Reports reports reports

I recently commented on the NZ Angels blog about a post discussing the New Zealand Institutes report on ‘ lifting innovation ecosystem performance ‘

Check it out here.

On a similar note there have been a couple of other notable reports that have been published.

• a report released by the office of the PM’s science advisor presents the results from a recent workshop about what is needed to help translate NZ research to economic benefit. Download here.
• Driving Economic Growth through Bio-Based Industries: The 2009 Bioeconomy Industry Summit Report. View here. It was good to see them recognise the Bioscience Enterprise program at the University of Auckland, too bad they forgot about Chiasma despite it addressing some key issues highlighted in the report (point 9.5 and 9.6). It also excluded some other developments  e.g. the LENS classroom at the Liggins institute which is responsible for exposing high school students to careers in science (point 9.6); FRST industry fellowships for fresh grads, The Institute of Innovation for Biotechnology at the University of Auckland. It also includes some weird ‘progresses to date’ e.g. MoRST’s future watch program – does anyone even know about this? I am also getting quite concerned with the number of times (in addition to this report) I read about the need to keep PhD students in NZ following doctorate completion. Going overseas to pursue your science research is not a bad thing, in fact its actually good. Why? You get an international perspective, experience and connections working at the world’s leading research institutes with world leading researchers. The more important aspect of this debate is making sure individuals return to NZ following this experience and then capitalising on it (glad to see the report mentions this also). Also keep in mind at present NZ is oversupplied with science grads, there is simply not enough jobs out there. Go check seek.co.nz or trademe jobs if you doubt this. But wait it doesn’t stop there. Over supply typically = lower wages. Lower wages = less incentives to stay in NZ. A vicious cycle indeed.
• New Zealand’s research, science and technology priorities: feedback document. “ The government is currently setting priorities for research, science and technology and is seeking feedback from the sector. This document seeks your comments on the government’s proposed investment structure, the balance between investment areas and on the areas in which it is proposed research platforms might be established. “ Feedback due 18th Nov.

 

____________________________

Graeme @ graemefielder.com

Spark $100K Challenge Prizegiving

On Thursday night the winners of the Spark $100K Challenge were announced. For this event I was delegated the job of entertaining the 200+ audience, making sure the proceedings went smoothly and controlled the stage…yes the MC. It was a great night that celebrated the success of all 12 team finalists and a good example of university’s entrepreneurial ecosystem coming together – Spark, Bioscience Enterprise Programme and Chiasma, UniServices, the ICEHOUSE, the staff and of course the students.

Duncan Ledwith, the $100K chief judge, mentioned that the challenge is not a ‘playground for students’ it is serious stuff. This is something that the business community now has accepted and was even more evident this year with the quality of business plans and pitches continuing to impress. We are confident that more than just the winners will be pursuing/starting up their venture following their Spark experience. One thing that really stood out during the night was the 55sec elevator pitches – everyone of them was very smooth and down to perfection ( only one just ran over time).

The winners of the night included:

• Video Pitch Challenge Runner-up – Greenloos [ LINK ]
• Video Pitch Challenge Winner – Nova Eco Tech [ LINK ]
• 55sec LIVE elevator pitch audience text vote prize – Metabo-LINK
• $100K Challenge Runner up -$10,000 seed capital – Nova Eco Tech
• $100K Challenge Winner -$20,000 seed capital and $10,000 worth of ICEHOUSE incubation time – Greenloos
• 2 additional teams were also recognised by offering the 3months ICEHOUSE incubation time.. They were ‘The Hurtle’ and ‘Points2Change’.
• Metabo-LINK, the team that created a venture around an Unpolished GEM, novel fungicide compound from university IP. Due to their contribution to helping develop the technologies business case Uniservices awarded them a prize of $2500.

Brief team descriptions

Greenloos – have developed an odour-free portable toilet where the by-products can be recycled.

Nova Eco Tech – have developed engine conversion technology to retrofit petroleum/diesel vehicles to run on alternative fuels.

Metabo-LINK – are seeking to commercialise a novel antifungal compound for crop spoilage

The Hurtle – Bringing you new high adrenaline rides that will shake the international adventure tourism industry

Points2Change - A novel loyalty card program targeted towards benefiting charities.

Some photos from the night.

Greenloos – Winner (Pictured: Angus Blair, Brad Lovett, Lucy Luo and Dean of the Business School Prof. Greg Whittred)

Nova Eco Tech – Runners-up ( Pictured: Dr. Shu Chin Ma and Robert Fisk)

The 2009 Spark Committee

Mauzima Ali and myself ‘MCing’

____________________________

Graeme @ graemefielder.com

Scientists: What do we want them to be?

A recent blog post by Adam Small and article by Godfrey Bridger comments on the issue of scientists becoming entrepreneurs got me thinking about our expectations of the modern day scientist.

What do we want them to be?

Ultimately we want them to conduct world standard research to expand our knowledge which we can leverage for the benefit of the human race. This benefit can take many forms but of particular relevance is products and services to fuel our economic prosperity as a country.

Scientists don’t need to be entrepreneurs, but they do need to be entrepreneurial or commercially aware. This is not an option! It is and will continue to be part of the scientists job description. Part of their responsibility to ensure the knowledge derived from their research is disseminated and put to use. Like most things we need to take in consideration the diversity amongst our scientists; from those who want to pursue the venture through to fruition to those who are quite contempt to pass it on to the ‘business folk’. However the basal level of competence should include the ability to:

• be innovative (obviously)
• assess the need for their proposed research e.g. patent search
• recognise commercial opportunities within their research and know how to act upon them
• know the implications of intellectual property within their research
• have an understanding of how products and services typical in their field are developed and delivered (regulatory routes, commercialisation routes, timelines).

The majority of senior scientists that have learnt the above have simply absorbed it through the years of osmosis while being in academia. What we are seeing now is hopefully this happening a lot earlier in scientists’ careers supported by education programmes and initiatives to cater for the various thirsts for bio-enterprise and technology transfer.  Some examples off the top of my head [of course biased towards Auck Uni ] are university business plan competitions (Spark, Kickstart/Audacious, Entre’), new cross disciplinary degrees (Bioscience Enterprise Programme a Auck Uni), student lead initiatives ( Chiasma), integration of IP components into papers (Baldwins and CHEM392 at Auck Uni), integration of entrepreneurship papers into core tech programmes (MGMT 303 New Ventures & Entrepreneurship in the Biotech programme at Auck Uni).

Conversely the business units supporting these R&D facilities i.e. typically business development teams (BDOs) in CRIs and tech transfer offices within Universities need to also provide adequate support to nurture their scientists. Some methods include:

• having strong relationships with its researchers from Day 1. Don’t sit back and wait for them to come to you. Part of a early career scientists induction should be a meeting with their TTO/BDO rep/ contact.
• communication
  • communicate to researchers the benefits of technology transfer
  • communicate success – each new successful licensing agreement, each time a academic reaps benefits from taking their research through the TTO/BDO
• allow staff to explore their entrepreneurial ambitions.
• promote cross collaboration of research through linking IP.
• have seasoned entrepreneurs on standby to mentor or develop technology for potential spin offs or search for appropriate licensees.
• have funds available to drive both technical and business development of projects that have commercial value.
• educate staff in intellectual property and R&D commercialisation

 

____________________________

Graeme @ graemefielder.com

Market Validation

*Pointers from Spark Launch Pad workshop held for the 2009 Spark 100K Qualifiers.

A market is a collection of people with the same problem/ pain who you propose to address with your solution. Market validation is about finding this group of people who are wanting and willing to buy your product.

To identify and validate your market:

1. Identify the pain – Your solution should address a pain point within the customer such that it makes your solution a must have as opposed to a ‘like to have’ – you should be able to focus this down to one sentence. What is the scale of this pain?– is it getting bigger?
2. Identify who has this pain. This should be a person. If you ask them about the pain you should get an emotive response. Your solution should aid a customer in meeting there goals/objectives e.g. Think about why would this person be fired from their job and consequently what are they most concerned about achieving.
3. What is your unique selling proposition/ how do you fix their pain. Who are the competitors in this space and what are they doing?
4. Prove the above

 

____________________________

Graeme @ graemefielder.com

 

Cancer goes public

Genesis Oncology Trust, the body that funds my PhD stipend have recently released a pair of TV commercials. Both were fronted by researchers, Dr. Nuala Helsby and Richard Egan, who pulled off some impressive performances. As you will see they do a great job of breaking down what their research is about into easily digestible layman’s speak that really hits home with the audience.

PS: Good timing considering we have just had prostate cancer fundraising events throughout September and now the pink ribbon appeal for breast cancer happening in October.

____________________________

Graeme @ graemefielder.com