Page 126 - T-I JOURNAL19 4

774 NNAKWE, COOCH & HUANG-SAAD INVESTING IN ACADEMIC TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION 775

traditional early-stage product development gov- to federal research funding, as it was given the funda- setting, publicity, and offering technology extension government sponsored industry-academe research
ernment grants, I-Corps was created to bring teams mental task of bridging the gap between research and services (7). As for learning, the government has partnership programs (the Industry–University
of NSF-funded researchers and industry experts engineering product development (7). Focused on relied on its financial support of traditional education Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRC) program
together to enroll in an entrepreneurship and innova- “Blue Sky” thinking, DARPA program officers were channels, such as university degree programs (7), and the SBIR/STTR programs) and 2) the absence of
tion course and complete an opportunity recognition able to invest in technologies that would not see a and directives for new initiatives, such as science, innovation and entrepreneurship training for STEM
exercise while developing a potential business model. return for at least 10 to 20 years, allowing researchers technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) innovators (5). Influenced by his experience as the
For the first time, NSF was directing funds towards to experiment with new innovations (6). education reform (e.g., Educate to Innovate campaign dean of engineering at the Massachusetts Institute
developing the individual innovator, as opposed In the 1980s, the government facilitated a more (14)). of Technology (MIT) and with the MIT Deshpande
to the technology itself. With I-Corps, NSF began decentralized form of industry policy by increasing This historical review demonstrates that the Center, Director Suresh launched the I-Corps pro-
investing in faculty human capital development and its support for commercialization and development overall role of government in innovation has relied gram to catalyze a connection between university
facilitating the creation of closer university-industry through direct and indirect means (6). Initially, there on R&D funding and policy development. These basic science research and commercialization.
ties (5). were major changes in U.S. patent policies and prac- two mechanisms have been used to direct intellec- NSF program officers throughout the agency were
The purpose of this article is to provide a retro- tices to strengthen patent protection (9). Congress tual focus towards government relevant needs and called upon for feedback and input during program
spective narrative of the I-Corps program, describe also passed three significant acts to promote technol- to motivate individuals and institutions to pursue development. Key program officers responsible for
how it evolved into the National Innovation Network ogy transfer: the 1980 Stevenson Wydler Technology research translation. The government innovation operationalizing the program included Errol Arkilic,
(NIN), and offer insight into the conception, execu- Act, the 1982 Bayh-Dole Act, and the 1982 Small system was developed to be highly decentralized Don Millard, Rathindra DasGupta, Richard Voyles,
tion, evolution, and expansion of this unique training Business Innovation Development Act. Two of the during the Reagan years with several overlapping and Anita La Salle.
and support network for academic researchers. This acts focused on policy with respect to national labs, elements (6). According to Block (6), “This com- At first, I-Corps was conceptualized as a mento-
article also describes the impact of I-Corps and universities, and non-profits, while the third act plexity is, in part, intentional because the innovation ring program for academic scientists and engineers.
addresses the challenges the program may face in set aside funding specific to translation. The 1980 process is highly uncertain; even the best scientists Ultimately, I-Corps evolved into a structured, expe-
the future. Stevenson Wydler Technology Act required federal and engineers spend a lot of time wandering down riential education program for teams of academics
laboratories to collaborate directly with state and local false pathways.” But what if we can help scientists and industry experts working together to explore
BRIEF HISTORY OF GOVERNMENT governments, universities, and private industry (10). reduce the amount of time spent wandering down the economic potential of NSF-funded research.
INVESTMENT IN ACADEMIC INNOVATION Each national laboratory was mandated to create an false pathways? This goal was what the NSF sought to Programmatically, I-Corps bridges the gap between
The federal government has played a significant Office of Research and Technology Applications (10). address in the development of the 2012 NSF I-Corps IUCRC and the SBIR/STTR programs by providing
role in supporting American innovation since World The Bayh-Dole Act gave universities and government Program. academics with a level of training not commonly
War II (6). Fueled by the transition into the Cold labs the ability to file for patents and license tech- Rather than developing an infrastructure that experienced by research scientists. Throughout the
War, the U.S. government heavily invested in gov- nology derived from federally funded research (11). relies on researchers to self-select into translatable I-Corps process, academics are immersed in the com-
ernment technological capacities through research The 1982 Small Business Innovation Development opportunities and independently seek out relevant mercialization process, educated in entrepreneurship,
and development (R&D) funding, policy support for Act directed government agencies that spend more translation resources, NSF looked to develop a pro- and provided funding to explore commercialization
commercialization and development, and support than $100 million annually on external research to gram that invested in the researchers themselves. By opportunities.
for learning and diffusion of knowledge (7). All of set aside a fraction of their research budgets (1.25%) educating NSF researchers in early-stage opportunity Like the SBIR and IUCRC programs, the I-Corps
these efforts were designed to promote innovation to support work from small, independent, for profit identification and connecting researchers with the program provides researchers with early-stage com-
and provide infrastructure and capital for research small businesses (12). The Small Business Innovation necessary resources to consider translation, NSF has mercialization funding or use-inspired research,
scientists to explore their own research ideas or, more Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology begun to create a larger pool of innovators capable respectively. However, unlike SBIR and IUCRC
importantly, explore research that supported govern- Transfer (STTR) programs were most recently reau- of developing and pursuing translatable innovations programs, I-Corps focuses on early-stage venture
ment-specific needs, such as weapons systems (8). thorized until September 30, 2022, at a rate of 3.2% from federal funds. development, opportunity recognition training,
Government R&D spending has dominated the and 0.45%, respectively (13). Finally, the government and network support, all of which are critical for
government’s role in innovation (7). Following World has historically also used tax credits to support inno- CONCEPTUALIZATION OF I-CORPS realizing the full commercial potential of innovative
War II, the U.S. government established a network of vation: R&D tax credits, tax credits or production In 2010, Dr. Subra Suresh was confirmed as the technologies.
federal research labs focused on government-specific subsidies for new technology companies, and tax director of NSF and became responsible for one
needs and several research funding agencies. The credits or rebates for new technology customers (7). quarter of all federally funded university STEM I-CORPS TEAMS AND CURRICULUM
NSF was created in 1950, followed by the Defense Government support for diffusion of knowledge research (15,16). Despite the fact that universi- I-Corps three-person teams and its curriculum
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in and technology and learning has traditionally been ty-based programming for innovation had existed are the foundation of I-Corps. Teams of three, an
1958. DARPA was established in response to the indirect. Similar to policy setting, the government for over 30 years, Director Suresh identified two Entrepreneurial Lead (EL), an NSF-funded Principal
Soviet Sputnik launches and relied entirely on extra- worked to increase knowledge diffusion through cod- prevalent challenges to national STEM innovation: Investigator (PI), and a Business Mentor (BM), are
mural researchers (7). DARPA was a unique approach ification of technical knowledge, technical standard 1) a programmatic gap between the two flagship awarded $50,000 to enroll in a six- to ten-week