Worth Reading: University Responsibilities, the Patent System, Killing Startups, Free Agency, and Noteworthy TTOs
I’m pleased to bring you this month’s list of articles that we at Fuentek feel are worth reading. Many of these are pretty new, while some are oldies but goodies. Several of the pieces hovered around a similar theme, resulting in a slightly longer list despite the shorter month. Good thing we have leap day this year!
What Responsibilities Should Universities Bear? This post on the Chronicle of Higher Education WorldWise blog by University of Warwick (UK) vice-chancellor Nigel Thrift discusses the increased emphasis on universities as forces for economic growth, engines of mobility for urban and regional prosperity, and as a source for “impact,” particularly in realm of world problems. Although Thrift notes that “there is no narrative that I know of that puts [these responsibilities] all together,” IMHO the TTO is where most/all of this comes together. The trick is making sure this doesn’t result in the TTO having conflicting goals/metrics. (We’ll be blogging more about this in the weeks to come.)
Another relevant article on this topic is David Rohde’s discussion of the university as job laboratory. (Thanks go to @CSUTechTransfer for tweeting it.) We at Fuentek appreciated University of North Carolina chancellor Holden Thorp’s points about the need to create a university environment that is conducive to tech transfer. One quibble though: Making it easier for professors to start businesses is probably not the best way to slow faculty departures, since faculty entrepreneurs usually must focus exclusively on their startup venture when (that is, if) it’s successful. But those who make it big might make a big donation (such as UNC startup Quintiles’ $50M donation). At the risk of implying that their money is more important than their presence, I’m pretty sure most institutions would consider this to be a pretty sweet consolation prize for a faculty entrepreneur’s departure.
You also might consider “Kodak Is in Bankruptcy, but Its Hometown Hasn’t Lost Its Sparkle,” an NPR commentary by University of Rochester professor Adam Frank. In considering the company’s demise, Frank notes that a transition is taking place whereby the university provides hope for the future by “spinning out new knowledge, new technologies, [and] new jobs.” (On a side note, I also enjoyed reading, “Innovation Is Hard,” an IEEE Spectrum interview with Scott Anthony, author of The Little Black Book of Innovation, about why things went awry at Kodak.)
No, the Patent System Is Not Broken: Given the prevalence of negative news articles about patents recently, this is a refreshing change of pace and a worthwhile reality check. Posted in the Forbes Leadership Forum, author Kenneth Lustig of Intellectual Ventures reminds us that not all non-practicing entities (NPEs) are bad. Specifically he points out that patent trolls are the bad apples “who take advantage of the legal system to drive settlements, just as the personal injury field has its ambulance chasers and corporate law has its ‘shareholder rights trolls.’ But these few outliers are hardly the norm.”
How to Kill a University Startup: This informative and fun-to-read post by Babs Carryer, the embedded entrepreneur in Carnegie Mellon University’s Project Olympus, provides case studies and lessons learned about “three common areas where academics can benefit from a better understanding of the issues…: intellectual property, founder partnerships, and the interaction between business and science people.” (It’s nice that we’re not the only ones sharing stories from the field.)
Universities, Inventors, and the Bayh-Dole Act (download): Although published in December 2009, this paper by Sen. Birch Bayh, Joseph P. Allen, and Howard W. Bremer is still relevant, given the inclusion of tech transfer “free agency” provisions in pending legislation. Of particular interest to us here at Fuentek was the “prominent study [that] compared the underperforming Swedish technology transfer system with what Bayh-Dole established in the United States.” Bayh et al. quoted the study’s findings “that the American university system, whereby intellectual property is commonly awarded to universities, is more effective in facilitating the commercialization than the Swedish system in which rights are awarded directly to the inventors.” Definitely worth reading.
TTO Activities and Achievements: Consider these noteworthy items:
- Vanderbilt TTO undergoes overhaul, expansion in bid to ramp up results: Published in the January 2012 issue of Technology Transfer Tactics (and kudos to them for also running it in full online!), this article discusses the changes that have been occurring and that are planned for the school’s newly renamed Center for Technology Transfer and Commercialization. It’s exciting to see this type of university investment in and commitment to tech transfer, especially given the potential for success. (Check out this success story for an example of what’s possible.)
- U-M to lead statewide Tech Transfer Talent Network to bring more innovations to market: This University of Michigan feature describes a cross-university effort involving seven institutions’ partnering to “increase the supply of seasoned entrepreneurs and innovators who can lend their expertise to university tech transfer offices.” (It also got some nice coverage in the Ann Arbor press.) This is exactly the kind of tearing-down-the-walls collaborations within a single large system or involving completely separate “rivals” that we love to see!
- Recap + Video: “Inside the Black Box:” The University of Colorado TTO posted slides and a video excerpt from a presentation on the inner workings of tech transfer at their institution. I was particularly impressed with the “deep dive” they took into their IP management, mature vs. new cohorts, and more.
- I loved this tweet from @NASASpinoff: An atomic innovation for artwork: http://t.co/98nOWVMx. This is a great tech transfer story involving NASA’s Glenn Research Center. It’s always fun to see the amazingly diverse ways that NASA innovations come down to Earth. (BTW, NASA’s Dan Lockney will be a panelist in my social media session at the upcoming national meeting of the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer. More on that in April.)
Finally, I just had to include on this month’s list “Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa” Despite being 40 years old, this letter eloquently reminds us what comes out of space exploration.
What do you think about the ideas presented in these articles? Do you have other recommended reading ideas? Post a comment below or sending us a private message through our Contact Us page.