AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey FY 2005: Survey Summary

® Survey Summary ® AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey: FY2005 Survey Summary www.autm.net ©2007 The Association of University Technology Managers®. All Rights Reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without written permission from AUTM. Association of University ® ® Technology Managers , AUTM and ® are registered trademarks of the Association of University Technology Managers. AUTM Licensing Survey™ is a trademark of AUTM. 3 AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey: FY2005 Letter from Dear AUTM Members and Colleagues, AUTM VP I am very pleased to present the AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey Summary: FY 2005 Canada and and would like to acknowledge and thank the three Canadians who have worked so hard President on the AUTM Metrics and Survey Committee throughout 2005/06. They are: • Sean Flanigan, University of Ottawa; Chair and co-editor–FY05 Canadian Licensing Survey • Tanya G. Glavicic-Théberge, McGill University • Marcel Mongeon, Mongeon Consulting, Inc. This is the second year AUTM has published an individual summary report for Canada. The Canadian technology transfer profession has truly come of age over the past five years, as is evident in this survey. The Survey responses show many areas of success such as: • Growth in research funding, and resulting disclosures of new technologies • Increases in: • products arriving on the market • active and executed licenses • technology transfer licensing office staffing • number of patent applications filed Inclusion of data reported in the AUTM U.S. Licensing Survey Summary: FY 2005, shows that in many areas, technology transfer is making an impact. Specifically, in Canada, we see an increase in research funding from our provincial and federal governments, leading to a subsequent increase in the number of technology disclosures received by the Technology Transfer Offices (TTO). There was an increase in the number of full time licensing professionals employed and an increase in patent applications and licensing. However, it appears that in Canada, the financial climate for startups still has not recovered from the 2000–2001 near simultaneous collapse of the Internet, telecommunications and biotechnology sectors. 4 Survey Summary ® Despite our extraordinary accomplishments, academic technology transfer is an arduous, sometimes grueling, business and it takes time before we see the fruits of our labour. A few institutions may achieve blockbuster deals, but these take 10 to 20 years to bear fruit. Most institutions eventually see a modest return from their activities after 10 to 15 years. So why do we engage in technology transfer? We hope that the vignettes contained in this report, along with the Better World Reports to be found at www.betterworldproject.net will help readers realise why we do what we do, and how what we do helps further the mission of academic research and its commercialization. We are delighted to include for the first time several vignettes from Canadian colleges and technical institutes this year. As the colleges become more involved with technology commercialization activity they are setting up TTOs, and in many cases, forming regional networks with other academic institutions. This year several colleges participated in the Canadian Licensing Survey. I would like to re-emphasize Stuart Howe’s message from last year: technology transfer is the transfer of knowledge, ideas, know–how, innovation and patents which are intangible assets, to enable the science and knowledge from our institutions to have a practical application and benefit to society. As Stuart outlined, “getting research results to the public is, quite simply, the reason technology transfer professionals are passionate about their work.” One of the things I value most about AUTM and the colleagues I meet through our www.autm.net Association is how many of us are truly passionate about what we do: how much time we give to support AUTM, which improves the caliber of TT professionals, both in North America and around the world. The decision to increase the number of vignettes this year to show commercialization activity from every province across Canada, from universities, hospitals and colleges, was a key goal for us. We want everyone from researchers, provosts, journalists, governments and the “Canadian on the street” to understand what we do, and why, and to get as excited as we are about the long-term benefits to our country. The AUTM Licensing Survey is another way for us to tell our story. 5 AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey: FY2005 The Annual Survey is also an incredibly valuable tool, not only for benchmarking between academic technology transfer offices, but also for analysis by academics and individuals who shape Canadian public policy. As the technology commercialization environment evolves, new metrics will need to be developed. AUTM is committed to providing leadership in the development of new metrics and ensuring that the metrics are captured and reported accurately. We are delighted that we will be working closely with the Alliance for Commercialization of Canadian Technologies (ACCT) on building upon the metrics we are collecting and looking for others that may help to demonstrate the technology transfer activities in Canada. May I take this opportunity for special thanks to: • Sean Flanigan, who has co-edited this report. Together we encourage all Canadian universities, hospitals and colleges to participate in the FY2006 Survey. We are keen to see the survey grow from strength to strength. Remember as Sean says “Good Numbers Count.” • Ray Hoemsen, Red River College Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, for all the work by him, and his team, in pulling the vignettes from the universities, hospitals and especially his success in compiling all the stories from the colleges, new this year. Caroline Bruce, University of British Columbia 2006–2008 AUTM Vice President for Canada John Frasier 2006–2007 AUTM President 6 Survey Summary ® Acknowledgments I am pleased to see the second Canadian AUTM Annual Licensing Survey report, especially with two Canadian editors. While AUTM is an international organization, and licensing surveys are conducted across the globe, the U.S. and Canadian surveys are conducted simultaneously each year. This year’s Canadian report discusses the unique environment of Canada. North America provides for some commonality between U.S. and Canadian technology transfer, but the funding and ownership elements are often different across the borders. Geography does not impact how AUTM members see their efforts rewarded through the creation of more startup companies, more academic research-based products released to the public and more active relationships with companies (through licenses to develop and/or release products). AUTM members enable this activity by managing an institution’s intellectual property, providing advice or managing research or clinical agreements with companies, making research tools widely available to other researchers and participating or leading discussions that foster greater academic — industry interaction, among other activities. This Summary Report, for Canada prepared by the 2005 AUTM Metrics & Surveys Committee, and the Social Impacts Committee, represents an initial step by this committee in providing non-practitioners greater insight into the academic technology transfer process and data meaningful to that effort. The U.S. will release their own Summary Report from the Annual Licensing Survey. Dana Bostrom, Sean Flanigan and Caroline Bruce as editors of the Canadian Report, www.autm.net thank the following individuals for their participation throughout the year, which makes this Summary Report possible: 7 AUTM Canadian Licensing Survey: FY2005 Metrics & Survey Committee Alice Li, Cornell University Bill Tucker, University of California Christine Burke, University of California Deanna Vandiver, The Lousiana State University Health Sciences Center–New Orleans Jodi Hecht, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Justine Gordon, Research Foundation of the State University of New York Ken Sherman, University of Nevada, Las Vegas Marcel Mongeon, Mongeon Consulting, Inc. Patricia Cotton, University of California Patrick Reed, Georgia Tech Research Corporation Robin Rasor, University of Michigan Sean Flanigan, University of Ottawa Tanya Glavicic-Theberge, McGill University We also thank the social impacts vignettes sub-committee, and all the authors of these vignettes at the host institutions. We thank you for helping to show the impacts of our activities. Social Impact Vignette Sub–Committee Deanna Vandiver, Chair, The Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-New Orleans Allyson Best, University of Mississippi Nikki Borman, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Jeff Cope, RTI International Carol Dykes, University of Central Florida Ray Hoemsen, Red River College Doug Jamison, Harris and Harris Group, Inc. Laura Savatski, BloodCenter of Wisconsin 8 Survey Summary ® And, as always, the survey would not be possible without the dedication and effort of Rick and Nola Colman, who are the masters of the technology behind the survey, follow-up and data verification and data production. Sincerely, Dana Bostrom AUTM Vice President, Metrics & Surveys University of California, Berkeley Editors Caroline Bruce, Ph.D. University of British Columbia AUTM Vice President, Canada www.autm.net Sean Flanigan University of Ottawa 9 AUTM Canadian Licensing

Load more