Universities Explore New Approaches for Tech Transfer

University technology transfer efforts have been the subject of considerable discussion of late, moving all the way to hearings on Capitol Hill. Whether or not broad changes may be afoot as debate continues on the merits of the Bayh-Dohl Act, but several universities are already tweaking, modifying or stepping up their efforts to establish new businesses in emerging fields through innovative approaches.

 

The incentive for university direct involvement in tech transfer can be significant as administrators seek new sources of revenue because the payoff to universities and local economic impact can, on occasion, be quite lucrative. Last year, the University of Massachusetts (UMass) generated its best take yet from commercialization of its intellectual property, a record $41.4 million across five campuses, according to UMass officials.

 

In 2005, university technology managers across the U.S. reported more than $42 billion in R&D expenditures at U.S. academic centers, 628 new spinoff companies created, 4,932 new licenses signed, and an increase in patent applications filed over the previous year, according to the Association of University Technology Managers’ FY 2005 Licensing Survey (see the March 5, 2007 issue of the Digest).

 

Universities often rely on outside expertise to handle technology transfer services such as intellectual property protection and market analysis. The downside for some universities is less control of the licensing revenue and the costly fees associated with the services. Last month, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM) won approval from the UW System Board of Regents to manage its own intellectual property, effectively separating from the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF).

 

UWM officials said the decision will allow the university to shape its own destination in research and technology transfer. The Regents also approved a resolution to allow UWM to withdraw from the WiSys Technology Foundation Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of WARF established to promote scientific investigation and research at all UW System universities, except the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

 

UWM Research Foundation President Brian Thompson said the decision will allow greater flexibility to tailoring licensing programs to specifically meet UWM’s needs and potentially lead to increased revenue to UWM. Previously, 40 percent of the revenue generated from licenses was allocated to WiSys. Additionally, the move will allow for a greater economic impact on the region. Preference for licensing will be given to companies in the region where high technology and advanced manufacturing jobs will be created or retained in the state, and the UWM Research foundation will actively encourage start-up companies based on university research.

 

By eliminating some of the traditional barriers of technology transfer, the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) hopes to grow new or existing businesses in the state through a program that offers Nebraska-based businesses free access to intellectual property. Under the program, AdvanceNebraska, companies that want to develop UNMC’s intellectual property submit a business plan, and if it is proven to be commercially viable and the company has the resources to implement it, the licensing fee and patent cost is waived for 3-5 years.

 

Companies in return must be located in the state and employ workers. UNeMed, the marketing and licensing arm for UNMC, negotiates a share of the future profits, which varies depending on how critical the license was to the final product or how much money the company put into development.

 

A new program announced earlier this month by the Maryland Technology Development Corporation (TEDCO) provides funding on a competitive-basis to university-based teams with the goal of increasing the number of university start-ups. The program, TechStart, recently made its first round of awards, providing six teams with $15,000 each for market research. Teams must consist of an inventor that assists in evaluating the feasibility of the start-up, an experienced entrepreneur to provide business guidance and a technology transfer manger. 

 

In Massachusetts, Boston University’s (BU) School of Management and its Office of Technology Development created the Entrepreneurial Research Lab (ERL) to spur the formation of companies and commercialize research from BU labs. This “living laboratory” focuses on entrepreneurs – either current students or recent BU grads – connecting them to professors, mentors, businesses, investors and policymakers. The ERL provides incubator space and mentoring in exchange for active participation in educational activities of the school, including designing new educational activities, acting a live case study and providing guest lectures.

 

Universities that are traditionally strong in research may lack the ability to spin off companies from that research. A new program at the University of Texas San Antonio (USTA) business school is hoping to fill that gap for the school. Last fall, the Center for Innovation and Technology Entrepreneurship was created as a pipeline for USTA faculty, students and the surrounding business community to develop new technology ventures. Student teams submit their projects to the UT System Technology Transfer Office in support of a patent. The center’s director, Corey Hallam, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate, hopes the program produces at least two start-up companies each year.

 

Learn more about university tech transfer…

The debate over the future shape and form of university tech transfer will be the focus of an engaging breakout session at SSTI’s 11th Annual Conference, Oct. 18-19, 2007 in Baltimore. The discussion, which will frame the issue around local and regional TBED priorities, will be led by Dr. Donald F. Smith, Vice President for Economic Development for Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh.

 

For more information visit: http://www.ssticonference.org/