT technology, and engage the VC and business community.

Slide 33

National Acceleration & Entrepreneurship Models (cont’d)

 Blackstone “Launchpad”:    Opened in 2008 as part of the University of Miami Career Center, Launchpad treats entrepreneurship as a “career path,” offering guidance and resources through individual and group consultative sessions, workshops, and networking events.

Local Venture Coaches play a key advisory role.

Blackstone expanded the model to Wayne State U. and later a Northeast Ohio consortium; a new initiative of $50 million over 5 years (to start Dec. 2012) will further expand innovative entrepreneurial models.

Slide 34

National Acceleration & Entrepreneurial Models (cont’d)

 National Science Foundation’s “I-Corps”:  NSF selected universities to develop and serve as hubs to conduct entrepreneurial training for science & engineering faculty, involving intense five-day sessions.   Now hosted by Georgia Tech, Stanford, and University of Michigan; a recent solicitation will result in several additional university hubs. Additional current solicitation will result in smaller entrepreneurial nodes. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 35

National Acceleration & Entrepreneurial Models (cont’d)

 I-6 program:   Created by multiple agencies, lead by EDA, i-6 is intended to bring together multiple, public-private partners to identify a current or persistent problem or unaddressed opportunity, and implement innovative strategies.

Started in 2010 with six awards, two subsequent rounds in 2011-2012 have focused on energy & manufacturing. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 36

National Acceleration & Entrepreneurial Models (cont’d)



Jobs & Innovation Accelerator Challenge:

  A joint program by EDA, DoL/ETA, and SBA, is designed to generate startups and jobs through collaborative, cluster-based regional development. Most involve accelerating ideas to near-production or pilot-production prototypes in cluster driven industries. To date, two rounds have awarded about 40 regions grants averaging $1.8 million that have targeted industries, including health care, energy, advanced manufacturing, and information technology. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 37

National Acceleration & Entrepreneurial Models (cont’d)



National Network of Manufacturing Innovation

Institutes (NNMII):   Proposed $1 billion public-private partnerships involving regional initiatives that bring together universities, corporations, manufacturers, entrepreneurs, workforce development, & investment vehicles for collaborative R&D, acceleration, and startups.

National Additive Manufacturing Innovation

Institute (NAMII), a $70 million public-private pilot was awarded by DoD & DoC in August 2012 to a consortium involving PA, Northeast Ohio, & WVA. copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 38

Checklist for Academic Institutions

[Excerpted/Paraphrased from Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships © ]  Has the institution identified core research strengths and does the institution have a strategy for building its research base?

 Is the institution’s president supportive of technology transfer, entrepreneurship and economic development; and is that support demonstrated in academic policies?

 Is there “buy-in” from academic deans and faculty researchers; are there sufficient incentives to encourage “buy-in”?

Slide 39

Checklist for Academic Institutions

(cont’d)

[Excerpted/Paraphrased from Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships © ]  Does the institution have sufficient funding and staff devoted to transfer, entrepreneurship and economic development?

 Do the institution’s hiring, promotion (tenure) and intellectual property policies encourage faculty participation and promote excellence in technology transfer and entrepreneurship?

 Does the institution have the infrastructure and services, and/or linkages with external resources to launch startups?

Slide 40

Checklist for Academic Institutions

(cont’d)

[Excerpted/Paraphrased from Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships © ]  Does the institution have an “entrepreneurial culture;” does it celebrate and reward entrepreneurial success?  Are there effective research and commercialization relationships with industry; and is there sufficient flexibility and responsiveness to benefit both parties?

Slide 41

Checklist for Academic Institutions

(cont’d)

[Excerpted/Paraphrased from Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships ©]  Do the institution’s policies and practices promote long- term benefits rather than short-term technology transfer gains?



Are academic administrators aware of the benefits

derived from engaging in technology transfer and entrepreneurial activities?  Are state policy makers aware of the benefits?

Slide 42

Checklist for Academic Institutions

(cont’d)

[Excerpted/Paraphrased from Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships © ]  Does the institution work with policy makers and organizations to develop and advocate for comprehensive strategies that support   Research & development funding, Industry-university partnerships, and   Technology transfer and commercialization, and Entrepreneurship? copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 43

Two IA reports are particularly relevant from www.InnovationAssociates.us

:  

Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships :

institutions.

Sponsored by the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), focuses on top emerging, smaller

Accelerating Economic Development through University Technology Transfer:

Sponsored by the CT Governor’s Competitiveness Council, focuses on U.S. top performing institutions in technology transfer.

Slide 44

Other Helpful Publications from IA’s Website:

 

Emerging Issues & Recommendations for Technology Transfer and Commercialization in a Global Manufacturing Environment :

With the Council on Competitiveness and University of Akron

Developing High-Tech Communities: San Diego:

Sponsored by the U.S. Small Business Administration copyright pending: Innovation Associates www.InnovationAssociates.us

Slide 45

INNOVATION ASSOCIATES

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.InnovationAssociates.us

+1.703.925.9402

Slide 46

Document

Transcript Document

Creating a University Ecosystem to Accelerate Commercialization & Energize Startups

GOOGLE

GROUPON SUN MICROSYSTEMS SILICON GRAPHICS NETSCAPE CISCO SYSTEMS BIOGEN YAHOO LYCOS MAPINFO

What do all these companies have in common?

They are all spinoffs from universities

The universities created an internal and external ecosystem that promoted technology transfer, commercialization, entrepreneurship and economic development.

Commercialization activities at U.S. universities have sky rocketed

Startups at U.S. universities are rapidly increasing

Startups are of growing importance as an economic development tool

Why are startups an important economic development strategy?

Valley of Death

Why is the Valley of Death important?

University commercialization as an economic development strategy

University commercialization as an economic development strategy

Community Colleges are engaged in entrepreneurship

Successful tech transfer and entrepreneurial outcomes are built on substantial, excellent and focused research

Multiple internal factors affect the institution’s success in technology transfer and entrepreneurship

Internal factors that affect success

Internal factors that affect success

Entrepreneurial-engaged universities provide or facilitate access to a full range of services

Accessing capital

Accessing capital

Building management capacity

Building management capacity

Accelerating innovations

Accelerating innovations

Accelerating innovations

Incubating startups

From Core Capacity to Regional Impact

Checklist for Academic Institutions

Checklist for Academic Institutions

Checklist for Academic Institutions

Checklist for Academic Institutions

Checklist for Academic Institutions

Technology Transfer & Commercialization Partnerships :

Accelerating Economic Development through University Technology Transfer:

Other Helpful Publications from IA’s Website:

Emerging Issues & Recommendations for Technology Transfer and Commercialization in a Global Manufacturing Environment :

Developing High-Tech Communities: San Diego:

INNOVATION ASSOCIATES

Directory