Dr. David M. Smith discusses the challenges of translating scientific innovation into real-world applications. He describes the "valley of death" as the gap between invention and implementation where ideas often fail due to high risks and costs. Key pitfalls in translation include lacking the proper expertise at each development stage, having contradicting priorities between partners, and ineffective communication with different target audiences. Dr. Smith advocates for an innovative mindset of seeking outside perspectives through interaction, training the brain through integrative thinking exercises, and being aware of one's own creative triggers.

1. STUCK IN THE VALLEY OF DEATH
The gulf between scientific innovation and market development
Dr. David M. Smith
Arbeitsgruppenleiter “DNA Nano-systeme”
Fraunhofer Institute für Zelltherapie &
Immunologie
Leipzig, Deutschland
© Fraunhofer

2. OUTLINE
 Personal introduction – my path to applied biosciences
 Valley of death for scientific innovation
 The mindset for innovation
© Fraunhofer

3. EARLY LIFE & EDUCATION
 1977 - Born in Dallas
© Fraunhofer

4. EARLY LIFE & EDUCATION
 1977 - Born in Dallas
© Fraunhofer

5. EARLY LIFE & EDUCATION
 1977 - Born in Dallas
 Physics/philosophy – UT Austin
 1998 – physics??
 1999 – biophysics research
 Applied science: more trouble than it’s
worth
© Fraunhofer

6. RELOCATION TO GERMANY
 Graduate studies @ Uni-Leipzig
 Continued allergy to applied science
 PhD work – esoteric
 Horror show of colleagues
© Fraunhofer

7. STEP TOWARDS APPLIED SCIENCE
 Post-doc @ LMU München
 DNA Nanotechnology – implied promise
 Adjustment
 Excitement
 Frustration
© Fraunhofer

8. APPLIED BIONANOSCIENCE
 Fraunhofer Gesellschaft (Feb. 2013)
 Cell Therapy & Immunology (IZI)
 Europe’s biggest organization for applied
research
 Best of both worlds
 Research
 Framework for implementation
© Fraunhofer

9. THE VALLEY OF DEATH
© Fraunhofer

10. THE VALLEY OF DEATH
 Gap between invention and real-world implementation
 High risk, high cost, long timescales
 Applicable to all commercial areas
© Fraunhofer

11. THE VALLEY OF DEATH
 Gap between invention and real-world implementation
 High risk, high cost, long timescales
 Applicable to all commercial areas
 Commercialization of scientific discovery
 Translational research
 “From bench to bedside”
B. Mellor, Nature 2008
© Fraunhofer

12. PITFALLS IN TRANSLATIONAL
RESEARCH
 Gaps in critical expertise
 Contradicting priorities
 Ineffective communication with targets
© Fraunhofer

13. GAPS IN CRITICAL EXPERTISE
 Early stages of development are fragile
 Limited financial resources
 Impatient investors
 Financial instability of founders/employees
 Major delays or technical mistakes can be fatal
 The right expertise are crucial for each stage of development
© Fraunhofer

14. GAPS IN CRITICAL EXPERTISE
 Example: early cancer diagnostic vs. garage startup
 Investment without proper knowledge base
 Inability to develop basic prototype
 Failure within 2 years
 Clear view of what skillsets are needed and when they are needed
 Roadmap of expertise
 Avoid hubris – you don’t know everything
 Contracting needed skills can be the difference
© Fraunhofer

15. CONTRADICTING PRIORITIES
 Different backgrounds + different viewpoint  varying goals
 Are goals of critical partners & contributors compatible?
 Different doesn’t have to mean conflicting
 Incompatible priorities create deadlock
© Fraunhofer

16. CONTRADICTING PRIORITIES
 Example: Publish vs. Patent
 Publish: scientific achievement judged on publication record
 Patent: protection of intellectual property essential for investors
 Example: Early cancer diagnostic vs. established giant
 Scientists: novel, high-impact discovery
 Industry: nuts & bolts of marketable product
 Never assume all critical partners have the same vision
 Resolve incongruities before they become destructively incompatible
© Fraunhofer

17. INEFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION WITH
TARGETS
 Every step of translation/development has a target audience
 Investors
 Partners/collaborators
 Regulators
 Customers
 Each target wants something different
 Failure to communicate appropriately can be fatal
© Fraunhofer

18. INEFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION WITH
TARGETS
 Example: scientists communicating with non-scientists
 What’s the big picture?
 Message lost in technical details
 Tailor message to your target
 Know your audience
 “cheating” is OK
 Pick 1-2 focal points based on their perspective
 Build message around these points
© Fraunhofer

19. THE MINDSET FOR INNOVATION
 Interaction – search creativity away from your field
 Integration – exercise the cognitive muscle
 The spark
© Fraunhofer

20. INTERACTION: SEEK OUTSIDERS
 Explanation forces re-examination
 Others’ qualification/ignorance  new viewpoints
 Creativity chain reaction
 Unexpected insights  dopamine stimulation  creative spark
 Bonus: not feeding potential competitors
© Fraunhofer

21. TRAINING: INTEGRATION OF IDEAS
 The low-lying fruit has been picked
 Innovation lies in cross-section of fields
 Biomedical meets nanotechnology
 Social media meets video streaming
 Cognitive pathways in ideation are like a muscle
 Training: integrative brainstorming
 Create a project idea from 2-3 unrelated scientific papers
 …or otherwise unconnected business/sites/etc
© Fraunhofer

22. VOODOO: FINDING YOUR SPARK
 Great ideas come in all locations and situations
 Always be ready – writing leaves a lasting impression
 Keep a catalogue, know which situations work for you
 You can’t force creativity but you can repeat the conditions
 A drink or two never hurts
© Fraunhofer

23. TO THE POINT
 Avoiding the valley of death
 Critical expertise
 Compatible priorities
 Targeted communication
 Tips for creative innovation
 Interaction
 Integration
 Know your spark
© Fraunhofer

24. QUESTIONS?
© Fraunhofer