Here are the Seven Pillars of the New University Innovation Practice. Freedom to innovate is not new–it is the form of practice that university faculty developed over the course of 75 years, and was the source of “successes” that were used to champion the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act. Then administrators dismantled that system and replaced it with a more expensive, slower, complicated, compulsory, and less effective system that looked good on paper but in practice has not only been terrible for placing inventions but also has degraded many of the strengths that universities once had.
Given what we have learned about IP management in university settings, and how IP has changed over the past thirty years, and the introduction of new things, such as the internet, freedom to innovate can take on a new aspect, and give universities a chance once again to shine in the promotion of discovery and practical application of new ideas and technology.
1. Start with freedom to innovate.
The university makes no claims to own inventions or other works made by its faculty, staff, students, visitors, employees, whether within the scope of employment, using its resources, or under its auspices, unless there is an agreement by those involved that ownership will be with the university. A number of policies are involved in making a change back to freedom to innovation–intellectual property, research, conflict of interest, consulting, and employment policies all may need to be modified. There are ways to do this, or to navigate policies that otherwise are not aligned with freedom to innovate.
2. Create projects.
A project is an administrative structure that provides for common management of assets in the context of open university research and instructional environments. A project exists when individuals voluntarily associate to accomplish a purpose. A project permits a statement of common ground rules for those involved, with the university serving to manage those commitments, and any associated assets, tangible and intangible. Projects are social objects, and are themselves intangible assets. Creating projects creates value–and often way more value than is created by patents.
3. Enable personal outreach.
Many ideas and technologies enter a university setting through personal communications. Enable consulting activities, and create simple transitions so that what starts as personal engagements may move to institutionally based work for others. Projects provide that sort of flexibility. Build a network of external agents that can assist faculty, staff, and students with their discoveries and inventions–not only with IP management, but with publication, with open source and hardware decisions, with consulting contracts, and with advice about building new ventures and investment.
4. Follow the money.
A freedom to innovate approach immediately saves substantial money in a technology transfer/IP management program. A university’s patent budget drops, and the number of “disclosures” under management also drops, saving overhead costs. With fewer inventions under management, a technology licensing office can spend more time on developing assets and less time on processing paperwork for inventions that will never go anywhere. Income on freedom to innovate comes from a number of directions–invention licensing, payments that recognize university equity in privately managed inventions, service agreements, memberships and subscriptions, and designated funds. Money under freedom to innovate requires different treatment: project income first, then dividends. Dividends, too, may be handled in ways beyond simply more money for research and for administrative slush funds.
5. Use the internet.
The internet has transformed how information, data, software, publications, and instruction can be delivered. Make the transition to internet-based interactions in support of projects. The internet can be used to deliver assets, to encourage participation, and to build networks. Moving to internet-based transactions can greatly reduce transaction times, align with many forms of open distribution, and develop relationships with industry and the community at levels different from those normally arising in conventional patent licensing.
6. Install quality oversight.
Openness does not mean anarchy, nor does it mean a self-interested free-for-all at university or public expense. But a university cannot provide oversight when it is also institutionally interested in profits from licensing intellectual property. This oversight cannot be simply a Vice Provost for Research. The faculty senate or similar governing body is a good venue for managing personal activities of faculty and to track projects. Build an oversight infrastructure to ensure there’s public accounting and that faculty, staff, and students can see clearly how licensing, projects, and personal activities are being conducted.
7. Import ideas and technology, extend practice venues.
Laboratory research is only one area in which innovation arises, and often the laboratory is not a very good area at that. Other areas have been just as productive, if not more productive, in producing discoveries that lead to innovation. Field work, company factories and shops, and practice-based work is often a source both of discovery and practical application. Moving university talent into the community rather than trying to entice the community into supporting laboratory work changes the fundamentals of innovation practice.