Improving Invention Disclosure Quality for Tech Transfer

Becky Stoughton is a Fuentek vice president, specializing in entrepreneurship and establishing/building TTOs. She worked for
5 years at the Office of Technology Commercialization at the
University of Texas at Dallas, playing a key role in launching the office.
She also has served on the board of directors for TeXchange and as assistant VP for strategic alliances for AUTM.

Improving Invention Disclosure Quality

Understanding what makes a high-quality invention disclosure was a key topic at the University of Vermont’s 12th annual Invention2Venture Conference. Considered the entrepreneurial event in the state, I2V is a series of roundtables covering a wide range of topics on how to protect, develop, and finance ideas into new businesses. Fuentek’s Becky Stoughton (left) was invited to join UVM’s Kerry Swift (right) to help improve the quality of invention disclosures submitted to that institution. Their roundtable focused on helping researchers and innovators think about their technology’s commercialization potential and how to communicate it clearly in the invention disclosure.

What makes an invention disclosure a high-quality invention disclosure? This is an interesting question that has nothing to do with the quality of the technology.

Fundamentally, a high-quality disclosure includes enough detail for a patent attorney to identify novel aspects for patentability. It also includes the inventor’s perspective on the technology’s commercialization value. This helps the TTO to better evaluate the invention’s market potential and commercialization options.
Unfortunately, many invention disclosure submissions come up short. The possible reasons for this vary. But mostly it seems to boil down to a lack of researcher understanding of the importance and role of the invention disclosure.

Getting high-quality invention disclosures from researchers takes some work on the part of the technology transfer office (TTO). It’s a top priority to teach researchers that the invention disclosure is more than a burdensome piece of paperwork. In fact, it’s a never-ending effort, since new researchers join the university every year. Fortunately, we at Fuentek have found that time spent up front minimizes time spent later. Here’s what we recommend.

Offer Inventor-Focused Education

We have found that the biggest positive impact comes from training sessions specifically designed to appeal to researchers.

For example, we offered a successful entrepreneurship program through the Foundation for Polish Science. In it, we concentrated on the general fundamentals of commercialization. The researchers gained a solid understanding of such concepts as the Technology Overview and Value Proposition. This helps them prepare better, more informative invention disclosures.

The focus of the training depends on what will appeal to your institution’s researchers. Use “How to Secure Funding for Your Research” to teach them how to articulate the technology’s value in a compelling way. A “Useful Tips for Publishing Your Research” session can emphasize when to report their invention.

The bottom line: Offer researchers information that appeals to them to provide the skills and insight for high-quality invention disclosures.

Put It in Context

When engaging with researchers, help them understand why a solid — and timely — invention disclosure is important.

For example, at the I2V event (see photo/sidebar above), Kerry Swift explained that the invention disclosure provides crucial information to the patent attorney. She urged the researchers not to write simply “See attached paper” when asked to summarize the invention’s relevant aspects. The intent of the two documents is very different. A research paper is helpful background, but it is not written to convey the important points needed in the invention disclosure, such as its novel aspects and potential commercial applications. Why leave it up to the TTO and maybe a patent attorney to try to read between the lines?

Presenting the big picture of how the disclosure fits into the overall process puts researchers on the path to completing the form with more than a cursory effort and turning it in at the right time. Consider using Fuentek’s “Road to Tech Transfer” infographic to explain the overall process.

**Provide Help When They Need It**

The most powerful training is just-in-time training, where the learner is applying the new knowledge right away. So if you offer in-person or live web-based training sessions, Fuentek also recommends offering a recorded version for on-demand viewing via your website. For an example, check out this blog post about an inventor-outreach project we did for NASA, which included a 6-minute overview.

For longer trainings, Fuentek suggests breaking apart the full recording into short chapters. Clearly indicate which topics are covered in each segment so researchers can easily find the information they need.

Sometimes institutions help researchers fill out their invention disclosures. There are pros and cons to this. As a service organization, the TTO should be willing to help if needed. Plus such one-on-one support is an opportunity to improve a researcher’s abilities to complete future disclosures. But it can be time consuming, and some TTOs don’t have that time to spare.

However, if your TTO wants (or needs) to offer this type of support, consider ways to maximize efficiency. One example is to have an “office hours” session with multiple computers where several researchers can come in and work on their invention disclosures while a TTO staff member is on hand to answer questions.

Give Them an Example

Provide an example — either fictional or cleansed of any sensitive details — of a well-completed form so researchers can see the level of detail that’s expected. In fact, consider offering several examples that align with various technology areas so they resonate with the researcher’s expertise.

Think About What You’re Asking

Finally, take a hard look at your form:

Is it easy to understand? Or would revising the fields/instructions make it more intuitive?
Do you really need all of the information being requested now? Or can some of the details wait until after the initial triage/screening is complete?
Is it easy to fill out via computer? Is there a way to pre-populate it with the individual researcher’s information?

Remember: The invention disclosure is a two-way communication tool. Before the researchers can communicate their inventions to you, you have to clearly and succinctly communicate to them what you want them to tell you.

Fuentek has found time and again when supporting our clients with these efforts that this advice helps to empower inventors to complete their invention disclosure forms in a useful and compelling way. For more information about how we can support your TTO in developing and/or implementing these types of initiatives, contact us today.

Categories

Researcher Relations

Recent Posts

Categories

Fuentek Top Bloggers

Fuentek Goes to Hollywood (Florida) for #AUTM2017

By Danielle McCulloch

Danielle McCulloch formerly served as a Fuentek vice president. She transitioned to our client and is now Program Manager for NASA’s Flight Opportunities program.

Fuentek’s Becky Stoughton, Danielle McCulloch, and Laura Schoppe at AUTM 2016

The Fuentek team is getting ready to head down to Florida for the 2017 meeting of the Association of University Technology Managers^® (AUTM^®). AUTM’s national meeting provides a great opportunity for technology transfer professionals to network with universities, industry, investors, and research institutions. It’s also an excellent way to learn about the latest advancements in tech transfer and even advance your career.

Fuentek has long participated in the annual meeting, from moderating sessions to speaking and exhibiting. And this year is no exception. Here’s a sneak peek into our plans for this year.

Monday: Industry/Academia Connect and Collaborate

This forum is great for learning about industry needs. Universities can use the insights shared to match their technologies to companies’ interests, achieving more targeted marketing. You’ll also get great information to share with faculty, so they can start thinking about what new things they should be working on.

Over the years, Fuentek has attended this event to collect industry needs that we use when analyzing client technologies’ commercial potential. So we will definitely be there throughout the afternoon.

Tuesday: Applying Lean Startup Principles to Tech Transfer (Session E7)

More than buzzwords and bandwagons, this session relates aspects of the Lean Startup philosophy to tech transfer. It provides a fresh perspective on standard processes while recognizing that “going Lean” is not a one-size-fits-all proposition. These panelists will focus on providing useful tools:

Fuentek’s Becky Stoughton, formerly of the University of Texas at Dallas
Troy Brady of Auburn University
Malcolm S. Townes of Missouri University of Science and Technology

If you want to prepare a little for this session, check out Becky’s earlier blog post on this topic.

Wednesday: Save a Thousand Words: Creating Effective Technology Transfer Infographics (Session F4)

AUTM Conference Webcasting: Even if you can’t attend AUTM 2017 in person, you can join a live webcast of select sessions, including this session on tech transfer infographics. Get the details here.

With their combination of design and text to present complex ideas or data, infographics can provide a compelling way to tell a tech transfer story. This session will present and discuss several examples of tech transfer infographics, including our Road to Technology Transfer and Cultivate Your IP infographics). These panelists will discuss the key components that make infographics relevant and useful:

Fuentek president Laura Schoppe
James Spencer of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Clifford Michaels of Emory University

You can read more about Fuentek’s infographics here. And you can see them in person at…

Exhibit Hall Booth #208

There are plenty of opportunities throughout the conference to spend time in the Exhibit Hall. While you’re there, take a few minutes to stop by and visit Fuentek at Booth #208. We’d welcome the opportunity to speak with you about how we can help you:

Optimize your patent portfolio and streamline IP management
Market technologies efficiently and effectively
Find sources of technology to address R&D challenges
Negotiate win-win deals that generate royalty revenue and sponsored research revenues or to in-license technologies from academia or other organizations
Establish effective university-industry collaborations
Achieve more efficient and effective office operations and structure
Communicate effectively with various stakeholders
Enhance entrepreneurship within the larger organization

We look forward to seeing longtime friends and meeting new colleagues at AUTM 2017. To schedule a time to meet with me, Becky, or Laura to discuss how Fuentek can help your organization achieve its IP management and other strategic goals, use AUTM Connect.

Categories

Tech Transfer Industry Events and Activities

Recent Posts

Categories

Fuentek Top Bloggers

Improving Researcher Relations Before, During, and After Invention Disclosure (plus a free webcast)

By Danielle McCulloch

Danielle McCulloch formerly served as a Fuentek vice president. She transitioned to our client and is now Program Manager for NASA’s Flight Opportunities program.

Invention disclosures are a technology transfer office’s (TTO’s) bread and butter. Therefore, TTO success depends in large part on having a productive relationship with your organization’s researchers.

Building a strong foundation with researchers is an ongoing process that happens before, during, and after they file their invention disclosures. Fuentek’s experience has shown that there are three areas where a TTO can focus these efforts:

Educating researchers about their tech transfer opportunities and obligations
Communicating effectively with researchers about their inventions
Elevating the profile of tech transfer in your organization

Educate Researchers

First the Why, Then the How

Traditionally, training for innovators has focused on the nuts and bolts of tech transfer, such as how to fill out an invention disclosure. We have found, though, that a more “big picture” message sticks with them longer. This is particularly important when researchers are new to the organization and will be conducting research for several weeks (or even months) before they have an innovation to report.

Several TTOs have found our Road to Tech Transfer infographic helpful in explaining the big picture to researchers. Regardless, focus on what’s in it for them and what their role will be. Also, teach them about keeping the market in mind as they’re innovating. This helps them not only to know when to submit the invention disclosure but also to submit better ones.

When researchers need training on how to report their invention, we recommend doing a one-on-one session. Sitting down with them gives you a chance to answer all their questions and help them fill out the disclosure form. For more on this, check out this “Improving Invention Disclosure Quality” blog post from Fuentek’s Becky Stoughton.

Augment with Online Resources

The in-person sessions can be augmented with short webcasts that cover various aspects of tech transfer. You can break down a longer online training into smaller chunks that deal with one concept at a time. Remember: A short piece of useful information on a single topic is more likely to catch — and hold — innovators’ attention than a longer one.

For example, Fuentek derived a 3.5-minute webcast on understanding and explaining a technology’s commercial potential from our 45-minute Pitching for Innovators webinar. This short video helps researchers understand that being able to get a patent doesn’t necessarily mean that the market wants/needs the technology and learn how to begin to identify whether an invention fits the market.

This type of just-in-time learning (or refresher) tool can be part of the TTO’s website. Or you might want to have a stand-alone online resource for innovators, like the site we developed for NASA.

Communicate Effectively About Their Invention

Cultivating a positive relationship with innovators does not come from saying “yes” to everyone who wants a patent. It comes from effective communication, even when you have to say “no.” That means:

Explaining the criteria for technology evaluation
Being transparent about the TTO’s decisions
Providing feedback in a timely manner

Quite frankly, communication is as important as process when it comes to researcher relations. An example of this is when Fuentek helped a university client clear out a backlogged IP portfolio. A key element was communicating with the faculty early on.

Before disseminating any technology evaluation reports, we helped the TTO explain to researchers what was going on and why it was happening. We told inventors up front that some would get good news about their technologies while others would not… but they would be given a reason for the decision.

This communications strategy paid off. Because of these efforts, faculty were not surprised when the technology screenings were delivered. There were few if any complaints, even though only about one-third of the inventions had enough potential to continue to the next phase of commercialization. We had anticipated a 2-year schedule for securing faculty buy-in. In fact, within 6 months, they were all on board.

Elevate Tech Transfer’s Profile

Of course, one of the most important aspects of researcher relations is making sure they know you’re there! In helping clients spread the word about the tech transfer program, we have found a variety of communication tools to be useful.

Innovator Recognition Efforts

The researchers already working with you are a great outlet for word-of-mouth advertising. So, feature them at an event hosted by the TTO and/or piggyback on other high-profile events. For example, some universities announce patent awards during halftime or time outs at basketball games.

And innovator recognition doesn’t have to be an event. You could place posters on campus or table tents in the cafeterias. And you can work with the public affairs/relations office to issue a press release about an innovator’s success in tech transfer.

Newsletters

Publish a quarterly TTO newsletter distributed to researchers or others you want involved in the tech transfer or other program. It can be a printed piece, like this one we did for the TTO at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. Or it can be an email blast like these for NASA’s Flight Opportunities program.

Also, consider leveraging the other publications distributed to the researcher community. Contact the editors to place articles or “advertisements” in the campus magazine.

Tech Showcases

Giving researchers a chance to discuss their research via poster sessions at an internal event provides an excellent opportunity to “preach the tech transfer gospel” and identify technologies that were ready for reporting. Check out this blog post about our experience with such an event at a NASA center.

Look to the Experts

Fuentek has supported clients with our innovator training services as well as our services related to communications. If your TTO could use help in enhancing engagement with researchers, contact Fuentek today.

Categories

Researcher Relations

Recent Posts

Categories

Fuentek Top Bloggers

The How-To of Tech Transfer Metrics: Gathering, Analyzing, Communicating

By Laura Schoppe

Laura Schoppe is the founder and president of Fuentek, LLC. She is a past chair of the AUTM Foundation and also served as AUTM’s vice president of strategic alliances and chair of the Global Technology Portal Committee.

Our regular readers know that metrics for technology transfer offices (TTOs) is a frequent topic for the Fuentek blog. Today I’m going to provide some how-to tips for getting the most out of your tech transfer metrics tracking efforts — specifically, gathering, analyzing, and using metrics.

Gathering Metrics

Whether they are direct metrics or indirect metrics, collecting them takes time. So, it should be done strategically and meaningfully.

Be Careful What You Wish For

When setting goals/metrics for the TTO, ensure you’re motivating the right behavior. This might require you to tie together several metrics. For example, if the target is simply to increase the number of deals without a related metric tracking deal value, you’re going to wind up with a lot of deals that are not worth much.

Align Metrics with Goals

Keeping an eye on both the short term and the long term, track metrics that correspond to your organization’s goals. Be sure what you’re measuring progress in achieving goals rather than merely counting what can be counted.

Also track the metrics that will be most meaningful to your stakeholders. Not only will this make it easier to answer stakeholders’ frequently asked questions, but it will also help you demonstrate the TTO’s value.

Ask and Ye Shall Receive

Some metrics are best identified by going directly to the licensee or startup company working with your technology. This Technology Transfer Tactics article offers some excellent ideas for using templates to gather relevant data.

Make It Part of the Routine

Build the steps involved in collecting metrics into the TTO’s routine processes. Capturing the details as they occur during their daily tasks ensures staff won’t have to drop everything and frantically gather whatever they can track down when the higher-ups ask for information. They can just run a report. Of course, this assumes you…

Use a Good IP Management Database System

An effective IP management database gives you a place to store the metrics, and then it can generate useful reports with the click of a mouse. Take a look at this post by Fuentek’s Becky Stoughton for more on effective IP management databases.

Full disclosure: As discussed here, Fuentek used to rely on our own proprietary system, and now we use Wellspring Worldwide’s Sophia tool. These systems have been crucial to our success during the past 15 years.

Anecdotes: Not Every Metric Is a Number

Inventor/Licensee appreciation is difficult to quantify. So, let their words speak for you. Save emails with positive comments, putting the text and other relevant details in the database or a spreadsheet so you can find what you need when you need it.

In addition, prepare success stories that illustrate the benefits of the tech transfer program. If appropriate, you can send them to the media. But regardless, post them on your website. This is particularly important for stories with intangible benefits. For example, this success story explains how a new agreement will streamline future licensing of a technology.

Analyzing Metrics

So, once you have these data, here are some tips for making sense of them.

Normalize, Normalize, Normalize

Normalizing metrics is absolutely essential for any meaningful comparison over time and especially across organizations. Your numbers will be really off if your institution has only a fraction of the research expenditures or TTO staff compared to its “peers.” Even internal comparisons will be off if, say, you had a one-time monetization of a blockbuster license the year before. Normalizing controls for these differences.

As a single-parameter example, below is a chart using licensing survey data from AUTM for six universities that are often compared by their state legislature and university system administration. The teal bars are the total number of disclosures in a year, which shows Universities C, E, and F dramatically outpacing the other three. However, when we normalize invention disclosures relative to each institution’s research dollars, the universities with smaller research programs (Universities A, B, and D) are doing from very well to deficient, respectively, in capturing what innovations are created on their campuses. Of the universities with larger research programs, University C is performing very well, while Universities E and F could be doing better.

Click image to view larger

Fuentek has a metrics white paper with guidance on how to normalize dozens of tech transfer metrics.

Using and Communicating Metrics

There are a variety of ways to put the metrics to use. Here are some suggestions.

Drive Performance of Your Staff…

You might announce metrics annually, but review the metrics internally at least quarterly, or some of them even monthly. Doing so provides insights on how staff are performing and indicates whether the TTO is on track to meet the goals.

… But Don’t Go Overboard

Having said that, don’t forget that tech transfer takes time. The horizon is several years. So, the numbers may not match the goals as quickly as you’d like. Use a critical eye when you ask yourself: Are we doing everything right and we just need to be patient? Or are we not hitting our numbers because something is awry?

Stay Ahead of the Curve…

Regularly sharing your metrics helps you set stakeholder expectations and offer explanations in a positive manner. This allows you to be ahead of things (rather than reactive) when AUTM releases its annual licensing survey data.

… and Anticipate the Comparisons

If your TTO tends to get compared to a specific group of institutions, use your normalized metrics to point out relevant differences before the AUTM data comes out. Explain who your peers truly are when it comes to tech transfer… and why they’re not necessarily the same as, say, your basketball rivals.

Put Your Best Foot Forward

When you’re communicating your metrics message, identify the area(s) where you had success and make that your focal point. If you have bad news to deliver, put it in context. And remember to include the anecdotal success stories and “love letter” quotes.

Draw Them a Picture

An infographic can be a useful tool to convey metrics. It is particularly helpful when year-by-year data charts might be confusing or make the TTO’s accomplishments hard to recognize. Below is an excellent example from Emory University. Notice how Emory’s Startup Snapshot rolls up 30 years’ worth of data into impressive numbers — very well done!

Source: Emory University Office of Technology Transfer (used with permission)

Fuentek has spent years helping a wide range of TTOs evaluate, communicate, and elevate their performance metrics. Contact us today to discuss how Fuentek can help you.

Categories

Benchmarking & Metrics, Securing Stakeholder Support

Recent Posts

Categories

Fuentek Top Bloggers

Tracking Tech Transfer’s Indirect Metrics

By Rebecca Stoughton

Becky Stoughton is a Fuentek vice president, specializing in entrepreneurship and establishing/building TTOs. She worked for
5 years at the Office of Technology Commercialization at the
University of Texas at Dallas, playing a key role in launching the office.
She also has served on the board of directors for TeXchange and as assistant VP for strategic alliances for AUTM.

Tech transfer is like billiards: Indirect shots can still score points.

As Laura Schoppe noted in her post about the key direct metrics for technology transfer offices (TTOs), there are important indirect metrics to track as well. These are factors that the TTO can influence, but others have more control over the ultimate outcome. Some feed into the early stages of the tech transfer pipeline in terms of the quantity and quality of invention disclosures. These indirect metrics also relate to economic development, which seems to be growing in importance every year.

So, today’s post outlines the indirect metrics that are appropriate for various TTOs. In selecting the ones to track for your TTO, choose those that align with the organization’s goals.

Don’t Forget Qualitative Measures

In addition to the number-based metrics specified here, be sure to capture any qualitative measures of your indirect impact. Whether you write it up in a detailed success story or quote an appreciative email, save the examples as anecdotal evidence of the TTO’s value. (More on this in a future post.)

Startup Success

Startups are the ultimate indirect metric for a TTO. Sure, licensing a technology to a startup is a direct metric. However, once that deal is signed, the TTO doesn’t have much influence over whether the startup is successful.

But as I noted in a recent Technology Transfer Tactics article, the TTO helps plant the seed of that company. Therefore, the TTO contributed to the growth of that company. And that growth is worth tracking.

So, consider the long-run, cumulative capture of these indirect metrics related to startup success:

Number of products/services involving licensed technology
Number of startups that introduced a product/service to market
- Also track as a percentage of all startups
Number of startups still “alive” and generating revenue after 5 years
- Also track as a percentage of all startups
Number of startups that secured additional funding (e.g., SBIR, VC, IPO, acquisition)
- Also track the dollar value as well as the type of that funding
Data regarding sales, revenues, and/or employment for startups, regardless of connection to licensed technology (Remember: You helped plant the seed.)

If any startups come back to the university later to establish sponsored research agreements (SRAs), be sure to track these quantity and dollar-value metrics, linking them to their appropriate TTO origins.

Industry Funding

In addition to the various ways that TTOs are directly involved in cultivating and securing SRAs, they can also indirectly influence efforts led by faculty researchers. That impact can be measured with such indirect metrics as:

Number of technology evaluations that provide broader market data to inform researcher’s ongoing work
Number of new introductions between researchers and companies with relevant interests
Number of SRAs with TTO-identified companies
Total dollars secured via these SRAs

In addition, these companies may eventually go on to license the technology and may even launch new products/services related to their SRA. Track these metrics and link them to their TTO origins.

Government Research Funding

Some government grant proposals require a section on commercialization potential and approach. TTO support to researchers can be invaluable here, so tracking TTO efforts and results is important. Use these metrics:

Total number of TTO-supported proposals
Percentage of these proposals that resulted in funding
Total dollars secured

Faculty Recruitment and Engagement

Several of our university clients say they have seen an increase in researcher interest in their institution’s tech transfer capabilities and policies during the interview stage. (In fact, we had one researcher tell us he almost didn’t join the university because of the low royalty percentage awarded to faculty.) Some universities offer faculty candidates the opportunity to meet with TTO executives as part of the recruitment process — an important indirect metric.

Similarly, new faculty researchers need information about how to work with the TTO effectively. This interaction starts as part of the onboarding process and continues on an ongoing basis. Ideally, when these faculty have an invention or are about to publish on something with commercial potential, they will know exactly what to do.

Given the far-reaching (albeit indirect) influence of the TTO’s operations and policies, track the following metrics:

Number of interactions/interviews with candidates
Percentage of these candidates who join the university’s faculty
Number of new faculty contacted by TTO
Number of faculty attending TTO meetings/training sessions
Percentage of these who submit an invention disclosure within 5 years

Note: TTOs are typically not informed when new faculty join the university. So, develop a good relationship with your institution’s human resources (HR) department to become part of the notification process. Then you can engage with faculty during their transition.

Regional Innovation Ecosystem Development

When I was at the University of Texas at Dallas, we actively interacted with several regional organizations to enhance the innovation ecosystem. If your TTO engages in this type of community outreach — be it with incubators, associations, investors, or even the TTO’s partners within the institution (e.g., Office of Industry Relations) — these are the metrics to track:

Number of relevant points of contacts in the networking database
Number of TTO-initiated outreach contacts
Number of relevant events/meetings attended by TTO staff
Engagement with TTO outreach efforts — for example:
- Number of subscribers to a newsletter
- Open/Click rates for mass e-mails

Tracking these outreach metrics will be especially helpful if they eventually lead to licenses, SRAs, partnerships, or other noteworthy successes.

Looking Ahead to a How-To Post

Because it takes time, collecting and analyzing metrics should be done strategically and meaningfully. Furthermore, some of the metrics outlined here are not easy to collect. So, our next post will discuss best practices for collecting, analyzing, and using metrics to communicate with stakeholders. Watch for it here or subscribe to the Fuentek blog.

In the meantime, check out our white paper on establishing useful tech transfer metrics. And feel free to contact us to discuss how Fuentek can help your TTO with effective metrics tracking.

Categories

Benchmarking & Metrics

Recent Posts

Categories

Fuentek Top Bloggers