Translating University Technology into Cold Hard Cash - A Good Idea?

The Post-Dispatch had a great story today on how universities are increasingly commercializing the technological developments of their researchers. They do so largely through patenting and licensing. This activity, especially in the medical world, can generate substantial amounts of money. According to the Association of University Technology Managers (with 3500 members), this specific licensing activity adds up to around 2 billion dollars each year.

Two billion may sound like a lot of money, but it is isn't, actually. It is just scratching the surface of what universities spend on research. This concept of university licensing of developed technologies is a relatively new one. Universities were first granted this power only 30 years ago and really only begun to use it in the last decade or so. In fact, from my experience with the patent office here at UK, my university is only really patenting (and thus seeking licensing fees) from the really big projects. A potential return analysis is conducted and if the return looks less than a few hundred thousand dollars or so (minimally), the university doesn't even bother with the patent.

What I am saying is, that 2 billion is only catching the upper end of the curve and missing nearly all of the long tail. For instance, I would venture that very, very few innovations from Colleges of Education are being patented, even though new commercial innovations are being generated. Those innovations are either privatized by the researcher (making private profit), or just released to the public for free. For example, (I'm not going to release details of the innovations we are working on at UK, as they are not yet market ready) this researcher at Indiana University's College of Ed. developed this product, but just turned it into a private corporation and pocketed the money.

So, what do we think of all this? Can the traditional service concept of universities co-exist with the concept of commercialization? The very kind of big picture, big impact innovations that could change a state like Kentucky are the ones being put behind the patent wall and only those with existing cash get to play. Seems a bit counter-intuitive. But, on the other hand, as Legislatures continue to reduce university funding, these types of revenue streams keep the innovations coming.

I'm very mixed on all of this, but these commercialization concepts are very rapidly invading my and other university researchers lives. And, my P-12 readers, your next.    

Comments

[Chris Willis]

I think one of the major concerns in the commercialization of university research is the potential that the research questions could start to narrow to only those that might have commercially consumed outcomes. I think that this type of narrowing locks into place certain assumptions about the world that we should still be questioning.

Without a doubt, public higher education institutions are suffering the effects of declinng public revenues and commercially successful innovations can help and could be sought to fill that gap. But, schools must be disciplined to keep valuing all research whether it produces income or not.