best%practices%of%knowledge transfer%in%japan ......best%practices%of%knowledge transfer%in%japan:%%...

Best Practices of Knowledge Transfer in Japan:

Proof-‐of-‐Concept Program and Enhancing Development of Global

Entrepreneur Program

Kosuke Kato, PhD, RTTP Team Leader, Business Development Team,

Office for University-‐Industry Collaboration, Osaka University.

SNITTS: September 15, 2015

2

Definition of Innovation

*Roberts, Edward B. (1988) Managing Invention and Innovation, Industrial Research Institute, Inc

Innovation = Invention X Commercialization

Roberts, Edward B. (1988) MIT Sloan School of Management defined :

3

Process of technology commercialization

3. Incubate

define

Commercializ-ability

7. Promote adoption

9. Sustain

commercialization 2.

Mobilize Interest

and endorse-

ment

5. Demonstrate contextually

in products

and processes

4. Mobilize resource

for Demo

6. Mobilize market consti-tuents

8. Mobilize

complimentary assets for delivery

1. Imagine the dual (techno-market) insight

*1: Jolly, V.K., Commercializing New technologies, Getting from Mind to Market, Harvard Business School Press, p18, 1997.

Jolly*1 shows five independent sub-‐processes and bridges between them for technology commercialization. At an early stage, the technology that has been created in the university labs shifts from Imagining to Incubating. TTO’s value on university technology commercialization: whether TTO can effectively promote achieving complex tasks in these initial three steps.

4

Osaka Univ. created own Innovation Ecosystem

Ref. Takata (2011) Study of the Process of University Technology Commercialization: The Roles and Effects of Educational Courses

Today’s focus

Technology Transfer Office

Students

Entrepreneurs

Business Plan Competition

Faculty

Educational Programs

Mentors/ Advisors

Proof-‐of-‐Concept /Prototyping

Pre-‐Seed Projects Startup

“Imagining”

Potential Stakeholders and End-‐users

Osaka Univ.

“Incubating” VCs

Licensing to Existing company

“Mobilize”

In order to do that….

Proof-‐of-‐Concept Program

5

Bridge the Gaps in Technology Transfer

How do we bridge the “Gap” in Technology transfer? This “Gap” extends from where the government funding of basic research ends to where existing companies or investors are willing to accept the risk to commercialize the technology.

6 Would you like to more effectively bridge this gap? Would your stakeholders like to more effectively bridge this gap?

Which step do you think is the most important?

1. Target stage and research field

2. Fund (Money): source, sustainability, and size

3. Management

4. Metrics: measurement of KPIs

7

Four (4) steps to implement successful “Gap Bridging Program”




3. Management


8

Source: Mind the Gap 2011

Target stage, research field, and fund

9

Key Success Factor (KSF): Analyze your own gaps first and then design the program to bridge your own gap.

Today’s focus

Depending on the stage and research field, the program structure (e.g. fund size and management) will be very different

10

Scale up experiment – e.g. “A New Epoxy Resin” case study Undertake testing of a technology or material to obtain data on performance Develop a more user-‐friendly software interface Send a material out to independent third party for testing under industrial conditions Conduct in vivo or animal testing of a new compound

Example of Proof-‐of-‐concept/prototyping

11

Stage: Proof-‐of-‐concept/Prototyping, mainly Research field: All field Fund source(s): – Government: Strengthening research university project – Regional: Osaka prefecture manufacturing project – Osaka University: Rent by managing open laboratories Fund size: 10-‐30K US$/project (Total: 150-‐200K US$) Sustainability: Negotiation with each source every year Expected financial return: No

Target stage, research field, and fund : Osaka University’s case

Important Note:

Money is of course important.

However, the value of the

“Gap Bridging Program” is Not only about the money!

12

Four (4) steps to implement successful “Gap funding Program”



3. Management

4. Metrics

13

Unsuccessful Management

14

Potential licensees

Investors

Faculty TTO

1. Faculties wrote and submitted their proposals on the basis of their (unverified) assumption to attract potential licensees/investors.

2. TTO staffs evaluated the proposals and granted budgets to the winners. 3. Showing the collected data or developed prototype, TTO tried to motivate

existing companies or investors to take the risks to commercialize the faculties’ technology. But, TTO staffs couldn't, unfortunately. Lost money!

1

2 3

3

15

Looking at a success story at Osaka Univ. and the four (4) Key Success Factors (KSFs)

Why is it so difficult to bridge the Gap, even if a faculty has enough money?

Successful Management

KSF1: Gap Analysis and Verification through Technology Assessment

16

Problem 1: It is generally very difficult for faculty to correctly analyze the gap to bridge for motivating existing companies or investors to take the risks to commercialize the faculty’s technology.

Faculty

Companies to support 1. Market Research 2. Prior Art Search

Students’ resources 1. Faculty’s Lab. 2. MBA 3. Business Plan

Competition

Oversight committee and mentors’ advices

1. Industry experts 2. Clinicians 3. Regulatory experts

Interview to Potential licensees

Interview to Investors

Solution! Gap analysis

TTO

Selection criteria at Osaka Univ.

17

Results of interview(s) to potential licensee and/or investors – If the specific data collection or prototyping is completed by the end of

the fiscal year, can this project be succeeded in e.g. Licensing to the potential licensee(s)? Committed by the investor(s)?

Market :needs, size, trend, and new vs. existing market. Social contribution Sustainability of competitive advantage. Intellectual property: e.g. freedom to operate. Barrier to market entry: e.g. regulatory path and custom. Stage of development and technology development plan Resource allocation Business formation

Large weight

Based on the Gap Analysis, the plans were mostly modified from the PI’s initial proposal

PI and TTO staff meet and discuss the points made by the advisors at the screening, and based on this advice an implementation plan sheet is submitted. Notice of Acceptance Notice of Approved Budget Hands -on Support

PI makes a presentation for external advisors on campus, and the advisors decide with TTO to accept or reject.

TTO staff investigate industry needs and opinions. PI produces and submits full application (ca. 6-10 pages) Review by external advisors

Advisors review the submitted entry sheet and advise on commercialization TTO staff give feedback to PI and decide whether to write full application. Consider application for other support programs

PI (Principle Investigator) fills in and submits a ca. 4 page application entry sheet to TTO

Actio

n

Program Entry

Full Application Auditing

Pre-‐ Screening

Hands on Support

Implementation Plan

Selection process at Osaka Univ.

19

Faculty

Problem 2: Faculty is generally not good at business formation and deal makings in the process of tech. transfer. Companies to support

1. Proof-‐of-‐Concept data collection

2. Prototyping 3. Market Research 4. Prior Art Search

Students 1. Faculty’s Lab. 2. MBA

Entrepreneurs

Oversight committee and mentors


Potential licensees

Investors

Solution! Team formation and Deal makings

TTO

KSF2: Team Formation and Deal Makings

KSF3: Out source

20

Problem 3: Faculty is generally not interested in the data collection or prototyping which are NOT lead to the publication of academic papers.

Companies to support 1. Proof-‐of-‐Concept data

collection 2. Prototyping (e.g.

manufacturing company)

Solution! Out source

Faculty TTO

KSF4: Appropriate level of commitment

21

Faculty

Problem 4: Faculty sometimes does not trust/obey TTO staffs if the resources for commercialization (money, human, and facility) are owned/gotten mainly by the faculty but not by TTO.

University Management (e.g. Vice president

for research)

External resources Public Private

Providing useful human networks, other resources, and hands-‐on support

Solution!

TTO

Caution: Too much service to faculty will decrease the faculty’s commitment

Real case study: A new epoxy resin

Technology prior to Gap bridging program Dr. Junko Ichihara in Osaka University – methods to enable chemical powder reaction without solvent (liquid) under a laboratory scale.

important applications in epoxies

Gap bridging project (ca. 30,000 US$): Scale-‐up experiment Gap analysis: Dr. Ichihara was originally planed to use a large-‐size glass reactor. However, external advisory board conditioned Dr. Ichihara’s group that the group should negotiate with a company to rent a larger scale chemical reactor to meet industry's needs. Deal making: TTO staff negotiated a potential licensee to rent a five litter chemical reactor by free of charge under a joint research agreement. Outsource: The scale-‐up experiment itself has no value for publishing academic paper. Therefore, a external technician was hired.

Outcome Deal making: Potential licensee launched an incubation laboratory inside Osaka University under a joint research agreement (FY2012) Deal Making: Licensing agreement with the potential licensee (FY2013) 22

Summary of the 4 KSFs: G-‐TOC Integrate innovation ecosystem to bridge the Gap

23

G-‐TOC: Gap analysis Team formation Out source Commitment

These are the complex tasks which we should work as Technology trasfer professionals for university technologies!

24

Companies to support 1. Proof-‐of-‐Concept data

collection 2. Prototyping 3. Market Research 4. Prior Art Search

University Management (e.g. Vice president

for research)

Students 1. Faculty’s Lab. 2. MBA 3. Business Plan

Competition

Entrepreneurs

Oversight committee and mentors


Potential licensees

Investors

Faculty TTO

Summary of the 4 KSFs: G-‐TOC Integrate innovation ecosystem to bridge the Gap




3. Management


25

Metrics: Evaluation of the program

26

Short-‐term – G-‐TOC: Have you solved/avoided the four (4) major complex problems which occurred without this program?

– Have you moved the project to bridge the next gap (e.g. to get follow-‐on funding)?

– Have existing companies or investors accepted the risk to commercialize the technology (e.g. to make deals on licensing agreement or to get an investment)?

Long-‐term – Have you built a community to bridge the Gap? – Have you formed business and created job?

How do we measure the effectiveness of the “Gap Bridging Program?

Evaluation of OU Gap Bridging Program FY2011-‐2014

27

Short-‐term – 133 proposals received – 45 proposals accepted and hands-‐on supported – 18 Joint research agreements signed – 5 Licensing agreements signed – 9 follow-‐on funding received – 1 MTA (Material transfer agreements) – 1 Investment (A bank decided to invest: FY2013) Long-‐term – Building a community to bridge the Gap:

ca. 20 external advisors from industry, VCs, and regulatory department Subscription of Market Research Databank

– Business formation: 1 startup company launched in FY2012.

Enhancing Development of Global Entrepreneur (EDGE)

Program

28

29

Osaka Univ. Innovation Ecosystem

Ref. Takata (2011) Study of the Process of University Technology Commercialization: The Roles and Effects of Educational Courses

Today’s focus

Technology Transfer Office

Students

Entrepreneurs

Business Plan Competition

Faculty

Educational Programs

Mentors/ Advisors

Proof-‐of-‐Concept /Prototyping

Pre-‐Seed Projects Startup

“Imagining”

Potential Stakeholders and End-‐users

Osaka Univ.

“Incubating” VCs

Licensing to Existing company

“Mobilize”

30

Boston University

SRI International

PG3-‐2 Technology Commercialization Technology Assessment Venture Assessment

PG3-‐3 LEAN LAUNCH PAD Customer findings and validation

LEL

Motivated Entrepreneur Candidates

Various Technologies

Filtered Technologies

Fundamental Knowledge Practical Skills

POC, Prototype Entrepreneur

with Start-‐up knowledge

MVP, POC, Prototype Entrepreneur with

Start-‐up skills

Collaboration

Collaboration

Collaboration

Gap Funding

Mentoring (VCs, SRI International,

etc)

PG3-‐1 Development of Motivated Entrepreneur Candidates PG3-‐2 Development of Entrepreneur with Start-‐up knowledge PG3-‐3 Development of Entrepreneur with Start-‐up skills

We combine mentoring service and gap funding into those education programs and create impactful Startups and entrepreneurs.

PG3-‐1 Entrepreneurship Introduction Two days workshop for Innovation Entrepreneur Speaker series

30

Osaka University EDGE Program

31

Example of students activities

Assess real technologies being developed at Osaka Univ. or related institutions. – Social/market needs – Solution and technology features – Potential market analysis – Competitive analysis – Technology development plan – IP strategy – Product & services – Financials – Milestones & exit strategy

Present the business plan to real VCs

32

Evaluation of EDGE program (Sep. 2014 – Aug. 2015)

Course programs provided – 9 two-‐hours seminars, called “Entrepreneur speaker series” – 1 two-‐days course – 1 two-‐weeks course – 2 two-‐months courses

Mentors participated – 50 mentors or advisers from 30 companies (e.g. VCs)

Students participated – 202 participants to two-‐hours seminars – 112 participants to two days or more length courses

Students’ interaction with potential stakeholders – 249 interactive meetings completed

33

Evaluation of EDGE program (Sep. 2014 – Aug. 2015)

Business plan competitions which technology entrepreneurs challenged – NEDO Technology Commercialization Program (overseas version)

4 teams applied and 2 teams selected as winners to visit silicon valley – NEDO Technology Commercialization Program (domestic version)

1 team applied and awarded – EDGE competition: 1team applied – Japan business model competition: 1 team applied – Bio science grandprix: 1 team applied and awarded

Key contracts toward technology commercialization signed – 1 follow-‐on funding – 1 joint research agreement

Startup company established – 1 startup company

Technology Transfer Professionals (RTTPs) in Japan

34

11 Existing RTTPs in Japan

35

Name Affiliation Position

Ami KATSUKI Kyoto University Chief professional staff

Katsuya FUKAMI Kyushu University Professor

Kazuya SUZUKI Todai TLO Licensing associate

Kosuke KATO Osaka University Team leader, Business Development

Megumi TAKATA Kyushu University Business School Professor

Shinji OHNISHI Kansai TLO President

Takafumi YAMAMOTO Todai TLO CEO

Tomoko OHYA Osaka University Chief Univ. Research Admin.

Tomoo ISHIDA Todai TLO Board member

Toshihiko MATSUHASHI Osaka University Prof. for Univ. Industry Collaboration

Yusaku TENJIN Todai TLO Board member

Please visit ATTP website to apply for RTTP!

Thank you for listening. Questions?

[email protected]‐u.ac.jp

36

mailto:[email protected]

Best Practices of Knowledge Transfer in Japan: �Proof-of-Concept Program and Enhancing Development of Global Entrepreneur ProgramDefinition of InnovationProcess of technology commercializationOsaka Univ. created own Innovation EcosystemProof-of-Concept ProgramBridge the Gaps in Technology TransferWhich step do you think is the most important?Four (4) steps to implement successful �“Gap Bridging Program” Target stage, research field, and fundExample of Proof-of-concept/prototypingTarget stage, research field, and fund�: Osaka University’s caseImportant Note:��Money is of course important.��However,�the value of the�“Gap Bridging Program” �is Not only about the money!Four (4) steps to implement successful �“Gap funding Program” Unsuccessful Managementスライド番号 15KSF1: Gap Analysis and Verification through Technology AssessmentSelection criteria at Osaka Univ.Selection process at Osaka Univ.KSF2: Team Formation and Deal MakingsKSF3: Out sourceKSF4: Appropriate level of commitmentReal case study: A new epoxy resinSummary of the 4 KSFs: G-TOC�Integrate innovation ecosystem to bridge the GapSummary of the 4 KSFs: G-TOC�Integrate innovation ecosystem to bridge the GapFour (4) steps to implement successful �“Gap Bridging Program” Metrics: Evaluation of the programEvaluation of OU Gap Bridging Program�FY2011-2014Enhancing Development of Global Entrepreneur (EDGE) ProgramOsaka Univ. Innovation EcosystemOsaka University EDGE ProgramExample of students activities Evaluation of EDGE program �(Sep. 2014 – Aug. 2015)Evaluation of EDGE program �(Sep. 2014 – Aug. 2015)Technology Transfer Professionals (RTTPs) in Japan11 Existing RTTPs in JapanThank you for listening.�Questions?��[email protected]�

best%practices%of%knowledge transfer%in%japan ......best%practices%of%knowledge transfer%in%japan:%%...

Documents