Page 21 - Technology and Innovation Journal - 19-1

UNIVERSITY-BASED TECHNOLOGY ACCELERATORS 359

In this section, we outline a few of these challenges student and faculty entrepreneurs, which may end
as well as some potential solutions we have tried. We up helping them on their next ventures. Culture
look forward to hearing about how other programs change is difficult to measure, but anecdotal evidence
have addressed these challenges in the ongoing con- from participating teams about how the program has
versation that we hope this paper and the creation of changed their grant application approaches, how they
the public repository of resources will initiate. work with their advisees, and how they behave in job
interviews can help demonstrate a program’s impact.
Metrics Some programs do before-and-after videos of each
Funders of translational accelerator programs may team, for instance, to emphasize the team’s growth
have varying objectives and metrics. For example, during the program. However, programs would also
our medical technology program, funded by a pri- be wise to not start solely believing their own sto-
vate foundation, is most interested in patient impact rytelling at the expense of continuous and rigorous
through successful product commercialization. The self-analysis and improvement.
PowerBridgeNY and Combine programs, which are
funded all or in part by governmental agencies, have Sustainability
significant economic development objectives, with Our current accelerator programs have been
metrics that include job creation, company revenue, awarded multi-year grants, with the expectation
products sales, etc. However, given the early-stage that the programs will secure additional funding to
nature of the technology, the typical outcome metrics continue beyond the contract period. This situation is
for any program will likely be negligible for several fairly common, as the governmental or philanthropic
years regardless of how well the program is set up. sources that typically fund such programs often have
There will also be questions regarding whether teams finite funding timelines and view their resources as
would have become successful even without the inter- “seed corn” for larger third-party investments. The
vention. Conversely, even technologies that do not hypothesis is that, after several years, these programs
advance in a particular program can lead to future will demonstrate their effectiveness and attract invest-
successes outside the program, as a team may learn ments externally and/or from resources within the
valuable lessons that will help make their next ven- universities.
ture successful. In fact, an underlying mentality of Unfortunately, securing follow-on funding is often
the educational curricula is to accelerate teams to extremely challenging regardless of the industry area
a potential failure or pivot point so that they can or program success rates. The universities in which
instead allocate their time, energy, and resources to these programs are housed have many competing
future projects. How can metrics capture this? demands for each funding dollar, with commercial
The Columbia programs have all wrestled with translational accelerators often being lower on the
the above problems in deciding what metrics to list compared to basic research, student financial aid,
track and report. Once accelerator graduates have and classrooms. While the participating industry and
been operating their companies for three or more venture partners may benefit from the increased and
years, the quantitative business metrics may become improved deal flow, their own financial structures
more substantial, thus allowing accelerators to better may limit their ability to significantly fund not-for-
demonstrate their value to potential sponsors, appli- profit programs.
cants, mentors, and other interested parties. However, As the initial funding source wanes, programs
quantitative metrics still cannot adequately capture may consider limiting the number of awards made
the true impact of the programs. each year or reducing the amount of each award in
While moving current technologies out of the order to stretch the funding. Another option is for the
lab is an immediate goal, we also seek to affect program to continue to offer the educational elements
cultural change within the university to encour- (boot camps, mentoring, etc.) and eliminate the large
age entrepreneurial efforts and increase long-term proof-of-concept awards altogether. As mentioned
commercialization figures. The Columbia programs earlier, graduates of the program often report that,
provide connections and training to individual while the funding is helpful, the education is far more