Process Evaluation Of Transfer Projects Ppt Final

996 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
996
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
61
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Process Evaluation Of Transfer Projects Ppt Final

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

×