This module is a selection from a larger module on the Academic / Industrial Interface.
Author:
Dr. Manuel Panar
University of Delaware
Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry
Newark DE 19716
email panar@udel.edu
Knowledge transfer is relatively straightforward. It is the classical role of the universities. The transfer takes place through the open literature and through personal collaborations. An individual scientist in industry is the recipient, and patent considerations are not involved. Membership in industrial consortia can facilitate transfer for members of the consortia. From the industrial side, the best guaranty of using the most recent academic advances is to have on its staff experts doing research in the relevant areas. Barring this, it will be difficult for an industrial lab to properly evaluate the usefulness of new results.
Technology transfer involves an academic researcher having a
potentially commercial idea and wanting an industrial lab to
support further work, or the university having patented an
invention and wanting to license or sell it. The issue here
becomes how to get someone in a corporation interested enough to
free up corporate funds to buy it.
The rest of this discussion will be directed to how to make
technology transfer work.
Most people feel that the world outside of science is far harder
to deal with than science itself. Nature is at least consistent.
When selling an idea, the problems which can prevent success are
at least as frequently non-technical as scientifically objective.
We will discuss some of them now.
It is possible to be led astray by a rational analysis of what
should happen next. This is the stage at which a large number of
factors become of critical importance. Many of them are not
technical. None of them are mysterious, and the reader probably
recognizes them all.
An understanding of the slow and expensive route an idea follows from its conception to commercialization has two lessons to teach us about transferring ideas to industry.
First it emphasizes and explains why a company may seem overly cautious in picking up one's great idea. Even though the faculty member clearly sees the commercial potential of the idea, the company will be only too aware of the pitfalls which may lie ahead. They will also have to consider the idea in the context of the many others in which they have the option of investing limited development resources.
The second point is one which industrial scientists learn early. While coming up with a great idea, it is very useful if the idea can be put into practice with existing plant equipment which happens to be under-utilized. This potential can cut many millions of dollars off of the investment necessary to get into the business. Barring that, the next best is to have the a product which can be fabricated with minimal capital investment. This leads one to consider specialty uses such as in biomaterials and electronics as fields of research.
The part of this process most commonly carried out in universities with industrial support is the first phase, the lab demonstration of a concept. An embryonic idea may be funded by industry with varying levels of commitment as to the disposition of any forthcoming inventions. These can range from a contract for sole rights, to a non-binding agreement that the funding industry will have first rights of refusal for licensing of any patents.
It is important to remember that a corporation is not a
hypothetical smooth running system. One must work with a few
individual scientists or managers who are as fully protective of
their own turf as anyone in the academic world. Unfortunately for
those of us in research, unique solutions to practical problems
are rare. A researcher may have an idea which can clearly solve a
technological problem. However, there is a strong possibility,
even a probability, that someone in the company is pushing
another solution. The industrial researcher has the advantage
that the Company already owns the patent on the ideas, and the
researcher has a personal interest in seeing the ideas become
commercial. Moreover, the industrial person is there full time to
push them on the development staff.
The "not invented here" factor can be very strong.
Unless the concept is one of the very few ones which are going to
lead society into a totally new direction, there is almost
certainly other ways of doing what the new concept accomplishes.
There may be variants of the concept which others are thinking of
which will work as well, or almost as well, but which are legally
a separate invention.
Another powerful deterrent to the use of an invention may appear to be organizational inertia. Manufacturing may look upon a new process as a potential problem. The life of the plant technical staff is going to be much more difficult and hectic for the next year if a new process is going to be installed. They must be convinced that the benefit to the company overweights the disadvantages to them.
The scientist within industry probably has a much clearer idea
of the needs of the development people than an academic scientist
can get through the limitations set by corporate confidentiality.
The problems which arise from distance from the needs of the
"customer" or "client" may be the most
difficult to deal with. The difficulties which even the corporate
laboratory of a large company can have in being certain that it
is getting answers that the manufacturing departments are able to
apply are surprisingly great.
The best way for faculty members to deal with this problem is to
convince the company that their input is so valuable that they
are hired as consultants. Close personal relations with technical
staff members is second best. These colleagues can often help
keep one's thoughts consistent with the company's needs without
infringing confidentiality.
Here is another potential trap. Many members of chemistry departments who have not worked in fields such as materials in the past are beginning to recognize their vast scientific potential. Since materials, such as polymers, are of known utility, there is a tendency to when one has some new chemistry which results in long molecules to assume that industry must be waiting, checkbook in hand, to buy patent rights. In fact, there rarely isn't some other way to get to similar polymer properties. Industry will always try to make a patent it owns do the job rather than buying a new one.
A company buys an idea because it will give them a product
they can sell, but no one else can. Therefore the confidentiality
of the idea, at least until it is covered by a patent, is of
great importance. The following example is a real one. A
researcher had a process which was as yet incompletely worked out
but had the potential of commercial interest. Following the
initial contact, while negotiations were going on to permit the
company to follow up on the idea its own labs, the work was
discussed at meetings. This gave any competitor an equal
familiarity with the chemistry, and destroyed the potential for
it to give the original company a commercial edge. This
effectively killed interest in supporting further work, or in the
company continuing it independently. There is no question that
the confidentiality is a problem in any interaction.
Table of Contents
© Manuel Panar 1996