Building a University Innovation Ecosystem to Spark Regional Reviatlization


Published on

Carnegie Mellon University’s experience in evolving a university innovation ecosystem has greatly contributed to the transformation of the regional economy. Building upon the Pittsburgh experience, the presentation will highlight innovative strategies for engaging frontline faculty, venture and economic development partners to accelerate the development of university spin-offs.

Tim McNulty, Carnegie Mellon University (moderator)
Lenore Blum, Founding Director of Project Olympus, Distinguished Career Professor of Computer Science, Co-Director CIE, Carnegie Mellon University
David Mawhinney, Executive Director, Don Jones Center for Entrepreneurship; Managing Director, Open Field Entrepreneurs Fund; Director, i6 Agile Innovation System; Assistant Teaching Professor, Tepper School of Business; Co-Director, CIE, Carnegie Mellon University
Bob Wooldridge, Director, Center for Technology Transfer and Enterprise Creation (CTTEC), Carnegie Mellon University

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Collaborative and Super Disciplinary , a Carnegie Mellon ThingWe’re arguably the the only university in the world this way.
  • We are generating a lot of startups. AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) has rated us the #1 university (without a medical school - #2 overall) in generating startups. 1st in # of start-ups 2009-11 among ‘peers’ (including Stanford, Cal Tech. GA Tech, MIT, UC System, Penn, UT Austin and Columbia) when normalized for research base; Without normalizing we still had three more start-ups than Stanford in that period despite both their far larger research expenditures and ‘seat’ at the center of the blue-chip venture worldBlue = generated from faculty research: Standard deal formula starts at 5% ; add-ons depend on menu selectionRed = student-generated or imported IP: CMU does not own student’s IP and takes no equity (unless working on faculty research).Guiding Principles: Reduce friction, increase volume, provide more resources (mentoring and investment),encouraging and flexible policies (e.g. faculty leaves, etc.)
  • Building a University Innovation Ecosystem to Spark Regional Reviatlization

    1. 1. #UEDASummit #UEDASummit
    2. 2. Building a University Innovation Ecosystem to Spark Regional Revitalization: Lessons from Carnegie Mellon Lenore Blum Director, Project Olympus, Co-Director, CMU Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship David Mawhinney Director, Don Jones Center, Co-Director, CMU Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship Bob Wooldridge Director, Center for Technology Transfer and Enterprise Creation (CTTEC)
    3. 3. Building a University Innovation Ecosystem to Spark Regional Revitalization: Lessons from Carnegie Mellon The Pittsburgh Renaissance Carnegie Mellon, its Role, its Programs and Key Features: • Inside-Out: Creating Winning Ventures from Cutting-edge University Research/Great Ideas • Creating a Vibrant Alumni Entrepreneurial Network • Tech Transfer’s Standard Deal for Spin-offs
    4. 4. Pittsburgh •Innovative •Resilient •Bridging communities •Can-do culture
    5. 5. Pittsburgh •A model for regions across the country that are re-inventing/re-vitalizing themselves
    6. 6. Rise from rust : Pittsburgh transformed itself over 30 years October 28, 2013 6:21 PM The great transformation from steel production to education and medicine -- "eds and meds" -- took advantage of existing strengths and made them grander. Carnegie Mellon University quickly embraced the new computer age. The medical institutions, led by UPMC, today the region's biggest employer, went from strength to strength with inspired leadership.
    7. 7. • Over the 5-year period (2008-2012), the Pittsburgh region saw $1.3B being invested in the region's early stage technology companies • Pittsburgh experienced a dramatic increase in the number of very early stage companies attracting funding with pre-revenue companies nearly doubling --an indicator that the research universities and broader entrepreneurial community are starting the next generation of promising technology companies that will ultimately drive the region's future growth.
    8. 8. Pittsburgh: A Community of Innovation Idea Development Startup leveraging $$ billion$$ research OTHER TECHNOLOGIES UNIVERSITIES/ Eds & Meds INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Rapid Growth Maturity Reinvention PRA – Attraction and Support Services/ Allegheny Conference NON-TECH LIFE SCIENCES Early Growth I N N O V A T I O N S Pittsburgh Technology Council – Trade Association PLSG Drug Discovery Tissue/Organ Engineering Neurological Treatments Medical Devices Innovation Works (IW) AlphaLab Government IDEA FOUNDRY Foundations PowerUp Pittsburgh Angels VCs TiE Pgh PRA=Pgh Regional Alliance, PTC=Pgh Technology Council, PLSG= Pgh Life Sciences Greenhouse KIZ = Keystone Innovation Zone (NB. This diagram is a modification of a TTC slide)
    9. 9. The collaboration between the two schools helps to raise the profiles of the University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University to among the world's best Read more:
    10. 10. Interdisciplinary Collaborative Innovative Can-Do Culture
    11. 11. 18 Nobel Laureates John F. Nash, MCS 1948 Economic Sciences 1994 Herbert Simon, SCS/TPR Faculty Economic Sciences, 1978 Edward Rubin, CIT Faculty Peace, 2007
    12. 12. 11 Turing Awards Allen Newell SCS Faculty,1975 Raj Reddy SCS Faculty, 1994 Manuel Blum SCS Faculty, 1995
    13. 13. 100’s of Innovators & Entrepreneurs Kai-Fu Lee, SCS 1988 Jonathan Kaplan, Tepper 1990, Open Field Entrepreneurs Fund Red Whittaker, Robotics Faculty
    14. 14. Entrepreneurship: Integrative Experience
    15. 15. Formed from a partnership between Project Olympus and Donald H. Jones Center (cs/technology) (business) CIT, Fine Arts, Dietrich, Heinz, MCS, SCS, Tepper
    16. 16. Council of Deans
    17. 17. Faculty Liaisons Sciences Fine Arts Computer Science Engineering Business Pubic Policy/Managem Humanities/Social Science
    18. 18. Innovation Partners Disruptive Healthcare Technologies Institute
    19. 19. Why Olympus? • We are sitting on a goldmine of potentially commercializable research Untapped Research/Innovation
    20. 20. 2007 What do students want? Copyright © Lenore Blum, 2013
    21. 21. 2007 What do students want? •CONNECTIONS •OPPORTUNITIES to try out their ideas and learn from mistakes Copyright © Lenore Blum, 2013
    22. 22. At the core of Olympus operation are its PROBEs (PRoject-Oriented Business Explorations) where faculty and students explore the commercial potential of their cutting-edge research and innovations. Copyright © Lenore Blum, 2013
    23. 23. PROVIDES •Micro-grants (***Spark Grant Fund***) •Space, Equipment • Advice, Education, Assistance, Mentors •Networks, Connections, Contacts •Visibility Copyright © Lenore Blum, 2013
    24. 24. Project Olympus Start-Ups
    25. 25. Project Olympus Start-Ups By the Numbers (Jan 07- today) • >130 PROBEs (2/3 student-generated) • ~90 Companies formed (2/3 students) • >$65 million in initial follow-on funding for PROBEs and spinoffs (+recent acquisitions) • 10 SBIRs • 13/21 OFEF grants to recent graduates • 1/3 AlphaLab Accelerator Companies
    26. 26. Mindkin Fooala •Students bring tremendous energy •PROBEs provide unique BeatBots Tropical Health experiential learning M-Tool Semiotic
    27. 27. •Commercial endeavors resulting from faculty-based research have great potential to act as engines for the economic growth and recovery. •Benefits the region, the nation and the world.
    28. 28. Innovations Fellows Program
    29. 29. Creating a Vibrant Alumni Entrepreneurial Network
    30. 30. Open Field Entrepreneurs Fund 21 Portfolio Companies $50K Conv. Note w/ $50K Match Jonathan Kaplan, Tepper 1990 Two Classes Per Year
    31. 31. The View from Tech Transfer What are we doing? • Standard Deal • Outreach/Office Hours • Gap Funds 36
    32. 32. The View from Tech Transfer How are we doing? 20 18 16 All Start-ups CMU #1 in start-ups per research $$s spent (amongst universities without a medical school) 14 12 10 Direct Indirect 8 6 4 2 0 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 37
    33. 33. The View from Tech Transfer How are we doing? In the Region 38
    34. 34. A Research and Entrepreneurship Showcase Cells, Circuits and Cities