THE BUSINESS OF SCIENCE

MY 7 RECOMMENDATIONS… for better deep tech/STI commercialisation. Here are 7 key areas we need to get better at:

1.    A clear commercialisation agenda at University/RI level. Commercialisation goals must be aligned with all aspects of University life to bring about better outcomes. This includes the resource requirements, career development, how KPIs are set, compensation, training etc. Critically, a more professional approach to the administration and management of innovations at the ICC/TLO/TMO level is required with specialised staff, relevant qualifications and career paths of their own to attract the best talent;

2.    Clear focus areas for R&D that not only reflect the depth of knowledge and expertise that reside within the University/RI but also its relationship with industry and the overall ecosystem. This will help focus limited resources to areas where specific advantages can be leveraged and exploited effectively;

3.   Universitys/RIs need to build capacity and exposure in business building processes amongst its researchers/innovators. Innovators cannot just focus on the science. They also need to have an understanding of business building fundamentals or at least be exposed to them to ensure success eg researchers/innovators with MBAs who can help bridge the technical and business aspects of taking innovations from bench to market;

4.    Development of an ecosystem that attracts angel investors who have deep tech/STI backgrounds OR have made their fortunes in deep tech/STI OR at least are comfortable with ventures based on the same – this is currently missing in our ecosystem. Their participation is critical to fill the gap at the earliest (and riskiest) stages of development;

5.    More Industry-University/RI “interchanges” – I mean this in the widest sense possible. From collaborations, networking, sponsorships to simple “get togethers” - anything to maximise opportunities for industry to become aware and understand the technologies that are in the pipeline. Ultimately, it is the depth and frequency at which these interchanges occur that help build confidence and attract investment. I believe that there is a close relationship between “risk” and “confidence” in that investors need to have confidence in the science before risking any capital;

6.    Better awareness of the different funding options available today (public and private) would also provide a better picture of the funding pathway that is available. It is incumbent on funding agencies (like Cradle, who I work for) to create awareness of its products and services through outreach or other promotional activities. In this respect, more VCs open to investing in deep tech/STI would also help complete the funding pathway at the later stages as there is a currently a dearth of VCs willing or capable of investing in deep tech/STI; and

7.    Finally, we need to change mindsets – deep tech/STI commercialisation is a long-haul business requiring patience and deep pockets – success will not come easy. Expect many (expensive) failures before we can see a vaccine for dengue, solutions for non-communicable diseases, quality affordable housing, clean rivers….

Why do it? Because it is deep tech and innovations in STI that will solve the more intractable problems of our lives, not e-commerce platforms or food delivery services. We ignore it at our peril.

PS if you are looking to commercialise your deep tech/STI innovation, have a look at the offerings by Cradle Fund at www.cradle.com.my, Platcom Ventures at www.platcomventures.com and MTDC at www.mtdc.com.my.

PPS this article is written #1 in the context of Malaysia #2 it represents my own personal views and #3 it is written in deference to the many who have looked at and those who continue to look at this age-old issue. Keep fighting the good fight guys!