Wellington
According to a couple of intellectual property commercialisation experts doing a mini road triplate last year; a) we’re doing it completely wrong, and b) realise that patents can be sold and/orlicensed.
Paul Adams of Auckland-based EverEdge IP says while New Zealand has no shortage ofincredible ideas for a world that has a huge demand for innovative products and technology,there’s a commercialisation gap in this country. It’s not so much what people commercialise buthow it is done that matters most.
And the way most Kiwi companies (and others around the world too, so we shouldn’t feel we’realone on this) are set up, innovation and commercialisation is almost doomed to failure right fromthe get go.
Among his observations are:
Adams says it effectively means that organisational pressures kill innovation; and it isn’tthat managers are stupid, they are simply responding rationally to their environment. On thispremise, “unless we change the environment and the way innovation and commercialisation aretreated, managers will continue to make decisions that retard or ignore the highest potentialinnovations,” he says.
He suggests a number of ways around this rationale yet destructive outcome, contending that thenumber one factor in success in innovation and commercialisation is CAPABILITY .From Adams point of view, companies must build an internal commercialisation capability whileworking with an external capability to help deliver immediate projects and build managementcapability he says.
The corporate and commercialisation skill sets are almost completely different he says.
Whereas the classic corporate skill set is structured decision making processes which looks toreduce risk, a commercialisation mentality is flexible, responsive and even ad hoc in its decisionmaking, while being able to accept and work with risk.
While corporates favour specialists, avoid failure and work with reliable, solid data,commercialisation favours generalists, finds that failure is frequent and data is often unreliableand irrelevant.
The corporates target large, well known markets with quick certain paybacks while preferringcertainty and known facts, commercialising companies’ initial markets are often small and unknown,payback is often distant and uncertain, at the same time being comfortable working withuncertainty.
Adams’ presentation segued into Chicago’s
Global IP Law Group
managing director
This is a legitimate way to extract extra value from R&D, and the sale of IP is a means tomake more money beyond the physical shipping of a tangible product he says. Patents should thereforebe seen as something separate from the actual business, and there is increasing recognition that itis a separate asset.
“A company may pursue a particular line of R&D, but if this doesn’t result in aparticular product or service, a return can be obtained from selling the patents,” he says.