Managing Research Dynamics

1. Managing Research Dynamics Session 3 – Performance Management & Output Capture Hugh Aldridge Director for Industry Cambridge-MIT Institute

2. Aim • What knowledge exchange products work? • That extract usable applications from fundamental research • That transfer analytical skill sets developed within fundamental research • How do you measure performance? • How do you capture the outputs of fundamental research as content for your knowledge exchange products? • How do you keep your product line competitive

3. Conflicting priorities • Pressure to focus internally • HOWEVER, internal success requires that external customers are happy Government

4. The Voice of the Customer • Colleagues from 7 global companies: • Chemical • Aerospace • Telecomms • IT Hardware • Pharma • Medical imaging • Were asked for their views of UK universities – their skills, leadership, performance

5. Chemicals • Ideal person – grounded in technology, legal & business – very rare if not non-existent • Therefore, ideal Office – a balance of all three • Offices that have clear mission and policies are ALWAYS easier to work with • TTO leader – experienced business person (there is no substitute for having LIVED in industry) with a technical/research background • Solving the 3 customer tension – political ‘savvy’ • Offices led by patent attorneys or professors tend to focus on process NOT identifying what to patent (professors want to patent everything!) • Ability to set realistic goals and expectations with internal customers

6. Aerospace 1 • Serious concerns – perceived disconnect between owners of knowledge and knowledge transfer (KT) specialists – ie tension between TTOs and their internal customers • KT requires partnership of ‘knowledge owner (KO)’ with ‘knowledge recipient (KR)’ • Is there a role for people in the middle? If there is then it should be to facilitate the KO/KR relationship – they mustn’t be gatekeepers • Too often TTOs are driven by universities’ desire to extract money from industry – this prevents knowledge exchange • Reflects confused TTO missions: • Promoting KT/KE • Making money

7. Aerospace 2 • TTOs twist discussions that should be about knowledge exchange to being about IP terms • TTOs don’t understand who their customers are • TTOs need to (but don’t) have a real understanding of business • This company uses framework agreements and after they are in place TTOs have no ongoing role • TTOs seem to employ people without appropriate backgrounds in science, technology and business • TTOs do not add value to companies – begs the question what they are for • TTOs damage the economic performance of the UK

8. Telecomms • Knowledge exchange NOT technology transfer – TTOs represent an old paradigm • Relationship between a university and industry has to be mutually beneficial – universities need people able to facilitate the identification of shared value • Time has to be taken to develop trust – Knowledge exchange requires mutual trust – facilitation of dialogue leading to the development of trust is essential • Universities need to recognise that value lies in applicability – translation from basic results is often required • Universities need to manage their customer relationships professionally – ‘maintaining the bridge’

9. IT • Main drivers for relationships are: • Recruitment • Increasing market share – influencing future decision makers • Sales • Reputation • Research • Universities focus too much on research • Universities place too much value on their IP – lack market awareness and ability to listen to industry • Universities are too promiscuous – don’t invest in their friends (US universities are much better at this) • Universities lack relationship management skills

10. Pharma • Some good news – TTOs are getting better: • Many officers still insufficiently knowledgeable or experienced – this wastes time and money • TTOs often over-estimate the importance/value to industry of their IP: • Make unreasonable demands (eg for royalties even though it’s not possible to track IP to products) • There is too much ‘supplier push’ and not enough ‘market pull’ • Universities are becoming too focused on making money and not on supporting the UK economy through knowledge exchange: • Confused missions feeding through to unhelpful behaviour • Trend towards a US approach – making relationships more difficult • Many institutions don’t have the IP portfolio to warrant a TTO – there needs to be a rationalisation

11. Medical Imaging & Systems • Interested in avoiding having to do much development work, are looking for late stage technologies • TTOs need to be more flexible over IP based upon a sophisticated understanding of the IP land-scape • TTOs need to have legal, business and technology experts (too often costs are cut and inexperienced staff employed)

12. Why Industry works with universities • Recruitment – the ‘war for talent’ • Sales • Reputation – thought leadership • Knowledge/Technology: • Jump-start entry into a new field (major chemical company) • Incremental product improvement – not typical For many companies the acquisition of technology is not the main driver, but they realise research funding might be the price to win the ‘war for talent’

13. What industry needs from universities • To be driven by business • Direct experience of business • To be able to realistically assess value • To be able to facilitate – find mutuality • To avoid being a bottle-neck or impediment to dialogue between the principals (academics & company staff) • Clarity of mission • To be able to manage relationships • To listen to their external customers – to be clear who their most important customers are • To recognise that they are in a global competition

14. What goes wrong? • Aims and objectives are misaligned because of conflicting drivers • Universities don’t listen to their most important customers (they need to be clear who these are) • Industry often talks about research and licensing when sales or recruitment are the real interest

15. Observations • Many companies are developing strategic partnerships: • Few institutions around the world (1 per continent) • Objectives: • Recruitment • Thought leadership • Sales • Research • Where does responsibility for such relationships lie in universities? • Do universities have the necessary skills – what are those skills? • Universities have not recognised sufficiently that they are operating in a global competitive market • Global companies will go where they can optimise quality, ease and cost • Increasingly this will be China and India