TII Innovation Journal

Resource Guide: SSTI publishes new report

SSTI, the State Science Technology Institute in the US, a kind of "sister organization" of TII (but with more information distribution than networking and less business membership than TII), publishes interesting reports. Lately SSTI published its Resource Guide (download from their site) I have taken an excerpt of the introduction (read below) The report has an interesting Commercialization Roadmap, which is good to give an overview/checklist about the many processes and expressions used involved in "Commercialization" (for those who like Tabular knowledge ;-)

Introduction ... Technology-based economic development is the approach used to help create a climate where that new economic base can thrive. Based on the experience of tech-based economies like Silicon Valley, Research Triangle, and Route 128, it is generally acknowledged now that the following elements are required for a tech-based economy:

•An intellectual infrastructure, i.e. universities and public or private research laboratories that generate new knowledge and discoveries
•Mechanisms for transferring knowledge from one individual to another or from one company to another
•Physical infrastructure that includes high quality telecommunications systems and affordable high speed Internet connections
•Highly skilled technical workforce
•Sources of risk capital
•Quality of life, and
•Entrepreneurial culture

This resource guide focuses on three of the elements – intellectual infrastructure, capital, and entrepreneurial culture – and is intended to assist economic development practitioners in their efforts to accelerate transition to technology based economies. ....

Practitioners can use the guide to implement and update programs addressing these three critical elements required for a tech-based economy. The guide also begins to resolve one of the most challenging issues for the tech-based economic development community: the paucity of written information that captures the insights, wisdom and practical knowledge of people who have decades of experience in the field.

The report caught my attention for another reason: its reference to PriceWaterhouseCoopers and their MoneyTreeReports.

The MoneyTree Report is a quarterly study of venture capital investment activity in the United States. As a collaboration between PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association based upon data from Thomson Financial, it is the only industry-endorsed research of its kind. The MoneyTree Report is the definitive source of information on emerging companies that receive financing and the venture capital firms that provide it. The study is a staple of the financial community, entrepreneurs, government policymakers and the business press worldwide.

The interesting point here is the overall drop in venture capital investment since the "Bubble" burst in around 2000 and the trend to see business angels consolidate their activity to move downstream in the funding pipeline, ie. investing larger sums than usual. But it's also evident that the US now also realizes a widening gap between early stage and VC funding.

EU Research Programme Design

In early October 2006, I was invited to a meeting in Brussels as an "expert" to participate in a workshop on how to improve the design, the monitoring and support and the follow-up of programmes and projects in one of the domains of the upcoming FPVII programme. A group of consultants had drafted a report, which a group of some 20 experts were to comment upon.

The word "improve" is important as it concerns how projects from this DGs  can better lead to innovation and technology transfer. Should a subset of projects be reserved so more SMEs can be involved? Does it help projects to have end users onboard? How about industry associations or the many "clusters" (publicly induced)- will a research result better reach the market place if they are research partners? Can diligent review of socio-economic aspects or use of non-technical experts increase the "business-readiness" of a project?

These are concerns, then, which a group of researchers must consider to successfully bid for funds in this programme if it is up to this experienced group of international consultants.

I think the Commission may have gotten it wrong. My basic position is that the first and foremost criterion for market-oriented research is high quality of results. In other words, that genuinely new knowledge is created (patent language: it is "novel"). I don't see how an SME, an industrial association or a non-technical expert can contribute anything to the resolution of this question.

But politicians and the Commission as well, then, want to see more research results reach the market. What should they do?

Let me first say that I find the initiatives in many DGs outside the Research DGs have many good innovation support measures, especially the Technology Platforms and similar Foresight instruments to give overall guidance to research in a given area.

Secondly, I can see that many funded "R&D" projects do not deserve that title. Too often researchers state that a certain problem is unsolved or interesting, but most often there already exists a body of knowledge and research, which has answered the key questions of the "R&D project. The provocative statement probably is based on a criticism of the peer review process. Too many funding agencies and directors of research centres grant money to projects, which are not based on diligent studies of "prior art". OK, so we can solve that. And DG research should help do that by granting pre-proposal funds for  literature studies, which also could contain an element of studies of the perceived needs of relevant industries.

Then my second position is that we should leave the researchers alone to do their research, but demand -and fund- that they spend some time on structured dialogue with industry representatives, associations, non-technical experts. The outcome of this dialogue should be used to feed back to the researchers what the "outside" world believes, but still we should leave the researchers at what they are best at (they may adapt and include the feedback into their work or not). But the outside experts could/should be organised as what is called an "accompanying measure" in Brussels: the outside dialogue partners could get funds to think creatively about what they learnt through the dialogues and then try to find potential industrial partners to the research project and on its behalf. The accompanying measure partners could easily be a consortium of experts who were retained for the length of the programme to support all projects during the project cycle from application to commercialisation. Such consortia would gain a lot from adapting the lessons of good practice in commercialisation reported elsewhere and on this site.

Why not let a whole sub programme's commercialisation, for instance in fuel cells, be managed by an outside consortium in the same way as eg. the IP Group for UK universities or how Cambridge University Enterprise manages IP coming out of its university? These IP management groups have continuity, commitment , expertise and - funding to follow up on promising research results. And do so with a commercial perspective. Give the group funding to help do the initial peer review both technically and with regard to nmon-technical aspects. Give full funding of the support to projects as they are ongoing -and give some funding for the final phases (in order to ensure that the best prospects get selected for future funding).

CUE: Cambridge University Enterprise

  CUE a Master of Commercialization
Cambridge University is an excellent university. Even more excellent in my view is their way of commercializing inventions coming out of CU. Obviously the "Cambridge Phenomenon", first studied by my old friends from now merged Segal Quince Wicksteed (Bill Wicksteed!), the region's history, presence of benevolent angels and so on are important for that success.

Some years ago CU merged all commercialization activities in CUE. Have a look at their recent Annual report and see how an already impressive record  improves by almost 50% over just 5 years. One would assume that the quality of the (basic) research is not very volatile. Such matters take generations to build up and seldom make quantum leaps. I interpret the growth in commercialization successes as a result of the (re-)organization, really good people (look at the CVs of CUE staff: impressive) and then access to own seed funding (and, of course, lots of VCs crowding around CUE). A minor, but perhaps not less important resource is the creation of "Enterprise Champions", faculty staff who advise CUE on different relevant matters.

PS: compare CUE's score with that of all Denmark, one of the most competitive countries and with the highest knowledge management score in the world: CUE (on the basis of 3,500 research FTE) creates almost half the results in terms of management of invention disclosures, patent filing and licensing and spin off more than 5 times the number of new companies (year 2004) - and with half the TO staff of all of Denmark!

TII Summer School

TII SUMMER SCHOOL
This year's summer school, will take place from 11 to 15 September in the south-eastern Hungarian city of Szeged. This is the association's flagship training event which brings together in a one-week programme 5 stand-alone training workshops covering different aspects of managing the innovation and research exploitation process, taught by practitioners for practitioners.

The subjects being covered this year are:

Day 1: An Introduction to Innovation Management
Day 2: Making the Business Case for Technology Opportunities
Day 3: The Commercialization of a Knowledge-Intensive Business Idea
Day 4: Building Success in International Project Management
Day 5: Marketing Scientific Results and Services in a Turbulent Environment - What is Really Working in Technology Marketing and Commercialization Today?

Our trainers, who come from Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Australia are all seasoned professionals who are well placed to share their in-depth, practical experience of their subject with the participants. The workshops offer a lively mix of theory and practice delivered via presentations, case studies and group work, all in a relaxed, multi-cultural training environment.

This year, we have chosen the beautiful spa city of Szeged in south-eastern Hungary as our venue; often referred to as the City of Sunshine. The city is the cultural and economic centre of the Great Plain region and a thriving university town.

Interested in participating? Read more Click to see the details

Understanding Knowledge-Driven Cities

Understanding Knowledge-Driven Cities: "

‘Ideopolis – Knowledge City-regions’ is the culmination of a year-long research project involving in depth studies of ten UK and four international cities. Key to the success of an Ideopolis is ‘knowledge intensity’ – the number of knowledge industries and knowledge workers within a city and its surrounding region.

The Work Foundation’s research has found that the UK is on the way to developing a collection of vibrant, sustainable knowledge cities that are driving economic development in their regions. London and Edinburgh have been identified as Ideopolises – cities that have adapted most rapidly to the demands of the knowledge economy – with Manchester, Bristol, Glasgow and Newcastle fast catching up.

Alexandra Jones, Ideopolis Project Director at The Work Foundation said:

A small number of cities are at the cutting edge of the knowledge economy and are hugely attractive as places to do business, live and work. Other cities must learn from their success.

The Work Foundation’s research gives a framework for cities, businesses, universities and other stakeholders in a region to work together to increase knowledge intensity. It can help cities evaluate their strengths and weaknesses, and assess how close they are to becoming an Ideopolis.

An Ideopolis is a sustainable knowledge city that drives economic success in the wider city-region. It has:

• High levels of economic success.
• High levels of knowledge intensity.
• A diverse industry base including distinctive specialist niches.
• A university that has a mutually beneficial relationship with the city. This leads to industries based on research strengths, knowledge transfer to businesses and the retention of graduates.
• Strong communications infrastructure and good transport links within the city and to other cities.
• Distinctive long-term ‘knowledge city’ offer to investors and individuals alike.
• Strategies to ensure that deprived communities also benefit from the economic success associated with knowledge.

The nine drivers of an Ideopolis are:

   
1. An appropriate physical knowledge city.
   
2. Path dependency – building on what’s already there.
   
3. A diverse industry base including distinctive specialist niches.
   
4. High skill organisations.
   
5. A vibrant education sector embedded in community and economy.
   
6. A distinctive ‘knowledge city’ offer.
   
7. Strong connectivity within and outside the city-region.
   
8. Strong leadership around the vision of a knowledge city, supported by networks and partnerships.
   
9. Community investment.

To assess each city’s status as an Ideopolis researchers used data from a variety of government sources to measure:

• Knowledge intensity – using OECD and The Work Foundation’s own definitions.
• Economic output – measured as Gross Value Added (GVA).
• Quality of life – using the 2004 index of multiple deprivation and using The Work Foundation’s quality of life index.

The Work Foundation is an independent, not-for-dividend, evidence-based research organisation and consultancy. It exists to inspire and deliver improvements to performance through improving the quality of working life.

Sources

   
• A summary of the project
   
• Read the full report (pdf 597kb)

"

(Via URENIO Portal: Innovation, Environments of Innovation, Intelligent Cities and Regions.)

Executive Reports: Managing Venture Capital in Finland - the Over-Arching Issues You Need To Know

Research & Markets Summary

Executive Reports: Managing Venture Capital in Finland - the Over-Arching Issues You Need To Know: "This 14-page research report written for venture capitalists and managers explores the thriving venture capital community in Finland. With an analysis of various exit strategies and the characteristics of successful venture capital investments, this Executive Report provides insight into"

(Via Research and Markets - Venture Capital RSS Feed.)

NSTI Nanotech Ventures 2006 Is Now Accepting Submissions

NSTI Nanotech Ventures 2006 Is Now Accepting Submissions: "Deadline for ‘seed’ to ‘early stage’ company submissions is Friday, March 10.

The NSTI Nanotech Ventures will take place May 8-9, 2006, at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston, Massachusetts.  Nanotech Ventures is considered an ideal forum for 'seed' to 'early-stage' companies to showcase their technologies, market advantages, and to search for funding.  Selected companies give 15-minute presentations to the audience, and benefit from on-site networking with the NSTI Nanotech Ventures Vetting Team, corporate capital, venture capital and multi-sector investment attendees.  The Nanotech Ventures Vetting Team includes IBM, Harris & Harris, UBS, and Garage Ventures.  To submit a venture, visit http://www.nsti.org/Nanotech2006/Development/ventures.html

"

(Via NSTI Nano World News™.)

TechConnect Plans To Welcome Thousands At Its Inaugural Summit in Boston

TechConnect Plans To Welcome Thousands At Its Inaugural Summit in Boston: "Deadline for IP and Venture Submissions For Summit Consideration is March 10.

TechConnect, a global technology outreach organization located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is committed to locating the world’s most promising IP and start-up companies. TechConnect has created a one of a kind community for innovators to demonstrate their early stage developments in various technology categories and connect them with investors and enterprises looking to bring these ideas to market.

The TechConnect Summit will be held on May 8-9, 2006 at the Boston Hynes Convention center. IP and Venture submissions will be peer reviewed by TechConnect’s Advisory Board, which includes more than 30 individuals representing top universities and companies from around the world. All accepted IP and Venture submissions will have the opportunity to present during match-making presentations at the Summit.

For more details about the TechConnect Summit, including special early registration discounts and exclusive sponsor opportunities, visit http://www.techconnect.org/Summit2006/index.html.
To submit an IP for Advisory Board consideration: http://www.techconnect.org/Summit2006/participate/IP/index.html
To submit a Venture for Advisory Board consideration: http://www.techconnect.org/Summit2006/participate/users/index.html"

(Via NSTI Nano World News™.)

UK pressure group calls for more science...

UK pressure group calls for more science...: "UK pressure group calls for more science and engineering funding"

(Via CORDIS News.)

Global themes in biotechnology innovation

Global themes in biotechnology innovation: "Biotechnology hotspots are emerging around the world. This analysis profiles some of the trends emerging from a 38-region analysis of biotechnology capacities and activities around the world. Of note are the ways that some countries with limited resources are able..."

(Via About Biotech/Biomedical.)

China bumps up research and development spending

China bumps up research and development spending: "China spent 236.7 billion yuan (about 29.19 billion US dollars) on research and development (R&D) in 2005, a report released by the National Bureau of Statistics shows."

(Via People's Daily Online.)

The Structure and Evolution of Industrial Clusters: Transactions, Technology and Knowledge Spillovers

In this paper we investigate the relationship between location patterns, innovation processes and industrial clusters. In order to do this we extend a transactions costs-based classification of industrial clusters into a knowledge-based taxonomy of clusters, along the lines suggested by a critical revision of the main assumptions underlying most of the existing literature on spatially defined clusters. Our arguments show that the transactions costs approach and the innovation and technological change framework are broadly consistent, and that real insights into the microfoundations, nature, and evolution of clusters can be provided by these classification systems.

New publication - Iammarino: "

The Structure and Evolution of Industrial Clusters: Transactions, Technology and Knowledge Spillovers
Simona Iammarino (SPRU and University of Rome) and Philip McCann (University of Reading) December 2005

SEWP 138 Abstract / Download

"

(Via SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research.)

EXPLORING THE VALUE OF PATENTS! FROM SPRU

New publication - Meyer: "

Exploring the 'Value' of Academic Patents: IP Management Practices in UK Universities and their Implications for Third-Stream Indicators
Martin S. Meyer (SPRU, Helsinki University of Technology and Steunpunt O&O Statistieken) and Puay Tang (SPRU) February 2006

SEWP 143 Abstract / Download

"

(Via SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research.)

China sets favored taxation policies for knowledge-based

THE CHINESE ARE STILL COMING

China sets favored taxation policies for knowledge-based enterprises: "The Chinese government announced here Sunday that it has set favored taxation policies for the nation's knowledge-based enterprises."

(Via People's Daily Online.)

China issues incentive policies for innovation

The CHINES ARE COMING. WATCH OUT.

China issues incentive policies for innovation: "China's State Council issued Sunday incentive policies encouraging scientific and technological innovation."

(Via People's Daily Online.)

India boasts huge inflow of foreign R&D investment

India boasts huge inflow of foreign R&D investment: ""

(Via CORDIS News.)

The Directory of Venture Capital & Private Equity Firms 2006 Edition

The Directory of Venture Capital & Private Equity Firms 2006 Edition: "This Ninth Edition of The Directory of Venture Capital & Private Equity Firms, completely revised and enhanced for 2006, is designed to give librarians, entrepreneurs and others interested in the Venture Capital and Private Equity fields, the most essential and current information on the Venture"

(Via Research and Markets - Venture Capital RSS Feed.)

Find Your Partner: Tips from nowEurope

Find Your Partner: "Successful participation to the European Community programmes demands quite a bit of self-promotion. Evaluators tend to judge European dimension of consortia by the number of countries participating to the project. Co-ordinators are, therefore, often obliged to put on board partners that they do not know from before. How to find them?"

(Via nowEurope.)

The 2005 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard

The 2005 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard: "

The 2005 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard lists the Research and Development (R&D) investment of the top 700 EU and the top 700 non-EU corporate R&D investors, based on annual audited company consolidated reports and accounts. It also provides information on other economic and financial data of the companies. The Scoreboard provides up-to-date comparisons between companies, sectors, and geographical areas, as well as a full picture of the competitive situation of EU firms in the global R&D environment.

The report was prepared by:

The Joint Research Center (JRC)

The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies

The report contains two volumes.

Volume I -  Analysis of the 2005 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard analyses the economic and financial data of top companies investing in R&D and discusses some of the main features and trends emerging from the data collected. It also offers some examples of using the Scoreboard database for more detailed analytical purposes and presents an extract of the dataset showing Scoreboard companies ranked by their R&D investment.

Contents of Volume I

• Acknowledgements
• Foreword
• Key Findings
• Content of the Scoreboard
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Overview of Industrial R&D Investment
• 3. Top R&D-Investing Companies
• 4. R&D of World Scoreboard Companies by Sector
• 5. Scoreboard Companies – EU vs non-EU Main World Regions
• 6. EU Countries
• 7. Financial Indicators for Scoreboard Companies
• ANNEX 1 - Lists of EU 700 and non-EU 700 companies
• ANNEX 2 - Note on the effect of changes in exchange rates on Scoreboard data

Volume II – Company Data reports on the data for the top 700 EU R&D-investing companies, together with the top 700 R&D-investing companies from outside the EU, The tables show corporate R&D investments, capital expenditure, sales and other financial indicators disaggregated by company, sector and country. Methodological notes concerning the company data are also included in this volume

Contents of Volume II

• II.1. TABLES of Company R&D-Related Data

EU Listings

• II.1.1. Ranking of the Top 700 EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year
• II.1.2. Ranking of the Top 700 EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year, by Member States
• II.1.3. Ranking of the Top 700 EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year, by sectors (of declared main activity)
• II.1.4.Ranking of Top 10 companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year, within selected EU Member States (not fully represented elsewhere in the Scoreboard)

Non-EU Listings

• II.1.5. Ranking of the Top 700 non-EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year
• II.1.6. Ranking of the Top 700 non-EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year, by countries
• II.1.7. Ranking of the Top 700 non-EU companies by R&D investment in the 2004 financial year, by sectors (of declared main activity)
• II.2. Methodological notes

Related Resources

• Download Keynotes
• Download Volume I
• Download Volume II
• Visit The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies
• Visit the Joint Research Center (JRC) Corporate Web Homepage

"

(Via URENIO Portal: Innovation, Environments of Innovation, Intelligent Cities and Regions.)

Surprise, Surprise: SMEs DO NOT HAVE A FINANCING GAP

SMEs' access to finance in the EU-15: is venture capital so crucial?: "Scope for venture capital in financing SMEs has been, since the late nineties, subject of many discussions and debates. With regard to the flourishing literature and political support towards venture capital, this has appeared as a way to substantially improve SMEs' access to finance. However, recent assessments have enlightened its decline."

(Via nowEurope.)

Here is a short version: On average, more than three out of four SMEs have sufficient financing to see their projects through (77%). Analyses of the national results reveal large differences in the financial situation of SMEs. In Ireland, Finland, Denmark and the United Kingdom, more than 9 out of 10 SMEs report having sufficient financing to see their projects through. In Portugal and Italy this is the case for just around two-thirds of SMEs and in Greece and Germany this is true for slightly less than three quarters of SMEs Analyses of the various types of SMEs reveal that views on the current financial state vary somewhat by sector, with SMEs operating in the field of industry being least likely to have sufficient financing to see projects through (74%) and those operating in the construction sector most likely (81%). The longer a company has existed, the more likely its current financing is sufficient to see projects through. As to be expected, companies that have cut the number of employees in the past year are less likely to have sufficient financing to see projects through (65%) than are companies where the number of employees has stayed the same (80%) or increased (79%). Views also vary by level of turnover but there is no specific pattern to be discerned from the data.