how could stronger ktos support weaker ones – in west and east

How could strongerKTOs support weakerones – in West and East

Knowledge Transfer Stakeholder Forum

IU21KT Study

Brussels, 20 November 2014

A study on behalf of theEuropean Commission

Špela Stres

Jožef Stefan Institute

Ljubljana, Slovenia

Open innovation platforms

C of Ex, C of Comp

Demola, Innovation VouchersUniversity Incubators

TTOs

Organizational Forms, Activities, Beneficiaries and Results of KT Vehicles

EC landscape – Mixed Signals

RESULTSContractsCompaniesLicences

Patent is not a result, but a KPI. EC should formally acknowledge existence and need for TTOs.

ProfessionalNetworks

PersonalRelationsandMentoring

Potential Support Sources

Collaborationof KTOs


Events andEducation

Understandthe situation

ProfessionalRecognition

KT Stakeholder Forum ▪ Brussels, 20/11/2014Š.Stres, How stronger KTOs could help in East and West?


Events andEducation

The way forward to strengthening KTOs and

enhancing KT in Europe through collaborationenhancing KT in Europe through collaboration

with National Networks

Špela Stres, PhD, LL.M.

(former)-Vice-President ASTPPROTON



enhancing KT in Europe through collaborationenhancing KT in Europe through collaboration

among field related National Players


Board Member, Steering Committee HEPTech


A Commission's initiative to promote coordinationwith the Member States aiming at i.a.

establishing guidelines and indicators,establishing guidelines and indicators,exchanging best practices and promoting

monitoring and evaluation."



enhancing KT in Europe through

internationalization - collaboration of National

Players with those Abroad


National Coordinator, Enterprise Europe Network


Why a new association as ASTPPROTON for Europe?

ASTP and ProTon Europe were the two major Europeanassociations for KT professionals with a combined membershipbase of approximately658 people from 450 institutions

After operating for many years in parallel and with a differentAfter operating for many years in parallel and with a differentapproach to professionalization, it has been decided by theboards of both associations that the best route forward forKT in Europe is to combine forces.

The two boards decided to merge the two associationsinto a unique one, named ASTP-PROTON.

4% of members from Eastern Europe!

Why a sectorial organization asHEPtech?

CERN established it to connect in particular sectorialplayers from industry, research organization in HighEnergy Physics (HEP) and National Agencies active inpromoting, advancing and accelerating research 2 businesstransfer.

25 member institutions from 14 countries geographicallywell covering the state participation to CERN.

The ultimate goal is to benefit European industry throughconnecting it to HEP research.

25% of member institutions from Eastern Europe!

Why a elite club as TTOCIRCLE?

The EC established as an initiative to promote coordinationwith the Member States. (establishing guidelines andindicators, exchanging best practices and promoting monitoringand evaluation)

25 member organizations from 15 states together with 5international organizations, under coordination of JRC.

CEA/16.000 employees, INRIA (F); CNR, ENEA/600 (I);Fraunhofer Society, Helmholtz Association, Max Planck Society(D); IMEC (B); NERC for the Research Councils UK (UK); RISE(S); SINTEF (N); TECNALIA, CIEMAT (Sp); TNO (N); VTT (Fi);CERN, ESA, ESRF, JRC, ILL (International), ETH Board (Switz);TUBITAK (Turkey); Yeda R&D for Weizmann Institute (Israel);DTI (De); Teagasc (Ir).

No member institutions from the Eastern Europe!

Why a wide network as EEN?

The Enterprise Europe Network was established by DGEnterprise to help small business to make the most of theEuropean marketplace. Working through local businessorganisations, it can help to:

Develop a business in new marketsSource or license new technologiesAccess EU finance and EU fundingAccess EU finance and EU funding

Members include chambers of commerce and industry,technology centres, universities and development agencies.Close to 600 member organizations, more than 4000inter-connected experts across the EU and beyond, in 53countries. More than 10 Sector Groups bringing togetherTransfer Experts from different fields.

All 11 Eastern European Countries represented.

PROMOTION: Promoting knowledge transfer

SURVEYS: Knowing where we are is a basis for improvement

EDUCATION: Providing high quality services, increasing the performance of individuals and KT offices the efficiency of the European innovation ecosystem

should the one who educates also set certifying rules (not should the one who educates also set certifying rules (nottransparent)?

COMMUNITY BUILDING:Forming a strong community of KT professionals and KTOsEstablishing a community (also members from industry!)

PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION

CONNECT TO THE USERS

Opinion based:- professionals- (offices)

Opinion & Quantitative Data based:- professionals- course providers- (offices)

Knowledge based.

PROFESSIONAL RECOGNITION

Topical industry eventsSector GroupsDatabase of Technologies

CONNECT TO THE USERS

Innovation Union in Perspective ofProfessional Organizations

15

Share of EEU participation

TTO Circle

- 25 institutions / 21 W.Europe, 4 Internat., 0 East.Europe 0%

ASTP

- 657 members / 4% from Eastern Europe (5% including Russia and Turkey) 4%- 657 members / 4% from Eastern Europe (5% including Russia and Turkey) 4%

HEPtech

- 25 member institutions, 14 countries / 5 East.Erope 36%

EEN

- >600 organizations, >4000 professionals, 53 countries

- all Eastern European countries included – max 11/28 39%







Events andEducation




- research amount and quality- patenting- licensing- contract and collaborative research

How does EU look like in KTNumber of Publications per mio inhabitants 2009-13

How does EU look like in KTNumber of Citations per mio inhabitants 2009-13

European Patent Applications per Mio Inhabitants

How does EU look like in KT

http://www.arrs.gov.si/en/analize/odlicnost/patenti.asp

Period EU Slovenia Slo. vs. EU % Rank Data FromPublications 2009-2013 4.604 8.91 193,5% 5 of 28 2014, ISI WoS

Citations 2009-2013 27.897 42.379 10 of 28 2014, ISI WoS

Highly cited 10% 2010 151 220 10 of 28 2014, ISI WoS

Highly cited 1% 2003-2013 122 141 12 of 28 2014, ISI WoS

Number per mio. Inhabitants

151,9%

145,7%

116,0%

How does KT PIPELINE look like inEEUAn Example: Slovenia

Researchers 2011 5.041 6.104 9 of 28 2014, ISI WoS

Patent Applications 2013 129,6 65,6 13 of 28 2014, EPO

GDP 2013 25.700,00 17.100,00 16 of 28 2013, IS

2009-2012 36.0%17 of 28 2013, IS

121,1%

50.6%

66,5%

Licensing and

Patent Revenues from

abroad as % of GDP

National economy and KT relations?How to take into account national economy specifics and not just strive to sell?

40

50

60

EU27

Czech

Is impact on national economy part of KTbusiness or not?

Is relation to SMEs important to KTOs or not?

0

10

20

30

Czech

Sweden

Hungary

Slovenia

UK

Is KTO responsible for national companies'development?

Innovative firms collaborating with sources of knowledge / chosen countries**IS 2011

How does EEU look like in KTWhat does the industry want from the Academia?

CCR promotion is crucial in countries with underdeveloped PRO-company relations!






Events andEducation




- increase patenting measures- (assure patenting for sales attitude)- increase PRO-SME relations

- increase high-tech spinout creation

Glasgow

Cambridge

Leuven

CERN

Dating with the best

Zurich

We are many

PROBLEMS- It becomes about the $

- Helping is hard work- KT is a competitive business

- Assisting means losing advantage- The ones who teach

The mentor needs to be interested in the outcome to make it happen!

- The ones who teach- Set rules for certifications

- Focus mainly on licensing- Little emphasis on collecting what is needed inEastern EU

DIFFERENCES- increase patenting measures- (assure patenting for sales attitude!!!)- increase PRO-SME relations

- increase high-tech spinout creation

Profiling and optimizing for performance

FRAGMENTED SERVICES → PULL THE FORCES TOGETHER& ORGANIZEEU: Average TTO with 8 FTE for approximately 2500 FTE researchers.**Example Eastern Europe TTO: 1-3 FTE employees, 1-5000 researchers.

DIFFERENT OBJECTIVES → INTEGRATED APPROACHEU: (Collaboration with SMEs is not a KTO priority)

– Patent portfolio management, licensing– Also spin-out creation and fund management

Being effective and providing what the country needs

– Also spin-out creation and fund managementEEU: (Contribute to the national economy break-through)

– Increase patenting– Establish strong intra-country PRO-SME relations– Improve SME internationalization

UNAPPROPRIATE STAFF → SUPPORTING WORK EFFICIENCY, not EVENTSShare of TTOs with science-technology profile staff**:- Scandinavia 100%- the rest of Europe 89%- In Eastern Europe, only 63% TTO employs scientists, many social scientists

**Source: European Knowledge Transfer Indicators Survey, April 2013







Events andEducation




Way forward


- National policies should support KT on the operationallevel, involving EARTO, EIRMA, EUA

- Are Smart specialization documents harmonized with KTdirectives? Set a WG by the EC to overview Smart Specializationdocuments through countries in view of KT?

(1) Establish clear national policies

- Council Recommendations for EU countries could be taken intoaccount to review national KT policy and performance? Set aWG on this issue?

- Any state/PRO financed KTO should be operating within aharmonized national legislative system, PROs shouldhave clear exploitation strategies → EC power couldcome in handy to achieve that nationally


-Connect KTOs with similar profiles in one region

-Support establishment not of regional KTOs but of network ofregional KTOs operating in the NET-Working model

-In the EEU do not focus on sectors, support general KTOswhich are strengthening from collaboration

(3A) Net-WORKING or learning bydoing

which are strengthening from collaboration

-Finance this network of KTOs from the EC budget to boosteconomic development of the region

-Append educational events on this operational structurefocused on KT results (not as per se instrument)


(3B) Support Achievements


(4) Issue specific financing calls forKTOs

- Issue calls for KTO NET-working / parallel to research calls

-based on required number of results (contracts, spinouts, new jobs)

- Integrate KT services to R&D proj.:

-ESIC / consulting level-ESIC / consulting level

-operational level should be required

-this would force national level changes needed (because theresearch participants will want to burn all the money and they willbe eager to support proper measures to be established)


Way forward


Always support increase of achievements (contracts, spinouts),not increase of activities (workshops, exchanges, consulting).

Thank you!

how could stronger ktos support weaker ones – in west and east

Documents