FITT (Fostering Interregional Exchange in ICT Technology Transfer)

1. FITT (Fostering Interregional Exchange in ICT Technology Transfer)

2. Researchers’ Consulting Activities in general • Researchers have competences in some domain, which allows them to perform consulting activities on demand of industrial companies • This can be an additional source of revenue for researcher and of scientific expertise for the company • These activities can generate intellectual property, which risk to stay out of control of a TT office • They can also give birth to interesting projects and partnerships for the research organisation which employs the researcher

3. Researchers’ Consulting Activities in practice

4. Evidence report

5. Measures taken by INRIA • Researchers being civil servants, they ask authorisation to perform extra activity • They fill in a form which gives details about consulting agreement negotiated with a company • Researcher’s responsible give opinion on: • compatibility of this extra activity with main activities of the PRO (research director) • researcher’s engagement in consulting being only his secondary activity (human resources) • risk of conflict of interests (TT officer) • opinion of regional centre director, optionally opinion of Transfer and Innovation Department • final authorisation is given by INRIA’s CEO

6. Measures taken by INRIA Involvement of TT officer in every request for authorisation of consulting allows to:

7. When? • Timing • The new legislation on civil servants extra activity (giving some precise regulation of working time and salary) appeared in July 2007 • The question was raised in INRIA in September 2008 • The new procedure was put in place in October 2008

8. Who? • Stakeholders • INRIA headquarters, in particular Transfer and Innovation Department – set up the new policy, follow-up some part of requests • INRIA regional centres: TT officers, research and administrative directors, human resources – evaluate researcher’s requests, try to detect transfer potential or possible risks behind this activity

9. Pros & Cons PRO’s CON’s • Building researchers awareness of IP protection issues and of the consequences they have for their work as consultants • Clear rules are set up concerning researcher’s financial benefits, amount of time dedicated to consulting and potential use of INRIA software and other IP (guidelines for researchers) • Possibility to have a view on researchers’ contacts with companies; TT officers stay in the loop • Researchers can still provide private consultancy, which brings them financial benefits and meets the needs of SMEs • The necessity to make this new process understandable for researchers, who can have the impression that “everything is becoming bureaucratic” • The validation procedure should not be too long and complicated, which would discourage researchers (in INRIA: 15 days to give an answer)

10. Why ? • Rationale: • Researchers at PROs are an important source of expertise for the private sector; INRIA’s mission includes sharing these competencies, SMEs being the privileged partners • Some cases showed that: • Consulting may involve transfer, which is not taken into account by researchers when they negotiate contract on their own • Researchers’ personal contacts with industry can be interesting for INRIA TT office, if only there is an information flow • Consulting services are sometimes an occasion to bring the company closer to INRIA and to initiate a collaboration • There was a need for a procedure which allows to manage all those aspects of consulting

11. Why ? • Impact: • The number and the nature of actors involved in authorisation procedure guarantee a thorough examination of each case • Researchers become more conscious of limits and opportunities of the activity they engage in and pay more attention to INRIA IPR; if a problem arise it can be solved together with TT office • A way to avoid the situation when an effective transfer is done by researcher as a consultant and the TT office, as well as the management, learn about it post factum • TT office gets a mean to seize the opportunities of partnerships that arise from contacts with companies • The benefits of all the parties (researcher, company, INRIA) should be preserved in an optimal way

12. Outcome • The process has been formalised and implemented in INRIA activities; every contract concerning researcher’s consulting services for company or other organisation passes through TTO and is examined before being signed • Effective follow-up • No negative feedback from researchers

13. Lessons Learned • Looking back now, what would you … • ... do different? – The practice seems to be on the right track • ... improve? – There is an ongoing reflection towards facilitating the consulting activities, especially for SMEs, usage of a specific structure, know-how transfer contract with INRIA and other mechanisms in addition to the consultancy provided by researchers • … recommend to others? – Setting up a process to follow-up consulting activities is worth some efforts, as it increases both researchers awareness and opportunities detection

14. Suggested Readings • Link to bibliography • Links to code book • Consultancy • Know-how • Confidential information • Confidentiality • Intellectual property • Intellectual property protection • Link to relevant websites • www.inria.fr