The Russia Innovation Collaborative aims to connect Russian and US institutions to increase innovation and economic growth in Russia. It provides consulting services to Russian regional governments on innovation policies and programs. It also works to build cooperation between universities to facilitate innovation and supports tech transfer and market entry for companies. The collaborative follows an innovation ecosystem development model to assess regions, map existing capabilities and gaps, create action plans, implement projects, and provide training and marketing support. An analysis found gaps between Perm's current innovation ecosystem and best practices, including in university entrepreneurship education and collaboration with businesses.

1. The Russia Innovation Collaborative
Building the Perm Innovation Ecosystem

2. The Russia Innovation Collaborative
has designed programs
to nurture and support innovation and
accelerate the migration of ideas from the
lab to practical commercial application.

3. Russia Innovation Collaborative:
Mission
Russia is currently undertaking a program of modernization of its
economy, with a particular focus on fostering technological innovation.
Despite the strength of intellectual resources and very strong basic
science, Russia has not been successful at developing clusters of
innovation.
Massachusetts is one of the world-leading clusters of innovation. It has
a well-developed public-private relationships that contributes to the
success of the innovation ecosystem.
The focus of the Russia Innovation Collaborative is to connect key
institutions and stakeholders in Russia with those in Massachusetts
and throughout the US with the goal of increasing economic wealth

4. Introduction
• The Russia Innovation Collaborative (RIC) is a limited liability
company registered in the Commonwealth (state) of
Massachusetts with its office in Boston, Massachusetts in the
Cambridge Innovation Center, across the street from MIT.
• RIC has three inter-related lines of business:
– Consulting to Russian regional governments on policies to promote
innovation and action plans to implement those policies.
– Building cooperative programs between U.S. and Russian universities
(primarily national research universities) to facilite innovation.
– Tech transfer and market entry for private companies.

5. Introduction
• Daniel Satinsky – Background:
– Business lawyer for 15 years
– Graduate of Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy
– Former President, U.S.-Russia Chamber of Commerce of New England,
Inc.
– Participant in 4 start-up companies
– Consultant to Russian software companies in U.S. market entry
– Co-author Yaroslavl Roadmap 10-15-20, innovation policy study done
by New York Academy of Science
– Contributor to Modern Russia (www.modernrussia.com)

6. Introduction
• Cynthia Bouthot – Background:
– Head of Innovation and R&D Programs for the British Government for the
past 2 years
– Consul, Head of UK Trade & Investment for 6 years
– 15 years industry experience in global operations:
• Global Lead of Business Readiness for EMC’s $200 million ERP implementation
and
• Director of Industry Practice for Benchmarking Partners
• International Finance and Auditing at Honeywell Bull
– BS from Boston College’s Carroll School of Management with a major in
Finance and a Masters degree in International Economics and Finance
from Brandeis University
– Mentor for Boston University’s Kindle Management program
– Founder of 3 start-up companies

7. The Russia Innovation Collaborative
Innovation Ecosystem
Development Model

8. Perm’s Phase 1 Project

9. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Innovation Assessment
• Review key strengths of the region
• Define priority sectors vis-à-vis key
counterparts and global market
potential
• Evaluate competitive position
nationally and internationally
• Identify key innovation ecosystem
stakeholders
• Determine if innovation project is a
go or no-go

10. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Ecosystem Mapping
• Map region’s capabilities against
innovation ecosystem
• Interview key stakeholders in each
ecosystem area, including
entrepreneurs, VC’s, academics,
large business, SME’s and
government policy makers
• Determine ‘AS-IS’ reality,
highlighting existing gaps
• Determine ‘TO-BE’ aspirations
through interviews and analysis of
what is possible

11. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Innovation Action Plans
• The difference between the AS-
IS reality and the TO-BE
Aspirations is the innovation gap
• Compile and prioritize key gaps
between as-is and to-be
• Build teams of stakeholders to
construct action plans (teams will
be called I-team ‘innovation
teams’)

12. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Innovation Implementation
• Assign cross-functional innovation
teams to each action item
• Manage and implement action items

13. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Training and Education
• Build educational campaigns for key
stakeholders including academics,
scientists, entrepreneurs and
government officials
• Convene networking groups and
other forum for consistent sharing of
information between stakeholders

14. Innovation Ecosystem Development:
Marketing and PR
• Build marketing and PR
campaigns based on
innovation strengths
• Promote region to possible
collaborators and inward
investors
• Continue to link region’s
innovation cluster to
innovation clusters throughout
the world

15. Best Practice Innovation
Ecosystems
Tech transfer and commercialization Serial
Academic Entrepreneurs
Excellence
Government
/ Policy Innovation Ecosystem
Thriving
knowledge
based
sectors
Industry
Associations and Public and Seed
Networking Groups Funding, grants and
Venture loans
Capital

16. Perm’s Innovation Ecosystem
Academic Tech transfer and commercialization
Excellence Serial
Entrepreneurs
University
Innovation
Perm’s AS-IS Thriving
Innovation Ecosystem knowledge
based
Government
sectors
/ Policy
Big Business
Industry and Small
Associations and Venture
Public and Seed Business
Networking Groups Funding, grants and relationship
Capital
loans
Best Practice Exhibited Gaps to Best Practice Exist Significant Gaps and Failures Exist

17. AS-IS and GAP Analysis

18. University Gaps
• Small number of students exposed to knowledge about entrepreneurship
• Narrow focus on teaching students, rather than including Post-Grads and Professors in business or
entrepreneurship education
• Inability to structure scientific research on business basis (weak understanding of markets or commercial
applications)
• Missing conceptual understanding of basis of business and university cooperation in innovation process
(traditional contract research does exist where university plays following role)
• Insufficiently developed connections and understanding of international research directions
• Lack of knowledge of foreign business curriculum and consistent contact with innovative Russian businesses
• Lack of clarity on purpose and expectations from incubators
• Perm’s universities appear to be focused on the Incubator as the one answer to bringing entrepreneurship into
universities rather than creating multiple programs and schemes to educate and stimulate activity
• Competition for scarce federal and regional funds among competing universities and RAS institutes
• Problem of ‘me-first’ pursuit of funding that inhibits cost and function-sharing cross-institutional cooperation
• Lack of physical facilities for student gathering to exchange ideas
• Lack of consistent and long-term curriculum development that includes integration with business in the
innovative, knowledge-based sectors
• No course work on innovation in large enterprises
• Lack of consistent interaction with businesses engaged in innovation
• Lack of differentiated strategy for academic/research collaboration and commercial innovation development

19. Large and Small Business
Gaps
• Lack of global competition in Perm prevents incentive to innovate
• Market mechanisms are not working freely and a a result there are limited incentives for large companies
to innovate internally or look outside to smaller companies for innovation
• Large companies are not using open innovation and therefore blocking the fundamental supply/demand
relationship with small companies; Market failure in the relationship between big business as demand and
small business as supply
• No clear route to market for Perm’s new projects; Funding seems to be small and early stage and no clear
path for future funding
• New Russian companies do not benchmark against global competitors (which is needed even if addressing
only the Russian market first)
• No mechanisms for small business to liaise with universities; No apparent funding to encourage a business
to work with the universities via funding or “innovation vouchers”
• Appropriate government support structures do not appear to support big/existing business modernization
and/or innovation. Current schemes appear focused on new business
• Lack of government programs to encourage or spur collaboration between big business and small business
• Lack of good news stories and examples of how careers in small / entrepreneurial companies are attractive;
and current success stories appear to be exceptions rather than the rule.
• Lack of systemic processes; successes are opportunistic rather than systematic
• Perm’s investment agency does support business by bringing international companies and R&D shops into
Perm and helping Perm companies make links internationally (R&D collaborations, licensing deals, and new
routes to market)
• Lack of consistent missions of Perm companies and key stakeholders traveling to international markets to
develop new relationships and understand routes to market

20. Government Gaps
• Perm’s sector focus priorities (Biotech, ICT, Energy, etc) are not clearly based on existing strengths and
capabilities as expressed during university and industry interviews
• Sector focus areas are not defined in a way to show detailed capability based on existing industrial
capability, university strengths and differentiation from competitors such as: Remediation technologies
(water, soil, etc), Utilization of Waste materials and super toxics, Biotesting and Diagnostics, Plant biology
and organic chemistry, Nano materials and polymers
• No clearly stated set of incentives and grants to support entrepreneurs, start-ups, existing companies and
FDI target companies
• Mechanisms are not in place to enable meaningful data to be collected on the value of grants/funding, as
well as dissemination of key propositional differentiators
• High taxes and costs of credit for big and small companies are sited as barriers for growth
• Perception is that Perm lags similar regions of Tomsk and Ekaterinberg. Need to determine if this is
perception or truth and make appropriate changes (real programs or PR)
• Perm’s investment agency does not appear focused on key international targets nor focused on the three
key goals of an agency: to create a new wave of high value investment into Perm, to promote the
integration of Perm technology into world markets through professional representation and to develop a
positive brand image for Perm and for its scientific and business resources

21. Serial Entrepreneurs
• No existence of or culture supporting serial entrepreneurs
• No mechanism/network in place that enables the coalescing of an entrepreneurial community, including
tech transfer and commercialization support systems
• Lack of awareness of existing entrepreneurs in the community
• Lack of on-going engagement in entrepreneurship teaching and curriculum; Lack of consistent
entrepreneurship training at each university
• Lack of supporting tax, grants and inward investment incentives and support for serial entrepreneurs
• Limited public/Seed Funding, grants and loans for serial entrepreneurs
• No early stage educational programs for young children to learn entrepreneurship
• No apparent incentives to encourage entrepreneurs to work with the universities via funding or
“innovation vouchers

22. Tech Transfer and
Commercialization
• Patent filing and in particular international patent filing is a missing skill set in the Perm Innovation
ecosystem
• Local, rather than global, expertise in commercialization and intellectual property
• Lack of understanding of how to create IP products or services from academic’s work
• Lack of local resources to evaluate technology for market and assist with business expertise
• ‘Old school’ scientist do not understand a personal benefit of commercialization nor do they understand
the benefit for their students and as a result, they cannot teach or mentor their students in these areas.
• No technology transfer or commercialization education or training programs geared towards faculty
• Some Perm prize competitions appear to be narrowly focused and difficult to penetrate making it difficult
for innovative companies or technologies to participate
• Academic publishing of scientific work does not appear to be taking place internationally and therefore the
peer review process and understanding of international findings and competitors is limited.

23. VC and other
Funding Sources
• Lack of a ‘menu’ of tax incentives focused on each phase of a start-up’s life cycle.
• Funding seems to be small and early stage and no clear path for future funding
• Venture Capital industry is underdeveloped
• Limited public/Seed Funding, grants and loans
• Lack of private funded IT investment in the region. As a result, highly innovative and fast growing ICT
companies are more likely to encounter difficulties in raising finance
• Lack of sophisticated Business Angels network
• There is no clear support to identify and promote a range of other sources of finance for growth, including
dept as well as equity funding

24. Innovation Gaps, Innovation Teams
and Action Plans
Short Term Issues
Cross
Functional Action
Identified Medium Term Issues plans
Innovation
Gaps
teams
Long Term Issues

25. DRAFT Gap Summary
Short • Lack of clarity on Incubators and over- reliance as the one answer to brining entrepreneurship into universities
rather than creating multiple programs and schemes to educate and stimulate activity
Term • Each university is creating its own incubator / tech transfer center without having the scale to support
• No clearly stated set of incentives and grants to support entrepreneurs, start-ups, existing companies and FDI
target companies
• Patent filing, especially international patents are a missing skill-set in the innovation process
• Business plan and prize competitions are not easy to access and not leading to a clear path of
commercialization
• Lack of consistent missions of Perm companies and key stakeholders traveling to international markets to
develop new relationships and understand routes to market
Medium • No consistent course work or curriculum on entrepreneurship, technology transfer and other business training
to a broad range of students and focus only on students rather than post-docs and professors
Term • Lack of systematic international relationships at the government, university and business levels
• Lack of government programs to spur collaboration between big business and small business, and university
and business
• Perception that Perm lags Tomsk and Ekanterinburg
• Perm’s investment agency is not focused on international targets, promoting FDI into Perm and helping Perm
companies understand international routes to market
Long • Lack of global competition prevents incentive to innovate
• Market failure in relationship between big business as demand and small business as supply and for large
Term companies to innovate internally – complete lack of open innovation mentality
• Lack of serial entrepreneurs and culture of entrepreneurship

26. The Implementation Process –
Taking Action and Getting Results!
ACTION PLAN:
Create one overarching
technology transfer center
to support all university and
Each university is creating institute commercialization
its own incubator / tech and have each university
transfer center without focus on educational
having the scale to support programs and curriculum
Cross
functional
Lack of consistent missions of
Perm companies and key teams
stakeholders traveling to ACTION PLAN:
international markets to develop Conduct a mission of Perm
new relationships and understand companies and key
routes to market stakeholders to Boston to
develop international
relationships