Dear Global Technology Transfer Office Manager,

If you woke up tomorrow and your technology transfer office (TTO) went out of business would anyone care?  Would your institution and the world be all that worse? Would the academics in your institution lament your departure?  If you answer all of these questions in the affirmative I suggest you first re-evaluate your perceived grasp on reality and secondly your importance in the early-stage commercialisation value-chain.

Technology transfer is not what I would consider a core competence of an academic institution, however for better or worse the industry’s organic growth has given it a place of prominence in many institutions. I have officially been in the industry for less than a year and am already frustrated with the vestiges of a bygone era. As a not to distant outsider I encourage all of us to evaluate, accept and remedy the structural defects in the industry before it is swept away in a coming wave of creative destruction. Here are some of the abbreviated problems, as I see them with my idealistic & naive blinders on:

Lack of Choice: Technology transfer is a service business yet in the absence of choice academics have but one route to commercialise their innovations.  In the absence of competition the incentive structure just doesn’t drive meaningful customer-facing improvements in the system.  Instead perverse incentives drive the creation of small fiefdoms often to the detriment of effective commercialisation.  In time the University silently loses as you end up with a disenfranchised base of academics who work “around” rather than “with” TTOs.  In virtually every industry competitive choice is seen as a net positive for the customer, but somehow this has been overlooked in the ivory tower.

Challenge of Specialisation: The nature of early-stage academic innovations is such that they are often so specialised that they require expert advice to identify opportunities which may be up to 10 years or more in the future.  Unfortunately very few institutions can leverage economies of scale to adequately staff their TTO with the necessary breadth and depth of expertise, yet very few TTOs will actually embrace Open Innovation and allow for the management and commercialisation of IP to take place outside the walls of their institution.

Fixed Pie Fallacy: I saw it in United States, England and see it everyday in Ireland, TTOs competing as if there were a fixed and overly restricted amount of resources; behavior that is indicative of immature, early stage industries.   Perhaps this is a relic from an era where University’s thought their TTOs were the path to infinitely large endowments along with commercial as well as scientific fame.  It is time for governments and academic institutions to accept and begin operating like technology transfer is a public good, not a money-making operation.

Fear & Accountability: Early-stage commercialisation is messy, ambiguous and unpredictable but when you look at the make-up of typical technology transfer offices, they are composed of some of the most risk-averse people around (sorry to some for the generalisation!)  Based on my observations, far too many TTO decisions are made based on fear of covering one’s ass rather than what is “right” in a given situation.

It is for these reasons that I am rooting for companies like Intellectual Ventures. Behind all of the “patent troll” vitriol is a commercialisation platform that puts just about every technology transfer office to shame.  It is to IV’s credit that they have started their operations in the Asia-Pacific…a region ignored for too long as a source of robust early-stage academic discoveries.

I expect it is only a matter of time before the leaders of academic institutions accept that they may not be the best managers of early-stage innovation; and that alternative models may be a more meaningful and direct way to capitalise on institutional innovation. That Nathan Myhrvold & Edward Jung have had the foresight and wherewithal to assemble such a game-changing business is a credit to both their intelligence and bravado.

With that I wish Mr. Myhrvold & Mr. Jung “Gods Speed!”

and if either should happen to read this and want to open up an office in Ireland “call me!”

Regards,

~Steve Gotz

For more background on IV…

Indian deal validates Intellectual Ventures strategy to pursue global partnerships

Related articles by Zemanta

• Open Science: a step towards Open Innovation (freelancingscience.com)
• The real patent threat (news.cnet.com)
• Who’s Driving Innovation in the Life Sciences Ecotope? Some Ideas for Keeping Early-Stage Venture Alive (xconomy.com)