• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement
 

Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement

on

  • 1,787 views

Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement -- A Panel Introduction and Presentation at the University Industry Demonstration Partnership meeting, December 2-4, 2008, at National Academy of ...

Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement -- A Panel Introduction and Presentation at the University Industry Demonstration Partnership meeting, December 2-4, 2008, at National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,787
Views on SlideShare
1,770
Embed Views
17

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
32
Comments
0

4 Embeds 17

http://www.uiin.org 7
http://www.linkedin.com 7
https://www.linkedin.com 2
http://resources.uiin.org 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement Presentation Transcript

    • Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement Eric Giegerich, UC Berkeley Sherylle Mills Englander, UC Santa Barbara Susan Capella, Intel University Industry Demonstration Project National Academy of Sciences Washington, DC December 4, 2008
    • Differing Approaches
      • Opportunity: Universities and industry are working together through an expanding variety of engagements.
      • Problem: Current engagement models seldom reflect the nuances of the relationship, needs, and activities.
      • Challenge: Several industries, including IT, chemical, automotive, and oil and gas, have argued that a "one size fits all" approach to sponsored research and IP licensing typified by biotech deals from the 80's and 90's aligns poorly with their business models.
    • Conventional Engagement Models at Universities
      • Environment: Open, public, publishable research environment
      • Engagement Model: Tend to fit industry contracting into federal grant model
      • Agreements: “One size fits all” templates
      • Sponsors: Single sponsor (primarily federal agencies)
      • IP Strategy: Tends to be patent-centric
      • IP Access: Exclusive license to IP is assumed starting point
    • Conventional Engagement Models at Companies
      • Environment: Closed, confidential, trade-secret, product development environment
      • Engagement Model: Tend to fit university contracting into procurement model, or contract research model:
        • Buyer / Seller
        • Ordering goods, vs. sponsoring research
        • Research is “made to order” to meet company specs
      • Agreements: “One size fits all” templates
      • IP Strategy: Capture every type of IP resulting from project
      • IP Access:
        • Want ownership…or
        • NERF for FTO and…
        • Exclusive / nonexclusive varies by sector
    • Differing Approaches – Open Questions
      • How do companies and universities increase their cross-cultural understanding and tool box for engaging in U-I partnerships?
      • How can both sides deploy a full spectrum of research collaboration and IP management strategies ?
      • How can office structures and and operating philosophies support U-I partnerships?
      • What corresponding menus of actions and agreement types are available?
    • Panel Format
      • Panel Overview
      • A Berkeley View – Eric Giegerich
        • Q&A
      • SSLEC Center – Sherylle Mills Englander
        • Q&A
      • Intel – Susan Capella
        • Q&A
      • Panel Q&A
    • Differing Approaches to Industry-University Engagement Eric Giegerich Office of Intellectual Property & Industry Research Alliances (IPIRA) University of California, Berkeley University Industry Demonstration Project National Academy of Sciences Washington, DC December 4, 2008
    • A Berkeley View?
      • A multidisciplinary group of Berkeley researchers has met since Spring 2005 to discuss The Landscape of Parallel Computing Research.
      Is there a Berkeley View of University – Industry Partnerships? ... Their goal: To discuss a change from conventional wisdom. To reinvent from the bottom up. They call it… The View from Berkeley
    • A Berkeley View?
      • Features of a Berkeley View can be observed.
      • Berkeley pioneers university-industry approaches:
        • Organization structure – IPIRA
        • Staffing
        • Operating philosophy
        • Relationship focus
        • Exploring new success metrics
      • Henry Chesbrough says IPIRA practices Open Innovation .
      No Manifesto. Decentralized. Free Speech. But…
    • Industry Alliances Office IAO Office of Technology Licensing OTL A Berkeley View
        • --Office Structure
        • Organizational structure erases bias toward monetizing or licensing.
        • A given activity is not at the expense of another.
        • Licensing and ISRA revenue counted together.
        • Chancellor is behind it.
    • A Berkeley View
        • Backgrounds in technology transfer, business, contracting
        • Backgrounds with Industry experience
        • Negotiators focus on IP, negotiation, contract management
        • Negotiators empowered to draft de novo
        • Negotiators have full pallet, full tool box
        • Negotiators given signature authority
        • Negotiators recognized for advising, consulting, teaching
      --Staffing for Industry Research Partnerships
    • A Berkeley View
      • Encourage long-term relationships
        • Single transactions don’t build best relationships
        • Long term relationships foster repeated engagement
      • Before exchanging drafts, build good business understanding of the proposed relationship and project(s)
      • Establish Common Ground
          • Two parties are pooling resources
          • R&D is a shared effort
          • Each party has stakeholders
          • Each party needs return on their investment
      --Relationship Focus
    • A Berkeley View
      • Encourage innovation
      • Give permission to experiment and make mistakes.
      • Take a holistic approach, agnostic about where industry engages.
        • Industry and PI interests should determine relationship type
        • Could be ISRA, Gift, Membership, License…
        • IP strategy should match deployment strategy
        • Chaperoning
      --Operating Philosophy
    • A Berkeley View
      • Conventional Metrics: SRAs, Patents, Licenses, Startups
        • Quantity and revenue
      • New Metrics: All Aspects of University-Industry Partnerships
        • Total industry contribution to campus
          • Funding, know-how, data, materials, equipment, confidential information
        • Licenses resulting from sponsored research
        • Number and variety of repeated engagements
        • Industry advising, market feedback, deployment
        • Industry internships and hiring
        • Social impact, public good
      • These are experimental. We are still learning.
      --New Success Metrics
    • A Berkeley View --Another Metric
      • Several Companies engage on multiple fronts…
      • Sponsored Research Agreements (SRAs)
      • Industry Affiliates Programs
      • IP Licenses
      • Subscription Agreement
      • Fellowship Agreements, Internships
      • Open Collaboration Agreement (“Lablet”)
      • Research Gifts
      A Berkeley View --Another Metric
      • Provisos…
      • These models work in Berkeley’s ecosystem
        • We don’t claim they work everywhere
      • Some are proven, some experimental
      • These models evolve
      • These examples show potentials for
      • university - industry partnership
      From Berkeley… Some Examples
      • Collaboration Agreement
      • Nokia, Navteq, UC Berkeley, Caltrans
      • Features cutting-edge wireless traffic technology
      • Using cell phones as mobile traffic sensors
      • Creating traffic monitoring system fusing GPS cell phone data with existing traffic sensor data
      • Literally “road testing” in traffic studies
      • Together, these partners create, test, and deploy new technology
      Example 1 of U-I Engagement Models Mobile Millennium
      • Collaboration Features
      • Public and private stakeholders
        • Industry: Nokia, NAVTEQ
        • University: UC Berkeley
        • Government: US DOT, CalTrans
      • CCIT – a deployment-focused
      • UC Berkeley research center
      • Sharing tasks, data, software, equipment
      Example 1 of U-I Engagement Models Mobile Millennium
      • Multiparty Research Agreement
      • A Berkeley Research Center
      • 20 companies, 3 UC campuses
      • Industry Sectors:
        • Equipment vendors
        • EDA companies
        • Foundries
        • Integrated manufacturers
        • Memory companies
      • State matching funds (UC Discovery)
      Example 2 IMPACT Integrated Modeling Process and Computation for Technology Marvell Microfab Lab
    • Example 2 IMPACT Integrated Modeling Process and Computation for Technology
      • Industry Benefits
        • Students = most important product; hiring, internships
        • Workshop 2x/year
        • Opportunity to suggest research directions, steering committee
        • Access to Berkeley Microfab Lab
        • Reports, software, deliverables
        • IP rights—Early access to participants
      Marvell Microfab Lab Example 2 IMPACT Integrated Modeling Process and Computation for Technology
      • IP includes: Patents, copyrights, maskworks, open source (ie., not patent-centric)
      • Licensing decision process – Made explicit to show how UC Berkeley negotiates licenses when multiple sponsors express interest. 
      Example 2 IMPACT Integrated Modeling Process and Computation for Technology
      • Agreement Features
      • Ongoing for 9 years
      • Just changed from 1 to 4 year term
      • Easy termination for convenience
      • Flexible payment schedule: elect annual, semi, or quarterly. (Not one size fits all)
        • May include in-kind contributions
      • Public Domain Research Philosophy
      • A practice of managing a Project for early publication.
      • Prefers public dissemination over perfecting patent rights.
      • Berkeley nonetheless requires employees to disclose inventions in accordance with University policy
      • Berkeley reserves the right to perfect patent rights at its discretion when it may better serve the Project goals.
      Example 3
    • Example 3
      • BWRC is…
      • Industry Affiliate Program
      • Industry–University–Government partnerships
      • Laboratory for circuit and system evaluation from DC to 110 GHz
      • Focused on prototyping
      • Focused on long term relationships
      • Interdisciplinary
      • Focused on technology transfer
      • Army Research Laboratory
      • California Energy Commission
      • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
      • Gigascale Systems Research Center
      • MARCO Focus Center Research Program
      • National Science Foundation
      • Office of Naval Research
      Example 3
    • Example 3
      • BWRC is one example on campus which prefers a
      • “ Public Domain Research Philosophy”
      • No history of patent applications
      • Tends to work in EE-CS
        • May not work everywhere
      • It’s a response to an industry sector
      • Evolved from faculty and company needs
      • Commercialization and public good may be better served
      • It works: companies continue to support
      • It’s a fine line—we’re always mindful of Bayh-Dole
      • This model may evolve
      • Online Carbon Footprint Calculator
      • Situation: an Existing Technology with continuing research potential
      • Helps businesses and households evaluate their complete climate footprints.
        • includes direct and indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from energy, transportation, goods and services.
      • Provides local climate footprint estimates
      • Identifies actions to save money and reduce greenhouse gases.
      Example 4 http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2008/03/05_footprint.shtml A licensing or sponsored research opportunity?
      • Cool Climate Network (CCN)
      • CCN was created as a Membership Program with a TAP
      • Research focus: greenhouse gas footprint calculators and their introduction into the public sector and the marketplace (deployment)
      • CCN provides customized tools for businesses, schools, community groups, cities, states
      • Members: companies, consultants, nonprofits, schools, governments
        • Members therefore seek more than commercial IP rights
      • Partial displays of carbon footprint calculators publicly available.
        • CCN members get complete access, IP rights
      Example 4 Our Strategy: Rather than license exclusively, technology is accessed through membership under a Technology Access Program. (TAP)
      • Membership Program Features
        • Technology Access Program (TAP)
          • Full access to CoolClimate webservice & templates
            • BSD for non-commercial use
            • Right to negotiate with OTL for commercial license
          • Data, updates, limited support
          • Online community (network)
        • Right to obtain Certification Mark License
        • Voluntary grant back of data
      Example 4
    • Example 5 Socially Responsible IP Management
      • with a Social Impact Goal:
      • Make clean drinking water accessible
      • In countries with poor drinking water and poor public infrastructure
      • At little or no cost
      • By developing a new class of household consumer products for disinfecting water using surface-bound cationic antimicrobial compounds.
      Two Collaborative Research Agreements
      • Joint Contribution:
        • Research in safe water treatments and sanitation
        • Market and user adoption studies.
      • Aquaya Contributes:
        • Expertise in developing and delivering clean drinking water innovations in developing countries
        • International partner network.
      • Deployment Focus:
        • Aquaya’s partner network provides a channel in the developing world for the transfer of technology.
        • Market, user adoption helps deployment.
      Example 5 Socially Responsible IP Management
    • Example 5 Socially Responsible IP Management
      • Agreement Features:
      • Charitable Purpose
      • Economically Disadvantaged Countries
      • Visiting Researcher
      • IP Licensing
        • A fully paid, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (“NERF”) to inventions and copyrightable works
        • To develop, sell and publicly distribute low-cost water treatment products in EDCs.
        • Non-Assert
      • Sublicense Rights to Field Network
      • Retained Rights
    • A Berkeley View
      • Features of a Berkeley View of industry-university partnerships:
        • Organizational structure –created IPIRA
        • Staffing
        • Operating philosophy
        • Relationship driven
        • Exploring new success metrics
      • These features lead to creative examples of university industry partnership
      No Manifesto. Decentralized. Free Speech. But…
    • Contact
      • Eric Giegerich
      • IPIRA
      • University of California, Berkeley
      • 510-642-5850
      • [email_address]
    • Differing Approaches – Panel Q&A
      • How do companies and universities increase their cross-cultural understanding and tool box for engaging in U-I partnerships?
      • How can both sides deploy a full spectrum of research collaboration and IP management strategies ?
      • What corresponding menus of actions and agreement types are available?
      • How can office structures and and operating philosophies support U-I partnerships?
      • What are examples of new, innovative models of university-industry engagement ?