Malcolm Menzies

Malcolm Menzies Harnessing Science For Business A brief history of technology transfer Twenty years ago the former Department of Scientific Research, the advisory The New Zealand government has announced the creation divisions of the Ministry of Agriculture of a new Advanced Technology Institute – since renamed and Fisheries and some other smaller groups were disestablished and their assets Callaghan Innovation after the late Sir Paul Callaghan – to combined and redistributed to ten Crown be launched in 2013. Callaghan Innovation’s purpose will (state) research institutes or CRIs. Each CRI was established with a focus on an be ‘to help get New Zealand’s most innovative ideas out of economic, environmental or social sector,2 in the belief that such an alignment would the lab and into the marketplace more quickly and provide foster closer relationships, ensure better a high-tech HQ for innovative New Zealand business’.1 This transfer of knowledge between researchers and users, and incorporate the business- development is the latest in a long line of attempts to use oriented skills required to manage science- based innovation processes. There was research, science and technology to boost the country’s also reform in the way policy was set and economy (Palmer and Miller, 1984; Ministerial Working Party, government funding allocated to research, with the establishment of the separate 1986; Science and Technology Advisory Committee, 1988; Ministry of and Foundation for Research, Ministerial Task Group, 1991; Ministry of Research, Science Science and Technology. Over time there emerged considerable and Technology, 2006, 2007). dissatisfaction with the performance of the reformed science system, particularly Malcolm Menzies is a researcher on public policy and futures issues. His PhD from Victoria in relation to funding, structures, and University of Wellington is on the topic of ‘recognising scientific entrepreneurship in New Zealand’. connections between science and business Page 48 – Policy Quarterly – Volume 9, Issue 1 – February 2013 (Institution of Professional Engineers, Ekeland et al., 2001; Corolleur, Carrere challenge for research outputs to be taken 2004; Ministry of Research, Science and et al., 2004; Murray, 2004; Abramo and up by a broadly unreceptive business Technology, 2008; National Science Panel, D’Angelo, 2009). Scientific entrepreneurs sector. 2008), so in 2009 the government set up are rare, though probably not as rare as Scientific entrepreneurship offers the a review which produced a number of policy makers and managers may think potential to create radical, ‘technology- recommendations for further changes. (Aldridge and Audretsch, 2011). As one push’ innovations and underpin the Most of these recommendations related such scientific entrepreneur put it, albeit development of new economic sectors to funding, ownership and governance a little awkwardly: ‘I think a good scientist (Workplace Productivity Working matters, but it was also reiterated could be a good entrepreneur but – it’s the Group, 2004; Göransson, Maharajh et al., that technology transfer was ‘a core same tools but a different mindset.’ Better 2009). To help come to grips with this responsibility for all CRIs and [that the understanding of this ‘different mindset’ phenomenon, it’s worth starting with the government should] require CRIs to could be used alongside structural reform literature on the various components, develop, invest in and manage intellectual to support the development of systems beginning with that on entrepreneurship. property with the intent of moving that and processes to increase the incidence of intellectual property from their balance scientific entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship sheet into the private sector as soon The study of entrepreneurship faces as possible’ (Crown Research Institute The potential of scientific entrepreneurship an inherent difficulty, which is how Taskforce, 2010, p.12). The foregoing discussion does not mean to analyse a process which cannot be A further report on the high-value to dismiss the efficacy of conventional foreseen by most people and is generally manufacturing sector (2012) led directly processes of technology transfer in the recognised only in retrospect (Baumol, to the establishment of Callaghan Innovation. The panel of experts who prepared this report analysed primary The factors which empirical evidence most strongly barriers to technology and knowledge transfer, but also acknowledged the links to entrepreneurial success are: high self- complexity of the innovation process. The panel was more nuanced in its view efficacy; ability to spot and recognise opportunities; than many of its predecessors, and the establishment of Callaghan Innovation high personal perseverance; high human and social may provide an opportunity to reflect capital; and superior social skills ... on the dominant model of technology transfer and to consider whether modifications or alternatives might deliver better economic outcomes. presence of already-existing sectors 1983). Nevertheless, from past cases it is A strong argument can be made that with ‘absorptive capacity’ and capable possible to identify a priori indicators of previous reforms of the research, science of delivering very good returns on entrepreneurial success and contextual and technology system in New Zealand investment (Hall and Scobie, 2006). But factors or individual attributes that were premised on a mental model where there is no absorptive capacity – contribute to entrepreneurship. Several (Johnson-Laird, 1983; Ramirez, 2007) of for example, in nascent industries – the studies have shown a cluster of personality science and business existing in inherently pure transfer model breaks down both traits common among all successful different realms populated by people conceptually and in practical terms entrepreneurs, including the need for with separate and mutually exclusive (O’Shea, 2008). In New Zealand major achievement (McLelland, 1961) as well as sets of attributes (Menzies, 2008). This barriers to the transformation of existing persistence, innovative outlook, low need thinking in part underpinned a view of industries or the growth of new ones are for conformity, high energy level, risk- technology transfer wherein ideas are low research intensity and inadequate taking and efficiency (Belt, 1990). The created by scientists and passed to others absorptive capacity within the economy factors which empirical evidence most along a chain of increasing application (Carlaw, Devine et al., 2003). Instead, New strongly links to entrepreneurial success and commercialisation (Slaughter and Zealand firms generally take an informal are: high self-efficacy; ability to spot and Leslie, 1997; Evans, Kersh et al., 2004). and incremental approach to innovation, recognise opportunities; high personal This view makes little allowance for the and, rather than referring to research perseverance; high human and social possibility that the desired attributes and development or groundbreaking capital; and superior social skills (Markman may be combined within the same innovations, most cite feedback from and Baron, 2003). Meta-analysis by Zhao individual(s) – scientific entrepreneurs – customers or employees (especially sales and Seibert (2006) indicates significant who can move with their scientific ideas staff) and changing customer needs and differences between entrepreneurs and into the marketplace (Etzkowitz, 1998; values as important inputs (Knuckey, managers on four personality dimensions, Graversen and Friis-Jensen, 2001; Nås, Johnston et al., 2002). It is a major such that entrepreneurs score higher Policy Quarterly – Volume 9, Issue 1 – February 2013 – Page 49 Harnessing Science For Business on conscientiousness and openness to 1984, 1994; Bortagaray, 2009). But many processes. This does not discount the experience and lower on neuroticism and of the traits required by scientists are not possibility of leaps in thinking, but agreeableness. Hansemark (1998) claims inherently different from those required it does seem generally at odds with that only two psychological attributes by people working in many other realms entrepreneurial processes wherein an have shown any significant relation to – imagination, self-criticism, diligence individual acts on imperfect information, entrepreneurship: need for achievement and curiosity, for example. Scientists are backs his or her own judgement, and is and locus of control. considered to have a devotion to truth and judged retrospectively by results in the Risk is a major recurring theme and respect for the public literature, and to be marketplace. numerous attempts have been made motivated by the science itself rather than to measure the risk-taking attribute by external rewards. In this respect they Human capital and the competency of entrepreneurs, but this is not just a are quite similar to many entrepreneurs. movement function of personality. It also seems Like entrepreneurs, scientists spot The fields of science and entrepreneurship to reflect organisational context and opportunities and take risks, albeit these may have differences, but they are history (McCarthy, 2000). Opportunity are less likely to be of a financial nature. both human activities which may be recognition is also seen by many as a key They also at times challenge conventional employed for the purposes of economic behaviour (Smart and Conant, 1994; Baum, wisdom (Kuhn, 1996). Scientific effort innovation. In order to understand the Locke

Load more