Universities, Innovation, and the Competitiveness of Local and National Economies Richard K. Lester Director, Industrial Performance Center Professor of Nuclear Science and Engineering Massachusetts Institute of Technology CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
“We believe the United States’ economic and political standing are fundamentally bound up in our capacity as a society to innovate. We believe companies that do not embrace innovation as a core business value will fall to global competition – and that innovation in universities and government is crucial to unleash America’s national innovative capacity.” -- “National Innovation Initiative” Council on Competitiveness July 2004 CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
‘Standard model’ of university engagement in the local economy University-initiated technological entrepreneurship. Laboratory research Discovery/invention Disclosure Patenting Licensing Spinoffs But the model is incomplete. University role isn’t just about ‘tech transfer’. � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Myth #1: Economic significance of university spin-offs New business formation around university technology, though increasing, is still a small contributor to the total number of business starts (2-3% or less in the U.S.) U.S. universities U.S. total Startups 400-500/yr* 550,000/yr Patents ~ 3700/yr ~ 150,000/yr *Startups licensing university IP; total number of university-related startups: 8,000-10,000/yr � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Top U.S. patent award recipients -- 2004 IBM 3248 Matsushita Electric 1934 Canon 1805 Hewlett Packard 1775 Micron Technology 1760 Samsung Electronics 1604 Intel 1601 Hitachi 1514 Toshiba 1310 Sony 1305 . . . . . . Caltech 135 MIT 132 � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Myth #2: Payoff from university technology transfer Total licensing revenue to universities is -- and will remain -- a small fraction of research revenues (4-6% in U.S.) Don’t expect licensing to transform the finances of the university! � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Myth #3: Role of patenting & licensing in university tech transfer Licensing university patents is only one of several mechanisms that firms use to access university-developed science and technology Indirect mechanisms may be more important (e.g., industry hiring of university graduates) � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Multiple university roles in the local economy • Forming/accessing networks and stimulating discussion of industry development pathways. Undergraduates • Influencing the direction of Graduates search processes – Meetings and conferences Mid-career – Hosting standard-setting Executive forums Providing Educating – Entrepreneurship centers & public people mentoring programs Contract research space – Alumni networks – Personnel exchanges Cooperative research (internships, faculty with industry exchanges, etc.) Technology licensing – Industrial liason programs Adding to – Visiting committees Faculty consulting Problem- – Curriculum development the stock of Providing access to solving for committees codified specialized – Creating the built environment industry instrumentation and knowledge to support this equipment Incubation services Publications Patents Prototypes � 2006 Richard K. Lester
CBR/IPC Innovation Benchmarking Survey • Barriers to innovation • Role of public policies • Sources of knowledge, technology • Types of collaboration • Human resources • Innovation effectiveness and efficiency CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
Innovation Benchmarking Survey: Sample Characteristics Full Samples Matched Samples UK US UK US Size No. % No. % No. % No. % (Employees) 10-99 1409 66.2 951 61.8 769 66.9 786 68.4 100-999 531 24.9 375 24.4 248 21.6 231 20.1 1000+ 189 8.9 214 13.9 132 11.5 132 11.5 Total 2129 100 1540 100 1149 100 1149 100 CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
University contributions to business innovation • Industry interactions with universities are widespread and multi- faceted • Informal contacts, recruiting, publications, and conferences are the most frequently cited contributors in both UK and US • Licensing of university patents is among the least frequently cited interactions CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
At MIT, even patent holders downplay the role of patenting and licensing in university tech transfer. Source: Agrawal and Henderson, “Putting patents in context”, Management Science, Jan. 2002. Based on interviews with 68 MIT faculty in Mech E. and EECS with at least one patent and license. � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Universities compared with other sources of knowledge used in business innovation • Internal knowledge, customers, suppliers, and competitors are the most frequently cited sources of knowledge relevant to innovation. • Universities are less frequently cited. • UK companies cite use of all external knowledge sources more frequently than their US counterparts. CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
Uses of partnerships and collaborative arrangements by innovating firms • Other firms, customers, and suppliers are the most frequent partners/collaborators in both countries. • UK firms are somewhat more likely to partner with universities than their US counterparts. • In both countries, firms are more likely than twice as likely to collaborate with other firms as with universities. CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
Selected summary • Interactions between firms and universities are wide- ranging and multi-faceted. • University-industry interactions are more pervasive in the UK than in the US, but UK firms attach less importance to these interactions than their US counterparts. • Universities are seen by industry in both countries as a relatively small contributor to overall innovation-related knowledge flows. • ‘Traditional’ university contributions -- education and training, conferences, publications, informal contacts -- are seen by industry in both countries as significantly more important than patenting and licensing. CBR Summit: 29-30 March 2006 Innovation and Governance
The LIS Project: An international, interdisciplinary collaboration Sponsors Research Units Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Industrial Performance Center, MIT National Science Foundation SENTE, University of Tampere TEKES Helsinki University of Technology Norwegian Research Council Center for Business Research, University of Cambridge Cambridge-MIT Institute (UK) Rogaland Research Institute UTRI (Japan) University of Tokyo Disciplines Management science Entrepreneurship studies Economics of innovation Engineering systems Urban and regional studies Political science � 2006 Richard K. Lester
‘Outside-in’ perspective on university role How can universities strengthen the abilities of local firms to take up and apply new technological and market knowledge productively? � 2006 Richard K. Lester
LIS Case Portfolio Country Location Industry/technology USA Rochester, NY Opto-electronics USA Akron, OH, Advanced polymers USA Allentown, PA Opto-electronics/steel USA Boston, MA Bioinformatics USA New Haven, CT Biotechnology USA Charlotte, NC Motor sports USA I-85 Corridor, NC/SC Autos USA Alfred-Corning Ceramics USA Youngstown, OH Steel/autos Finland Tampere Industrial machinery Finland Turku Biotechnology Finland Seinajoki Industrial automation Finland Pori Industrial automation Finland Helsinki Wireless Finland Oulu Medical UK Central Scotland Opto-electronics UK Aberdeen Oil and gas UK Cambridge Bioinformatics Taiwan Taipei-Hsinchu Electronics Taiwan Taipei-Hsinchu Software Japan Hamamatsu Opto-electronics Japan Kyoto Electronics Norway Stavanger Oil and gas � 2006 Richard K. Lester
LIS Interviews Number of interviews United States 258 Finland 238 United Kingdom 103 Japan 84 Norway 31 TOTAL 714 An additional 117 interviews were carried out in Taiwan. � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Finding I: Multiple university roles in the local economy Create Attract Unlock Adapt Combine � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Finding II: Firms seek different inputs from different universities Help with specific problems (‘analytical’) Staying current; participating in ongoing conversations about the direction of technologies, markets, curricula (‘interpretive’) � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Four pathways of regional innovation-led growth Indigenous creation of new industry I. Silicon Valley: Personal computers Boston: Systems biology Transplantation of new industry into region II. I-85 corridor (NC/SC): Automotive industry Taipei-Hsinchu corridor (Taiwan): Electronics industry Diversification of existing industry into new III. Akron, OH: Tires Advanced polymers Rochester, NY: Cameras, copiers Opto-electronics � 2006 Richard K. Lester
Recommend
More recommend
