These recommendations, lightly edited from the report, Corporate Venturing: Insights for European Leaders in Government, University and Industry, address some of the main challenges in the process of technology transfer: the limited amount of external guidance and support that is available during the whole process, the lack of financing during the Valley of Death and the issue of existing financial mechanisms not being adapted to technology transfer needs.
Although categorical recommendations cannot be provided, given the constraints of the current analysis, these suggestions provide some initial thoughts and considerations to aid in the development of policies: enhancing technology transfer, cooperating in corporate venturing and utilising more sophisticated investment mechanisms. These recommendations by the authors have been developed based on a literature review, experience in the field and interviews with other experts.
Promote co-investment mechanisms for proof of concept (PoC) projects
1. Connect specialised investors by supporting existing sectorial gatherings of investors (for example business angels, VC, corporate venture capital and family offices) who are involved in early-stage venture development in deep technologies. These individuals can help develop networks, identify opportunities and syndicate investments.
2. Enhance cooperation among corporate funds by fostering co-investments by corporates (for example, through a joint CVC challenge fund) in early-stage commercial development, focusing on shared challenges. This type of collaboration could be used to launch challenge prizes, utilising the communication capabilities and resources of several corporations, in order to attract the best entrepreneurial scientists. This mechanism could be supported by the co-investment fund (described in the previous paragraph).
3. Establish a technology transfer fund by creating a new financial mechanism to coinvest in PoC projects for European researchers. This fund should be managed not solely according to financial metrics (such as by the European Investment Fund) but also according to specialised impact metrics—for example, within the European Innovation Council. The performance indicators of the fund should be long-term (for example, 15 years) and should consider the potential long-term revenues generated by the project, especially in connection with enabling technologies. In principle, this fund should co-invest in PoC projects with the research institution or with university-linked venture funds in exchange for shares in those spin-off companies that are developed from these investments. The fund structure and the process of selecting institutions should be developed carefully, using the expertise of bodies such as the European Investment Fund, to avoid market deformation.
4. Promote philanthropic and impact investment funds by supporting the creation of social funds that address European social goals. It may be possible to facilitate the emergence of pan-European platforms and networks through European bodies, convening the leading actors in this domain and encouraging the development of guidelines and the dissemination of best practice.
Tailor existing investment mechanisms for technology transfer
5. Adapt existing financial mechanisms by adapting the initial phase of the small- and medium-sized enterprise instrument, which supports the funding of startups, to fund PoC projects in a startup incubator. The incubator should be in either a research institution or in a private incubator that has a linked investment fund.
6. Validate policies with experimentation by using a more evidence-based approach to policy-making with regard to corporate venturing and technology transfer. As some aspects of the corporate venturing phenomenon are quite new, it is sometimes difficult to develop evidence- based policies due to the limited availability of historical data. By conducting small experiments in selected regions (sandboxes) to gather data, prototype policies could be developed and validated in an effective and efficient way.
7. Monitor corporate pre-equity investment performance by conducting further research on corporates that are increasingly financing PoC projects and evaluate the effectiveness of such schemes. In these cases, corporates typically invest from €50,000 to €250,000, and the entrepreneurial scientist has less than 12 months to validate the model. Success is measured by how many PoC studies are progressed to the next stage and by other milestones related to the development of intellectual property (IP).
Further support to the European technology transfer process
8. Develop a more unified regulatory framework by, in the longer term, authorities should seek to define a more simple, agile and unified legal framework to assist startups in development and growth (for example, creating a startup, recruiting international experts and cross-regional investment in VC). Currently, each region has its own rules for startups and investors. When a startup (or a research spinoff) wants to scale in Europe, there is a barrier to entering each market, due to varying rules and regulations.
9. Professionalise the field by enhancing and enriching master’s degree-level programs in technology transfer management. Although there are some certifications, there are currently few bachelor’s and master’s degrees in this field. In some cases, these include courses on IP matters but exclude other subjects that are crucial for technology transfer. Encouraging the widespread adoption of existing certifications and qualifications. There are relevant certifications available to technology transfer staff in Europe, such as Registered Technology Transfer Professional and Certified Licensing Professional certifications. Building on prior EU-funded initiatives, support could be provided to enable more widespread use of such certifications. Providing targeted funding to support the recruitment of professional practitioners (for example industry experts or investors) who can mentor researchers on venture development and market entry. There is a need to enhance the level of industrial experience that is available within many technology transfer offices (TTOs), especially for smaller offices that are located outside industrial clusters.
10. Support training and industry engagement by providing funding for technology transfer staff to attend suitable training courses and go on short-term placements in industry. Key needs for the university sector are to support small TTOs and to develop staff awareness of industrial perspectives. Existing pan-European bodies in the technology transfer field are well-placed to lead such initiatives. One way would be to reinitiate the European Entente program that enabled university licensing staff to devote time to short-term placements in corporations.
11. Share lessons from successful cases by inspiring the technology transfer field through giving visibility to success stories. This can be achieved by giving greater visibility to entrepreneurial researchers who are showcased in existing rankings, including those who have successfully worked with industry to introduce their discoveries to the market. Providing funding to include in existing training and development events for technology transfer officers—not only experienced professionals but also those who are new to the discipline. Such an approach would enhance the flow of knowledge among individuals and among regions.