initiating and sustaining early stage programs in technology innovation and commercialization
DESCRIPTION
Four Michigan public universities, collaborating with private sector for-profit companies and state government agencies supporting technology commercialization and innovation, have successfully implemented methods for building and sustaining entrepreneurship, technology development and commercialization at emerging research institutions: distributing the cost, promoting best practices and affecting the cultural changes within institutions necessary for sustaining these activities. This program, led by Michigan Technological University has produced a model, termed U-TEAMED (Multi-University Technological and Expertise Assets Management for Enterprise Development). The emergent model offers guidance for identifying and capturing the important features of sustainable, faculty-led early-stage technology innovation and entrepreneurship education programs at emerging research institutions. Lessons include methods for securing revenue, sustaining faculty enthusiasm, anticipating IP and commercialization barriers derived from faculty-student collaborations, and creating an academic environment supportive of embedding technology innovation and entrepreneurship in academic curricula.TRANSCRIPT
1
Randy Hansen Co-director, U-TEAMED Technology Asset Knowledge Management
Infrastructure Innovation Emporium, Inc.
Jim Baker Director, Technology and Economic Development U-TEAMED Project Director Michigan Technological University
2
Discuss : ◦ Connections between conventional technology
transfer with entrepreneurship initiatives toward fulfilling economic engagement. ◦ Challenges faced by emerging research universities
in taking full advantage of these connections. ◦ Present experience from a pilot collaborative
program in the state of Michigan that may be helpful in overcoming these challenges.
3
Integrated with educational and research missions ◦ Educational opportunity in applied entrepreneurship ◦ Tremendous opportunity for mutual benefit between
educational, research, and licensing practitioner domains
More than just patent licensing ◦ Knowledge Transfer ◦ Consulting ◦ Sponsored and Unsponsored Research
4
Transfer important research results to the public. Service to faculty and inventors in dealing with industry
arrangements and technology transfer issues; Facilitate and encourage industrial research support; Source of unrestricted funds for additional research; Source of expertise in licensing and industrial contract
negotiations; A method by which the institution can comply with the
requirements of laws such as the Bayh-Dole Act A marketing tool to attract students, faculty, and external
research funding.
5
Adapted from Carlsson, B. and A. Fridh, “Technology transfer in United States universities – a survey and statistical analysis”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics (2002) 12: pp. 199-232.
Research niches struggle to obtain critical mass
High classroom teaching loads Modest financial and support staff resources Successes tend to be isolated and discrete
and don’t attract significant attention
6
Pool resources Leverage mutual and respective success for
collective ‘buzz’ Aggregate resources to increase net mass ◦ www.michiganlink.org
Share technical expertise and business best practices
7
Technology Transfer and Sponsored Research Development Partnership
Original Partners: Michigan Technological University (lead) Eastern Michigan University Central Michigan University Oakland University
Additional Partners Recently Added Lake Superior State University Ferris State University
• Initial discussions in 1997 • First proposal seeking underwriting funding
submitted in early 2002 – not funded – Michigan Tech, Eastern, Central, Western, Oakland
• Pilot collaboration program sponsored under State grant in early 2003 – Michigan Tech, Oakland, Western
• Full implementation of U-TEAMED sponsored under follow-on grant in Fall 2004 – Michigan Tech, Central, Eastern, Oakland
• Partnership expanded under foundation funding in Fall of 2008 - Ferris State and Lake Superior State
10
Objective: Establish a technology transfer function at each of the partner institutions. ◦ Outcome: Of the three partners without formal technology
transfer functions prior to the pilot: all have reviewed policies and procedures related to
technology transfer functions all have established and published procedures for
submission of invention disclosures all have reviewed procedures for specifying the IP
provisions of research grants and contracts one has established a program with dedicated staff one has implemented a program but is evaluating cost
effective staffing options one has partnered with a campus technology incubator
and has incorporated technology transfer objectives into its sponsored research office.
11
Objective: Increase research collaborations between individual researchers at each of the partner schools and with private industry. ◦ Outcomes: Participants from all four partners have collaborated on
the submission of proposals for innovation acceleration to NSF and other prospective sponsors
Faculty from all four partners have participated in an multi-university research conference, sponsored by the partners
Faculty from all four partners have initiated plans for inter-university research collaborations
Research asset information for the partners has been accessed on more than 25,000 visits to MichiganLink
To date, the collaboration has attracted the participation of at two additional public universities
12
Objective: Increase sponsored research at each partner university
13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09
Goal Actual
Advance innovation and technology entrepreneurship interests on each of the campuses. ◦ Outcomes: Of the three partners without formal technology
transfer functions prior to the pilot: all have achieved greater institutional visibility for
innovation and technology transfer all have conducted training and instructional sessions to
enhance faculty interest in advancing innovation and technology entrepreneurship
all are actively participating in innovation and technology-transfer processes at the state level
◦ All four partners have established innovation initiatives focused on advancing university-based technology start-ups and university-industry technology development.
14
Technology Transfer presence helped draw out innovators.
Leveraging experience lowered barriers to moving forward with third parties and accelerated transaction execution.
◦ Contextual experience/empathy is important in addressing the challenges emerging institutions face in moving things forward High course loads Limited budgets Minimal staff
On-site personnel are necessary to maintain momentum through regular contact.
Asset promotion databases are useful but require resources to populate and maintain.
Faculty workloads limit time available for commercialization activities.
Consistent executive leadership and communication of technology transfer as a priority is essential to broad participation. ◦ Researchers respond to institutional priorities. ◦ Well thought out structures with executive buy-in are
essential. ◦ Trust is necessary to work together and develop
reasonable and productive structures.
Technology Transfer is part of the institution’s research and knowledge transfer portfolio not a stand-alone revenue generator
Broad spectrum metrics are important in addition to conventional things like royalties.
Process transparency, incentive equity, and thoughtful metrics are critical.
Be mindful of the institutional cultural state ◦ Risk aversion ◦ Revenue expectations ◦ Reward structures
17
18
Michigan Technology Tri-Corridor Michigan 21st Century Jobs Fund Michigan Universities Commercialization
Initiative Michigan Initiative for Innovation and
Entrepreneurship
18