Page 79 - Technology and Innovation Journal - 19-1

UNIVERSITY RESEARCH COMMERCIALIZATION 417

$1.7 million as reported to Association of University nology is even earlier in the development cycle,
Technology Managers. Given the historical data avail- and that makes it nearly impossible to predict
able, it appears the cost of OTD operations has always which technologies will have ready markets in
been higher than license royalty revenue received by two (information technology), four (diagnostic),
BU. In 2009, the management team at OTD reviewed seven (medical device), or ten (therapeutic)
OTD’s mission and operations. First, we established years.
with university administration that the primary goal • Most university TTOs are focused on transaction
of the OTD was to “benefit society” and the secondary processing and not on business development and
goal to generate license revenue. Second, we reviewed marketing, and depend on industry to discover
other universities similar in makeup to BU and their university-patented technology.
technology transfer strategies. Third, we conceived • Universities usually license IP to an existing
and implemented a new technology transfer model company with resources and access to markets.
at BU. In many cases, there is no interest from compa-
nies, and starting a new venture becomes the
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROCESS REVIEW only other option. However, VC-backed new
In the review of BU and other similar universities, venture spin-offs based on university patents are
we found four core operational strategies that we felt uncommon (9), as there are only a handful of
could be improved: VC firms with a science focus, and management
1. Pipeline process of invention disclosures to with university spin-off experience is scarce.
• An invention is only as good as the inventor
licenses (i.e., faculty involvement in commercialization to
2. Cradle-to-grave case management organiza-
tional structure transfer their knowledge to the licensee is cru-
3. Passivity of TTOs cial).
4. Operating as if every patent is a potential block- • The Boston ecosystem is rich with industry and
buster (i.e., home run) new venture support. However, BU competes
for attention with the other research institutions,
We also made the following further observations: particularly with MIT, Harvard, and Partners
• In modeling the “data flow” of OTD (see Figure Healthcare.
2), we realized university technology transfer is • We felt the “MIT model” of patenting most
especially data diverse and intensive. As a result, invention disclosures would not work at BU or
it is extremely difficult to “curate” this data to for that matter at most other U.S. research
pinpoint the right company at the right time that universities, as it is highly dependent (a)
might be interested in licensing. on faculty entrepreneurial drive, (b) on the
• Universities have a significant deal of friction as unique position of MIT in the robust entre-
a result of a risk-averse culture, conflict of preneurial ecosystem of greater Boston, and (c)
interest imperatives, lack of hierarchical decision on a large patent budget.
making, and fear of reputational damage. • Patents can be compared to inventory in man-
• A few faculty operate in “Pascal’s Quadrant” and ufacturing processes, and “inventory turns” is a
are adept at commercializing their research. It is key metric for efficient manufacturing. The same
important to service these prolific faculty inven- principle can be applied to patents, reducing the
tors and to use their examples to encourage other number of “fallow” patents that are unlicensed.
faculty to commercialize their research. • TTOs should be in the business of playing foot-
• It is extremely difficult to “pick winners” from ball (team is successful when it carries the ball
a short list of promising technologies. As a VC into the end zone) not tennis (hit the ball to the
investing in all stages of the development cycle, opponent and call it a good day). In other words,
the author remembers how difficult it was to success is when IP is licensed and not the incre-
predict product-market fit even after a company mental steps leading to it.
had early product revenues. University tech- • Research faculty are “Explorers” but have diff-