Anna S. Nilsson
In the knowledge economy, the function of universities has expanded from the traditional roles of teaching and research to include contributing to national wealth. Governments and policymakers around the world are eager to see more university research being translated into products and processes, and driving economic growth.
Initatives are started - inevitably based on US examples - with the goal of increasing the number of spin-off companies.
But there is no easy fix: the process of bringing a research discovery through to commercialisation is complex. Not only does it involve a number of different people based in different silos at the university - such as researchers, university administrators and technology transfer officers, but it is also dependent on cooperation and involvement from external organisations ranging from local companies to institutional investors in major financial centres.
So it is not surprising to find that wherever you go in the world, initiatives that target only one link in the chain end up having the oppostite effect from what was intended.
This is exemplified in examples from a recent study, ”Commercialization of Life-Science Research at Universities in the United States, Japan and China.” The study demonstrates that the root of the problem is a lack of understanding of the various mechanisms underlying the processes of commercialization and how they relate to each other.
Policymakers need to consider a wide range mechanisms
Challenges in the Process of Commercialising University Research
Generic
- Lack of seed-financing and shortage of suitably trained staff
- Creating and maintaining top quality science
- Engaging commercial partners at the early stage of the process
- Policymakers’ tendency to focus on the structure – rather than the content – of activities, and to expect a quick return on investment
- University managers are unclear about the priorities and goals of the technology transfer function
- Cultural barriers prevent information flowing between universities and companies, and there may also be a lack of trust and respect between the two parties
- Universities often have conflicting goals, and as a result there may be insufficient reward and/or negative impacts on researchers who participate in commercialisation
US-Specific
- Bayh-Dole is a one-channel system and may become a road-block at universities that do not have sufficient capacity in their technology transfer offices.
- Interaction between researchers and companies is limited by a litigious climate and complex processes for negotiating intellectual property rights.
Japan-specific
- Domestic life science companies focus on internal R&D rather than collaboration with universities
- There is a low level of entrepreneurial thinking in society
- There is a shortage of individuals with experience in creating and growing university spin-offs. This is compounded by low levels of interaction between people in the technology commercialisation chain and by the rigid labour market
China-specific
- Government and authorities impose the commercialiation landscape and institutions in top-down processes; participants have little faith in the officially designated institutions
- There are few domestic life science companies that can take the initiative to proceed with commercialisation of university research
- Both the intellectual property and financial system are underdeveloped
To draw up policies that will increase the levels of commercialisation of university research and foster economic growth, a number of mechanisms need to be considered in concert. Studying the challenges and opportunities for these very diverse countries, three main issues emerged as critical.
Critical mass: For commercialisation processes to work, suitably qualified individuals from across the chain must be involved.
Efficient transfer channels: There must be time- and cost-effective channels for transferring university research to the private sector so that development can continue.
Interaction: There must be links between university researchers and the private sector to ensure suitable opportunities are recognised, and to support onward development.
One of the key challenges is getting policymakers to work across ministries
To create strategic plans for commercialisation of university research that take account of the three issues highlighted above, policy makers from different ministries need to collaborate.
In most countries, and at the European Union level, the relevant policies belong to different government departments; for example, the ministry of finance deals with taxes, the ministry of education deals with defining the aims of technology transfer at universities, and the ministry of industry is responsible for seed finance.
All those issues must be addressed in the commercialisation of university research: the challenge is to get ministries working together to form policies that will create a better environment. Furthermore, these processes are not static, which means that a strategic plan for commercialisation of university research must be revised from time to time.
Universities cannot be expected to be the sole drivers of commercialisation efforts
However, universities do not have the means to make all the changes identified in the study. One reason is that there are regulatory elements that are outside the universities’ authority. Also, financial resources are limited, which makes it difficult for universities to prioritise commercialisation at the expense of their research and education functions.
Universities cannot be expected to be the sole drivers of commercialisation efforts. But their involvement is absolutely vital for regional and national economic development.
Anna S. Nilsson, PhD MBA, is Science Attaché at Embassy of Sweden, Washington DC
Receive the Funding Newswire each Tuesday, our Policy Bulletin each Thursday, and news about bridging Europe’s east-west innovation gap twice a month in The Widening. 
A unique international forum for public research organisations and companies to connect their external engagement with strategic interests around their R&D system.
