Interesting question CA Vinod Kr Sharma . Do not have an answer for you, but sounds logically possible that the two "variables" may co-vary.

Thanks but I appreciate it if you could discuss it with your peer group. It looks like what you mentioned but surprisingly it is not like that and I say so because had that been the case then Universities filing the record number of patents must also have the highest number of entrepreneurial initiatives.

CA Vinod Kr Sharma ,

I would argue that patents do not necessarily reflect the No. of Entrepreneurial ventures/start-ups at this point in time (though maybe sometime in the future it will be more correlated). The role of the TTO in universities have been more focused on the licensing of patents rather than fostering ventures/startups.

It also comes to bear that traditionally academics see patents as evils of industry that bear disincentives to hardcore believers that knowledge should be free (a substantial number of academics do not understand the true intention of patents). Further commercialisation is also seen as a disincentive due to the apparent conflict between commercialisation secrecy as a competitive edge and publishing. These leads to faculty members in allowing the TTO to handle the patenting while freeing them from commercialisation to continue to publish.

My view is that students under faculty supervision are more prone to engage in startup activity than the professors themselves. Since they also fall under the universities intellectual property rules, they are more likely to end up in patent-startup activities.

Let me know if this helps

Regards

Great views. Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. Let me give you another perspective that is indirectly related to my research work. Universities consider the act of patenting as a complete reflection of their Research Orientation and Culture for getting better positioning which I think is not justified because to my best of understanding merely patenting an idea has little significance if it doesn't offer potential benefit to society. This could possibly be the reason why the USA and other countries scale high in the Innovation and Entrepreneurial Index. My point is the University should disclose complete information with their stakeholders and should not misguide them with incomplete information. Please do share your views

CA Vinod Kr Sharma ,

Let me give you my viewpoint as to why that indirect perspective is more important to your research (though it varies by country).

Given the financial stability of some academic institutions, some accreditation bodies are "encouraging" even universities to find alternative sources for income. This usually happens to educational institutions where they rely on students for income. One of the more attractive sources of income then comes from intellectual property that faculty and students generate as a byproduct of their activities. The relevance is not as important as with research institutions that compete ferociously for grants and recognition. This competition will put pressure in the strategic selection of candidates with high rate of publications and grant proposal know-how. This does not necessarily happen with educational institutions that have the pressure of selecting faculty members that are directed more towards education.

The drive towards alternative sources of income is one of the driving factors (in my view) as to why entrepreneurial activity is flourishing in educational institutions. Entrepreneurial activity will take place more often there because of lower barriers to entry. The educational institutions usually do not have well established TTOs and are not well positioned competitively to secure big licensing agreements due to infrastructure constraints and staff overwork(full course load leaves little time to dedicate to early stage research). This opens the door to smaller projects that can be pursued by staff, students or even invited external resources via an accelerator which needs less commitment to infrastructure than bigger licensing projects to big companies.

Tying this to my initial post, I think that the development of entrepreneurial activity is taking off for the wrong reason under the wrong conditions. While it appears to be a sound strategy it leaves those companies vulnerable in those initial stages where bigger support is needed. The Motto that you have to "give it all" at those initial stages does not work. It takes careful planning and strategy to succeed based on seed ideas and it is not a function of "give it all" strategy but of "think strategically".

Hope this helps

Regards

Indian Universities particularly the private players are more interested in following the route of patenting for demonstrating the research culture and getting a higher rating for influencing the admissions. The types of patents filed by faculties have little to do with the intellectual and entrepreneurial nourishment of the students.

In my view, a university's performance cannot be judges merely on the basis of a number of patents filed by its faculty members. What say?

CA Vinod Kr Sharma ,

Very interesting dynamics that you are describing for Indian Universities! This does not generally happen where I currently reside where patents do not carry that importance.

The importance factor depends on whether the country has solid enough economy for IP enforcing (countries that lag behind usually do not do much patent enforcement to allow catch up of the market).

The question that I would pose to you is the following: From the University's perspective what is the benefit of having a patent?

From your post it is mainly as an advertisement to drive enrolment. If this is the case it might be worth asking if there is a roadblock (e.g. legal) which interferes from there being other incentives. For example be it that it is non profit entity that cannot directly benefit the stakeholders (yes academic institutions are a business, sadly).

To your point on "intellectual and entrepreneurial nourishment of the students", it is really difficult to predict patent quality. Your suggestion "performance cannot be judges merely on the basis of a number of patents filed" is on point. The difficulty is on establishing an alternate metric which reflects values. When we get to values, then the question is which ones and whose? Take for example an Indian University that is attracting foreign students, then it is not just local values but of those foreigners as well. These will drive enrolment and justification for them to be there. I am not saying that it should not be pursued, but that it is an extremely difficult subject and sometimes a sensitive one.

Very nice subject, keep it up

Thanks

CA Vinod Kr Sharma,

I work for the TTO of the University of Bergamo (Italy), as a Knowledge Transfer Manager. The work I do deals with enhancing the patenting capacity of university researchers and I have an overview of both the number of patents filed and entrepreneurial activities born in universities by university researchers and students.

I'm also a PhD student and I conduct research in this field applying scientific methods that can bring benefits to TTOs.

Regarding your question: referring to Italian universities, several studies show that there is no correlation between the number of patents and the number of university spin-offs or student ventures.

The level of intellectual property production and innovative entrepreneurial activity remain strongly dictated by a country's culture and personal initiative.

However, there are some aspects that need to be considered and which, from my point of view, can influence the relationship between number of patents filed by Universities & the No. of Entrepreneurial ventures / start-ups:

1) it would be necessary to invest in the increase of university staff involved in the Utt, to improve and expand technology transfer through the production of patents by encouraging professors to patent rather than publish research results, for the benefit of the university of reference.

2) The production of spin-offs/start-ups for which the UTT contribution is less clear should be supported by adequate internal regulations of the individual universities: for example by setting clear rules to minimize conflicts of interest or in defining the ownership shares of the spin-off/start-up company.

Thank you Matteo Spreafico for such valuable insight.