eu-israel innovation seminar technological …...eu - israel innovation seminar technological...

2013

18-19 November 2013

EU - Israel Innovation Seminar

Technological Incubators - Tel Aviv

EU - Israel Innovation Seminar Technological Incubators

18-19 November 2013

2

Table of Contents

Summary 3

Report 4

Programme 22

List of Participants 26

Link to photographs https://www.dropbox.com/sh/o0aoxrp5gr4auxc/d0LneHMSj7


18-19 November 2013

3

Summary

More than 70 European incubator managers and staff, start up companies, policy

makers and academics attended the third annual EU Israeli Innovation Seminar

which took place on 18-19 November in Tel Aviv. The European participants came

from 15 EU Member States - Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary,

Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and

Slovenia. They were joined by 30 of their Israeli counterparts as well as 30

representatives from EU Embassies.

This year's seminar focused on technological incubators. The seminar's first day was

held at the Google Campus in Tel Aviv and took the form of facilitated discussions

and a roundtable of incubator managers. On the second day, participants visited

Israeli incubators and a municipal start up facility.

The keynote speech was given by Professor Ehud Gazit, Chief Scientist of the

Ministry of Science, Space and Technology who spoke about the academia,

government and industry triple helix as a key for innovative society.

The variety of countries, in terms of size and innovation development, led to

stimulating discussions. Among the conclusions reached were: the need for a critical

mass of talents, that there is no one best practice, the importance of diversity, the

need for successful entrepreneurs to serve as mentors, recognising failure as a

positive indication, and the necessity to continually adapt the innovation

ecosystem. Differing positions were advanced on whether a culture can be changed

and on how to encourage entrepreneurship in societies lacking that predisposition,

the role of the educational systems, the relative importance of funding, the positive

and negative aspects of multinational research centres, the role of a country's

"diaspora" and whether or not a country should be concerned about and address its

"brain drain".

It was agreed that it was important to maintain the seminar's momentum. Among

the ideas for a common project were the establishment of a competition that would

award a prize to the best of the best 3 incubator graduates nominated by the

participating countries. It was also agreed to set up a Google forum to maintain

communication between the participants and to provide input to the planning of

next year's seminar.

Alexandra Meir

EU Delegation, Tel Aviv


18-19 November 2013

4

REPORT1

Keynote Speech

Professor Ehud Gazit, Chief Scientist Ministry of Science, Technology and Space

The concept of chief scientist in Israel is unique, due to Israel’s special nature. Every

office in the government has a chief scientist. Tech transfer is knowledge transfer

from academy into society. Incubators in Israel are an important part of the Israeli

culture. It is called ‘Greenhouse’ in Hebrew, which relates to the protection of the

weak and small. Incubators create a triangle: government, industry, academy, not in

this order. The academic world is the source. An example is Teva, which developed

the Copaxon drug. The concept for this drug originated in the Weizmann Institute as

an innovative concept and was not intended to be a drug. Nevertheless it brought

more than 22 billion dollars revenue to Teva. Cherry tomatoes are another example

– originated in The Hebrew University. This type of dynamic innovative link between

academy and industry is encouraged in Israel and has its benefits.

Innovation in Israel is research initiated. It relies on the imagination, innovation and

creativity of researchers, their desire to develop new products. As a government

(Chief Scientist) we have to find ways to encourage the development of new

technologies, by supporting various activities, e.g. the MAGNET PROGRAMME, which

directs the transfer of knowledge from the academy towards product maturation,

and is involved in the formation of consortiums between industry and other

partners, and in attracting the right kind of innovations.

University: the excellent source of basic research, the prime source for innovation

and creativity. Incubators are only one option, licensing to companies is another,

local and foreign. Technological maturation is also important.

The 1980 Bayh–Dole Act by the USA government was a turning point in the transfer

of technology from the academic world to the industry: this affected decisions

regarding ownership of patents and inventions financed by the American

government, thus providing the public with access to the best products of the

research.

The government should provide the framework for deep innovations, the right

conditions. In Israel multi-nationalism is becoming more prevalent. Most of the IT

generated in Israel belongs to multinational companies. This is interesting, and raises

many issues, which are being debated in the Ministry of Economy.

In the Ministry of Science several forums discuss and decide on priorities and

coordination of activities, e.g. cyber security. Cyber tech is becoming more and more

complex, and will hold more importance in the private sector in the future.

Prof. Gazit is actively involved in negotiations for Horizon 2020, hopes that

difficulties will be overcome, and looks forward to collaborations with the EU.

1 This report, prepared by Moshe Papo, summarises the discussion rather than giving

a verbatim record.


18-19 November 2013

5

INCUBATORS IN THE INNOVATION ECOSYSTEM

Facilitator: Pekka Roine, Foundation of Finnish Inventions

Innovation is the driving force behind much of the EU knowledge transfer. In Israel,

Ben Gurion himself supported this. Israel has succeeded in the incubator arena and

serves as a model. 15 nations have gathered here to learn about the programme and

from each other, so that the EU can do better, and in order to improve the transfer

of information.

Mr. Jürgen Wengel, Deputy Head of Unit 112, Federal Republic of Germany,

Ministry of Education and Research

New innovation support instruments and programmes of the Federal Republic of

Germany

Mr. Wengel expressed his wish to broaden the subject of the interface science /

industry. Innovation system in Germany: one of the most innovative countries in the

world. Two thirds comes from industries, locomotive, pharmaceutical, and other

more traditional industries. Germany tends to encourage the traditional, and is less

of a startup country. A third comes from public institutions. This is different to other

countries

2006: more money was directed into the innovation area in Germany. This was a

strategy over many industries. The demand orientation is another factor. In Germany

there are five areas: mobility, communications, security, health care and Cleantech.

Holistic approach: financing, taxes, interaction between science and industry. How to

bring science into innovations. Germany is investing in R&D, and less in worldly

markets.

Complex instruments have been introduced:

- Supporting entrepreneur culture

- High tech startup fund

- Validation programmes, money for further development of university and scientific

projects.

GENERIC APPROACHES: selecting several clusters of innovation projects. Money is

allocated to these. Universities, industry, government, and others, all working

together. Global competition is good for startup. The clusters do consulting training,

events, incubators, healthy interaction within the tech field, creating a good

environment. This is the German approach to innovation, it is a success story and

works well along the lines of HORIZON 2020.

What next? What happens after this intensive nursing?

Another question, how long to support? Critical mass determines this: it is difficult to

attract the investment, there is a room for cooperation within EU, and some has

already been attempted.


18-19 November 2013

6

Mr. Yossi Smoler, Director Technological Incubators Programme, Office of Chief

Scientist, Ministry of Economy ISRAEL

The Israeli Incubator Programme

Fifth year in the job. Background in the IT industry, founder of startup companies.

The job I am doing is not a career, more like my contribution to my country

Incubator programmes in Israel: in response to failures. The basic model was

originally non-profit incubator companies, aimed at providing work to former Soviet

Union scientists who did not find appropriate positions when they immigrated to

Israel. This changed in 2002, because of viability issues.

Today’s model: Licenses for incubator companies are issued. The incubators are

private companies for profit. All the incubators in Israel today are profitable

companies, of all types and not only from Israel. Today the failure is a different one.

The high tech industry in Israel makes up to 50% of export. We have many talented

people and many entrepreneurs, but the problems are financing. The government

intervened in order to overcome market failure. Top companies were selected and

provided with an incubator for several years, where everything was provided. After

that period they are released and the criteria for success is the ability of that

company to raise at least half a million dollars, which signals success. The

government allocates anywhere between $500,000 – $850000

The budget is a two year budget, and provides 85% of the project cost. The higher

the risk the higher the budget. The government carries 85% of the risk; the incubator

(a private company) carries the remaining 15%. This is a simplified version of a more

complex system that was abolished.

If the company succeeds, it pays back 3% of annual revenues until the full grant is

paid back. Of course there is interest on the loan, but reasonable. The objective of

the government is not to make money.

Incubator – provides mentoring. It does all logistics, and so incubator companies are

chosen by expertise, leaving the entrepreneurs to do their job. The incubator is

expected to continue investing into the new companies and thus they are selected.

Selecting projects: due diligence is performed by the incubator companies, few are

selected by the companies, the names are transferred to the approval of the

government, to gain the financial support. A committee appointed by the

government decides who will be accepted or rejected. Most are approved by the

government, because the real choosing is done by the incubator companies. Only 2-

3% of projects are accepted eventually, due to budget constraints.

Reforms over the years: In the past, the grant came up for renewal every three

years, under strict guidelines. Today the model is based on 8 years support, where in

the seventh year the tender is open to competition. Large companies are selected

also. The chief scientist monitors the process but does not interfere unless the risk

criteria are not met. The office tries to focus the incubators on a specific area and

not go too wide.


18-19 November 2013

7

22 incubators exist in Israel at the moment. Only startups that cannot succeed

without government support are selected.

FACILITATED DISCUSSION:

Q. by participant: do not think it is good that incubators are associated with large

companies. What is the rationale for the Israeli different approach to incubators?

How does one avoid large companies coming in at the end of the process and buying

the readymade solution?

A. Yossi Smoler: a good point. The big companies can just wait and buy the startups,

without spending a penny financing the process. We try to connect large companies

who have big pockets, to the process from the start, with the added benefit of

establishing the connection to the customer base, to strategic partners, etc. The R&D

remains here in Israel, even if the company leaves, and that is good enough for us,

because we are good at R&D.

Q. DENMARK: have you assessed how this is attracting foreign investment?

A. Yossi Smoler: the answer is yes, there is an attraction and interest. The

government is paying more of the money, and the risk is low, why not open startups

in Israel? Over the next few days, tenders will be opened in Israel, there will be high

competition, and few will be chosen.

Q. GREECE: regarding the clusters in Germany, how are they defined, what are the

criteria, etc.

A. Jürgen Wengel: We have three rounds: 1. general description of the process – 30

offers, judged by an independent jury. They chose 12 finalists. 2. Each had to develop

a strategy of 60 pages, present it before the jury, in the mean time they were

assessed by experts in the industry.

3. Finally 5 were chosen. Our criteria: the company must be an existing company,

with a management structure in place. The financing period is 5 years, and then they

go their own way, but with public support.

The strategy depends on the field, e.g. life sciences, aviation, software, micro-tech,

neurolinguistics, etc. Each area demands a different strategy.

A. Yossi Smoler: We don’t do this; we do not define the area we want the incubator

to focus on. We don’t want to define the need of the market. In Israel at present the

split of the 200 companies running in incubators is: 40% medical devices, 10%

biotechnology and pharma, 30% ICT; 15% Cleantech, 5% others. This was decided by

the market.

Q. LATVIA: Why would a new investor be willing to invest in a company where the

share owner himself does not want to continue investing into the next stages?

A. Yossi Smoler: true, that could become a problem. In Israel there is an additional

programme that focuses on companies that have graduated from incubators. Here

the government carries 50% of the cost and demands matching from the investor.


18-19 November 2013

8

Q. from IRELAND to Yossi Smoler: what should be the government involvement in

TTO’s?

A. Yossi Smoler: TTO’s are a must for any research institute, just to make sure that

there are knowledgeable people involved in identifying IP that can be

commercialized, and have the knowledge to do this. In Israel they work well.

Q: should the government be involved in standardizing TTO’s?

A. Yossi Smoler: we do not interfere in the TTO’s function and objectives. We set up

some regulations regarding how to work with TTO’s. The model we are using today

offers three options: equity, licensing, or both. The IP that is allocated is a licensing,

equity, or both. The IP is given on a non-exclusive, unlimited basis, so long as the

company exists. If the company closes the original IP given before the incubation

time returns to the university, but the IP generated within the incubator time

belongs to the company

A. Jürgen Wengel: Germans don’t put too many expectations on the TTO’s. We are

not ready to take shares with universities and companies in an easy way. The salaries

paid in universities must be able to attract professionals and that is not the situation

in Germany.

Comment GERMANY: the people involved in tech transfer in universities are usually

people who have not made it in the academy, are inexperienced in industry, never

started a company, never negotiated a deal, and they actually use us. One needs

professional tech transfer organizations, like the Weizmann Institute.

Comment HUNGARY: We have started an incubator programme, similar to the

Israeli one. There is no second expert evaluation after the incubators have selected

the companies. We have included a follow up fund. All is done by the designated

incubators. We were surprised by the demand. There were 20 applicants for a fund

that was sufficient for 4, and we selected 4. Those that were not accepted continued

anyway, which is interesting. These were supported by the private sector, investors.

Q. FINLAND: Israel has been a model for Finland too. Greetings from ‘SLASH’, a large

investor, entrepreneur, startup event which happens in Finland in November, with

6000 participants, amongst them several hundred investors from all over the world.

Our programme ‘Vigo Venture Acceleration Programme’ has been running for 4 year.

A two year acceleration period. There are 70 startups in Finland, 10 accelerators;

private equity has been attracted into startups. 170 million euros have been raised,

two thirds from private, half of the private from foreign super-angles. There is a

positive mood in Finland.

Q. for Yossi Smoler: what are the incentives for new and emerging accelerators; it is

time and money consuming to become an accelerator.

A. Yossi Smoler: accelerators are for projects that are less risky, internet

applications for example. It is important to define an accelerator. Some incubators

have opened their own accelerators to serve as gatekeepers to the incubator,

eventually selecting the top players.

Q. ISRAEL: When one has many incubators and startups, what is the long term

purpose? What is the mix between the sale of the company to the MNC’s and

building long lasting companies in the country, for the future, and to enhance


18-19 November 2013

9

production? In Israel this is an issue which is debated and I would like to hear the

other countries policy approach

Q. GREECE: how do you keep the startups from leaving the country, after all the

investment? Is it only universities that take part in TTO’s, or are there private

individuals who can also participate?

A. Yossi Smoler: we all want companies to stay. The bad news is the global market;

we cannot force companies to stay. We can give incentives for companies to stay,

but that’s all we can do. The role of the incubators is to provide the framework for

the development of startups. Staying or going will depend on the will of the

shareholders and government.

There is an R&D law in Israel, and it deals with IP developed in Israel with

government funding. We have developed a formula that takes into account the

money invested by government. A startup that wants to sell will be liable for fees

based on criteria of government ownership, and the staying or leaving of the R&D in

Israel will affect the fee.

Comment GERMANY: would recommend governments focus less on policies that

attach strings to IP’s and instead focus on making the country an attractive place for

investors. Money goes where talent and information is.

Comment FINLAND: The Israeli model encourages high competition and allocates

money only to the top successful companies, whilst other countries tend to dilute

the money amongst many companies, not necessarily achieving success. The Israeli

model enables recycling of talent.

Q: How is the selection performed?

A. Yossi Smoler: the candidates have to perform their own market research, their

own patent infringement survey, etc. The chief scientist office has several

programmes that offer various levels of government involvement.

Comment GERMANY: offers various programmes, not only for startups. Cluster

alliances exist, strategic alliances with other countries. Israel has joint R&D

development projects with other countries.

A. Yossi Smoler: Israel has bi-national and multinational agreements with many

countries all over the world, especially Europe, for joint R&D projects, that are very

successful.

Q. to Yossi Smoler: what is a good return?

A. Yossi Smoler: the amount of money invested from 1991 to this year into

companies within incubators was 690 million USD. During the same period, private

investors invested about 3.5 billion USD into the same companies. The ratio is 1:5

It’s a good investment for the government, for every dollar the government invests a

private investor will give 5. The government collects the tax on the 3.5 billion, and

receives additional royalties from the companies in the future, so a lot of money

comes back.

Q. CYPRUS: angel investments; are there incentive programmes to attract them?

A. Yossi ISRAEL: There are incentive programmes, some tax relief. They can also be

shareholder in the incubators.


18-19 November 2013

10

ROUNDTABLE OF INCUBATOR MANAGERS Moderator: Dariusz Zuk CEO of Entrepreneurial Poland

Panelists: Seppo Ruotsalainen - Finland, Christian Tidona - Germany, Simone Botti

-Germany/Israel, Gerasimos Mentzelopolous - Greece, Sabie Valner - Hungary,

Haim Kopans - Israel, Duby Lachovitch - Israel, Roy Wiesner - Israel, Marcello

Merlo, Agris Kipurs - Latvia, Andrius Bagdonas - Lithuania, Robert Barski - Poland,

Celso Carvalho – Portugal.

Dariusz Zuk:

Polish entrepreneurship:

The first factor of success is dreaming: 9 years ago we decided to create a better

ecosystem on the global market. We wanted our startups to be the finest in the

global market.

The second factor in success is stepping into the dream: over the past 9 years we

have created 14 incubators in Poland. We have 1300 companies inside the

incubators, and 6000 post incubator companies.

We invested in startups. The process was simple. Initially we watched video

presentations sent in by applicants. We chose the best of them and then called some

in to present their idea. Each company chosen received 25,000 Euro to start off.

We have accelerators intended for companies that are post incubators. We start

with incubators, where we incubate the idea. Later there is money, and later

accelerators, the latter accelerating business for the startup. Even those without

means can come to accelerators. It’s not always about money, its about dreaming

and doing something big. An accelerator is intended for realizing dreams.

The third factor of success: try and be foolish, do differently to others.

Q. to panel members:

In what ways are you different and unique and what makes you successful?

- Incubators based in university environment

- Greece: flexible, friendly atmosphere, don’t hesitate to take risks.

- Italy: opening incubators, creating platforms of different kinds, digital, web design.

Successful because we try to make life easier for the users.

- Hungary: incubator for global startups. Very global, unique, partnerships of business

owners, mentors on high professional level.

- Germany: innovation from all over the world. We focus on attracting outstanding

talent from all over the world. Talent attracts capital. Achieving critical mass.

- Israel: Internet, mobile. Unique because we focus on people, invest in new talented

people.

- Israel: venture capital. Incubator is successful through talent, through good people,

good investors, knowledge, experienced people, ex company owners. For every

dollar invested you need another 3-4 dollars for follow-up. Partnering is another key

to success, identify who are the major players and teaming up.


18-19 November 2013

11

- Finland: Mental capital is the key to success. Public money is also helpful. Networks

and financing networks, partnerships. Perseverance, never give up, but don’t be

stupid.

- Latvia: wanting to learn new systems

- Israel: corporate incubator. We want to improve the model developed by the chief

scientist. Using the ‘partner inside’, the corporate partner, who can open the doors.

It is important for survival. This partner tells you what’s what.

- Israel: the corporate partner, during the R & D stage, tech support, strategic advice.

Money is not the only subject being discussed these days, today the question of

people is also being explored along with talent, ecosystem, and the rest of the

innovation package.


How do we attract the best talent?

- Germany: ask the talents what they want. They are looking for an outstanding

innovative environment. Use government support to create outstanding incubators

that will attract talent. For this to succeed there must be critical mass so it may not

work for all countries. In addition, until one becomes big enough, one needs some

sort of sustainable collaboration environment to enable growth of new talent. In

Germany this was achieved through clustering but there are other ways.

- Lithuania: Try and attract nationals to return to their countries, and bring with them

their friends, to join global leader programmes, they can implement different

projects.

- Israel: money is very important. If you want to attract talent you must provide more

than a work place. You need to create an environment where these talented people

will be able to fulfil dreams, will be able to build the companies they want to build,

and you need to be able to fund these companies until they become ‘stand alone’

companies, or are able to fund the next stage of their growth. But the next question

is what connections can you bring in, what experience can you bring in, how many

doors can you open.

- Finland: for three months of the year it must be dark rainy and slushy, that helps.

Talent seeks talent; Finland has an incubator with 28 nationalities working in it.

- Italy: doesn’t agree about the rain. We need sun, and a nice place to live, not only

dark and work. We need other things, friends, girlfriend, etc. Building startups is not

everything. Lowering the cost of establishing companies in cities is important, so the

startup players can function in this environment.

- Hungary: raise the bar very high, and those chosen will attract and develop the next

generation of startups. Hungary is losing programmers to London. An ambassador

programme is needed. You are competing with multinationals. Offering similar

conditions financially could help.

- Ireland: money, support. Incubation centres must be attractive in order to attract

people back.

- Germany: Why focus on the local population? Why restrict the talent pool just

because of a government incentive? I want to choose from the full global population.

This must be understood on the policy level.


18-19 November 2013

12

- Germany: important to convince people to become entrepreneurs. Can incubators

play a role in this game? Maybe it’s a question of how to communicate to students

what an incubator is.


How do we fill the gap between demand and availability of talent?

- Greece: connecting universities to incubators

- Finland: after university, entrepreneurship can be suggested as a career path,

through startup events, workshops. Attracting young people, sometimes out of

fashion, to the path of entrepreneurship. Trends are reversing, i.e. people are

returning to their original countries with talent and experience.

- Israel: one must be taught how to start a company, with all its complexity. Why does

Israel have so many startups? Because of the will to take risks, and how someone

who fails is treated. Failure is not a bad thing; it’s a learning experience and makes

that person a viable choice for investment because of his experience. If you can

create a culture of this type, you will create the right environment for talent to

appear.

- Hungary: let your biggest companies go bankrupt, show positive examples to others.

In Israel the rise in startups coincided with the huge influx of Russian talent into the

marketplace. There are trends in countries e.g. the going away from Nokia in Finland.

The rise of gaming. Warning: Incubators on their own cannot change cultures; there

is also a role for government. You can’t change cultures, Germans will remain

Germans, suit and tie and driving porches, and yet the kind of startuper’s I like run

around in their jeans and wear Nike shoes. They are fundamentally counter-culture

and are by definition forced out of corporations and into the startup life.


Looking at your country, what do you think today is the right way to develop

incubators that are financially viable/profitable? I would like to hear from others

approaches and conclusions.

Poland: practice makes experienced, like a doctor will not gain experience without

practicing on patients.

- Germany: In Germany we start from the problem, e.g. a need of a drug company,

and we invite ideas from all over the world, this is a good example because the

market is already there. In the less successful model an idea is pursued for years and

developed into a product, and only then does the company start talking with the

customer, the drug company, which many times is not interested.

- Israel: venture capital is measured on two parameters and two parameters only: ROI

(Return on Investment) and IOR (Interest on Reserves). A venture capital that cannot

deliver on these two parameters doesn’t really exist anymore. Profitability is the

secret. An incubator must allocate 3-4 dollars for every 1 dollar of initial seed money,

for follow up. If this money exists the incubator will succeed.

- Corporate incubator: first understand the most important asset, which is the piece of

IP, and examine its viability and application. In addition we invest in top tier

scientists.


18-19 November 2013

13


Show us the process of successful investment

- Israel: you need a top notch CEO; we are in the business of creating business.

- Israel: Life sciences or biotech: first invest in the data, in the science. Usually when

you go from academia to industry

- Israel: A typical investment in is almost a million dollars, this happens several times a

year. We believe that a company needs these kinds of monies to eventually cross the

river to success; otherwise you are creating mediocre companies. Large American

companies will assist initially and later may become buyers. We support the

company for about 1.5 years. We push the startup into the market as soon as

possible, with a minimal product, to test market forces, and then we are back to

working on the product with the market in view. We are a venture capital first and

are using this advantage. Small exits are not interesting, we wait for large exits. We

held a company for 15 years and sold it a while ago.

- Q. from Finland, Ministry of Economy: a small number of startup companies

succeed. Finland has learned from the Israeli approach: incentives to managers in

incubators. The managers in Finland have to invest their own money into their

programmes, and that is part of the incentive.


What is a single recommendation for a government wanting to advance

incubators?

- Israel: policy of OCS (Office of the Chief Scientist), to ensure that the value of the

investment remains strongly in Israel.

- Latvia: learn from other countries about venture capital.

- Finland: know when and how to intervene. Governments should understand the

game, and how to walk this thin line.

- Israel: the private sector should be encouraged to invest; ensure that the education

is good enough, to create future scientists.

- Israel: Reduce red tape

- Germany: make entrepreneur education an option for students in universities;

cooperate; ask the government to get out of our way

- Hungary: less government intervention

- Italy: a smarter bureaucracy; the latter tends to repel those interested in startups.

- Poland: less rules and regulations, leave the operation to the companies, allow

companies to open and close fast.

- Israel: increase the budget that goes towards R&D

- Entrepreneurship is the mindset of a startup; therefore invest in a national

programme of entrepreneurship.


18-19 November 2013

14

EXPERIENCES FROM THE FIELD Facilitator: Dr. Dafna Kariv, Manager Centre for Entrepreneurship, Business

School, College of Management Mr. Celso Carvalho Director General Business Incubator at University of Aveiro,

Portugal

The main areas are communication systems, information technology, and metal

industry. University of Aveiro Incubator IEUA: 100 square meters, 20 offices. Great

campus, great buildings. Budget: 100 million Euros. Research is orientated around

economic needs. Within the campus are 3 large companies.

Entrepreneurial: from pre-starts to business ideas, through to startups, all the way to

large companies. Startups pay 50% of the cost. The space is available all the time; it

contains all the usual incubator items. There is access to all university facilities that

aren’t available within the incubator.

There are private investors involved, CEO’s from great companies come and share

experience, marketing, management, sales, communications expertise, failures and

successes in the field. We have 19 startups, turnover of around 5 million Euros, and

have created around 100 jobs in the past 2 years. We have 35 entrepreneurs of

many profiles, ages and activities. We believe that we must have the capacity to use

failure as a possible starting point.

If you don’t have a problem to solve, don’t build a startup, and don’t build a startup

around a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist. Entrepreneurship for us is a

mindset, not a startup.

Q: How is your financing, how does it work?

A: 50% of our cost is covered by outside financing.

Mr. Uri Arnin, ApiFix, ISRAEL

A company in the field of medical devices. Our company completed the incubator

programme and managed to secure funds by the end of the incubator period. This

means success.

APIFIX – a company that deals with correction of scoliosis – deformity of the spine.

Unlike the expensive, very invasive conventional approach, which can guarantee no

more than 50% correction, Apifix’s approach uses only two sets of rods, and

between them an expendable implant. After the operation, while at home, the

patient is encouraged to perform certain movements in the direction of the

deformity. The APIFIX system reads the movements, analyses the corrections needed

and slowly brings the spine into a correct position.

The market for this product is a niche market. What will decide your attractiveness in

the market are your margins. The biggest market is the USA. A novel medical device

has a small chance. Apifix chose to build the company from the EU market, put the

USA on hold, and approach the USA market again when there is clinical data.

The timeline here is very important. If you cannot move fast enough, you will not

survive the incubator period. Apifix had the first clinical trial one year after starting.

At the end of the second year when there was a need for more money, Apifix already


18-19 November 2013

15

had a successful clinical study and other necessary certification, and was ready to

enter commercial sales, and that enabled us to approach investors. Apifix partnered

with a spinal expert, a scientist, President of the Israeli Spinal Society. But even

having all this in place doesn’t guarantee additional money. Without the significant

support of the incubator infrastructure, and the connections they had built over the

past 20 years, our chances of securing more funding would have been zero. You

must have the support of someone that the investor personally trusts.

Caroline Arends DENMARK

CEO of Seed of Knowledge in Urban Development, established a year ago.

Currently constructing two research facilities on the Swedish side (see page 25). This

is called the Copenhagen- Malmo Region, a science hub that will become the home

for the new European Spallation Source (ESS). It will deal with hard, soft, and

biological materials. Our concern at present is to establish incubators connected to

our universities and research facilities. We want to encourage influx of researchers,

and private companies into our region.

There is an EU budget, 3.5 million Euros. Private companies have been approached

also. At the moment the company is preparing for facilities to become available. We

welcome any advice and experience pertaining to what works or doesn’t in this kind

of setup. Zeev Efrat ISRAEL - Aquarius Spectrum

A company which managed to successfully pass the first 3 years, and today, in its

fourth year, is searching for further funding. Deals with the identification of water

leaks in water systems. There is business behind such technology. The technology

comes from a medical device. The information is already available; the analysis

needs to be programmed. The customer for this service is not the end user, it is the

government. The government has a programme that finances new technology to

support utilities. 50% of the financing comes from the OCS. Luckily, Aquarius

Spectrum signed up with another big project, and then the investors, who are

actually the parent company of the incubator, decided to continue the funding.

Working a lot with subcontractors, each one to fulfill a different need, e.g. building

sensors and other devices. The pilot project will be in Jerusalem. After 4 years one

could say that we have become a company.

Loukas Pilitsis GREECE - Piraeus Bank Group, INCUBATOR

Created their own incubator because wanted to work with people who can execute.

Set up an incubator with finance, in partnership with the largest IT company in

Greece. The question was how do you turn R&D workshops into commercial

projects? When is the right time to get outside help? We developed mentorship

programmes where an advisor is married to a company and is obliged to stay for at

least two years. Depending on the type of project, we decide what additional

expertise is needed and bring it in. It’s a start up within a start up.

We have been successful in bringing the right people. The chemistry between the

investor and the advisor is critical.


18-19 November 2013

16

Challenge: encouraging groups to talk to each other. These are national ecosystem

issues. Groups discussing problems amongst themselves, finding solutions whilst

working in the same environment.

Ziv Kohav ISRAEL - ICL Innovation Incubator

A private incubator. Started two years ago following a tender issued by the Chief

Scientist to start an incubator within ICL, Israel’s largest chemical company, who

wasn’t so interested in innovation. The realization that innovation is needed became

apparent over time, and the need to build an incubator arose.

The model for the incubator was devoid of an exit strategy. Ziv and his team started

a company to execute this. They offered a strategic partner from day one, the

research and development branch TAMI of ICL.

The incubator was opened last year. The first challenge: technology scouting. How

do you reach new technologies that haven’t been publicized yet, still in development

stages? And if you find them, how do you convince them that this is the right place?

Most of them are eventually found through some kind of publication or the

registering of an ID.

Pawel Horbaczewski POLAND - Arta Tech

The company is working on 8 technologies in the digital field and people sales.

Worked on a digital book concept with new screen technology. The market gave him

no encouragement. Met an incubator company, found out that this is where people

understand that true innovation is usually rejected by the marketplace due to

misunderstanding. The incubator owner decided to give ArtaTech a chance, enabling

him to develop a product for very low cost. The incubator was located in a larger

technological park in Poland, and its other participants contributed a great deal to

the development of the ideas of ArtaTech. The incubator also provided access to

legal advice on a high level, to help the startup company negotiate successful

agreements. QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:

Q: What is the government’s role in evolving ecosystems?

Q: How can we learn from lost opportunities?

- Loukas Pilitsis Greece: both sides have to be careful where their advice originates. It

is very important for the funds and bankers that one uses experts in the specific field

that have no commercial interest. We have married investment expertise with

operational experience in technology. This has solved some of the issues just

mentioned by some of the participants, and also has helped, through the network of

people worldwide, to identify emerging trends.

- Finland: in Finland we have a good education system, but not many startups. The

objectives of the Finnish government were wrong; another issue is cooperation

between academy and industry, and also this has not brought startups. The word

startup does not appear regularly in agendas of government or other. It is important

to analyze this and understand what is affecting innovation.

- Israel: innovation feeds on the hunger for good ideas, the vibrancy of innovation.

The question is how do you create this atmosphere? We are on the receiving end,


18-19 November 2013

17

looking for new ideas, connecting ourselves to various networks with the hope of

capturing ideas. This is a unique gathering, involving investors, governments, and

commercial parties. This is a huge network, and if we worked together as one

community of innovation, and found a way to cooperate and share information, it

could add value to everyone.

- Greece: agrees, partnerships on all levels, building networks of incubators with all

that accompanies them.

- Germany: networking has to be a bit more selective, not all people can be

networked. In relation to the Polish startup story, it is hard to believe that a

government would go for a product developed by a small company, because of the

cost.

- Poland: true. At present the government’s position is not to buy any digital equity,

because that should be chosen by market forces. What the government is supporting

is the creation of the content, i.e. providing students with the content but not with

the devices.

- Germany: It is absolutely crucial once you have the entrepreneurs, to also have

experienced mentors onsite. What I usually see when visiting incubators is a bunch

of consultants who have never started a company and were never successful. How

do we make sure we get the right mentors?

- Greece: this has been implemented in the Greek model. The criterion for mentorship

is successful experience in the relevant field.

- Israel: those heading the incubators should be successful innovators who did it from

start to finish and succeeded.

- Denmark: we have had success in attracting ex-pats, who originally left for a better

tax system. We have also had experience with CEO’s of large companies wanting to

contribute their wisdom and experience to young people in university.

- Ziv Kochav Israel: we may have a winning solution. We work hand in hand with the

evolving company towards commercialization, at every stage finding the right

strategic partner, and at every stage assessing the company’s position, needs and

forecast. Milestones are decided in advance with the company, including

expectations, timescale, cost, etc. During this whole process we use experts in the

relevant field, experienced in industry, who can properly evaluate the offer coming

in. We don’t use criteria based on the size of the company, i.e. we are even willing to

take on a non-registered patent.

Q. from Finland: the implications for the incubators regarding knowledge transfer, so

that the tools are relevant to the product:

- Greece: knowledge comes from the academy. It is important to pinpoint the

professors, who are business minded, and there is the right environment and

government encouragement, the transfer of knowledge is important.

- Israel: it is an issue of culture. The universities are somewhat behind the times by a

few years. The Israeli culture is about ‘let's try it’, and young talented people are

willing to do this; join a small unknown idea and risk success, fearlessly. That is the

root of knowledge transfer. We search for young people with innovative ideas, even

though they may be inexperienced.


18-19 November 2013

18

Concluding Discussion Facilitator Gilead Fortuna, Samuel Neaman Institute, Technion ISRAEL

At the beginning of the session Gilead presented the agenda for the summary

session and elaborated on the each of the following questions stressing our goal to

share everyone’s observation and understanding.

Gilead stressed Israel’s dynamic approach which causes incubators to go through

constant changes and modifications. In Israel most start ups were built without

government sectorial guidance or priorities (no top down but mainly bottom up) and

we heard that in many other countries and even in Germany there is a different

approach, so there is a room for continued communication.

1. What did we learn today?

Italy: it’s a question of horses for courses, there is no best practice. The best

practice is not to have a best practice. Cross pollination is the secret, sharing ideas

and diversity. We look for startups that are looking to disrupt something, and in

order to recognize those one has to disrupt oneself, feed oneself with the diversity

that is happening in the world, notice future trends evolving before they are

publicized, and try to predict their direction.

Denmark: there is no culture in Denmark, so the first thing to do is pick the

successful system and learn it.

Hungary: it is not so much about culture. It’s more like a crystallization point, from

which other things materializes. It is important, whatever the culture, to make a

start. In Hungary recently, the chance to get support for the development of a new

idea has woken young people to innovation.

Slovakia: a great learning, even of hardcore principles, e.g. investing proportions in

startup versus follow up.

2. Israel system of support

Incubators are going through constant changes and modifications. In Israel the

support system is complex and yet it is effective. Israel is constantly learning from

other’s experience and modifying its incubator model, e.g. the 2011 shift in policy.

- Israel: There is an ongoing debate about multinationals, attempting to establish a

new incubator approach. Multinational companies today have what is called ‘open

innovation’. The example of the chemical industry (TAMI) in Israel is indicative of this

trend: open innovation, i.e. an incubator company approaches the industry and

offers in-house incubators, outsourcing of talent and expertise, etc.

In Israel most incubators were built without government support (no ‘top down’).

Greece: lack of trust between competitors. Gilead Fortuna Israel: sometimes the

acquisition of companies in Israel has been aimed at taking them out of the market

Finland: other sources of successfully acquiring expertise: private people.

Gilead shares his experience with a company formed in an incubator 17 years ago

that eventually went into IPO to NASDAQ two months ago and today is worth 450

million dollars.


18-19 November 2013

19

3. What did we miss in the discussion?

Israel: Regarding emerging technologies like nano-technologies and others: many of

the forces operating here are market ‘push’ and not ‘pull’. Is there a real need? What

can we do with these technologies? Some of the incubators are dealing with ‘push’

technologies, breakthrough areas; others are addressing ‘pull’ technologies, real

needs, and offering solutions.

a. Trends in MNC to apply “open innovations”

b. The huge difference in developing life sciences and Cleantech vs. ICT

c. Applying new emerging technologies (nanotechnology)

d. Solving market needs vs. breakthrough new technology or tool

e. Differences between ‘top down’ and ‘bottom up’ in choosing incubators

focus.

Israel: we don’t do ‘top down’, only ‘bottom up’

Italy: What was missing was crowd sourcing. Should avoid the ‘lose

lose’ situation; ‘if I can’t win, I will make sure that you won’t win

either’. This attitude is changing owing to the internet. We are more

open to sharing because everyone can gain from it. Crowd sourcing is

a new tool for market forces.

f. The role of versatility vs. clusters / focus subjects

4. Common agreement in the discussion: WE NEED TALENT

Finland: excited by the realization of the danger of consultants making a living within

ecosystems, like pests. The only way we can weed them out is a joint and public

effort. We need the guys who have done it and are good at it.

5. The difference between accelerators and incubators

Latvia: Accelerator can be established only in very developed ecosystems. They

provide the environment for beginning innovators, to start testing out their idea.

They mostly host ICT projects. The timescale is usually 2-3 months, which is too

short. Many times it ends in failure on the demo day, where none of the innovators

get invested.

Italy: in Rome we have been running an acceleration programme for the past 3

years. At the time Rome did not have an accelerator or ecosystem, but had a huge

talent base amongst 300,000 university students. We have accelerated 20 startups, 2

of which have failed. There are no certainties, but today this is how it is viewed in

Rome. It is important to modify the process by its results. The length of the

programme is 5-6 months, we allocate cash, and smart money. We network with

industry and academia.

Ireland: doesn’t have to be an ICT company for an accelerator. Other areas of

industry are also relevant; we use the principle of acceleration to forward

innovation; we use China as an accelerator for products, from a developing market

point of view.

Germany: different use of vocabulary. There is a big demand for accelerator

programmes; we provide money to different programmes, e.g. biotechnology, and


18-19 November 2013

20

are prepared to spend up to a million Euros over three years if necessary. There is

enough money available.

6. Does the new generation learn enough science to keep up the momentum?

Israel: In Israel we think it is a problem; not enough girls learning sciences, and not

enough young people in general studying the sciences.

Germany: in Germany there is a lack of entrepreneur education. There are a lot of

good scientists, but they are not trained on the business side.

Hungary: in most countries there are more good students than are needed. The ratio

has shifted in an unfavorable way. How many of the qualified students are willing to

go down the entrepreneurial path?

Greece: there are more scientists than needed. Do we need science education in

order to start a business, or start an entrepreneurial venture?

Germany: we are trying to lower the number of dropouts.

7. How can we expand the innovation on two levels?

a. Build new product and join a giant multinational.

b. Search for new talent in the world.

c. Establish more sustainable companies, as opposed to an exit company.

d. Expand employment opportunities to the wider economy.

Israel: in Israel, the high-tech and life sciences make up only 15% of the

industry. We want to inject new technology into other more traditional

industries so they may also enjoy state of the art innovation, thus increasing

our ability to compete with China and the East.

e. Apply innovation

f. Expand on the use of new innovation into the services and government.

8. Horizon 2020 as an engine for growth

Is it effectively being leveraged into the ecosystem of the incubator’s new

businesses, or is it still being held by the big corporations who have the means to

leverage it? We don’t have many success stories yet, and frequently a project ends

up on the R&D level.

Germany: it used to be; one can now apply for 100% funding of new projects;

money is becoming available to private hands, the smaller players. There are

additional incentives to promote prosperous startups.

9. Can we hear new innovative ideas regarding innovation and incubators, so that

by the next seminar we will be discussing completely different issues on the subject.

See recommendations for follow up

10. Gilead Fortuna’s - idea for the system approach, which needs to cover:

1. Manufacturing industry.

2. Services to the manufacturing industry and the economy

3. Government policy – what do we really want?

4. Global world guidance and involvement.


18-19 November 2013

21

Recommendations for Follow Up

• An idea from Germany: this is the third seminar of this kind. A good idea to

connect us and share insights over the coming year could be a competition.

Every incubator sends in data of its best three startups and we compete, and

there are prizes. The results will be published for venture capitalists to see.

Israel: This kind of competition exists in Israel.

• Creating a dynamic online forum:

• Each of the participants will send the others the experiences they

want to share regarding incubators.

• Alexandra Meir (Israel) will get everyone on a Google+ forum or

other platform, where we will start an exchange of ideas.

END

Rapporteur:

Mr Moshe Papo, Israel

+972-508-592629

[email protected]


18-19 November 2013

22

PROGRAMME

Monday 18 NOVEMBER 2013

Registration 8:30-9:00

Opening session

9:00 – 9:15

Ambassador Designate Lars Faaborg-Andersen - EU

Delegation

Greetings

Professor Ehud Gazit, Chair Nano Biology Tel Aviv

University, Chief Scientist Ministry of Science,

Technology and Sport

Keynote Speech - The academia, government and industry

triple helix as a key for innovative society

INCUBATORS IN THE INNOVATION ECOSYSTEM

Facilitator: Pekka Roine, Foundation of Finnish Inventions

9:15-11:15

Mr. Jürgen Wengel, Deputy Head of Unit 112,

Federal Republic of Germany, Ministry of Education

and Research

New innovation support instruments and programmes of

the Federal Republic of Germany

Mr. Yossi Smoler, Director Technological Incubators

Programme, Office of Chief Scientist, Ministry of

Economy

The Israeli Incubator Programme

Facilitated Discussion

Issues to be discussed:

• The role of the incubator

• Connection to other players in the ecosystem – formal and informal

• Government vs private incubators

• Strategic partnerships – universities, business, local government

• Regional models

• Role of angels, venture capitalists

Coffee break

11:15 – 11:30

ROUNDTABLE OF INCUBATOR MANAGERS 11:30 – 13:00

Moderator: Dariusz Zuk CEO of Entrepreneurial Poland

Panelists: Seppo Ruotsalainen - Finland, Christian Tidona - Germany, Simone Botti -Germany/Israel,

Gerasimos Mentzelopolous - Greece, Sabie Valner - Hungary, Haim Kopans - Israel, Duby Lachovitch -

Israel, Roy Wiesner - Israel, Marcello Merlo, Agris Kipurs - Latvia, Andrius Bagdonas - Lithuania,

Robert Barski - Poland, Celso Carvalho – Portugal

• Objectives of the different programmes

• Advantages and disadvantages of being sector specific

• Different models for different sectors

• How to evaluate effectiveness

• How have the programmes changed or made adjustments over time

• Key success factors and key reasons for failure


18-19 November 2013

23

Networking Lunch

13:00 – 14:00

EXPERIENCES FROM THE FIELD Facilitator Dr. Dafna Kariv, Manager Centre for Entrepreneurship, Business School, College of Management

14:00 – 15:45

Mr. Celso Carvalho Director General Business

Incubator at University of Aveiro, Portugal

The entrepreneurial ecosystem of Aveiro and the reasons

why we are recognized as an Entrepreneurial University

Mr. Uri Arnin, ApiFix ApiFix


Panelists: Caroline Arends - Denmark, Zeev Efrat - Israel, Loukas Pilitsis – Greece, Ziv Kohav – Israel, Pawel

Horbaczewski POLAND - Arta Tech


• Reasons for start-ups success or failure in the programmes

• The right time to enter an incubator

• The added value for large companies that manage incubators

• Synergies between companies

• Follow up for graduates

Coffee break

15:45 – 16:00

CONCLUDING DISCUSSION

Facilitator Gilead Fortuna, Samuel Neaman Institute, Technion

16:00- 17:30



• Best practices on which all agree

• Advantages of disadvantages of the various types of incubator programmes

• Follow up

Joint Reception with the Lithuanian Presidency and the EU Israel Chamber of Commerce Dan Hotel

99 HaYarkon Street Tel Aviv

Gathering 18:30

Greetings and Opening Remarks 19:00- 19:15

H.E. Ambassador Darius Degutis, Ambassador of Lithuania

Mr. Gad Propper, EU-Israel Chamber of Commerce and Industry

H.E Ambassador Designate Lars Faaborg-Andersen, EU Delegation

Keynote Speeches 19:15 – 20:00

Mr. Evaldas Gustas, Minister of Economy, Lithuania

Ms. Bina Bar On, Director General, Ministry of Science, Technology

and Space, Israel Mr. Nir Zohar, COO and President of the Israeli internet startup WIX

Networking Cocktail 20:00


18-19 November 2013

24

Tuesday 19 NOVEMBER 2013

10:00 a.m.

Visit to TheTime Incubator 6 HaNehoshet Street, Ramat Hahayal Tel Aviv

Or

Visit to Entrepreneurial Incubator of the School of Business Administration at the College of Management,

Rishon Le Zion and Rishon Start Up


18-19 November 2013

25

The Copenhagen Malmo Region Hub


18-19 November 2013

26

Participants

Name Country Organisation Position Email

Waldmueller,

Emanuel Austria Austrian Embassy [email protected]

Constantinou,

Anastasia Cyprus

Cyprus

International

Institute of

Management

Director [email protected]

Kofteros, Stavriana Cyprus Democratic Rally

Special

Entrepreneurship

&RDI advisor

[email protected]

Konnia, George Cyprus SAFE LLC CEO

Chief

Information

Officer

[email protected]

Marcou, Persefoni Cyprus

Embassy of the

Republic of

Cyprus

[email protected]

Papaioannou,

Yiorgos Cyprus SAFE LLC CEO CEO [email protected]

Philimis, Panayiotis Cyprus

CyRIC - Cyprus

Research and

Innovation Center

Managing


Stylianou, Michalis Cyprus

CyRIC - Cyprus

Research and

Innovation Center

ICEET Manager [email protected]

Trillidou, Marcia Cyprus

Research

Promotion

Foundation

Scientific Officer [email protected]

Schultz , Pavlina Czech Republic Embassy of the

Czech Republic

Commercial

Section [email protected]

Arends, Caroline Denmark

Lyngby-Taarbæk

City of Knowledge

& Urban

Development

CEO [email protected]

Bunkenborg, Helle Denmark

Technical

University of

Denmark (DTU)

Head of

Innovation Unit [email protected]

Grønning, Lasse

Holm Denmark

Royal Danish

Embassy

Commercial

Advisor [email protected]

Jespersen, Julian Denmark Royal Danish

Embassy Trainee [email protected]

Thellersen, Marianne Denmark

Technical

University of

Denmark (DTU)

Senior Vice

President for

Innovation and

Entrepreneurship

[email protected]

Dor, Stefane EU EU Delegation Tel

Aviv Scientific Section [email protected]

Meir, Alexandra EU EU Delegation Tel

Aviv

Scientific Section

- Policy Officer [email protected]

Jutila, Juha Finland Foundation of

Finnish Inventions

Managing


Miodowski, Jonathan Finland Embassy of

Finland

Commercial

Attaché [email protected]


18-19 November 2013

27

Rautiainen, Ismo Finland Foundation of

Finnish Inventions

External

Consultant [email protected]

Roine, Pekka Finland Foundation of

Finnish Inventions Chairman [email protected]

Ruotsalainen, Seppo Finland

Vigo Venture

Acceleration

Program

Programme

Executive [email protected]

Valtonen, Pertti Finland

Ministry of

Employment and

the Economy

Counsellor [email protected]

Eijsberg, Hendrik France French Embassy Researcher [email protected]

Hermani, Gabriele Germany German Embassy Science


Tidona, Christian Germany

BioMed X

Innovation Centre

and BioRN Cluster

Management

Managing


Wengel, Juergen Germany

Unit 112 New

Innovation

Support

Instruments and

Programmes,

Federal Ministry

of Education and

Research

Deputy Head [email protected]

Botti, Simone Germany/Israel Merck Start Up

Incubator CEO [email protected]

Alexiadis, Alexandros Greece Embassy of

Greece

First Counsellor

Economic &

Commercial

Affairs

[email protected]

Daoutakou, Despina Greece Embassy of

Greece

Second

Counsellor

Economic &

Commercial

Affairs

[email protected]

Fountas,

Chrysostomos Greece

Ministry of

Education

Advisor to the

Special Secretary

of European

Funds

[email protected]

Karniouras,

Panagiotis Greece

FORTH / DIKTYO

PRAXI Coordinator [email protected]

Mentzelopoulos,

Gerasimos Greece

Patras Science

Park, S.A. General Manager [email protected]

Pilitsis, Loukas Greece Piraeus Bank

Group

Executive Officer

of Piraeus Equity

Advisors

[email protected]

Siropoulou, Niki Greece

TEDxAcademy +

Rising Stars

Program

President of the

Board [email protected]

Stratakis, Emmanuel Greece

FORTH/IESL &

University of

Crete

Dept. of

Materials Science

and Technology

[email protected]


18-19 November 2013

28

Vaitsas, Constantine Greece FORTH/ DIKTYO

PRAXI

Innovation

support services [email protected]

Azbej, Tristan Hungary Hungarian

Embassy

Technical and

Science attaché [email protected]

Ban, Denes Hungary Digital Factory

incubator

Member of

Board

H.E. Nagy, Andor Hungary Hungarian

Embassy

Ambassador

Designate [email protected]

Korányi, László Hungary National

Innovation Office

Vice President

for International

Relations

[email protected]

Nikodemusz, Antal Hungary

Ministry of

Economy,

Department for

Innovation and

R&D

Director General [email protected]

Valner, Sabie Hungary Digital Factory

incubator

Managing


Clare, Julian Ireland Irish Embassy Deputy Head of

Mission [email protected]

Hutchinson, Clyde Ireland NASC Connect General Manager

Arnin, Uri Israel ApiFix CEO [email protected]

Bublil , Lory Israel

ISRAEL-ITALY

CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE &

INDUSTRY

International

Trade Analysi [email protected]

Calvares, Lina Israel The HiVE Programme


de Haan, Uzi Israel Technion

Entrepreneurship

and Innovation

Faculty of

Industrial

Engineering and

Management

[email protected]

Efrat, Zeev Israel Aquarius

Spectrum CEO [email protected]

Eilan, Michael Israel

I-Biz - Israel

Business

Information

Services

Senior


Fishelson, Uri Israel EEN EEN Coordinator [email protected]

Fortuna, Gil Israel Samuel Neaman,

Technion

Head of the

Center for

Industrial

Excellence

[email protected]

Galetti, Riccardo Israel

ISRAEL-ITALY

CHAMBER OF

COMMERCE &

INDUSTRY

[email protected]

Gazit, Ehud Israel

Ministry of

Science,

Technology and

Space

Chief Scientist [email protected]

[email protected]


18-19 November 2013

29

Getz, Daphne Israel Samuel Neaman,

Technion

Head of the

Center for

Science,

Technology &

Innovation Policy

[email protected]

Kariv, Daphna Israel

Centre for

Entrepreneurship,

Business School,

College of

Management

Manager [email protected]

[email protected]

Katz, Idan Israel Incubit VP Business [email protected]

Kelen, Tal Israel The HIVE Ashdod Director [email protected]

Kohav, Ziv Israel ICL Innovation Business


Kopans, Haim Israel JVP Media Director [email protected]

Lachovitch, Duby Israel Explore Tech Director [email protected]

Lahy-Engel, Patricia Israel TheHive by

Gvahim


Matan, Adee Israel ICL Innovation Consultant [email protected]

Moser, Naftali Israel

NM Business &

Economic

Development


Oren, Gil Israel

EU Israel

Chamber of

Commerce

General Manager [email protected]

Papo, Moshe Israel Rapporteur [email protected]

Reichman, David Israel VPSign CEO [email protected]

Rotem, Gev Israel RotaryView CEO [email protected]

Smoler, Yossi Israel Office of the Chief

Scientist

Director,

Technological

Incubators

Programme

[email protected]

Wiesner, Roy Israel Hutchison-Kinrot CEO [email protected]

Wiggins, Blayne Israel Attorney at Law [email protected]

Halfon, Oshrat Italy Italian Embassy

Office of

Scientific

Attache'

[email protected]

Magnifico, Roberto Italy

Innovation Lac

and partner of

LuissEnlabs

[email protected]

Mallogi, Stefano Italy Enel Spa Research Area [email protected]

Merlo, Marcello Italy Talent Garden Co-founder [email protected]

Ortona, Lorenzo Italy Italian Embassy [email protected]

Russo, Chiara Italy Codemotion [email protected]


18-19 November 2013

30

Sblandi, Fausto Italy Enel Spa

Head of

Innovation

Market &

Strategy

[email protected]

Schaumann, Dani Italy Intesa Sanpaolo Global Country


Kipurs, Agris Latvia JIC business

incubator Founder and CEO [email protected]

Silovs, Gatis Latvia

Ministry of

Economics, EU

Funds

Implementation

Department, EU

Structural Funds

Private Sector

Division

Head of Unit [email protected]

Bagdonas, Andrius Lithuania Sunrise Valley Director [email protected]

Kucevicius, Dimitrijus Lithuania

Innovation and

Knowledge

Society

Department of

the Ministry of

Economy


Milius, Pranas

Bernardas Lithuania

KTU Regional

Science Park Director [email protected]

Pauliukevičius,

Gediminas Lithuania

Northtown

Technology Park Director [email protected]

Saulias, Zaura Lithuania

Panevezys

science and

technological

park


Foden, James Malta

Malta Council for

Science and

Technology

Deputy Director

of the Research

and Investment

Funding Unit

[email protected]

Balder, Raffi Netherlands Yes! Delft Launch Lab


Dexel, Jan Netherlands Ministry of

Economy [email protected]

Eveleens, Jan-Peter Netherlands

Royal

Netherlands

Embassy

[email protected]

Gram, Fabienne Netherlands Yes! Delft

Incubator

Community &

Event manager

[email protected]

Jansen, Paul Netherlands

Royal

Netherlands

Embassy

Innovation


Karelse, Frank Netherlands Technology

Foundation STW

Programme


Segeth, Wouter Netherlands STW Programme

Officer [email protected]


18-19 November 2013

31

Barski, Robert Poland

Academic

Entrepreneurship

Incubator at the

University of

Zielona Gora


Dziegielewski, Lukasz Poland E-prototypy Vice President [email protected]

Horbaczewski, Paweł Poland Arta Tech Owner [email protected]

Nowak, Dominika Poland

Embassy of the

Republic of

Poland

Second Secretary [email protected]

Nowakowski,

Wojciech Poland Optiguard

Managing


Ozimek, Łukasz Poland Torun Technology

Park Coordinator

[email protected]

Przemyslaw, Bobak Poland

Embassy of the

Republic of

Poland


Ulman, Marek Poland

Polish Agency for

Enterprise

Development

[email protected]

Zielinski, Marek Poland

Embassy of the

Republic of

Poland


Zuk, Darius Poland Entrepreneurial

Poland CEO [email protected]

Carvalho, Celso Portugal

Business

Incubator,

University of

Aveiro

General Manager [email protected]

Cristina, David Portugal

Office of the

Secretary of State

for Science

Assistant [email protected]

Da Silva, Fernando Portugal Embassy of

Portugal

Cultural

Counsellor, Press

Attache

[email protected]

Mocanu, Andreea Romania Embassy of

Romania Second Secretary [email protected]

H.E. Javorcik,

Radovan Slovakia Slovak Embassy Ambassador [email protected]

Janovčík, Michal Slovakia

University of

Zilina, University

Science Park

Head of TTO [email protected]

Majchrák, Marián Slovakia

University of

Zilina, University

Science Park

TTO and

Incubator [email protected]

Mešťanová, Barbara Slovakia Slovak Embassy Commercial

Section [email protected]

Rybovič, Andrej Slovakia

Research centre

University of

Zilina

Incubator staff [email protected]


18-19 November 2013

32

Tomašovič, Peter Slovakia

Research centre

University of

Zilina

Incubator staff [email protected]

Ferlez, Jure Slovenia Livenetlife [email protected]

Cabrero, Emma Spain Embassy of Spain International

Programmes [email protected]

Ramírez , Ignacio Spain Embassy of Spain Technological

Officer [email protected]

Fielding, Julia Sweden Embassy of

Sweden Second Secretary [email protected]

H. E. Nesser, Carl-

Magnus Sweden

Embassy of

Sweden Ambassador [email protected]

Spångberg, Peder Sweden

Ministry of

Foreign Affairs

(department for

international

trade)

Coordinator for

the Ambassador,

Director-General

for trade

[email protected]

Kärre, Jossa Sweden Ministry of

Foreign Affairs

Trade promotion

coordinator at

the MENA

department

[email protected]

Walder, Eva Sweden Ministry of

Foreign Affairs

Ambassador,

Director-General

for Trade

[email protected]

Burris, Blake US Cleanweb

initiative CEO

eu-israel innovation seminar technological …...eu - israel innovation seminar technological...

Documents