1. Evaluation of Transfer Projects
FITT
(Fostering Interregional Exchange in ICT Technology Transfer)
www.FITT-for-Innovation.eu
2. The context
46% of resources are allocated to the conception, development
and launch of products which will never reach the market or fail
after the release.
Robert G. Cooper, 2000, Ivey Business Journal
How to reduce the risk of spending time, money and
efforts of the technology transfer officers on non-
valuable projects?
2 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
3. Need
Need for a first assessment of the disclosed
inventions on:
technical & commercial potential
the interest of the research organisation to
Credit: Microsoft Office
allocate resources to the transfer.
Necessity to be quick and simple.
Usually followed by a more in-depth analysis later.
Always performed internally whereas further investigation for
protection/exploitation of the invention can be outsourced (patent attorney,
marketing studies...)
3 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
4. Objectives
In the context of public R&D, this first-level assessment has the following
objectives:
To provide a first view on the possibility of transferring the research results,
making the best use of all kind of transfer
With a “return on research” i.e. financial returns that will reinforce the
research capacity
Responsibility to ensure the dissemination of the research results in order to
optimize their socio-economic impact (including employment creation) aside
from a strictly financial, return-on-investment perspective
Given the transversal nature of ICT, commitment to a broad perspective and
to consider all possible fields of application in order to ensure the widest
possible dissemination.
4 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
5. Elements of the process
Methodology
Stakeholders
Outcome of the assessment
5 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
6. Practices available in the toolbox
DETECTION of technology transfer opportunities
AWARENESS MONITORING OF
CREATION ACTIVITIES
‘Quick assessment
tool for business
ideas’
EVALUATION
‘Evaluation criteria’
‘Technology
transfer follow-up
committee’
6 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
7. Quick assessment tool for business ideas:
‘NABC’
Easy method to quickly analyse and develop value propositions for projects
N Customer/Market Needs
A Compelling Approach
B Customer Benefits/cost
C Worldwide Competition
Useful for researchers :
Guides them to write down a compelling, pitchy Value Proposition showing their distinctive
advantage
Makes them aware that the greatest technology is not enough, but needs to be combined
with great positioning and a great team
Useful for technology transfer officers
Good fit in organisations with large deal flow of ‘wild’ business ideas, emanating from people
with few entrepreneurial skills
Easy framework for dissemination/awareness creation
7 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
8. Evaluation criteria
Review of evaluation criteria used in research organisations for technology
transfer
Preincubation entry Incubation entry eval
Early-stage eval eval
n
tion Incubatio
a
Research Development Proof-of-concept Pre-incub Market
Licensing
Focus on Digiteo’s set of criteria for maturation projects & their condition of use
8 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
9. Technology transfer follow-up committee (1)
Focus on INRIA’s committee in charge of:
Startup creation projects
Industrial partnerships with transfer of assets (license or assignment)
Industrial partnerships with transfer of competences (expertise)
Participation to standardisation actions within a transfer action
An open source diffusion of an important code base
Composition:
3 internal persons (including representative from TTO)
3 senior private experts
Credit: Microsoft Office
When: one meeting every two months
9 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
10. Technology transfer follow-up committee (2)
Committee is advisory for the INRIA Transfer department. It gives
recommendations on:
go/no go (TT initialisation and follow-up)
transfer strategy adoption
asking for an opportunity/feasibility study
means allocation for maturation if needed
Process:
Template description of the project built by the researcher, TT officer and Sectorial
TT Associate
Submission sent a few days before the meeting (no late submission)
A collaborative tool allows the follow-up by all the staff concerned
10 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
11. Pros & Cons
PROs CONs
Early analysis allowing the adoption of Difficult to choose the experts, who must
transfer strategy. be legitimate to “kill” the projects.
Increased formalisation of the process, Risk of excessive formalisation of the
leading to the diminution of oral tradition. process. Some flexibility should remain, to
support great, “out of scope” projects.
More visibility for the projects that go
through the first-level assessment. Even if
the result of the assessment is negative,
the TT officers/ experts of the jury are
aware of it, leading to possible
developments in the future.
11 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects
12. Suggested Readings
Link to code book
Invention
inventor
Invention disclosure
Opportunity assessment
Proof of concept
Technology development maturation
Technology transfer
Valuation
Value proposition
Link to relevant websites
http://www.iphandbook.org/handbook/ch09/
12 | 26.03.2010 Evaluation of technology transfer projects