| By Gary S. Was RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES AND PRIVATE INDUSTRY CAN BOTH BENEFIT FROM A BETTER RELATIONSHIP.
Ties
to industry are important for engineering
colleges. They provide exposure
to real-world problems, job opportunities
for engineering graduates, an opportunity
for faculty members to apply their
expertise and of course, research
support. But right now universities
aren’t getting the research
dollars from such a relationship.
Of the $284 billion spent on research
annually in the United States, 63
percent comes from industry and
30 percent from the federal government,
according to the National Science
Foundation. Yet, only 5 percent
of the research expenditures at
the nation’s universities
come from industry. How can we be
missing out on such a potentially
significant source of research revenue?
The great majority of research
support from industry is in the
form of single contracts arranged
between an individual faculty member
and a scientist at the company.
This type of industry-funded research
is short-term, intellectually shallow,
high-risk and not connected with
either the university or the company’s
programs. And the contracting process
is unnecessarily cumbersome. While
75 percent of the 6,963 federal
grants (accounting for $536 million
in research in FY ’04) at
my own institution were awarded
using two agreement templates, the
1,173 industry contracts worth $32
million required essentially 1,173
templates. It’s not surprising
that neither industry nor universities
are excited about investing time
and money in such sub-optimal arrangements.
The good news is that universities
and industry want the same things:
a sizable program, commitment by
both parties, bright graduate students
and a focus on the company’s
core research mission. And both
sides are beginning to realize that
fewer, larger, deeper and more-focused
research programs are to their mutual
benefit. But that’s only half
the battle.
The other half is figuring out
how to set up the contract. Universities
are accustomed to retaining title
to innovations made under federally
funded programs as provided by the
Bayh-Dole Patent and Trademark Act
of 1980 and expect similar treatment
from industry. But since they put
up the money, companies usually
expect exclusive rights to the innovations
developed by university researchers.
As the Hewlett-Packard vice president
for worldwide university relations
put it in a speech earlier this
year, “Given that negotiations
with an American university can
take more than a year, the idea
is often valueless before an agreement
can be reached, and the company
often spends more in legal expenses
than it would be able to pay in
royalties. This can lead to a company
just walking away from the negotiation
and declining to sponsor any further
research at that university.”
In fact, many companies are seeking
relationships with European universities
in order to avoid the IP hassles
they face with U.S. universities.
So what should universities do
differently to improve their success
with industry? First, they should
focus more on the company’s
research objectives since research
programs are easier to sell to higher-ups
if they address the company’s
core missions. Engineering colleges
also need to demonstrate the benefits
of broad programs: access to renowned
experts focusing on the company’s
key research challenges and graduate
students as potential employees.
But universities shouldn’t
expect industry to treat intellectual
property the same way the federal
government does. Universities should
think about viewing the real payback
as the enhanced reputation created
by the exposure and the societal
benefits derived from their technological
achievements—both can pay
handsome dividends in the long run.
And companies need to respect the
rights of faculty members to protect
their innovations, publish their
results and preserve their ability
to work in the area beyond the immediate
project.
As with any relationship, the path
to success is paved by the mutual
understanding of each party’s
needs. And that makes it a win-win
proposition for both sides.
Gary S. Was is professor and
associate dean at the University
of Michigan’s College of Engineering.
|