Strategies, needs and practices of Industry

Living in an imperfective world and contributing to it

Though many economists may describe how perfect markets are the cornerstone of a healthy economy, most of the wealth creation is happening around market imperfections. You can make money in engaging into activities aimed at suppressing any imperfections in the markets(for example taking advantage of inconsistencies or deviations of traded items – an activity called arbitrage that generated a recent drive at getting information a few microseconds earlier by locating computers as close as possible to the exchange floor).

Another way to benefit from market imperfections consists in generating them, for example through patents. Patents provide a quasi monopoly to their holders to commercialize their invention.

Should we avoid contributing to such market imperfections and stop providing exclusive patented rights to firms ? Clearly not since often such incentive maybe required to allow the necessary investment be made to reach market. However sometimes another route consists in non-exclusively licensing out technologies to spur competition among firms willing to develop and bring the invention to market. Since it requires more work to be done effectively, one tends to overlook such opportunities.

Reaching out to(more) perfection may be something worth pursuing outside of theological endeavours.

One year off: new insights, perspectives on Firms-University interactions

After 10 years on the job and more than 200 hundred partnership deals with industry, it was time to take a break from the operational side. The pressure from a growing workload had been preventing any attempt to reflect and bring the meaningful perspective needed. At the same time, upcoming opportunities and challenges were calling for new insights requiring more time spent away from the bench.

With the support of my management, I have opted for a one year unpaid leave of absence in 2009. This decision has triggered a serie of changes within the team that proved to be overall positive despite the additional work linked to making sure the organization will cope with the requests flow.

My “sabbatical” work consists of three approaches: inward looking, outward looking and exploratory.

The inward part is linked to the mapping of the large diversity of partnering models used in Europe (and to a less extent in the US). Beyond a mere compilation of the models I had the opportunity to witness as President of ASTP, the goal is to outline general principles that apply to these models. Ultimately, such work should provide useful insights to business and academic decision makers when evaluating the opportunity to partner.

The exploratory part is a direct consequences of the previous work. By mapping a serie of models, one defines also a boundary where it becomes challenging to find models applicable to specific type of partnering. This is where the exploratory part begins. For example, how to best partner with firms when the generated knowledge can span from technological to non technological character ?

Finally the outward looking part remains an indissociable part of any sabbatical work. This is why since early May , I have relocated in Boston for six months. Being able to interact within a multidisciplinary team of professionals (within the ITEC department at Boston University) and at the same time be part of a wide network of firms and research institutions focused on innovation will most likely make my stay a very valuable experience .

Are patent auctions an opportunity to consider for Universities ?

Earlier this month, NASA annouced the successfull first bidding of a portfolio of 10 US patents in an auction helo by the US company Ocean Tomo. The proceed of 50’000 dollars will go back to NASA (see here for more information). Nothing new since the company organizing the auction has been operating for three years in this field. What is however attracting the attention is that for the first time a government agency used this opportunity to sell some of its patents.

The question is now: are Universities next on the list ?

On one hand, that could provide a approach complementary to other channels of commercialization worth considering. On the other hand selling IP rights to unkown buyers may raise a serie of questions when this is done by a public research institution.

Does a University has a responsability in defining the type of partners it sells its technology to ? Beyond respecting the export regulation (probably something Ocean Tomo is keen to respect), should it go further ? Probably yes and so the relevance of auction tools to University owned IP may be limited to well defined cases. Recent efforts in setting guidelines for University ‘s licensing such as the “nine points to consider when licencing University technology” points toward more involvment of University when licensing , not less. Will patent auctions reverse this trend ? probably not.

When the time will come…

I recently was participating at the Western AUTM regional meeting in Hawaï (I was the only European actually). During the meeting I attented a presentation given by a young executive in a private company explaining how we, TTOs, should interact with them. Nothing new there with the usual stress on how we should present our technologies to them, what kind of question they need to see answered and the fact they are very busy and we should not expect always a feedback on their side.

In a way I wonder if this approach has now become slowly outdated in the open innovation economy. The idea of a buyer’s market where we (TTOs) should fight to get the company’s attention to market our technologies is maybe evolving towards a seller’s market where companies will feel more and more the need to come to the TTOs in order to make sure they maintain a lead on the innovation pack. I am pretty sure this time will come but the question is when. I feel this is close and probably the companies that have identified and acted upon this change will take the lead in the upcoming innovation marketplace.