Vice President for Research and Economic Development Jackson State University
John Fraser, RTTP, CLP AUTM President, 2006 President Burnside Development and Associates
Yatin Karpe, PhD Chair, AUTM Foundation Board of Directors
Director, Office of Technology Commercialization Rowan University
Katharine Ku, CLP AUTM President, 1988–89
Executive Director, Emerita, Office of Technology Licensing. Stanford University Chief Licensing Advisor (West), Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
Andrew Maas, JD, LLM, RTTP AUTM Chair, 2024–25
Assistant Vice President – Technology Transfer The University of Texas at Austin
John Miner, MRA Chair, AUTM Metrics and Surveys Portfolio
Assistant Director, Physical Sciences, Office of Technology Transfer University of Central Florida
Ian McClure, JD, LLM
AUTM Chair, 2022–23 Vice President for Innovation, UK HealthCare Associate Vice President for Research, Innovation and Economic Impact, University of Kentucky Research
Lisa Mueller, JD Host, “AUTM On the Air” podcast Shareholder, Casimir Jones
Stephen Susalka, PhD, CLP, RTTP AUTM Chief Executive Officer
Mike Waring AUTM Advocacy & Alliances Coordinator
John
AUTM Foundation: Funding the Future of Tech Transfer
Yatin Karpe, PhD
What Does the Future Hold for Tech Transfer? Don’t Blink, You Might Miss Something Awesome
Ian McClure, JD, LLM 32 In Their Own Words
David Winwood, PhD, RTTP
Fred Reinhart, MBA, RTTP
Jane Muir, RTTP
James Severson, PhD, CLP
Jon Soderstrom, PhD
Louis Berneman, EdD
Terry Young, MBA
Niels Reimers, ME, MIME
John Fraser, RTTP, CLP
42 Gamechangers
Inêz Sobral Escoval
Anji Miller, PhD, CLP, RTTP
Drew Bennett, MBA
Bryn Rees, RTTP
Allison Markova, RTTP
Maithili Shroff, PhD, CLP
James Zanewicz, JD, LLM, RTTP
Daniel Dardani, CLP
Yatin Karpe, PhD, RTTP
AUTM: Celebrating 50 Years of Innovation
Andrew Maas, JD, LLM, RTTP
AUTM Chair, 2024–2025
Assistant Vice President — Technology Transfer
The University of Texas at Austin
It is with great pride and honor that we kick off this milestone year celebrating AUTM’s 50 years of advancing technology transfer through education, advocacy, and community.
Over the past five decades, AUTM has continually evolved alongside the profession, serving as a cornerstone in fostering the innovation ecosystem. This ecosystem has been instrumental in bringing transformative ideas to life by connecting researchers, industry leaders, and entrepreneurs to translate groundbreaking discoveries into tangible societal benefits.
Throughout this special anniversary year, we reflect on AUTM’s rich legacy, a history filled with remarkable achievements and progress. Within these pages, you will discover compelling stories from past and present AUTM leaders. From the trailblazing efforts of early pioneers who built technology transfer offices and established foundational practices where none existed, to accounts of the challenges and changes we’ve navigated over the years, each narrative highlights the resilience and ingenuity that define our community.
Looking forward, you’ll also encounter thoughtful predictions on what technology transfer might become in the next 50 years and the Gamechangers who will be leading the way. I foresee a promising future shaped by innovation and collaboration.
At the heart of the enduring success of our last 50 years is the unwavering dedication and passion of our Members and volunteers. It is their vision and relentless drive that have continuously elevated the profession, fostered mutual support, and, most importantly, influenced the world in profound ways.
As we commemorate this extraordinary milestone, let us celebrate the achievements of the past, embrace the opportunities of the present, and look forward to a future of continued excellence and innovation. Together, we will ensure that AUTM’s legacy of advancing technology transfer remains a vital force for good for many years to come.
AUTM: A Driving Force for Innovation and Societal Impact
Stephen Susalka, PhD, CLP, RTTP
AUTM Chief Executive Officer
As we celebrate AUTM’s 50th anniversary, it’s not just a moment to look back at where we’ve been, but a crucial opportunity to understand how our past shapes the future of technology transfer.
This commemorative history isn’t simply a nostalgic trip down memory lane; it’s a vital resource for navigating the complex landscape that lies ahead. Within these pages, you’ll find more than just stories of past triumphs and challenges. You'll discover the DNA of our organization, the core values and principles that have guided us through five decades of evolution.
Understanding how AUTM has adapted to change, how we’ve overcome obstacles, and how we’ve consistently championed the vital role of technology transfer will be invaluable as we face the uncertainties and opportunities of the coming years.
The world of innovation is in constant flux. New technologies are emerging at an unprecedented pace, funding landscapes are shifting, and the demands on our profession are evolving rapidly. By studying our history, we gain critical insights into what strategies have worked, what lessons we’ve learned, and how we can best position ourselves to meet the challenges of tomorrow.
This book is a chance to learn from the pioneers who built this field, to glean wisdom from the experiences of those who have come before us, and to use that knowledge to forge a stronger, more effective path forward. It’s not just about celebrating our achievements; it’s about equipping ourselves with the tools we need to shape the future of technology transfer, ensuring that AUTM continues to be a driving force for innovation and societal impact for the next 50 years and beyond.
I encourage you to delve into these stories, reflect on the lessons they offer, and join us in building a future where groundbreaking discoveries are translated into real-world solutions for the benefit of all.
The History of AUTM
Katharine Ku, CLP
AUTM President, 1988–89
Executive Director, Emerita, Office of Technology Licensing, Stanford University
Chief Licensing Advisor (West), Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
In December 1979, I stumbled into a job that very few people knew about. The 70 attendees at my first Society of Patent Administrators (SUPA) meeting in February 1980 were cautiously hopeful that the Bayh-Dole bill, stuck in the Senate, would eventually become law and university technology transfer could become a reality.
By 1989, a tech transfer profession had been born, and SUPA became AUTM during my Presidency. Today, technology transfer is a profession that people aspire to join. AUTM Annual Meetings now have as many as 2,000 attendees. Who could have predicted?
Bayh-Dole established the framework for universities to commercialize the results of research; it was, and is, indeed an inspired piece of legislation. But it was AUTM that enabled a profession to be created. In the early days, AUTM Members shared:
How they were setting up their offices
How they were evaluating inventions and deciding whether to file patents
How they were finding potential licensees
How they were actually negotiating and concluding a license agreement
Those of us on the front lines of tech transfer didn’t know how to manage the workload or keep track of what we were doing through databases, or how to do BayhDole compliance, or how to set up accounting systems that would enable us to track royalties, expenses, and manage royalty distributions. All of this took an enormous amount of effort by every tech transfer office. But we did it through AUTM. We taught each other.
In 1994, AUTM released the first ever Licensing Activities Survey so that universities would know more about each other. The survey was not meant
to be a beauty contest, but a way to assess and measure performance. The survey has collected data on technology transfer activities from universities, hospitals, and other research institutions in the United States and Canada for more than three decades and has become an important source of information on the commercialization of academic research. As it has evolved over the years, the survey has included data on a variety of metrics, including invention disclosures, patent applications, licenses executed, and startup companies formed. The data is used to track trends in technology transfer and to benchmark the performance of different institutions. Today, the AUTM Licensing Activity Survey is a valuable resource for policymakers, researchers, and the public. It provides insights into the impact of academic research on the economy and society.
As AUTM grew, it became harder to have such a large organization of individuals come up with policy recommendations. In 2006, a small group of university technology transfer directors and their corresponding academic research leaders came together to discuss some of the challenges facing the tech transfer community. The meeting resulted in a document titled, “In the Public Interest: Nine Points to Consider in Licensing University Technology” that laid out certain principles and guidelines that the group felt were important to memorialize. Initially, 12 organizations signed up to it, and eventually the AUTM Board of Directors endorsed it and provided a coordinating forum for organizations to add their endorsements. AUTM was, and is, essential in helping to promote these best practices.
As technology transfer evolved, it became apparent that early-stage university innovations were often so scientifically risky that only the inventors believed in their potential commercial value. The nascent biotech industry and emerging software companies grew alongside the equally nascent university
technology transfer profession, with many faculty starting companies based on their own technology. Universities established conflict of interest policies, many of which included the concept that technologies should be marketed broadly for fair access. Thus, most universities now have an “Available Technologies” section on their website. In addition, AUTM created a platform to help showcase university technologies available for licensing, previously known as the Global Technology Portal (GTP) and built on a proprietary platform, the data is now accessed through the AUTM Innovation Marketplace (AIM). By sharing best practices via AUTM, university tech transfer offices all have developed useful websites, giving inventors and companies information to help those unfamiliar with tech transfer learn how to interact with universities.
Today, the AUTM eGroups, whereby Members can post questions and get real-time answers from the community, is one of the most impactful AUTM Membership offerings. Everyone can benefit from the interaction, and it is always interesting to see the different perspectives.
In the early days, AUTM Members shared…We taught each other.
The profession continues to evolve. When I first joined, the focus was on patents and licensing. Licenses were relatively simple, including royalties, some upfront money and annual payments, and a statement that the licensee would diligently develop the technology. Today, licenses are extremely detailed with myriad economic terms and very specific diligence requirements. The legal wording in licenses has become extremely sophisticated, trying to address every potential scenario rather than trusting that the two parties will be able to rely on a good relationship to work out unforeseen events.
Early in the profession, there were many discussions at universities about the appropriateness of taking equity, particularly in the context of institutional conflicts of interest; today, all universities want to take equity in their startups. Tech transfer offices, in fact, are now often tasked with building an entrepreneurial ecosystem, by helping startups begin, mentoring entrepreneurs, providing seed capital, etc. Their responsibilities have grown enormously, and
tech transfer professionals have to continue to expand their understanding of business in general, as well as in particular sectors. Because invention disclosures come from all areas of research, the task of understanding various business models of so many different industries is a huge challenge for any tech transfer office. AUTM is, and will continue to be, essential to sharing this knowledge.
I still believe it is important to plant as many licensing seeds as possible, or, do many reasonable deals quickly with fewer rounds of negotiation. It is very difficult to predict which companies will be successful, and a tech transfer office has more potential profitable opportunities, or “shots on goal,” if they can execute several licenses and get the technology out the door quickly. Stanford would not have predicted many of its winners, but it did create an entrepreneurial environment that continues to thrive and benefit the world.
My thoughts about the future: from my perspective, having now been on both sides, I think university tech transfer offices today need to find the right balance between impact and income. The focus should be on impact: helping to move research into the commercial sector as quickly as possible. Impact based on the long-term effort to build and maintain an entrepreneurial ecosystem will last generations. The way to build an entrepreneurial ecosystem is to make it easy for entrepreneurs to start companies. Because the economic terms of licenses greatly affect the ability of startups to find investors, to partner with bigger companies, to go public or be acquired, it is important to balance potential royalty income against building more companies. In the long term, if the university creates an entrepreneurial ecosystem, the royalties will be there.
Lastly, the university tech transfer community has an important role in the success of the U.S. government’s effort to develop regional technology hubs. The CHIPS Act of 2022 is the Federal government’s recognition of the value of university technology transfer. Those universities who receive these grants should spend the money wisely and use it to develop their own entrepreneurial ecosystem for the benefit of their region and the country.
AUTM is a very special community that truly cares about the mission of university technology transfer and continues to share their wisdom and insights with each other. Congratulations on AUTM’s 50th Anniversary!
Annual Meeting and Member Statistics
New Orleans 1989, 2001, 2010, 2015, 2022
San Antonio 1990, 1998, 2004, 2013
San Francisco 1991, 1997, 2007, 2014
Orlando 1992, 2003, 2006, 2009
Dallas 1993
Phoenix 1994, 2005, 2018
Nashville 1995
Charleston 1996
San Diego 1999, 2002, 2008, 2016, 2020 (cancelled), 2024
Atlanta 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 2000
Las Vegas 2011
Anaheim 2012
Hollywood 2017
Austin 2019, 2023
Chicago 1976, 1977
Washington, D.C. 1982, 1983, 1984
Number of Annual Meeting Attendees
Membership
AUTM’s 50-Year Impact on Technology Transfer
Almesha Campbell, PhD
AUTM
Chair 2023–24
Vice President for Research and Economic Development
Jackson
State University
For the past 50 years, AUTM has been a cornerstone of technology transfer. The Association was established to support the development of academic research that changes the world and drives innovation forward. AUTM has now evolved into a global leader, providing comprehensive education, networking, and advocacy services for technology transfer professionals. Its influence extends across various areas, including education, international engagement, industry collaboration, advocacy, and inclusion, significantly shaping innovation and commercialization on a global level.
Education: Building the Foundations of Technology Transfer as a Profession
AUTM has significantly contributed to the technology transfer profession through its robust educational programming. Over the years, AUTM has developed a comprehensive suite of in-person training, webinars, and conferences that empower technology transfer professionals with the knowledge and skills necessary to navigate the complexities of intellectual property development, management, compliance, licensing, and commercialization. These educational offerings have become essential for professionals at all career stages, fostering a culture of continuous learning and professional development.
AUTM is committed to educating all levels of the technology transfer profession by creating new courses and trainings that are accessible and relevant to meet the growing demand of the field. These workshops and webinars enable professionals from diverse backgrounds and regions to engage with, and benefit from, AUTM’s expertise.
Networking: Fostering Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing
AUTM fully understands the value of networking within the technology transfer community and among its partners. The Association’s Annual and Region Meetings, as well as AUTM University, which brings together the Association’s most popular specialized courses in one place at one time, together provide opportunities to connect and collaborate, sharing experiences and best practices to advance the profession.
Moreover, AUTM’s networking opportunities have facilitated the formation of strategic alliances between universities, research institutions, and industry partners. Initiatives such as Connect and Collaborate and Partnering Forums have led to the successful commercialization of numerous technologies, benefiting society at large.
International Engagement: Expanding the Global Reach
Recognizing the increasingly global nature of technology transfer, AUTM has significantly expanded its international engagement. The Association has established partnerships and training programs with organizations and governmental agencies worldwide, helping to standardize best practices and foster crossborder collaboration.
AUTM’s international outreach includes the AUTMWIPO International Leadership Summit and hosting workshops in various countries, like offering AUTM’s Software Course in Hong Kong, the Essentials of Tech Transfer Course in Saudi Arabia, and leading the Egypt Technology Transfer Training Program. These events provide a platform for professionals from different regions to exchange ideas, learn from
one another, and implement these insights into best practices. The global connections forged through these mentorship programs have strengthened the international technology transfer network, facilitating the exchange of knowledge and best practices.
Industry Engagement: Bridging the Gap
AUTM serves as a bridge between academic and industry, facilitating relationships that allow for the transfer of groundbreaking research into innovation that impacts society. Through its partnership forums and Connect and Collaborate initiatives, the Association provides opportunities for tech transfer professionals to engage with industry leaders, fostering partnerships that have led to the development and commercialization of innovative technologies. These engagements have not only accelerated the commercialization process but have also provided valuable insights into industry needs and market trends. To further strengthen this collaboration, AUTM has created a dedicated Board of Directors seat specifically for industry.
Advocacy: Championing the Interests of Technology Transfer Professionals
For 50 years, AUTM has been a powerful advocate for the technology transfer profession, actively engaging with policymakers and providing input on legislation and regulations that impact technology transfer. Notable in the last few years is AUTM leadership’s role in drafting Section 10391 of the U.S. CHIPS and Science Act, which influenced the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) directorate, creating the NSF Engines, and the NSF Accelerating Research Translation (ART) programs. Through its advocacy efforts, AUTM has also helped to create an environment that ensures intellectual property laws and commercialization processes support innovation and economic growth.
Mentorship and Inclusion: Fostering a Sense of Belonging
In recent years, AUTM has placed a strong emphasis on mentorship, inclusion, and promoting a sense of belonging among its Members.
The Association formed the Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Committee in 2019 to help launch initiatives aimed at broadening participation in technology transfer, ensuring that all Members have
AUTM serves as a bridge between academic and industry, facilitating relationships that allow for the transfer of groundbreaking research into innovation that impacts society.
access to the resources and opportunities needed to succeed in the field. The Committee started with a demographic survey to gain insights into our community and those we serve. This foundational understanding guided the creation of an EDI Toolkit, webinars, and meeting sessions.
Mentorship has always been at the heart of AUTM’s mission. The Association recognizes that the success of technology transfer professionals is deeply connected to the support and guidance they receive from experienced peers. The mentorship program has created a platform where seasoned professionals can share their expertise with the next generation, ensuring that best practices and innovative strategies are passed down and adapted to meet the evolving needs of the profession.
AUTM’s Lasting Legacy
Over the past 50 years, AUTM has profoundly influenced the field of technology transfer, elevating itself as a globally recognized and trusted voice. AUTM is well respected as a convener of technology transfer professionals, with its educational programs, networking opportunities, international activities, industry collaboration, advocacy, and commitment to inclusion all highly sought after.
The Association is well positioned to continue its influence, fostering a diverse and inclusive community of technology transfer professionals dedicated to advancing the commercialization of research for the benefit of society.
AUTM Advocacy: A History of Growth and Success
Mike Waring AUTM Advocacy & Alliances Coordinator
When we look back at the history of AUTM over its first fifty years, we may not necessarily think of its advocacy first.
Begun by a handful of research administrators, the Society of University Patent Administrators (SUPA) launched in 1975 and later became AUTM. The goals of those founding figures at first were simple: promote networking, develop a greater appreciation of intellectual property, and support positive IP legislation. Most of the focus was on things like license negotiations and contracting.
But in 1980, a new opportunity to energize the work of university research came in the effort to pass the BayhDole Act. This landmark legislation was born of an idea from Purdue University and some others that came to the office of Sen. Birch Bayh (D-IN), where it landed on the desk of Senate staffer Joe Allen.
At the time, inventions developed from federally funded research at universities were still owned by the federal government. President Lyndon Johnson in 1968 had asked why more drugs funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) weren’t emerging. That led NIH to create “Institutional Patent Agreements” where universities with sufficient tech transfer capability could own and manage NIH discoveries, and later that was adopted for discoveries at the National Science Foundation (NSF). Later on, however, President Jimmy Carter’s administration ended the program. In 1980, with only a small number of discoveries moving forward, others asked, “What if the government gave the IP rights to the inventor and his or her university to exploit?”
That idea seemed radical at the time. Some federal agencies — notably the Department of Energy — opposed it. Some members of the Senate also were
disinclined to move the legislation, especially late in the term of President Jimmy Carter, who had just been defeated by Ronald Reagan. But with active support from a number of university research leaders, the push to pass this legislation came to fruition.
“Without SUPA, Bayh-Dole doesn’t pass,” said Allen. “This legislation has literally changed the world.” While some in higher education looked to a compromise, SUPA stood firm, and the bill as envisioned became law. With that, the profession of technology transfer took off. Allen credits SUPA Members with being “subject matter experts” to help push the legislation forward.
When Bayh-Dole passed the Senate, Niels Reimers from Stanford, Norm Latker, patent counsel for the NIH, and others, were sitting in the Senate Gallery. Reimers had testified at hearings on the issue and helped mount support for the idea even when Admiral Hyman Rickover voiced opposition, saying he thought the U.S. Navy should keep the inventions it helped create. Among the key senators to vote yes was Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH), who agreed to support it once he was assured that a major research institute in his state would be a party to it. SUPA Members also got Sen. Russell Long (D-LA) to finally support the measure.
AUTM leapt into action along with its allies when the proposed framework [of changes to the Bayh-Dole Act] came out...
“Working on passing Bayh-Dole was a lot of fun,” Reimers remembers. “It certainly caused scientists to think more about when they develop something that may have practical application. Disclosures after BayhDole rapidly climbed, doubling in the first year.”
In the immediate aftermath of the passage of BayhDole, SUPA Membership then began to grow as more and more universities got into the tech transfer business. One of the first challenges was teaching federal agencies how to administer the new law. SUPA also helped train people to work in this new undertaking. Reimers says in addition to launching the Stanford University tech transfer office, he was loaned for a year to start the tech transfer program at the University of California, Berkeley, and loaned again to reform the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) program.
“Government didn’t have a clue what was going on,” said Karen Hersey, a lawyer who worked at MIT in the early 80s. “This whole tech transfer idea took a while.”
One of the issues campuses struggled with was who are the right people to do the work. “We realized we needed this more in the hands of entrepreneurial people who were business focused,” she added. Over time, tech transfer professionals developed stronger ties to the agencies where they got their funds.
Ownership issues continued to come up even after the new law passed. Agencies still wrestled with it even a decade later, when federal agencies came up with Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs), which were designed to encourage national and federal labs to engage more closely in the further development of technologies. However, implementation was inconsistent across agencies, which at one point led the NIH to unilaterally impose price controls on NIH CRADAs. When that policy drove industry away, NIH later rescinded that policy.
The 1990s saw continued growth in the tech transfer field. By 1989, SUPA had become the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM), in recognition of the wider role tech transfer was playing and the different skills needed to make it successful.
And with that growth came new issues for the Association to tackle. In its early years, SUPA had relied on the Council on Governmental Relations (COGR) to act as its Washington D.C. “eyes and ears.” But now the Association had begun to take baby steps on its own.
In 1991, Janna Tom joined the University of California central office’s policy unit. She joined forces with Hersey, who helped establish the initial Government Affairs Committee for AUTM. They worked with other leaders, such as Joyce Brinton of Harvard University, to focus on government oversight issues. Terry Young at the University of Texas at Austin and COGR President Kate Phillips helped push efforts to interface more closely with both the Association of American Universities (AAU) and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC, now known as the Association of Public and Landgrant Universities [APLU]). They began to meet at the AUTM Annual Meetings, where Members such as Fred Reinhart and Dave Winwood became involved as well. They also engaged with some federal relations officers, including Jack Crowley of MIT and Kevin Casey from Harvard. And they later received support from Bob Hardy at COGR, who also helped link AUTM efforts with AAU, the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), and NASULGC.
“Changes to the patent law and continued attacks against Bayh-Dole were big issues,” Tom added. “International issues like access and benefit sharing also were important.”
Over time, concern about these governmental issues rose to a level where eventually the AUTM Board created a board position of Vice President for Public Policy, with Jon Soderstrom from Yale University its first office holder. In the early 2000s, its leadership passed from Soderstrom to Tom to Andy Cohn, who oversaw external relations for WARF. Cohn made sure AUTM Members were working to educate their federal relations representatives on the issues tech transfer was facing in Congress.
As AUTM began to raise its voice about government regulations and legislation, its interactions with the other higher education associations went through ups and downs. There were occasional tensions as the associate leaderships worried that AUTM was getting out ahead of its universities on issues.
“One of the things Andy also tried to do was make sure AUTM deferred to those associations so that universities could speak with one voice,” said Soderstrom. “But when Congress tried to change the nation’s patent laws, that move was catalytic to our efforts to weigh in.”
Soderstrom says there were several issues that garnered attention in those years. Specifically, he cites the Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples (CREATE) Act, which allowed cooperative research among institutions without the loss of patent rights. This was an example of where the validity of patents could be challenged by undertaking the very collaborative activities being encouraged by CRADAs. AUTM also worked to help tech transfer handle greater funding for NIH and dealt with concerns about gene patenting.
Indeed, the biggest challenge in the 2000-2010 period was when the America Invents Act (AIA) was first introduced. This legislation was the biggest change in patent law in 50 years and was supposed to help harmonize American patent laws with those of other nations. But pro-patent forces — including universities — objected to many of the concepts at first. Changing “first to invent” to “first to file” was just one of any number of modifications included in the bill. Another controversial change was creating inter partes review at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), which led to the creation of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board as a different way of challenging patent validity.
In the end, universities went along with the final version of the bill, which passed in 2011. However, the next four years were marked with efforts by those who wanted even more changes, such as requiring that “losers pay” for any litigation costs. AUTM joined forces with the other associations to effectively ward off any further intrusions into the patent system.
Other challenges to tech transfer emerged in the years after AIA. Several Supreme Court rulings also had an adverse impact on patent holders, notably in determining what exactly is “patent eligible.” AUTM often participated in filing amicus briefs with kindred spirits and voiced its concerns and support for legislation to fix those problems.
To respond to broader attacks on the value of tech transfer, AUTM created the Better World Report, where Members like AUTM Past President John Fraser helped collect numerous examples of success stories. Its focus is to promote public understanding of how academic research and technology transfer benefit the world. That resource continues to aid AUTM advocacy even today and boasts more than 600 current stories.
Perhaps the biggest challenge since AIA occurred in 2024, when the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a request for comments on proposed changes to the Bayh-Dole Act that would allow for the use of price as a factor in deciding when to “march-in” on a patent. Under law, only a few situations allow the government to take back a patent, mostly where a licensee merely sat on the patent and did not use it to benefit others. March-in has never been used and government agencies, until now, have not considered the price of a product or service created through federal funding as a reason to do so.
AUTM leapt into action along with its allies when the proposed framework came out in February of 2024. It engaged numerous allies and fellow higher education associations to file comments in strong opposition to the changes, and helped encourage dozens and dozens of comments from its member institutions raising serious concerns.
Most recently, AUTM has shown its increased focus on advocacy by holding one board meeting a year in Washington to facilitate lobbying by board members, as well as hiring a part-time, Washington-based advocacy consultant to direct and assist in those efforts. These changes have strengthened AUTM’s ability to provide important information to policymakers.
AUTM has come a long way since those first meetings in the 1970s. Today, AUTM is a recognized leader on the national policy scene and its close working relationships with AAU, APLU, COGR, and AAMC help ensure that the voice of technology transfer is heard on Capitol Hill, at the White House, and at every federal agency that does research. This effort will need to continue to ensure a healthy and robust American economy.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1974
The spark to form AUTM happened October 15, 1974, during a conference at Case Western Reserve University, where seven attendees met and agreed to contribute funds to form a new association. AUTM would officially come into being the following year. Other notable events of the year included the Rumble in the Jungle boxing match between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman, the discovery of the Xian Terracotta Warriors site in China, and Stephen King releasing his debut novel, Carrie.
How AUTM Changed the World
Joseph Allen Executive Director, Bayh-Dole Coalition
Fifty years ago, it was commonly predicted that America’s best days were behind us, and we should get used to being ranked third in the world economic order. But that never happened because a small group of visionary university leaders plotted a different course, which helped ignite the greatest renaissance in innovation the world has ever seen. Those leaders were the founders of AUTM.
In 1978, I was on Senator Birch Bayh’s (D-IN) staff on the Senate Judiciary Committee. One day, we got a call that Purdue University had a patent problem and asked if we could meet. Since Senator Bayh was a proud Purdue graduate, we were happy to help if we could.
Ralph Davis with Purdue, Howard Bremer with the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), and Norman Latker, patent counsel for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), explained that federally funded inventions were being taken away by the government only to waste away on the shelves, benefitting no one. We also learned that no new drugs were being developed from NIH funding under existing policies.
We were stunned to learn, that at a time when Japan and Germany were moving ahead of the U.S. in critical areas of technology, billions of dollars of taxpayerfunded research and development were being wasted. As the meeting wound down, they handed us a draft bill to remedy the problem by allowing universities and small companies that made federally funded inventions to own them without Washington micromanagement. That was the genesis of the Bayh-Dole Act.
There had been other bills introduced to change government patent policy, but all had failed. One difference with this draft was that it was written by those with practical experience in technology licensing, not theoreticians.
We found that Senator Robert Dole (R-KS) was also interested in the problem and the two senators decided to work together. The combination of Senators Bayh and Dole was magical because they came from opposite parties and different viewpoints. When they announced they were working together, other Senators took notice.
Bayh and Dole introduced their bill at a press conference, where AUTM helped find academic researchers whose inventions were being shelved by the dysfunctional patent policies then in place. Our AUTM allies contacted their respective Senators, and my phone began to ring as cosponsors joined our ranks.
After one call, I rushed down to the Senate floor with news that I just had to share with Senator Bayh. He was sitting at his desk, waiting to speak. I leaned over to let him know that Senators Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Strom Thurmond (R-SC) just signed on. Senator Bayh looked up with a big smile and said, “Are you sure this bill makes any sense?” We both laughed because Kennedy and Thurmond rarely agreed on anything, but here they were supporting Bayh-Dole. We knew we had a winner.
We called on AUTM when putting together our hearings. Again, we didn’t invite theorists, only those with practical experience, including several AUTM Members. The hearings were successful, and Bayh-Dole was unanimously reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But passing legislation is never easy, and Bayh-Dole was no exception. It was limited to small businesses and universities because they were the crux of the problem. An attempt was made to amend the bill on the Senate floor to include big businesses, which would have been the kiss of death, politically. Again, AUTM came to the rescue and helped us handily defeat the amendment. Bayh-Dole passed the Senate overwhelmingly, but it still had many hurdles left in the House.
As the 96th Congress neared its end, we hit a major hurdle. Rep. Robert Kastenmeier (D-WI) was backing a rival bill that included big businesses. We knew it couldn’t pass the Senate. It appeared we’d hit a stone wall. But one of the Congressman’s most important constituents was the University of Wisconsin, and WARF made it clear they really needed our version of the bill.
I got an unexpected call from Kastenmeier’s staffer. He offered a deal. They would accept Bayh-Dole if we would accept their version of a patent re-examination bill. We promptly agreed. At the last minute, Bayh-Dole passed, and on the very last day before it would have been “pocket vetoed,” President Carter signed it into law.
While Bayh-Dole provided the authorities and incentives needed to spur the commercialization of federally funded inventions, that could only happen if academic institutions quickly learned how to master the new tools given them. They went from having Washington take their inventions away one day to suddenly being responsible for managing them the next.
Once again, AUTM came to the rescue. At the time, there were only a handful of schools with any experience in licensing. That could have led to disaster, but AUTM filled the gap by sharing and teaching best practices. Soon, companies began seeing academic institutions as important, reliable research partners. As a result, revolutionary new products began improving lives here and around the world.
Before Bayh-Dole, the U.S. had lost its lead in several core technologies. Many experts predicted we would soon lose many more. Instead, America regained its technology lead across the board.
Here’s why, according to The Economist Technology Quarterly (December 14, 2002):
“Possibly the most inspired piece of legislation enacted in America over the past half century was the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980… More than anything, this single policy measure helped to reverse America’s precipitous slide into industrial irrelevance.”
We’ve come a long way in 50 years. But the threats to Bayh-Dole have never been greater than they are today. Many policy makers have no idea how the Bayh-Dole system works or what it’s done. We also need to educate those joining AUTM about its distinguished history, paying tribute to that small band who helped turn their country’s fortunes around.
There’s another part of The Economist article which is rarely quoted regarding Bayh-Dole:
“A goose that lays such golden eggs needs nurturing, not plucking for the pot.”
Now is the time for a new generation of AUTM leaders to rise to meet that challenge.
AUTM Licensing Survey: Providing Crucial Insights into the Vital Role of Academic Research
John Miner, MRA Assistant Director, Physical Sciences, Office of Technology Transfer University of Central Florida
The AUTM Licensing Survey, a cornerstone of technology transfer data and analysis, has a rich history intertwined with the evolution of the field itself. Its origins lie in the growing need for quantifiable metrics to demonstrate the impact of academic research on the economy and society. Before the survey’s inception, anecdotal evidence and individual success stories were the primary means of showcasing technology transfer’s value. However, as universities and research institutions became more proactive in commercializing their discoveries, the demand for comprehensive, standardized data became increasingly apparent.
Recognizing this need, AUTM volunteers Ashley Stevens, Dana Bostrom, and others initiated the first formal survey of university technology transfer activities, gathering data from 1991–92.
This initial effort was relatively modest in scope, focusing primarily on patenting and licensing activities. Data collection was often manual and relied heavily on paper surveys. Despite these limitations, the early surveys provided crucial baseline data, revealing the extent of university involvement in technology commercialization and laying the groundwork for future iterations. The first report was released in 1994 and quickly became a lynchpin in the AUTM toolbox.
Over the years, the AUTM Licensing Survey has undergone significant transformations in both scope and methodology. Early surveys primarily focused on quantitative metrics like the number of patents filed, licenses executed, and income generated. As the technology transfer landscape matured, the survey expanded to include qualitative data, such as the number of startups formed based on university
The survey’s value extends beyond simply tracking historical trends. It serves as a vital benchmarking tool...
technologies, the types of licenses executed (e.g., exclusive vs. non-exclusive), and the industries involved. This shift towards a more comprehensive data set provided a more nuanced understanding of the impact of university research.
Technological advancements have also played a crucial role in the survey’s evolution. The transition from paper surveys to online data collection significantly improved efficiency and data accuracy. The development of sophisticated databases and analytical tools has enabled more in-depth analysis of the survey data, providing valuable insights into trends, best practices, and the overall health of the technology transfer ecosystem.
The survey’s value extends beyond simply tracking historical trends. It serves as a vital benchmarking tool for technology transfer offices (TTOs), allowing them to compare their performance against peer institutions. This benchmarking data helps TTOs identify areas for improvement, justify resource allocation, and demonstrate their value to university administrators and stakeholders.
Today, the AUTM Licensing Survey stands as the most comprehensive and authoritative source of data on academic technology transfer activity in the United States and increasingly, globally. Its data is widely used by policymakers, researchers, and industry analysts. It provides critical information for evaluating the effectiveness of government policies related to technology transfer, understanding the dynamics of university-industry partnerships, and assessing the economic impact of academic research. It is also used as a trusted reference resource by scholars. Academic research relies on the data provided to speak to tech transfer value, economic development, and more.
It represents a testament to the foresight of early technology transfer professionals and the ongoing commitment of AUTM to provide valuable resources to its Members and the broader community. The survey’s continued evolution ensures its relevance in a rapidly changing world, providing crucial insights into the vital role of academic research in driving innovation and economic development.
The success of the licensing survey over the last three decades has been so far-reaching, not only because of the volunteers who have kept this large group project going, but also because of those who have continued to contribute their data to help advance the missions of the survey and of the tech transfer community.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1975
AUTM’s bylaws and articles of incorporation were approved in 1975, a year that also saw the founding of Microsoft, the filing of the patent for the Rubik’s Cube, and the premier of the Saturday Night Live late-night comedy and variety show.
AUTM Finds Its Voice
Lisa Mueller, JD Host, AUTM on the Air Podcast Shareholder, Casimir Jones
I am often asked, “Where did the idea of the podcast come from?” That’s a great question. The idea arose at the 2019 AUTM Annual Meeting in Austin, Texas. It was a Monday evening, and I was at the Opening Reception with a group of colleagues from several different tech transfer offices. After asking these individuals to share insights of what was working well and not so well in their specific offices, I thought to myself that it would be really helpful for a larger audience to hear more of these conversations on a regular basis — not just at the Annual and Region meetings.
I started thinking about the best way to communicate this type of information to individuals in the field, and I asked myself, “What about a podcast?” As an avid podcast listener, I thought this approach would be the best way to let individuals in tech transfer speak for themselves, their offices, and their universities. I did some searching and, to my surprise, did not find any other podcasts involving tech transfer. I went to bed and then forgot about the idea of the podcast for a while.
Fast forward to the Fall of 2019 and the idea of the podcast jumped back into my mind — and I was excited. I started researching what was required to host a podcast —format, equipment, software, etc., — and realized I had no idea where to even start. I was overwhelmed. I decided that if I was serious about the podcast, I was going to need help. I found a company that offered one-on-one podcast coaching and setup. They were exactly what I needed. They helped me refine the concept for the podcast, guided me on equipment to purchase and taught me how to use it, helped design the artwork for marketing the new podcast, found actors to record the intro and outro, and much more.
As an avid podcast listener, I thought this approach would be the best way to let individuals in tech transfer speak for themselves, their offices and universities.”
In the middle of January 2020, everything was ready to launch the podcast. I just needed to find guests and start recording. As a brand new endeavor, it took a bit of time to find some individuals willing to be the first guests. Thankfully, Dean Stell from Wake Forest University and Champ Gupton from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill agreed to be the first two guests. I recorded these first two episodes in the middle of February 2020, and they aired shortly thereafter.
When the pandemic hit and the AUTM 2020 Annual Meeting was cancelled, I thought the podcast wouldn’t survive. I felt I had lost a huge opportunity to get the word out about the new podcast at the Annual Meeting, and I figured that with people stuck at home with nowhere to go, they wouldn’t be listening to podcasts as much, let alone a brand new one.
I was completely wrong. Thanks to the generosity of individuals in tech transfer, more than 98% of the individuals I reached out to during the pandemic agreed to be on the podcast. From there, people started listening and kept listening. In fact, the number of people listening seemed to increase significantly week after week, particularly the longer the pandemic dragged on! I was completely mistaken — the podcast didn’t die — it thrived.
In February 2022, at the Annual Meeting, I was approached by AUTM about collaborating on the podcast. I was honored, and it was an opportunity too good to pass up. As a result, in September 2022, what started out as the “Tech Transfer IP Podcast” was re-launched under the new name “AUTM on the Air.”
The AUTM on the Air Podcast has opened many opportunities to introduce technology transfer to fields that otherwise would have had minimal interaction with us. Additionally, it’s provided AUTM Members an opportunity to hear from the best and brightest in the tech transfer and innovation commercialization space. With well over 200 episodes having aired, I couldn’t be more grateful to the AUTM staff and all of my guests.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1980
In 1980, the Bayh-Dole Act received congressional approval and was signed into law by President Jimmy Carter. Also in 1980, Luke Skywalker found out who his father was in the Empire Strikes Back movie, we wondered “Who shot J.R. Ewing” from the television show Dallas, and the global eradication of smallpox was certified by the World Health Organization.
Fostering a Diverse, Inclusive Community
Megan Aanstoos, PhD, RTTP
Director, AUTM Board of Directors, 2023-25 Senior Program Officer for VentureWell
From the beginning, the idea of creating a diverse community where everyone can engage and feel included has been a central part of AUTM. As the profession has evolved, the manifestation of this vision has transformed from an unwritten, informal style of engagement to a robust, engaged, and active component of the AUTM community and AUTM values.
Early initiatives to diversify the organization included considerations toward expansion beyond academia to include industry, non-profits, service providers, and others within the technology transfer and knowledge exchange sphere of practice. We also expanded from a United States-focused organization to a global leader. A task force comprised of AUTM volunteers was formed and in 2014 it became the Women Inventors Committee (WIC). This Committee highlighted the concerns of the community regarding women innovators and, by extension, women technology transfer professionals. Through WIC, AUTM developed and released the Women Inventor’s Toolkit and Nine Points to Consider for Fostering Greater Inclusion. The work with this group continues through the Women Inventors Special Interest Group (WI SIG).
The next step AUTM took to address equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) initiatives was in 2019 when the Board of Directors formally recognized the importance of EDI within AUTM with the formation of an EDI Committee. Established in July 2019 at the Central Region Meeting in Columbus, Ohio, the EDI Committee was the brainchild of then Chair-Elect Marc Sedam. A Diversity and Inclusion Special Interest Group (D&I SIG) was also created to foster discussion and inclusion within AUTM Membership.
One of the first tasks undertaken by the EDI committee was to develop three goals to support greater inclusion and diversity across AUTM beyond gender, race, or ethnicity:
Goal 1: Develop and conduct a survey of the AUTM Membership to establish a baseline and know who we are serving and who we may need to be more intentional about including.
Goal 2: Develop an EDI Toolkit to help technology transfer offices incorporate EDI within their work.
Goal 3: Bring EDI into the conversation through targeted webinars, watercoolers, sessions at meetings, and via the AUTM Insight newsletter.
After the committee established these goals, we set to work on tactics to help achieve such goals. Overall, the intended outcome was to make sure AUTM Members and the entire tech transfer community felt heard and included and especially believed that they belonged with AUTM.
Goal 1: Demographic Survey
Our first question as a committee was: Who are we serving? Without a clear depiction of the composition of the Membership, we could not develop programming to support the Members. We set about developing a survey, based in part on the AUTM Salary Survey, with a goal to assess the unique diversity of the AUTM Membership. Our initial demographic survey launched in 2020 as a pilot and was followed up in 2022 as a bi-annual demographic survey. The EDI Committee continues to refine the survey to ensure AUTM is asking questions that are relevant and supportive of the Membership. The insights from the survey are useful for determining how to engage and develop content that will help the Membership to engage, learn, and grow.
Goal 2: Building the Toolkits
When we started as a committee, many of the Members shared that they were looking for guidance on EDI, both within their offices and in their interactions with stakeholders. As AUTM has a history of developing
toolkits to provide guidance, insight, and direction for our Members, it was natural for the EDI committee to do the same. A task group from the committee came together and began working on the toolkit in 2020. With multiple rounds of edits, feedback from Members, and support from the AUTM staff, the toolkit was first released in 2022.
The toolkit has three objectives:
Promote inclusion and awareness to create an equitable Membership reflective of today’s world.
Encourage dialogue to inspire Members to bring the values of EDI to their personal and professional interactions.
Share best practices, data, guides, and resources to help AUTM, tech transfer/knowledge exchange professionals, and others to advance their EDI efforts.
With the launch of the toolkit, the EDI committee was able to provide a common language, knowledge set, and support for our AUTM Members to have thoughtful conversations, intentional engagements, and a way to be considerate of the varying perspectives, people, backgrounds, and expertise within their offices and their business practices. This toolkit continues to undergo revisions as the landscape changes and new insights are available. The EDI committee intends to continue to provide updated versions on a regular cadence.
Goal 3: Weaving EDI into the Fabric of AUTM
Equity, diversity, and inclusion are not just buzzwords or things to check off a list — they are important considerations when creating a community of many voices coming together for a common goal. To ensure EDI became common practice within the AUTM community, the EDI Chair and other members of the committee participated in the strategic planning sessions in 2021. With support from others in those sessions, “Inclusion” became a core principle for AUTM. In addition, the committee developed AUTM’s Core Values and an EDI statement.
Outlined in the Statement, AUTM pledges to:
focus on fairness, diversifying our leadership, and acting with integrity,
hold Association leaders and Membership responsible for its practices and actions,
consider and give weight to the diversity and inclusion practices of service providers when selecting those with whom we will do business, and
increase the diversity of our organization and programming.
Our Core Values include listening, embracing diversity, collaboration, innovation, responsibility, and integrity.
Other Projects
In addition to the three initial goals, the committee and the special interest groups worked together to develop materials that would continue to provide information, education, and support for the Membership. These include:
A column in the AUTM Insight newsletter, “EDI Deep Dive”, with fresh content related to topics of the moment.
Watercoolers led by EDI committee members, D&I SIG members, and guest speakers on topics such as ‘Inclusion in Your TTO’.
A suggested reading list with material to help Members have thoughtful conversations and review best practices for their offices
AUTM pledged commitment to support everyone's right to be a part of an inclusive community, free from bias and hate
A track at the AUTM Annual Meeting was initiated to bring more EDI-related topics to the Membership. That track has become ‘Policy and Advocacy’, but sessions dedicated to inclusion and diversity in innovation remain welcome. The committee has also worked with the AUTM staff and Members to encourage more diversity amongst panels and in programming at all the meetings.
Future Learnings and Action Call
The beauty of creating a diverse Membership where all voices are valued is that we are constantly challenged to learn, grow, and develop new ways to support and engage that Membership. The EDI committee continues to put forward revisions of the initial work, insights and enriching educational content through the newsletter, and hot topics at the annual and regional meetings.
The committee welcomes opinions, questions, and support from the AUTM community to ensure that AUTM remains a place where everyone in our profession feels welcomed, valued, and supported. Please reach out to the AUTM staff and committee Chair to share your ideas of how we can make sure AUTM’s commitment to EDI continues for another 50 years and beyond!
The Stories We Tell: AUTM’s Better World Project
John Fraser, RTTP, CLP
AUTM President, 2006 President Burnside Development and Associates
One of AUTM’s most impactful programs, the Better World Project, was born out of an off-hand conversation among the Metrics Committee in the late 1990s. The AUTM Licensing Survey had been gathering data for a few years and was doing a good job of showing some of the economic impact of university innovations but wasn’t showing more of the societal impacts of academic research on the world.
I remember meeting with Lori Pressman at that time and she asked me to write small vignettes that highlighted inventions developed at universities. Our goal was to include these vignettes in the published versions of the Metrics Report.
These short stories were a resounding success, so I asked the AUTM Board of Directors to request funds to support professional writers to share these stories. Our goal was to create a standard format of storytelling, while removing research jargon and better communicating impact. Ashley Stevens on the AUTM Board had just obtained a large grant to communicate the importance of academic tech transfer and the Board agreed to provide financial support.
Twenty volunteers and I created a committee with representation from across the United States to reach out to our local universities and ask for story leads. Our goal was to have at least one story from every state. This was achieved. Once we had our stories, AUTM contracted with writers to turn the rough story leads into polished one-page stories. The AUTM Board engaged an external project manager to handle the overall management of the project, including managing volunteer input, soliciting writers and editing their contributions, and managing the layout and printing of the stories.
The stories were gathered into full color booklets and distributed at the 2005 Annual Meeting. Attendees were very excited to see this new tool and its potential to tell stories that showed the broader impact of their daily work. The booklet’s introduction stated: “The Association of University Technology Managers launched the Better World Project in 2005 to promote public understanding of how academic research and technology transfer have changed people’s way of life and made the world a better place. The project draws from more than a decade’s worth of case studies and news from AUTM Members — the professionals who make academic technology transfer happen.”
The following year, at a Board meeting, we discussed what to call the booklets and how to label them. The external project manager was present to report on the project’s management, and he suggested we call the project the “Better World Project” and the booklets
[2005 Annual Meeting] Attendees were very excited to see this new tool and its potential to tell stories that showed the broader impact of their daily work.
the “Better World Report.” The Board unanimously accepted this. At that same meeting, the project manager reported on the agreed-upon distribution of the Reports beyond the tech transfer community. We sent copies to corporate licensees, politicians at various levels of government, university presidents, and journalists. The manager followed up with one-on-one phone interviews to get feedback and the initial response was uniformly positive. Several politicians and journalists mentioned they had no idea their local university had made such contributions to society. Everyone contacted emphasized the importance of continuing to make these reports available to communicate the impact of academic commercialization.
Recognizing the program’s importance and potential impact, the Board created a Better World Project volunteer committee and tasked it with producing Annual Reports on an ongoing basis. We assigned a
budget to the project to cover writer’s compensation and the publication of hard copies of the Report.
The report hit a snag in its third year with the financial recession of 2008. President Jane Muir moved the project into the digital age, terminating the relatively expensive hard copy publication but increasing distribution of the report via the internet.
Since its inception in 2005, the Better World Project has shown the significant global impact of research commercialization and the crucial role technology transfer plays in this process. Now boasting more than 600 stories contributed from many countries in its online library, the program serves as a testament to the power of technology transfer in transforming research discoveries into real-world solutions that improve lives and shape a better future.
Celebrating 50 Years of Volunteer Leadership at AUTM
From its inception 50 years ago, volunteers have been, and remain, the cornerstone of AUTM’s success. Whether serving on Committees, the Board of Directors, or Task Forces, their dedication, vision, and tireless efforts have established AUTM as a globally respected authority in technology transfer. These volunteers have paved the way for countless innovations to shape our world.
In its early years, AUTM was entirely managed by volunteers. In 1987, the Association engaged Bayfield Associates to establish its first headquarters office. As Membership and organizational complexity grew, AUTM transitioned in 1999 to a full-service association management provider, the Sherwood Group, Inc., later known as Kellen. In January 2015, AUTM hired Steve Susalka as its first CEO. This evolution has culminated in AUTM officially becoming a standalone organization on January 1, 2021, and employing its own staff, a pivotal step that reinforced its ability to support the profession and its Members.
Governance at AUTM has always been driven by its volunteer Board of Directors. Operating according to bylaws approved by the Membership, the Board sets the Association’s strategic direction, ensures the necessary resources are available, and makes key decisions. The Board’s composition has evolved
over time to align with the changing needs of the profession and the Association’s growing initiatives. For example, the creation of the Vice President for Affiliates position in 1999 reflected a commitment to engaging industry colleagues. The creation of an industry position in 2023 was vital in providing industry members with a representative voice within the organization.
Beyond the Board, AUTM’s Committees have played an essential role in advancing its mission. These committees, of which there are currently 33, have been formed, merged, or reorganized over the past 50 years.
The well-being of its membership is key to any professional organization.The following Committees focus on enhancing the value of AUTM for its Members:
AUTM Innovation Marketplace
Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Howard Bremer Scholarship
Industry Advisory Group
Membership Development
Mentorship
Volunteerism
Website
Professional development is a cornerstone of AUTM’s impact. The following Committees provide opportunities for technology transfer professionals to expand their skills, deepen their knowledge, and grow their networks:
Annual Meeting Program
Canada Region
Central Region Planning
Eastern Region Planning
Essentials Course Planning
Leadership Forum
Marketing Course Planning
Negotiations Course
Online Professional Development
Operations and Compliance Course
Software Course
Startup Course
Small Office Course
Valuation Course
Western Region Planning
Meanwhile, the Canadian Licensing Survey, Licensing Activity Survey, and Salary Survey Committees contribute critical data and insights that inform and guide the field.
AUTM’s fiscal health and sustainability are ensured by the diligent work of its Audit, Finance, and Investment Committees. Their efforts enable AUTM to continue delivering the resources and support necessary to help Members bring groundbreaking innovations to life.
With an outward-facing focus, committees such as the Better World Project, International Strategy, Public Policy Advisory, and Public Policy Legal Task Force work tirelessly to advocate for technology transfer, publicly promote its societal impact, and develop global connections. These groups amplify AUTM’s voice, ensuring it remains a leader in shaping policy and public perception.
Task forces have also played a significant role in AUTM’s history, often evolving into permanent committees. A notable example is the Women Inventors Task Force, which eventually became today’s Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Committee. Such transformations highlight AUTM’s commitment to adaptability and progress. As we celebrate AUTM’s 50th anniversary, we honor the countless volunteers who have dedicated their time, expertise, and passion to advancing technology transfer.
Their contributions have been instrumental in shaping AUTM’s legacy and ensuring its continued relevance in an ever-changing world. With the support of our Members and volunteers, AUTM stands poised to inspire, innovate, and lead for the next 50 years and beyond.
The AUTM Foundation: Funding the Future of Tech Transfer
Yatin Karpe, PhD Chair, AUTM Foundation Board of Directors Director, Office of Technology Commercialization Rowan University
Founded in 2007 by leaders of its parent organization, AUTM, the AUTM Foundation creates awareness, builds relationships, and secures financial support for initiatives and programs that benefit the Association and the profession.
The Foundation is led by experts in science, technology, business, and economic development, as well as intellectual property and licensing. Its focus is to continually assess global needs in technology transfer and identify the strengths and opportunities within the AUTM community to help impact the profession.
The Technology Transfer Career Training Program (T3) is the highlight of the Foundation’s efforts. It helps build our future leaders by offering early career fellows unique resources and opportunities to engage and learn. Since the Programs’ start in 2016, more than 100 fellows have benefitted from mentorship, access to the full AUTM webinar library, and attendance at AUTM’s Essentials Course, Annual Meeting, and one Region Meeting.
These fellows are financially supported by:
The Susan Riley Keyes Memorial Fund, which offers T3 positions to individuals from small TTO offices throughout North America. Individuals are selected through an application process;
LifeArc, a United Kingdom-based medical research charity which offers T3 positions to individuals in the UK and European Union. Individuals are selected through an application process; or
An individual TTO may sponsor an individual.
T3 would also not be possible without our volunteer mentors. Over the course of the program, more than 30 experienced tech transfer professionals have volunteered their time and expertise to help advise and guide the fellows to reach their individual goals.
None of this is possible without the fundraising efforts and overall stewardship of the Foundation’s leadership and volunteers.
Though a relative newcomer compared to AUTM’s five decades, the Foundation plans to impact the next 50 years, continuing to fund initiatives that benefit the technology transfer community, further economic development, and enhance the human condition.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1996
AUTM’s Technology Operations and Organization Licensing Skills Course (TOOLS) was launched in 1996, a year when Tiger Woods made his professional PGA Tour debut, Dolly the sheep was the first mammal to be cloned from an adult cell, and the Spice Girls released their debut single “Wannabe.”
What Does the Future Hold for Tech Transfer?
Don’t Blink, You Might Miss Something Awesome.
Ian McClure, JD, LLM
AUTM Chair, 2022–23
Vice
President
for Innovation, UK HealthCare
Associate Vice President, Research, Innovation and Economic Impact University of Kentucky Research
The “Tech Transfer and Me” storyline has been eventful for most of us, I’d venture to assume. Many of us didn’t mean to be here. Most of us will never leave. After all, most other jobs don’t actually have, as part of their impact potential, the opportunity to save someone’s life or save the world with each decision to file, sign, partner, or invest. The ride for the last 50 years has surely been one of bumps, excitement, challenges, existential threats, successes, failures, and education, all along the way. As a profession, we have fought to help others learn, to get a seat at the table, to be funded and resourced, to protect a working model, and to do what is right for technology and innovation.
Let’s look forward to the next 50 years and make some predictions. One theme is predictable...things will change fast.
Government Funding for Tech Transfer – It took close to 50 years in the U.S. for the government to realize that, for its mandate to commercialize government-funded inventions to be met, it would also need to fund the technology transfer resources required to manage the commercialization process and effectuate those outcomes. Meanwhile, other governments had already been funding tech transfer resources and programs for years. In 2022, the AUTM-WIPO International Leadership Summit focused on discovering exactly what more than 30 countries’ governments are doing — or not doing – to fund and support tech transfer resources in their country. That report is available on the AUTM website. This discovery actually supported discussions on Capitol Hill in the U.S. to advocate for the CHIPS and Science Act, and with federal agencies quickly working to design
programs newly authorized by the Act. We now have a number of seminal funding programs in the U.S. directly focused on increasing tech transfer and research translation capacity. Prediction for the next 50 years: Due to these programs, as well as many reciprocal programs across the world, we will see incredible increases in the overall capacity to perform knowledge transfer, especially at small and medium-sized universities. These successes
will sustain and even increase government funding levels for tech transfer resources.
Government Funding for Translational Research — The tides are turning a bit in terms of the acceptance of and encouragement for government-funded translational activities. Many countries around the world fund a much larger weighting of translational research relative to basic research than does the United States. This will change, as the global innovation race heats up and we become less patient for basic research to find its “Eureka!” moments. Prediction for the next 50 years: The United States will significantly increase its funding of translational research activities and applied science, catching up to countries that have been investing in this more heavily for years, such as China and Germany, and prompting a heavier foot on the innovation pedal across the world.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Efficiencies and Minimized Transaction Costs — Tech transfer is a contact sport, they say. Yes, but the types of contact that work are diversifying, and the types of activities that complete our workflows are also changing dramatically. Enter AI – it’s happening everywhere, including in TTOs, and the tools that we use to conduct market, patent, and competitive research, to transact, and to organize and project manage collaborations. Prediction for the next 50 years: AI will dramatically change the way we do business by making it a less –time-intensive process, but not to the detriment of headcount. Instead, it will change that headcount to be focused more on strategic relationships, deal-making, and training, and less on administrative, research, and document-intensive practices. Overall, transaction costs will decrease, and more deals will get done.
Growth in Scope — The tech transfer domain is expanding, as leadership roles in innovation (Chief Innovation Officer, or AVP of Innovation and Economic Development) are overseeing larger responsibilities and mandates to create enterprises that advance innovation ecosystems that include tech transfer. Never forget, however, that tech transfer is a foundational element and a driver of these ecosystems, and that won’t change. Prediction for the next 50 years: This expansion will continue, and we will see Chief Innovation Officers in every cabinet at every research university.
In the next 50 years, there are certain to be new challenges and opportunities that we can’t even imagine. Regardless of how or if these predictions happen or what awaits us on the horizon, one thing I feel certain of is that AUTM will continue to support and advance technology transfer and our Members’ vision for a better world.
In Their Own Words
Over the past 50 years, each of AUTM’s Chairs and Presidents has navigated unique challenges while achieving remarkable successes. Their unwavering dedication, alongside the efforts of the Board of Directors and AUTM Committees, has significantly shaped the technology transfer profession and strengthened the Association. In the following excerpts, some of AUTM’s Past Presidents and Chairs reflect on their experiences, sharing insights from their leadership journeys. These reflections are drawn from interviews conducted in 2019 by John Frasier, with the full interviews available on the AUTM website.
DAVID WINWOOD
Helps AUTM Get a Seat at the Table
AUTM President, 2016
What
led
you to become more involved in AUTM?
At the national level, I recall that sovereign immunity issues were a big topic in the late 1990s. AUTM didn’t seem to be responding to some of the Congressional attacks related to sovereign immunity. That’s when I started to pay attention to whether and how we could make a difference in the future of the profession by involving ourselves in policy matters.
What were some of the issues and challenges you encountered as AUTM VP for Advocacy and as President?
We wrestled with the challenge of AUTM getting a “seat at the table” with the other higher education associations. If I had any impact as VP for Advocacy, it may have been to make sure that AUTM did indeed get a seat at the table — for example, not only being asked to co-sign letters to Congress but occasionally leading the way on such communications. The fact that I was also on the Executive Committee of COGR and Chair of their Contracts & IP Committee at the time was helpful!
Attempts at patent reform — unfavorable toward universities — were a major area of effort. I was fortunate to be invited to testify before the United States Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee on the subject of patent reform. That experience was very special and resulted in a request from the Financial Times (FT) for me to provide a shortened version of my testimony to appear in the paper’s annual special publication on technology. The FT editor who asked me to write the article made me a little nervous when she told me that in the previous year’s edition, the piece had been written by Sir James Dyson.
[Internally] the change from a portfolio to director-at-large board; hiring an executive director with a tech transfer practitioner background who would adapt to this change and become the CEO and permanent face of the association in D.C. and elsewhere around the world; and the debate around changing the name of the association was the most difficult and divisive topic I encountered.
Where do you see the profession in the next 10 years?
I hope we’ll be considered more as an integral part of the operations of our institutions.
JAMES SEVERSON
Helps to Change the Narrative
AUTM President, 2000
What
are some of the biggest changes you have seen in the profession?
There have been many changes. Tech transfer has become more complex. The growth of AUTM necessitated a change to the management of the association, its governance structure, and the Annual Meeting. There has been a change from invention management to innovation management, with an increasing emphasis on innovation; an increased emphasis on tech transfer’s role in economic development, with an emphasis on company startups; an increase in the value and management of non-patented assets; and an increase in professionalism as new processes and procedures make it run more like a business.
What do you wish might have turned out differently?
The annual survey and the focus on revenue has been a challenge that AUTM has never been able to reconcile. Almost from its inception, AUTM leadership has struggled to change the narrative and to change the focus of thinking about tech transfer away from the money. We have explored alternative metrics, we have implemented a strong messaging program with the Better World Project, and I believe AUTM leadership has been consistent with its messaging about the benefits of tech transfer beyond the money, but the issue persists.
You Ought to Know
AUTM: 1997
The first AUTM-sponsored international conference, in partnership with Science Alliance, was held in Amsterdam in May 1997. That year, Comet Hale-Bopp passed by Earth, the first Harry Potter book was published, and IBM’s “Deep Blue” chess-playing computer defeated chess champion Garry Kasparov.
JON SODERSTROM Puts an Emphasis on Impact Over Income
AUTM President, 2008
Where do you see the profession in the next ten years?
It will be less about the process of identifying patentable inventions, filing/prosecuting applications, and licensing the patents to companies. It will be more focused on developing strategic partnerships with entities who can help faculty translate their ideas into commercially interesting investment opportunities. The commercially valuable IP will be increasingly developed outside the university in collaboration with these development organizations. This will be especially true in the life sciences.
What do you see as the biggest challenge on the horizon for our profession?
Drug price controls/march-in challenges, royalty recoupment, declining federal research and development budgets (in real and inflation-adjusted terms), patent validity challenges at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), continued activism by the Supreme and appellate courts that undermine the value of intellectual property, trade war with China — everything that is currently on the Public Policy groups’ list. These issues have been around for more than 20 years and will continue for the foreseeable future, if not longer. And that doesn’t even include the possibility that university Presidents might just say it isn’t worth the cost/effort to support these activities since they are losing money in a tight fiscal environment — hence the need to emphasize impact over income.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1993
The first AUTM Canadian Region Meeting was held jointly with the Licensing Executive Society (LES) in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, in 1993. That same year, Kim Campbell became the first female Prime Minister of Canada, the movie “Jurassic Park” was released (with pioneering use of computer-generated imagery [CGI]), and Uranus passed by Neptune, which happens once every 171 years.
LOUIS BERNEMAN
Restructures AUTM’s Administration
AUTM President, 1999
“I always try to adhere to the three best practices of public speaking — be direct, be brief, and be seated. (In this case, online, and I’m already sitting.)
My focus and goal as President (1999) was singular and long past due — to finally and permanently transition and restructure our Association administration from Bayfield [Bayfield Associates was AUTM’s first management-service organization] to a more comprehensive, full-service capable association management provider. Many before me had tried. But, in the final analysis and with AUTM’s best long-term interests at heart, the Board realized we had become too big (Membership), too complex (Annual and seasonal meetings, professional development courses, interactions with related associations, and more), and were dealing with too much money for a one-person office to manage. Welcome Sherwood. Long live AUTM.
FRED REINHART on AUTM’s Evolution
AUTM President, 2015
What are the biggest changes you’ve seen in the profession?
First, the aggregate knowledge base, recognized standards of good practice, and operational experience are awe-inspiring. Tech transfer has truly become a profession, with AUTM Membership growing from under 200 to more than 3,300 and represented by many countries besides the U.S. Second, AUTM and the profession are the recognized global leaders and have a seat at the policy table with more influence than ever before. Third, for better or worse, entrepreneurship and startups now have a dominant influence on TTO activities. Fourth, AUTM has a highly developed and beneficial network of cooperative partners in government, industry and academia, including internationally. Fifth, the set of responsibilities of many AUTM Members has evolved and broadened to include entrepreneurship and startups, economic development, conflict of interest (COI) committee work, industry relations, institutional development, and running technology parks, incubators, and gap/investment funds.
Where do you see the profession in the next ten years?
I think it will be unrecognizable in some ways because new models will emerge based on creating more viable startups as a result of smart integration of training, incubation, funding, and staffing. Tech transfer will continue to be woven more intelligently into the institution’s strategic engagement efforts with external partners. There will be more effective partnerships between academia and companies, foundations, and government players. The corollary for AUTM is how to address the needs of its Members without becoming an unfocused organization that tries to be all things to everyone. AUTM services must meet the needs of an evolving constituency, but I believe IP management, licensing (whether to existing companies or startups), and licensee and research sponsor relationships are still at the core of AUTM Members’ activities.
TERRY YOUNG
Helps AUTM Expand Internationally
AUTM President, 2001
What were some of the issues the Boards you were on wrestled with?
How to manage growth. Determining how to best create administrative help as Penny [Dalziel] had managed for so many years, but changes were needed. Much discussion of the bid process that led to the selection of Sherwood. Later, much of the deliberations were focused upon the political pressures facing the organization such as proposed Bayh-Dole changes, march-in rights, etc.
What are the biggest changes you’ve seen in the profession?
As I have been out of the profession so long, that is a difficult question. I guess that two things stand out. First, it appears that the focus of technology transfer today is in medicine, something of a progression, I believe. Second, it is amazing to me that the Bayh-Dole Act still exists.
What
do you wish might have turned out differently?
The organization’s continued success and growth speaks to the realization that it probably could not have gone better. The attention of AUTM to international relations always disappointed me. Jon Sandelin was the pioneer. As AUTM President, I paid great attention to international inclusion, with creation of Vice President of International Relations (Cathy Garner), and bringing delegations to the AUTM meetings, including delegations from China, Japan and Russia. I made many trips to Japan and worked closely with Akio Nishizawa to establish the technology licensing office (TLO) infrastructure in Japan; I count this as one of my greatest accomplishments in my career; Jon was also involved as well, of course. I do not know where international expertise development stands today.
JANE MUIR
Helps
Bring Marketing Skills and Concepts to Tech Transfer
AUTM President, 2014
What was happening in tech transfer when you first joined the profession?
When I started, the majority of tech transfer practitioners had either a science, engineering, or legal background. Only a handful of practitioners had a marketing or sales background like mine. While I felt a bit intimidated, I also saw it as a huge opportunity to utilize my knowledge of marketing to help expand the skill set of the profession.
What are some of your early successes?
Early successes included the infiltration of the concept of “value proposition” to all our marketing materials and communications. At the NASA Regional Technology Transfer Center (RTTC), we created some of the first-ever “Technology Opportunity Sheets,” which were flyers that described the value proposition for potential licensees of NASA technologies, rather than the scientific descriptions that had previously been used. I brought this practice to the University of Florida Office of Technology Licensing (OTL) when I transitioned, with surprising resistance from the OTL staff. Since they were primarily scientists and engineers, they believed anyone who would be interested in licensing the technologies would be interested in the science. When the marketing campaigns ultimately increased the number of licenses executed, the resistance subsided. Eventually, this practice was adopted as a best practice by many offices across the country and many parts of the world.
What were some of the issues facing the first AUTM Board you were involved with?
The first Board wrestled with financial shortfalls of the organization. Additionally, we tackled head on the “professionalization” of technology transfer. Recognizing that almost every profession that performs a service requires a credential of one sort or another, the board voted to create the Alliance of Technology Transfer Professionals (ATTP), which, in collaboration with seven sister organizations from around the world, ultimately created the process for technology transfer practitioners to receive designation as a Registered Technology Transfer Professional (RTTP). As VP of Professional Development, I served on the founding ATTP Board.
NIELS REIMERS
Helps
Shape AUTM
and Tech Transfer as We Know Them Today [From an interview conducted by
AUTM Bayh-Dole Award Recipient, 2004
In 1974, the National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored a meeting of those involved with the rapidly spreading licensing activities of universities. The meeting was held at Case Western Reserve University. After the NSF meeting talks, an informal gathering was held to discuss forming an organization of university licensing professionals. Around 30–40 attended. Later that year, there was a Licensing Executives Society (LES) Board meeting in Chicago near to Illinois Institute of Technology. LES had resisted any calls for separate meetings of licensing professionals in a specific industry because of the potential for antitrust claims, such as alleging that royalty rates being fixed at favored rates or the like. At the same time a founding meeting of an organization of university licensing professionals (to be called the Society of University Patent Administrators [SUPA]) was being held within walking distance.
At that time, I was on the LES Board. We told the LES Board of the founding meeting of SUPA and recommended that LES alter its policy vis-a-vis antitrust concerns and allow a separate meeting of only university licensing professionals to be held the day after a regular LES meeting, but under the LES umbrella. After much discussion, the LES Board voted to agree with our proposition. It was clear the momentum toward a separate organization was such that SUPA was formed that day. Those who may have supported our proposal of a more-or-less joint meeting with industry licensing professionals were quiet as the arguments against being “infected” by industry carried the day. In fact, Larry Gilbert, who was at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), got involved and he liked to call it SUPA.
Katharine Ku in July 2019]
JOHN FRASER Helps Share Our Stories of Innovation
AUTM President, 2006
Did you decide to get involved with [with AUTM] for any particular issue?
I decided on metrics, as it was the one quantitative way we had to communicate the value of what we did. Once I finished my initial Board term, I realized that the Metrics Report was being read only for the Royalty Revenue Top Line, and newspaper articles were implying that if there were great royalties you had a great office; few royalties meant a poor office. I was asked by Lori Pressman, Chair of the Metrics Committee, to help and we decided that my job would be to gather vignettes of university inventions that were developed into a product and were in the market. That task coincided with an interest in such stories that I had had for a long time when we were in Canada, so the fit was great. I decided to expand the search to gather at least one story from each state and have AUTM create a database. I was fortunate that when I pitched this to the AUTM board for some money, Ashley Stevens and the Board had obtained a grant from the Kauffman Foundation. So enough money was set aside to create and publish the first edition of the Better World Report and have one copy for every attendee at the 2005 AUTM Annual Meeting.
Where do you see the profession in the next ten years?
Expanding beyond a focus on transaction metrics to consistently studying the impact and communicating the value of what we do for the economy. More emphasis on researcher entrepreneurship interest and spin-out companies.
What is the biggest challenge on the horizon you see for our profession?
Paying more attention to Washington and representing our profession more regularly to educate elected and non-elected federal officials who change on a frequent and regular basis, as Joe Allen has continuously pointed out.
Gamechangers
Innovation has always been at the core of technology transfer. Fifty years ago, the field was just beginning to take shape as a profession, with the AUTM community establishing new technology transfer offices (TTOs) and developing foundational processes and procedures. Over the years, the field has been shaped by visionary “gamechangers” whose efforts have driven significant advancements. Nominated by their peers, the following individuals stand out as key figures to watch, as their work continues to shape the future of technology transfer for the next 50 years.
INÊZ SOBRAL ESCOVAL
In just a few short years, Inês Sobral Escoval has already made a significant impact on the field of technology transfer. As an alumna of the LifeArc Knowledge Transfer Innovation Fellowship, Inês is committed to advancing academic research and fostering a thriving tech transfer ecosystem. Her forward-thinking aspirations for the future reveal a deep commitment to the development of technology transfer. These include advancing academic research in technology transfer with her PhD, establishing a research group dedicated to healthcare technology transfer, and enhancing the Portuguese ecosystem for tech transfer professionals.
About Inês: Inês is an innovation and knowledge transfer professional with a strong background in life and healthcare sciences. With experience in academic technology transfer and bioentrepreneurship, Inês is an Alumna of the LifeArc Knowledge Transfer Innovation Fellowship and is involved in several technology transfer communities. She is pursuing her PhD in the area at the Centre for Innovative Biomedicine and Biotechnology (CIBB) of the University of Coimbra (Portugal), where she is approaching policies associated with the technology transfer process and the academia-industry interface.
ANJI MILLER
Anji Miller, MSc, PhD, CLP, RTTP, is a dedicated mentor and advocate for the technology transfer profession. Through her leadership of the LifeArc Knowledge Transfer Innovation and LifeArc Tech Transfer Fellowship programs, she has fostered the development of countless talented individuals. Anji’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion is evident in her work with Global Equity Diversity and Inclusion in Technology Transfer (GEDITT), of which she is one of the six founders, and her active involvement in various professional organizations. Her passion for the field and her dedication to mentoring the next generation of tech transfer professionals makes her a true game-changer.
About Anji: Anji is a highly accomplished innovation professional with more than 20 years’ experience of translating early-stage academic research in the life sciences sector. A proponent for professional advancement in technology transfer, at LifeArc she leads global translational education and training programs, including the Translational Skills Fellowship, leveraging her expertise in research, IP protection, management, licensing, and company formation to empower emerging professionals. As a strong advocate for EDI, Anji co-founded GEDITT to promote equality, diversity, and inclusion in technology transfer.
DREW BENNETT
Drew Bennett, MBA, is a visionary leader in the field of technology transfer. He has been instrumental in expanding the boundaries of traditional tech transfer to encompass software, digital technologies, and creative content. His innovative approach has led to the development of new licensing models and strategies, particularly in the realm of digital health technologies. He is a recognized expert in navigating the complex legal and ethical issues surrounding patient-generated data and open-source software. His contributions have had a significant impact on the field and will continue to inspire future generations of technology transfer professionals.
About Drew: Starting his career as a respiratory therapist working in trauma and neuro intensive care was the foundation for Drew to develop close relationships with university innovators and industry partners alike. He spent 25 years in the interim in the commercial software industry crafting a unique insight into the needs of startups and industry. He takes great satisfaction in having helped change outcomes for patients in critical care, chronic conditions, and improving the lives of patients with mental health illnesses.
BRYN REES
Bryn Rees, RTTP, has revolutionized tech transfer at the University of Colorado Boulder (CU Boulder). His innovative approach has transformed CU Boulder into a hub of entrepreneurial activity, fostering the creation of numerous successful startups. By emphasizing a venture mindset and providing invaluable support, Bryn has significantly contributed to the economic impact of the university. His leadership has earned national recognition and positioned CU Boulder as a leader in technology commercialization.
About Bryn: Bryn is the Associate Vice Chancellor for Innovation and Partnerships at CU Boulder, overseeing venture partners, the Innovation & Entrepreneurship Initiative, and workforce development. Together with his team, he works with university researchers, innovators, and entrepreneurs, and builds partnerships with the extended ecosystem to develop the next generation of creative leaders, business founders, transformative technologies, and economic growth.
ALLISON MARKOVA
Serving Director of Technology Transfer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), Allison Markova, RTTP, has been instrumental in building a successful tech transfer program. Her creative approach and innovative strategies have enabled WHOI to commercialize ocean technology, despite its unique challenges. Allison’s dedication to fostering innovation and creating a positive impact on the world makes her a valuable asset to the tech transfer community.
About Allison: Allison leads WHOI’s Office for Technology Transfer, transforming groundbreaking innovations into impactful solutions. With nearly a decade of experience at a premier ocean research institution, she uniquely blends her expertise in marketing, communications, and impact storytelling, with an educational foundation in environmental science. Her creative and unconventional approach has meaningfully advanced WHOI’s program, demonstrating her strong commitment to helping innovation create positive global change for our oceans and planet.
MAITHILI SHROFF
Maithili Shroff, PhD, CLP, is a rising star in the technology transfer field. After completing her PhD and a LifeArc-AUTM Technology Transfer Fellowship, she quickly advanced from Licensing Associate to Licensing Manager at the University of New Hampshire. Maithili’s dedication to the profession is evident through her volunteer work with AUTM and her credentials like CLP and RTTP. As the sole IP Manager at her institution, she has demonstrated exceptional skills and leadership. Her commitment to mentorship and her active involvement in the AUTM community make her a gift to the field.
About Maithili: Maithili is the Licensing Manager at the University of New Hampshire. She graduated first in class during her undergrad and earned her doctorate in life sciences on a prestigious Marie Curie Fellowship (European equivalent of Fulbright). She has worked on three continents and has more than a decade of experience across industry, academia, and government organizations. A recipient of the LifeArc-AUTM Technology Transfer Fellowship (2018–19), Maithili actively shares her expertise through seminars, panel discussions, and as an adjunct professor.
JAMES ZANEWICZ
James Zanewicz, JD, LLM, RTTP, is a prominent figure in the tech transfer field. His leadership at AUTM has been instrumental in shaping the organization’s events and initiatives. A champion for diversity and inclusion, James has worked tirelessly to create a more equitable and inclusive profession. His innovative approach to academic technology transfer has expanded the role of TTOs to include business development and industry partnerships.
About James: James serves as Chief Strategy Officer for Tulane Medicine, leading strategic initiatives, biomedical business development, marketing, communications, and crisis management. He has driven innovation at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Janelia Research Campus, Rhône-Poulenc Rorer, the daily news show “EXTRA,” University of Illinois, and University of Louisville. James leads BIO’s Technology Transfer Committee, serves on the Board of the Alliance for Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare, and chaired the ATTP Board, with board roles at AUTM, the Network for Academic Corporate Relations Officers (NACRO), and the BioJudiciary Project.
DANIEL DARDANI
Daniel Dardani, CLP, directs physical sciences and digital engineering licensing at Duke University’s Office for Translation and Commercialization. He is renowned as much for his expertise in software IP and innovation licensing as he is for his smile when helping fellow AUTM colleagues. A sought-after advisor and presenter, Dan provides strategic guidance and education in machine learning, AI, data science, and copyright matters at the intersections with healthcare and biomedical engineering. His insights are invaluable for licensing professionals navigating this rapidly evolving landscape. His longtime service to AUTM as a committee volunteer, committee chair, and Board Member is a testament to Dan’s dedication to the field.
About Daniel: Dan is a veteran technology transfer and IP executive with more than 20 years in licensing and innovation strategy. As Duke University’s Director of Physical Sciences and Digital Innovations Licensing, Dan oversees licensing and partnerships in engineering, medtech, software, and AI. Previously at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Dan led a complex technology portfolio, encompassing computer science, cybertechnology, and machine learning. He serves on the AUTM Board and Cardozo Law’s FAME Advisory Board, is a Certified Licensing Professional (CLP), has taught IP at Harvard Summer School, and holds degrees in physics and politicalscience from the University of Rochester. A passionate lifelong learner, he’s nearing completion of a master’s degree in technology and society at the University of Chicago.
YATIN KARPE
Yatin Karpe, PhD, RTTP, is a respected mentor in the technology transfer field. Known for his guidance and support, Yatin is always willing to offer advice and share his expertise. His strong network and forward-thinking approach have positively impacted the careers of many. Yatin’s dedication to mentorship and professional development has positively impacted the profession.
About Yatin: Yatin is Assistant Vice President for Innovation, Commercialization & Engagement at Texas State University. Yatin has more than 24 years of combined experience (primarily heading small offices — Rowan University, Lehigh University) managing all aspects of technology transfer, intellectual property, innovation management, licensing, commercialization, venture formation, entrepreneurship, and external economic engagement in an academic environment. He is the current Board Chair of the AUTM Foundation and also served on AUTM cabinets and committees in the past.
You Ought to Know AUTM: 1999
The 1999 AUTM Annual Meeting was the first to break the 1,000-attendee mark — 1,067 to be exact. Did you know that the Space Shuttle Discovery became the first vessel to dock with the International Space Station, the European Union introduced the Euro, and the Pokémon craze swept through the U.S., all in 1999 as well?
MEETING ATTENDEES
You Ought to Know AUTM: 2006
The Better World Project was first published in 2006 to highlight how academic research and technology transfer benefit millions of people around the world. What else happened in 2006? Facebook, Twitter, and Nintendo Wii were all launched.
