Urgently needed: A marriage counsellor

Science|Business Editor Richard L. Hudson

Consider the problem: Big corporations, as never before, are relying on university researchers to perform research they no longer do themselves; long gone from the corporate landscape is the central lab that wins Nobel Prizes. At the same time, universities – especially in Europe – are starved for cash and in greater need than ever before for corporate sugar-daddies to help fund their labs.

A match made in heaven, you think? Yes in theory – but in practice it’s also a match that isn’t working in Europe, judging by the discussions in May at the annual conference of Europe’s biggest corporate R&D bosses – the European Industrial Research Managers’ Association. Two workshops on the topic, “Accessing University Technology” (co-chaired by this writer), quickly turned into a group therapy session about the cultural divide.

From Mars…

Here’s the Martian view of the tech-transfer world – the perspective of the business world, as enunciated at the conference:

• The technology transfer offices at most European universities hinder, rather than help, the process of buying technology. They are often ignorant about, not only the commercial value of what they’re selling, but also about the technology itself.
  
  
• The intellectual property system, in the hands of many universities, is a paper chase. What should be a simple deal over who gets what if a technology succeeds becomes a legalistic tangle – with the academic negotiators often overestimating the commercial importance of what they’re offering. (Of course, if you think it’s bad in Europe, try the lawyer-infested US market.)
  
  
• There’s a complete mismatch over goals, time-frame and language between academics and industry. Despite slow reforms in the system, many academic researchers remain fixated on publication numbers and citation indices, rather than turning their ideas into socially useful products. And they operate on geological time-scales of a decade or more, rather than the 18-month product development cycle of many companies.

and from Venus

Now here’s the Venutian view – of the academics present at the meeting:

• Too many businesses are rapacious. They want to swoop in fast to get university technology on the cheap. They don’t like the tech-transfer offices for the same reason a wolf hates the farmer: It keeps him from the chickens. (And don’t get me started on the tooth-and-claw style of the venture capitalists!)
  
  
• Businesses like the ignorance of academics about the value of what they’ve got; it’s an asymmetry of information that works in their favour. And if the IP procedures are so cumbersome, why don’t the businesses just agree to make the IP free to all?
  
  
• High turnover inside a company can often mess up a budding relationship. It doesn’t do an academic much good to cultivate a project manager, when that person may be transferred abroad or moved out after just a few years.

Who’s right? As any marriage counsellor will tell you, that’s the wrong question to ask. To work together, both sides have to make an effort to understand the other’s point of view, and then take small steps to build trust. So here are some of the ideas that were mentioned at the workshops.

• Focus on the long-term relationship. Involve all levels of the company in the academic relationship, rather than just the project manager. Open your doors to the academics – inviting students into your own well equipped labs, even if only to work on their theses; it’s a great way to recruit talent, if nothing else.
  
  
• Keep the IP simple. One US executive described a new industry–university consortium now being formed for basic research. The companies pay a membership fee up-front to fund the academic research, and the universities agree to hand over the resulting intellectual property for a fixed-in-advance flat fee, rather than a complex royalty scheme.
  
  
• Don’t confuse a plough horse with a thoroughbred. Universities are not businesses; their main mission is to teach students and advance knowledge. Universities are best at supplying that basic knowledge to the companies, rather than in developing their technology into ready-to-sell products.