For university Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs), a review of performance, structure, and functions—particularly in comparison to peer organizations—provides the opportunity to optimize internal operations, enhance engagement with internal and external customers and stakeholders, and revise policies and procedures to better align with current goals. Tracking data metrics is one way to accomplish key goals and prepare for future opportunities.
In providing technology transfer services to R&D organizations, Fuentek has developed strategies for maximizing team strengths and skills, solving organizational pickles, and communicating value to leadership. Today’s post can help significantly improve your capabilities and operations. For example, when it comes to understanding how your IP management team is performing, metrics are your greatest ally. They help you get where you want to go by accurately revealing where you are.
Two weeks ago Tech Transfer Central’s eNews Blog featured a new effort by the Purdue Research Foundation to pool its resources with several related organizations — including other research centers and an entrepreneurial incubator — to increase innovation, research grant awards, and tech transfer throughout Indiana. According to the original news release, this collaboration will be managed by a board of advisers composed of local and state stakeholders as well as educational and economic partners. This struck me as a great example of the value provided by foundations that reside outside of the state university structure and own/manage the institution’s intellectual property (IP). Several state universities have implemented foundations to manage their technology transfer programs, entrepreneurship support, and more. These foundations can take advantage of greater flexibility in deal structure, reduced bureaucracy, more autonomy, and a broadening of services. For example,…
I’ve blogged before about technology transfer offices (TTOs) that are entering a new phase of life. Today I’d like to share Fuentek’s recommendations for the top of your To-Do List for rebooting a TTO. These are based both on what we’ve done for our clients and on my personal experience in the trenches at the Office of Technology Commercialization (OTC) at the University of Texas at Dallas.
As I discussed in early December, I’ve been curious about the experiences of those starting (or restarting) their TTO. So we created a short survey and invited the tech transfer community to use it to share their experiences. Two dozen folks responded — not bad considering it is a niche question– and today I’m sharing these responses along with some of my insights and experiences.
Having first-hand experience with starting up a brand new technology transfer office (TTO), I have watched with great interest as universities and other institutions have formed (and reformed) their TTOs. In the past few years, it seems that new TTOs have been popping up like wildflowers. (Can you tell I’m a gardener?) And reorganizations of already-established TTOs are just as commonplace. This flurry of activity is not surprising given the increased focus on tech transfer in the media and policy discussions both on the national stage and at the state level. Yet little has been written about the experiences of those establishing new (or renewed) TTOs. So we are conducting a short survey (
Last week I had the distinct privilege of serving as a panelist for the Lab-to-Market Inter-Agency Summit, sponsored by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Designed to obtain insights from experts in industry, academia, and finance about federal programs working to accelerate their labs’ rate of technology transfer, the discussion was productive and surprisingly candid. (Perhaps the latter begat the former!) I for one was encouraged by…
After more than 15 years of working directly with tech transfer programs at major research universities and other large institutions in the U.S. and abroad, we at Fuentek have learned that centralization, coordination, and even consolidation of TTOs can go a long way toward making commercialization of university innovations more effective.
Last week I read an interesting article on Beyond the First World. Terry Young discussed four reasons for establishing a technology transfer office (TTO) at universities. Making money was not on that list, and I agree that TTOs (wherever they are) can’t and shouldn’t have “make a lot of money” as their main goal. If making money were the main goal, many a TTO not only would be disappointed when it inevitably failed to achieve this goal, but it would miss out on some strategic and other qualitative successes.
Effective change leadership is one of the most challenging and rewarding opportunities for leaders. How do tech transfer office (TTO) directors effectively lead their organization through changes in the institution’s leadership, reorganizations, institutional economic challenges or legal disputes? How can you become a champion and lead your organization in the pursuit of objectives to align with a new set of imperatives from your institution or immediate management?