INNOVATION Today – Winter 2016

A M E D I A P L AT F O R M F O R I N N O VAT I V E E N T R E P R E N E U R S W W W. I N N OVAT I O N T O D AY. N E T

CONTENTS EUROPEAN INNOVATION H2020 ........................................................................................................................6 Enterprise Europe Network...............................................................................10 UK INNOVATION

06

Navigating Through the Valley of Death......................................................16 The UK’s Innovation Powerhouse....................................................................18 NESTA: Why Corporates Are Opening Their Doors.................................21 A Spoonful of Sugar.............................................................................................26 INNOVATION The Innovations of Tomorrow...........................................................................28 Top 10 Innovations of the Century..................................................................32 HEALTHCARE

26

NHS: Keeping Pace..............................................................................................36 SIMFO........................................................................................................................42 Technologie Allianz..............................................................................................43 Colour Breathing Relaxation Technology...................................................44 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Murgitroyd: Adding Value, Creating Growth..............................................50 UNIVERSITIES KAUST.......................................................................................................................52

60

Driving Businesses Forward Through Innovation....................................56 STRATA.....................................................................................................................57 Communication is Shouting, Marketing is Listening................................58 Africa: The Next Frontier for Digital Innovation.......................................60 CEU: Woman in Leadership..............................................................................62 BREXIT......................................................................................................................64 THE ARAB INVENTORS ....................................................................................66 TECHNOLOGY Titanium Studios...................................................................................................68 EUROPEAN INNOVATION SCOREBOARD.................................................72

68

Managing Director Sam Hussain sam@blsmedia.co.uk

Project Director Martin Fish martin@blsmedia.co.uk

Editors Imran Hussain media@blsmedia.co.uk Daisy Reece production@blsmedia.com

Graphic Designer/Illustrator Achraf Amiri hello@achrafamiri.com

BLS Media © are contract publishers of high quality media for prestigious organisations, event organisers, governments and trade associations both in the United Kingdom and internationally.

Our experienced publishing team will develop your publication from initial concept through to completion. Our services include: creative design, PR, advertising sales, sales training, editorial and distribution.

Whilst every care has been taken in compiling this publication and the statements contained herein are believed to be correct, the publishers and the promoters will not accept responsibility for any inaccuracies. Reproduction of any part of this publication without permission is strictly forbidden.

BLS Media © make no recommendation in respect of any of the advertisers and no recommendation may be implied by way of the presence of their advertisements.

ADVERTISING For advertising enquiries in future editions of contact: Sam Hussain info@blsmedia.co.uk www.blsmedia.co.uk PUBLISHED BY BLS Media Ltd, info@blsmedia.co.uk www.blsmedia.co.uk Unit 5, ‘Hiltongrove N1’ 14 Southgate Road London N1 3LY

W W W. I N N OVAT I O N T O D AY. N E T

FOREWORD The 24th of June, 2016 has settled itself firmly into the annals of history. Not many people foresaw Britain’s exit from the European Union. The vote to leave was a stern reminder that the worlds of business and technology are both constantly in motion and stubbornly unpredictable.

INNOVATION Today was set up to help SMEs pass through the SME instrument, acting as a bridge to support smaller companies who specialise in creating innovative solutions to tackle unforeseen challenges as they appear: be it the next generation of smart phone, the newest source of renewable energy or the latest breakthrough in the fight against disease.

INNOVATION Today is the publication that connects innovative SMEs with global organisations, from academia to investors. Covering innovations in various sectors, the publication caters for European SMEs “going global” at Phase 2 and 3 funding levels.

INNOVATION Today is concerned with celebrating SMEs across Europe that exhaust possibilities and indeed themselves in search of creating something truly innovative, today.

Due to Brexit, as we are a British publisher, our next edition of INNOVATION Today will spread its focus to promote innovative companies from the UK beyond Europe and to the rest of the world.

So until then, a special thank you to all our contributing writers and companies and please enjoy our first edition of INNOVATION Today!

Thank you for reading,

Martin Fish Project Director

Q&A

DR. BERND REICHERT, HEAD OF UNIT A.2 H2020 SME EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Dr. Bernd, please explain for our readers the targets and practices of the SME instrument in-line with Horizon 2020 and what the European Commission hopes to achieve for innovative SMEs… The SME Instrument is a new activity under the European Union’s Research and Innovation Programme Horizon 2020. This activity is exclusively dedicated to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). It aims to help highly innovative companies with a realistic market opportunity to realise their innovation, development and growth strategy. The Instrument provides funding for close-to-market activities, i.e. activities where the development takes place under production conditions (Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6 or higher). Think, for instance, of a small test series in order to proof the viability of newly developed prototypes, a test production line, or the validation of new products with respect to standards and regulations, miniaturisation of new products, etc.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE CURRENT PROGRAM WILL HELP STIMULATE THE EUROPEAN ECONOMY?

Although the SME Instrument has the somewhat impressive budget of nearly 3 billion € over seven years (2014-2020), I would not claim that we want to have a tangible or measurable effect on the European economy as a whole. Besides the aim to identify, support and showcase some of the European champions among the most innovative SMEs and to help them grow, I see two objectives with this Instrument. One is the role model of our approach with the hope that it might stimulate similar approaches at regional and national level. I think that today we have many programmes available which support the creation of new companies and their first research and development (R&D) needs, but not many programmes supporting small companies to valorise and commercialise their R&D results until other forms of financial support, like

loans or equity investments, kick in at a later stage and the innovation is in the market. And the other objective is supporting a better European innovation environment including small and large companies, public and private investors, business angels and venture funds, but also public procurement organisations.

THERE IS IN PLACE THE THREE STAGE FUNDING PROCESS FOR SMES TO OBTAIN EUROPEAN COMMISSION FUNDING. PLEASE EXPLAIN A LITTLE FURTHER THE RIGOURS OF THIS…

The Instruments provides funds in two different forms: A Phase 1 of 50.000 € in order to carry out detailed market, customer or IPR studies, to carry out some validation tests on an existing prototype or similar; and a Phase 2 of maximum 2,5 million € to implement the innovation and development strategy of the company.

In addition, each company which is funded under the Instrument receives

6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

a few days of business coaching and we are trying to build communities between the funded enterprises, but also with respect to larger companies, public and private investors, procurement authorities, etc.

In all Phases SMEs can apply alone or, if justified by the commercialisation strategy, together with other SMEs. All other potential partners, like suppliers, knowledge providers, etc., would be subcontractors.

Applications can be submitted at any time until 2020 and we assess these applications four times per year. About 5-6 weeks after such a cut-off date we inform the applicants whether they will be supported. The overall process until the grant agreement is signed and the first financial support is given takes three months for Phase 1 and six months for Phase 2, always counted from the respective cut-off date.

WHAT KEY ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE AS NECESSARY FOR INNOVATIVE SMES TO BEHOLD TO OBTAIN FUNDING?

S

upporting a better European innovation environment including small and large companies, public and private investors, business angels and venture funds, but also public procurement organisations.

The funds are awarded through an open but highly competitive application process aiming to select only the most innovative, highgrowth-potential enterprises. External experts assess the innovation content (new to the respective market and/ or market disruption), the market situation (competitors, market size, freedom to operate) and the company (existing or necessary competences, growth strategy, expected return of investment), very similar to the assessment scheme of any investor, with the difference that the funds of the Instrument are subventions and no reimbursement is expected. Success would be defined through the foreseen and realised company growth.

We see that many entrepreneurs have great ideas but little to no knowledge about the market they intend to go into, very good

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 7

technological skills but a partial or total lack of commercialisation expertise.

An applying company has good chances to be funded if it combines an innovation which is totally new or even disruptive to the envisaged market combined with a well thought commercialisation and growth strategy.

WHAT KINDS OF MENTORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES ARE THERE IN PLACE WITHIN THE HORIZON 2020 PROGRAM FOR SMES?

Within the SME Instrument each company receives business coaching, 3 and 12 days in Phases 1 and 2, respectively. But the SME Instrument is not the only such activity available to small companies. Interested companies might for instance check out the Start Up Europe Initiative with its investor readiness support or the ACE accelerator programme or Startify7, a team-building, thematicallyfocussed and lean-training system of

summer academies for young future ICT entrepreneurs.

THE PROGRAM COVERS MANY AND VARIED INDUSTRIES AND PROJECTS. ARE THERE ANY INNOVATIVE COMPANIES AND PROJECTS MORE LIKELY TO RECEIVE FUNDING THAN OTHERS? FOR INSTANCE, WOULD A TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT HAVE MORE OF A CHANCE THAN A MEDICAL ONE?

This is not exactly how it works.

In fact, each topic under Horizon 2020, called Societal Challenges and Leadership in Enabling and Industrial Technologies, provides 7% of its respective budget to the SME Instrument. This means that the budgets differ according to the financial endowment of each of these topics. For instance, the ICT or the Health topic have higher budgets than the green biotechnology or the space technology topic. A company interested to commercialise new ideas based on photonics technology might apply under the ICT, the energy, the health topic, etc., depending on which market segment it envisages. Applying companies are sometimes hesitating under which topic to submit. The best advice is to apply where the market expertise of the company lies, e.g. a company with a clear expertise in the transport industry would apply there, regardless whether the innovation is based on nanotechnology, information technology or constitutes a serviced innovation.

For non-technological innovations, which don’t find their place among the other more technological oriented topics we have the specific topic “New business models for inclusive, innovative and reflective societies”.

FOR YOU PERSONALLY, WHAT WOULD BE A GREAT ACHIEVEMENT OF THE PROGRAM? WOULD IT BE ONE SINGLE COMPANY WHO RECEIVED FUNDING BECOMING THE NEXT HOUSEHOLD NAME IN THEIR FIELD, OR WOULD IT BE MORE OF A NUMBERS GAME, WHEREBY MANY SMES THAT’S OBTAINED FUNDING WERE ABLE TO PROGRESS A FAIR AMOUNT?

Based on my belief that we need more role models of successful entrepreneurs in Europe who “made it”, my very personal idea of success would certainly be a future household name, preferably in an attractive industry sector. But very similar to our “older sister”, the US Small Business Innovation and Research Programme (SBIR), it might take quite a few years before we can come up with such success stories. Currently we focus on the follow-up investments companies obtain after our funding. And 10 million UK£ A-round a year after our initial grant is certainly a success, especially as company growth and job creation come with it.

WITH SO MANY NEW COMPANIES FAILING WITHIN THEIR FIRST FEW

8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

YEARS, IS IT A CONCERN PROVIDING SUCH LARGE SCALE FUNDING TO SMES?

Of course, also this scheme will have to face the same challenge any investor has to deal with: how to select a potentially successful company which finally excels on the long run?

Innovation and market successes are very hard to predict, and we know this as well. But small companies don’t only fail because they make the wrong market prediction, underestimate existing competitors, have badly calculated their available resources or simply the market reacts differently than expected. Great companies also fail because they cannot acquire the funds necessary to develop and implement an ambitious innovation and growth strategy due to the risk averseness of private and public financial actors alike. And we also know that the commercialisation requires much higher amounts than the R&D phases preceding it. That’s where the SME Instrument wants to come in: a very rigorous selection mechanism combined with sufficient funds to realise a tangible development in the company paired with business coaching and other services to make the funding more sustainable.

Therefore, I like to say: “No, sufficient funds are necessary to make it happen.

Not in every case we will be successful, but overall I am confident we can make an impact in and with the companies we support.”

IN 2020, WHEN THE CURRENT SCHEME HAS REACHED ITS CONCLUSION, WHAT PLANS ARE IN PLACE TO KEEP SME INNOVATION BOTH FUNDED AND STIMULATED?

Well, if you had the chance to be part during the design of a new scheme and afterwards had the possibility to help implementing it, you want to see the scheme persevere and prosper. We want to learn from our experiences and possible mistakes, and improve the SME Instrument over time. For instance, after having designed and implemented most of our processes with fairly sufficient efficiency, we will this year work on improving the overall quality of the assessment of the applications in order to select with even higher chances the real European SME champions.

And of course, we want to become even faster as the most innovative companies have no time to loose on their way to new markets. I hope that such improvements and based on our growing knowledge and experience the SME Instrument will become a lasting part of the European innovation landscape, as the SBIR programme has achieved it in the United States.

it combines an innovation which is totally new or even disruptive to the envisaged market together with a well thought commercialisation and growth strategy. Just the technical or technological competence is not enough, a clear market competence has to come with it. And this could mean that it is too early for a young company to apply for the funding, because it has not yet reached the right stage and might still need to burn more funds in its research activities before it can aim to commercialise.

Is it worth it, seeing to fairly low number of funded companies compared to very high number of applications? Yes, because the chances are still comparably higher than applying with most if not all venture funds. And we have seen one thing already: going through the application process with dedication helps any company to focus its innovation and development strategy regardless whether or not the funding will be obtained. And this is helpful not only in this application process, but is useful for any investment application and at the end also for the company itself.

FINALLY, WHAT ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE TO SMES LOOKING TO OBTAIN FUNDING THROUGH THE PROJECT?

Let me reiterate what I said previously: An applying company has good chances to be funded if

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9

G

reat companies also fail because they cannot acquire the funds necessary to develop and implement an ambitious innovation and growth strategy due to the risk averseness of private and public financial actors alike.

TITANIUM CAPITAL PTE LTD

TURNING TODAY’S IDEAS INTO TOMORROW’S REALITIES For more than a decade Titanium Capital has stood head and shoulders above the competition in both attitude and expertise in the funding market. With its unique joint venture system there is literally nothing that the company does not have the financial strength or knowledge to successfully undertake. Be it a standard building or a complicated movie all are grist to the mill. Our specialists cover the whole field of human endeavour. Knowledge in depth has been the hallmark of Titanium from day one.

The company’s slogan truly is “we don’t have clients just partners”.

Unlike banks we don’t smile and shake your hand in the good times and show you the door in the bad. When we talk about partners we really mean it and offer the funding to match. That is up to 80% with no personal guarantees and no contracts of the type which tie you up in knots forever. Our partners success is our success and their triumphs ours.

Above all Titanium Capital is a company which displays the best of humanitarian principles and donates the vast majority of its profits to deserving programmes around the world. But that does not mean funding deals which in reality have little chance of success. If a deal does not turn a profit than no donations can be made at its completion.

As you might expect Titanium is at the forefront of the green revolution with partners and directors who are leading lights in such fields as bio mass technology, solar energy and crop cultivation.We are also leaders in Aqua technology, an ever decreasing resource in this modern world.

Titanium is actively pursuing a future of clean sustainable and reliable power. It is one of our top priorities. Currently we are developing a pipeline of more than 200 gigawatts across a number of third world countries. This will not only generate power but change the quality of lives for millions of people. Our investments in the mining industry have made substantial contributions to local economies, providing jobs and improving living standards, often in the most challenging of conditions and locations.

Titanium Capital is not simply focused on the world as we would like to see it tomorrow but has its feet firmly planted in the world as it is today. We have strong connections in both the aviation and ship building industries and traditional construction still forms the bedrock of much of our work undertaking projects from 5 million dollars to 500 million and more. We can both finance and build housing estates, ports, harbours and airports to the highest competitive standards and therefore with a strong profit flow.

But there is more to life than just mere existence. We need to laugh and enjoy ourselves. Titanium now has a slate of films from the standard romance through to modern animation and cartoons. Some of our specialist technology can be used to promote everything from a product to a country with the latest patented 3D technology. Negotiations are also well advanced which will take us in to the music and television industries.

Titanium derives its strength and specificity from its culture and values. It takes pride in its team, and its partners. If you are looking for an investor with industry expertise and a clear conscience, Titanium Capital may be the perfect fit to breathe extra life into your project, leading to fast expansion and speedy returns which contribute to the progression of humanity.

For more details check our website: www.titaniumcapitalpteltd.com

1 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

reinnovating banking and finance ¡ Aggregate

¡ Cyber security

¡ Pharmaceutical manufacturing

¡ Agriculture

¡ Ecofarming

¡ Pharmaceutical research

¡ Airport Construction

¡ Education

¡ Port management & construction

¡ Airport Terminal Concession Development

¡ Engineering & Construction

¡ Power plants

¡ Architecture

¡ Environmental Solutions

¡ Property

¡ Auditing

¡ Environmental development

¡ Real Estate

¡ Aviation

¡ Fashion manufacturing

¡ Recycling

¡ Aviation Security

¡ Finance

¡ Refining - Oil & Gas

¡ Banking

¡ Gold & Hedge funds

¡ Satellite broadcasting management

¡ Border control

¡ Hospital construction

¡ Satellite manufacturing

¡ Branding

¡ Hospitality

¡ Security Solutions

¡ Broadcast facility construction

¡ Hybrid Engine technology

¡ Ship building

¡ Building material

¡ Infrastructure

¡ Shipping

¡ Cable manufacturing & laying

¡ Insurance

¡ Software development

¡ Cargo Terminal Planning

¡ International Trade

¡ Sponsorship

¡ Clothing Design

¡ Management

¡ Strategies

¡ Coastal Terraforming

¡ Marina development

¡ TV & Film

¡ Coins Minting Facilities

¡ Maritime Development

¡ Technologies

¡ Commodity trading

¡ Marketing

¡ Telecommunications

¡ Construction

¡ Mills

¡ Tunnel Construction

¡ Consultancy

¡ Mining

¡ Water Management

¡ Currency Printing Facilities

¡ Mobile Network Construction

¡ Water Treatments

WE TURN YOUR GREAT IDEAS INTO REALITY WITH UP TO 80% FUNDING Albania | Algeria | Angola | Antigua | Argentina | Armenia | Australia | Austria | Azerbaijan | Bahamas | Bahrain | Bangladesh Barbados | Belarus | Belgium | Benin | Bolivia | Bosnia & Herzegovina | Brazil | Brunei | Bulgaria | Burkina Faso | Cabo Verde Cameroon | Canada | Central African Republic | Chad | Chile | China | Colombia | Comoros | Congo | Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire | Croatia | Cuba | Cyprus | Czech Republic | Denmark | Djibouti | Dominica | Dominican Republic | Ecuador | Egypt El Salvador | Equatorial Guinea | Estonia | Ethiopia | Fiji | Finland | France | Gabon | Gambia | Georgia | Germany | Ghana Greece | Grenada | Guatemala | Guinea | Guinea-Bissau | Guyana | Haiti | Honduras | Hungary | Iceland | India | Indonesia Iran | Iraq | Ireland | Italy | JamaicA | Jordan | Kazakhstan | Kenya | Kosovo | Kuwait | Kyrgyzstan | Laos | Latvia | Lebanon Liberia | Libya | Liechtenstein | Lithuania | Luxembourg | Macedonia | Madagascar | Malaysia | Maldives | Mali | Malta Marshall Islands | Mauritania | Mauritius | Mexico | Moldova | Monaco | Montenegro | Morocco | Mozambique | Myanmar Namibia | Nepal | Netherlands | Netherland Antilles | New Zealand | Nicaragua | Niger | Nigeria | Norway | Oman | Pakistan Palestine | Panama | Paraguay | Peru | Philippines | Poland | Portugal | Qatar | Romania | Russia | St. Kitts and Nevis | St. Lucia St. Vincent & The Grenadines | Samoa | San Marino | Sao Tome & Principe | Saudi Arabia | Senegal | Serbia | Seychelles Sierra Leone | Singapore | Slovakia | Slovenia | Somalia | South Africa | South Sudan | Spain | Sri Lanka | Sudan | Sweden Switzerland | Syria | Tajikistan | Tanzania | Thailand | Trinidad & Tobago | Tunisia | Turkey | Uganda | Ukraine United Arab Emirates | UK | USA | Uruguay | Uzbekistan | Venezuela | Vietnam | Yemen | Zambia | Zimbabwe

www.titaniumcapitalpte.com

Gallery 4, Lloyds Building, 14 Leadenhall Street, London EC3 Email: info@titaniumcapital.org Phone :+44.(0)2.072.543.707 | Mobile :+44.(0)7.936.936.777

A sister company of THE SPECIALISTS - HENRY ABDO & CO

NAVIGATING THROUGH THE VALLEY OF DEATH The Valley of Death, as it is commonly known, is a phase that is feared by many start-ups and small companies.

This is when finances are running dry and the company’s product or service needs a further boost of investment.

Careful management of finances is critical at this stage of a company’s life and each spend has to be carefully considered. Investing in expensive equipment that might only be used occasionally, but is essential for developing the product or service, is something that needs to be robustly justified.

By Dr. Izhar Ul-Haq

Access to some laboratory equipment can often be obtained through third parties such as consultancies and other serviceproviding agencies but this can be expensive and sometimes time consuming. However, there is another, much more cost effective option available. The UK has some world class equipment at its national laboratories that provide large scale science facilities, such as high intensity x-ray sources, high power lasers and neutron sources, for UK researchers.

These are operated by the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), and as part of its portfolio of high-tech science equipment and expertise, the STFC manages the Innovation Technology Access Centre which consists of a suite of facilities that are readily available to industry.

Because the Innovation Technology Access Centre operates on a notfor-profit basis items such as x-ray diffraction systems, benchtop electron microscopes, clean rooms, etc. can be accessed easily and quickly at a very reasonable cost.

In addition to the equipment and

lab space, there is ready provision for hot desking with access to the usual facilities such as the internet, etc. For a more permanent base however, SMEs can set up an office or lab at one of STFC’s campuses that are located across the UK. Sci-Tech Daresbury near Warrington has a number of buildings dedicated to providing such accommodation and the Harwell Campus near Oxford also offers similar facilities. Setting up office at such locations can have significant advantages. For instance, Sci-Tech Daresbury is home to over 100 high-tech companies and such a community of like-minded people is in itself a superb catalyst in helping to form collaborative projects. To further encourage networking and partnership-forming the campus regularly hosts business breakfasts which are attended by delegates from across the North West.

In actual fact, STFC’s activities in support of SMEs extends much further than just offering equipment and office space. The Higgs Centre for Innovation at the Royal Observatory Edinburgh for example, which is due for completion

1 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

in 2017, will provide a much more comprehensive support package. It will be dedicated to Start-ups and SMEs, housing both business incubation and industrially-focussed NanoSat test facilities, and provide provision for business training, technical expertise, access to IP management and a variety of networking opportunities.

Furthermore, Sci-Tech Daresbury has recently set up the Campus Technology Hub; a purpose-built engineering facility that provides a focal point where businesses, universities and research organisations can work in partnership to tackle engineering challenges. It was designed in particular to address the many challenges faced

by SMEs, such as limitations in facilities and resource when moving from the concept to a prototype stage. The Campus Technology Hub aims to provide an affordable mechanism for entrepreneurs and others to access an impressive array of technologies, equipment and expertise, eliminating the need to develop, buy or pay prohibitively high prices to use engineering R&D capabilities.

Equipment such as polymer and metal

3-D printers, e-beam labs as well as a machining centre are all available through the Campus Technology Hub thereby negating the need for companies to invest in such expensive facilities themselves.

Another mechanism that is available for more in-depth R&D work is the STFC’s pioneering Collaborative R&D programme. This allows industry access to state-of-art large scale facilities, specifically the ISIS Neutron and Muon source. Provided certain criteria are met, the collaboration provides quick and easy access to the facility for an in-kind contribution from the collaborating partner. The programme is aimed at helping overcome key challenges and thereby increase productivity.

Furthermore, partnerships are highly valued by STFC and play an important role in supporting start-ups and SMEs. STFC manages the ESA Business Incubation Centre Harwell on behalf of the European Space Agency. This is designed to support the uptake of technology which was developed for the space sector but can be employed elsewhere in a non-space

environment. The programme typically provides financial support, office accommodation, business support and technical expertise to get the company off the ground as quickly as possible.

Additional support is later provided to help source follow-on funding as well as access to a wide range of contacts through ESA’s European-wide technology transfer network.

The ESA Business Incubation Centre Harwell programme is so successful that a similar model is also being operated by STFC in collaboration with CERN. Young companies developing high energy physics technology for alternative applications outside this area can apply for funding, business and technical support to take their technology closer to market and increase their chances of success.

Of course STFC itself has a successful innovations programme that encourages entrepreneurship and the development of commercial products and services from its own technology base. Companies such as Cobalt Light Systems, Quantum Detectors, Oxensis, The Electrospinning Company to name just a few, have all

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 1 7

been the product of STFC’s science and technology.

Although STFC designs, builds, operates and develops world leading large scale science facilities such as particle accelerators, and lasers with a 1000,000,000,000,000 watts of power, helping the UK’s economy to flourish by supporting industry through access to equipment, offices and world leading science and technology expertise, is a key and integral part of its mission. Working closely with our key partners such as Innovate UK, the Knowledge Transfer Network and the Catapult Centres (such as the Satellite Applications Catapult located on the Harwell Campus), STFC is continually looking at new and more effective ways in which it can support the UK’s industrial base.

So, if you are start-up, microenterprise, SME or even a multinational, why not contact STFC and explore the support that might be available to you!

THE UK’S INNOVATION POWERHOUSE

By Paul Wright, CEO United Kingdom Science Park Association

A YEAR OR SO AGO THE UNITED KINGDOM SCIENCE PARK ASSOCIATION RECENTLY CELEBRATED OUR 30THANNIVERSARY AND OUR CONFERENCE AND EXHIBITION HIGHLIGHTED THE CONTINUING VIBRANCY OF OUR SCIENCE PARKS, RESEARCH PARKS, TECHNOLOGY PARKS, INNOVATION CENTRES AND INNOVATION-LED INCUBATORS, AND THE VITAL CONTRIBUTION OUR MEMBERS MAKE TO DELIVERING THE UK INNOVATION AGENDA.

........................................

UK Science Parks have now reached a level of maturity with many of our Members being active for well over 30 years, and we have over 120 locations throughout the UK managing excellent environments that support the formation and growth of knowledgebased businesses.

Our Members work tirelessly to join up the various parts of the innovation journey, from the earliest stages of growth in an incubator or business accelerator, to the maturity of major international companies located on Member campuses.

Many of our Members have effective and intricate relationships with Universities and other centers of learning, and through offering appropriate infrastructure, resources,

access to funding, and other innovation and business support services, will make a significant contribution to the development of the new regional “powerhouses” in areas such as the Midlands and the North West.

THE CURRENT PICTURE UKSPA’s 2015 survey of our Members provided a valuable evidence base that demonstrated the level of activity, and impact of our sector in providing the vital engine room for accelerating the growth of the UK Knowledge economy.

Whilst the annual growth rate of the Association has been fairly impressive over the last 15 years, our most recent survey has highlighted some important trends within our sector, and provided us with an accurate picture of the changing nature of the environment our science parks, research parks, innovation centres and technology incubators are working in today.

For example, we know that 72% of our Member sites have tenant activity in Life Sciences, 22% in Satellite Applications, 45% in Big Data, and that a high proportion of UKSPA Member locations also have tenants focused on the Eight Great Technologies and BIS Industrial Strategies.

Our Members have the ability, and capacity to significantly influence the innovation supply chain both locally,

1 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

regionally and internationally. 93% of our Members feel that it is very important for their role as the centre for technology and innovation in their local area to be recognized by government and all local stakeholders.

The national demand and supply of suitable space for start-up and growth firms needs to be more fully understood, but it is worth noting that at the time of writing there are early signs that lack of suitable accommodation in some regions may be choking growth at a critical time.

55% of our Members report demand for space from growing companies, but have no further room for expansion.

UKSPA Members also provide accommodation and innovation and business support services that are attractive as soft-landing zones to overseas science and technology firms wishing to settle in the UK. 72% of our Members provide access to services for inward investment, and I believe this offering will only continue to grow in importance as tenants on our firms are increasingly operating on a global scale, and as our research and science base remains an attractive source of Intellectual Property for overseas firms.

Science Parks, Innovation and the Global Economy A recent report, ‘Contributors and Detractors: Ranking Countries’ Impact on Global Innovation’ published by the Information Technology and

© Illustration by Achraf Amiri

Innovation Foundation was discussed by our Members at a recent UKSPA conference.

The report placed the UK as the third best place in the world for innovation; behind Finland and Sweden and ranking us higher than the United States, France and Germany.

Human Capital - which addresses the quality and quantity of universities, the number of STEM graduates and number of researchers was also identified as a particular strength. As a source of innovative inventions and concepts our UK universities have a proud record; although the effective translation of these into innovative new products and services is perhaps seen as a little less successful.

So, whilst there are significant relationships between our Science Parks and our Universities, (in our most recent survey 87% of our Members believe that their collaborative work with Universities and Research Institutions is of great importance) and our Science Parks exist to encourage growth of technology businesses, we still need to investigate more ways to encourage greater engagement between our tenants/clients and the Universities we are so closely associated with. This is not to say that our Members do not find ways to effectively catalyse the translation of innovative inventions/concepts into new products and services, but it appears there is much more work to be done in this area over the coming

years. The impact of such efforts could be significant given the intimate relationship that Science Parks have with Universities.

SCIENCE PARKS: A REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE The current devolution debate, the growth of innovation districts, government support for Catapult Centres, Science and Innovation Audits and the imminent publication of the Government’s Innovation Plan demonstrates that “Place” is now being recognised as being of vital importance to economic growth.

Regional groupings of Science Parks and other innovation locations could give the sector a stronger voice in the devolution debates by promoting the addition of ‘coal face’ value and experience to the discussions on future innovation ecosystem development.

Science Parks working together will be able to multiply the effects of targeted interventions to promote knowledge economy growth.

The UK should be proud of the truly innovative communities that are clustered on, in and around our Science Parks and innovation environments, but without wishing to finish on a low note, the UK government has some way to go to accept and recognize the value of our sector compared to most other governments in Europe, and indeed throughout the world.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 1 9

O

ur Members work tirelessly to join up the various parts of the innovation journey, from the earliest stages of growth in an incubator or business accelerator, to the maturity of major international companies located on Member campuses.

2nd INTERNATIONAL

CONFERENCE ON APPAREL, TEXTILES AND

FASHION DESIGN

24TH & 25TH MARCH 2017

ICATFD 2017 Colombo Sri Lanka www.atafd.com

A forum for presentations and discussion of recent, on-going research and innovations for the apparel industry, with leaders from academia and industry worldwide. Day two hosts a dedicated symposium Colour in Fashion - Making it Fast, Lean and Green.

Speaker’s from International brands, manufactures and global service providers who are shaping how we do business today and the future. Share insight to what really works and makes a difference.

Demonstrations, exhibitions and discussion forums, for a powerful not to be missed day.

A spectacular choreographed fashion runway, a show case of our global fashion designers of the future.

Cultural tour day of the beautiful island of Sri Lanka.

Time for building important business connections while enjoying relaxed conference breaks, lunches and dinner.

A valuable event for Industry professionals, designers, buyers, merchandisers, Technologists production, IT, quality and sustainability managers colourists, educators and students, all will benefit with new knowledge for business advantage and as part of a CPD program.

CONFERENCE CO CHAIR Ms. Janet Best Fashion colour management specialist CCol FSDC, CText ATI UK

CHOREOGRAPHER & CREATIVE DESIGN HEAD Mr. Muhammad Fawad Noori Fashion designer design consultant GIFT University Pakistan

CONFERENCE KEYNOTE & CO CHAIR Mr. Georg Andreas Suhr CONFERENCE TRACK • • • • • • • •

Fashion and Colour Trends Innovation in Clothing Science and Technology Garment Industry and Merchandising Sustainability fashion Modest fashion Fashion and Textile Product Design Spinning, Weaving and Knitting Technology Colouration

International Brand Consultant Member of the Executive Board at Global Sustainable Fashion Week Germany

FOR INQUIRIES WHATTSAPP/VIBER number: +94 773 940 838 Email: helpdesk@gariteam.com

WHY CORPORATES ARE OPENING THEIR DOORS NESTA IS THE UK’s INNOVATION FOUNDATION

By Chris Haley, head of startups and new technology research at Nesta

Innovation is key to sustained corporate success. It is the only long-term way in which firms can maintain their market share against competitors. Reliance on perpetual ‘business as usual’ - simply hoping that the gales of creative destruction will abate - is not a sound strategy for corporate survival. Yet it can be very difficult to get right. Why is this, and what are successful corporate innovators doing differently?

To begin, we should note that innovation is not identical to research and development, but encompasses all the means by which new ideas create value, realised in new products, services, processes or business models. To put it into context, the most recent data from the ONS shows that UK business expenditure on R&D in 2014 was around £20 billion, led by the pharma, IT, automotive and aerospace sectors. Whilst this is not small change, according to the UK Innovation Index it represents only around 13 percent of firms’ investment in intangible assets and new knowledge production - roughly equivalent to firms’ spend on design, and significantly less than workforce training, organisational change and new software.

Whatever the form of innovation, though, one common challenge is that the return on investment is often inherently difficult to measure. Some benefits may only accrue many years after the fact: the time to market for new therapeutic drugs, for instance, is often well over a decade. The upside may also be quite diffuse: there is clearly benefit in oil companies improving their reservoir models, for

example, but this may be the result of numerous projects, with the resulting knowledge spread across multiple parts of the organisation. Other impact may be literally invisible: a nuclear power firm innovating to reduce failure, for example, may produce safer plants but succeeds primarily through continuing to avoid meltdowns and other accidents.

That is not to say that financial returns don’t exist. Evidence demonstrates that innovative firms grow twice as fast as non-innovators, in terms of both employment and sales, whilst on the specific matter of corporate R&D, the long-term average internal rate of return has been variously estimated at around 10–15 per cent, and as high as 30 per cent in some studies. However, such arguments often carry little weight with shareholders, especially those with short-term horizons. This makes innovation budgets a common casualty of cost-cutting.

Despite this, most firms do innovate on some level. Across the EU, almost three quarters of companies told the European Commission they introduced new or significantly improved services, goods or processes in the past three

2 1 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

years. Unfortunately, the vast bulk of this innovation activity was, or is, quite incremental - making tweaks to existing products or services - whilst studies suggests that it is actually a small number of radical innovations which yield the majority of the profit.

If that is so, why don’t companies embrace radical innovation more readily? The short answer is that it is much easier said than done.

Much radical innovation is highly disruptive and inherently ‘competencedestroying’ - that is, rendering obsolete many of the firm’s existing core capabilities, rather than building upon them. Moreover, it is often very difficult for firms to appreciate the potential of such innovations: as Clayton Christensen described in his classic work, The Innovator’s Dilemma, companies typically assess emerging or rival technologies using existing but outdated values, unaware that the basis on which products or services compete may be about to change.

MP3 players did not compete with vinyl for richness of sound, for instance, but brought convenience and portability to the party instead.

T

he past five years or so have seen a significant increase in the numbers of larger firms working with newly-founded businesses... startups

These strategic challenges require senior management to place big bets on which competencies to develop and which to let go. However, obstacles to innovation exist not just at the strategic level but also at structural, cultural and procedural levels, too.

Many firms are familiar with some version of the ‘not-invented-here’ syndrome, for instance, which biases them towards pet projects and established ways of working. This is a genuine problem - but it is quite wrong to think that risk-averse, innovationhostile, corporate culture only arises because of bias and irrationality.

Often it is exactly the reverse: that employees are responding rationally, but simply have insufficient incentives to act outside their immediate job description or take risks which might ultimately prove harmful to their career.

Innovation always involves risk, and despite many large firms echoing the startup mantra of ‘embracing failure’, most employees are aware that failure is often career-limiting.

Additional impediments may be caused by relatively mundane, procedural problems. It is very common for organisations to optimise

themselves over time towards exploiting existing opportunities, streamlining their processes for efficiency of day-to-day operations. Yet such streamlining often comes at the expense of flexibility, making it more difficult for the firm to explore new opportunities which don’t ‘fit’: thus core competencies ossify into ‘core rigidities’.

and process’. The attractions of open innovation include the promise of acting, or reacting, with more nimbleness and flexibility; accessing complementary assets; gaining access a wider range of ideas; changing risks; and experimenting with more potential directions than would be possible with internal resources alone.

So how are firms reacting to these challenges? Many organisations, recognising that their usual corporate environment is fundamentally hostile to innovation, start by creating an ‘innovation unit’ of some kind to insulate home-grown ideas. Provided that this unit is given sufficient time and resources, and that the insulation is not so thick that the unit loses sight of the corporate’s needs, this may not be a bad idea. But in itself it is rarely enough to solve the varied issues the firm faces.

Open innovation is not a new notion (the term was coined by Henry Chesbrough in 2003, but clearly has a much older history). However, what is novel is both the extent of the practice and some of the specific models that are being adopted. In particular, the past five years or so have seen a significant increase in the numbers of larger firms working with newly-founded businesses - startups - through corporate venturing, accelerators, sponsored hackathons, prize competitions, the provision of free tools, and various other mechanisms. This is especially observable in high-tech industries where the rate of innovation is rapid and where knowledge is distributed across multiple organisations, making it more difficult to innovate alone.

One noticeable trend over the past few years has been an increasing move towards open innovation - neatly defined by innovation consultancy 100%Open as ‘innovating with external partners in a way that shares the risks and rewards of the outcome

2 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

Working with startups addresses many of the issues mentioned above: it permits companies to place bets on emerging technology without necessarily having to build-up new competencies. In the words of one corporate innovation manager ‘it allows us to play in the space of the disruptor without being disrupted’. It can circumvent many of the internal obstacles to innovation whilst simultaneously exposing the firm to fresh thinking and dynamic individuals that might ultimately have beneficial cultural spillovers inside the corporate.

In addition, there is some evidence that independent startups can reach market, and profitability, in roughly half the time of corporate spinouts.

For their part, startups are often eager for the insight, routes to market, enhanced credibility and cash which the corporate can provide. As a result, new startup programmes run by corporates have expanded at a remarkable rate. According to Nesta’s own research, more than one in three accelerators programmes across Europe are now run or sponsored by corporates - with around 150 having been created in the past five years or so - whilst numbers of corporate

venturing units have also doubled in the same period.

However, corporates would be wrong to see startup collaboration as a panacea. Whilst partnering might lessen the need for certain internal innovation capabilities, it places additional demands on the ability of firms to form, maintain, evaluate and absorb collaborations. This is a skill in itself - and hence increasingly a source of competitive advantage for those who do it well.

There are also unresolved questions about the type of innovation for which startups might or might not be any good. For instance, although the pharma industry regularly works with young biotech startups (as has funded some substantial initiatives to aid this, such as the Stevenage Bioscience Catalyst), it faces deep, technical issues which are unlikely to be resolved without concerted research initiatives like the Structural Genomics Consortium.

More broadly, we also need to improve our evidence of what works: initiatives such as the Innovation Growth Lab, a global project led

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 2 3

by Nesta, help us gather much stronger evidence of what types of innovation collaboration works in what circumstances.

It seems certain that the future of corporate innovation is more open, more collaborative and more engaged with the ‘ecosystem’ around it. Corporate-startup collaboration will continue to grow - and may even become a requirement for many firms rather than an option. Firms of all sizes ignore at their peril the huge potential for mutually beneficial partnerships.

A SPOONFUL OF SUGAR Many drinks companies will be forced to change their products in response to the Chancellor’s new sugar tax.

Shraddha Sisodia, R&D Tax Consultant at Ayming UK explores why this is such a tricky undertaking, and how manufacturers will need to make full use of R&D tax reliefs in order to offset the investment costs.

One of the standout features of George Osborne’s recent budget was the somewhat controversial announcement of an incoming sugar tax on soft drinks. Having been a bee in the bonnet of youth health campaigners for some time, the new levy is squarely aimed at the high-sugar, fizzy drinks that tend to be popular with teenagers, and will come into effect in 2018.

Written by Shraddha Sisodia, R&D Tax Consultant at Ayming UK

While the precise details have yet to be determined, we know the tax will have two levels: a lower band for drinks with sugar content above 5g per 100 millilitres, and a higher one for those with more than 8g per 100 millilitres. Analysis from the Office of Budget Responsibility suggests these two levies will be 18p and 24p per litre respectively.

Although the soft drinks industry has been reducing the sugar content of its drinks for some time, this still presents manufacturers with quite the dilemma.

Do manufacturers simply continue on as before, either passing the levy onto customers or taking the hit themselves – or do they try to innovate and bring their products under one or both of the thresholds? Given the highly competitive and low-margin nature of the market, the former option may not be feasible for most.

But the innovation route is no easy path either. This is not the first time the food and beverage sector has found itself at such a crossroads. Previous clampdowns on salt content forced a

similar wave of innovation. The lesson from that episode, was that tweaking a product to meet external requirements while maintaining brand consistency as far as possible, is a difficult undertaking – requiring substantial time, thought and effort.

It’s a double-bind: the trick is to make the changes while keeping things as similar, and familiar, as possible.

Consumers are creatures of habit, and psychologically extremely fickle and sensitive when it comes to the slightest changes to their favourite products. This especially applies to familiar food and drink products, which many customers will have consumed day in, day out, for much of their lives.

The smallest discrepancy can make a big dent in sales and reputation.

The most obvious point here is the taste of the drink – the high sugar content of many fizzy drinks on the market today goes a long way to defining their taste and flavour. Any classic Coke fans who have had to switch to diet as part of their own diet will be able to attest to this.

2 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

Trying to achieve the same taste with sugar substitutes – or more natural alternatives such as honey and nectar – can create plenty of issues. Sprite’s decision to use ‘Stevia’ (a synthetic sugar alternative) in its drinks is a case in point here. Stevia tastes very similar to sugar, but not quite the same, and consumers can tell the difference: sales of Stevia-based Sprite crashed 9.4 per cent in the year following the ingredient change.

But the difficulty goes well beyond just the issue of ‘objective’ taste or the ingredients list. The branding and overall ‘look and feel’ of the drink can make a huge difference to our sensation of taste; the psychology at play is complex. The infamous Coke/ Pepsi blind test trials are testament to this – many people prefer the taste of Pepsi when the brand is hidden, but find Coke ‘tastes better’ once the brand is known. Pepsi may continually use this in the advertising, but it still hurts them. This effect can extend to features that should intuitively have nothing to do with taste, such as colour and packaging. Witness the

T

he soft drinks industry has been reducing the sugar content of its drinks for some time.

© Illustration by Achraf Amiri

introduction (and swift withdrawal) of ‘green ketchup’ in the early 2000s, or the fact that people will regularly attest that the same drink tastes better from a glass bottle than a tin can.

So, tweaking a drinks product without hurting brand loyalty is a potential minefield. But there are broader manufacturing issues here too.

Companies cannot afford to shut down existing production lines while they undergo the process of testing new recipes. This means installing a second line in the meantime. This will require investment, but it also makes for a quality control issue. Even where the equipment being used is technically identical, new equipment will often make a big difference to the taste of the end product.

All of this amounts to a prolonged and thorny ‘trial and error’ period for drinks companies looking to innovate their way around this problem. The first new recipe is unlikely to work, and what works in the kitchen may not work in the factory. So while 2018 may seem like a long way off, the timing

is actually fairly tight; the required technical processes will likely take anywhere from 6 to 18 months, or perhaps even longer. The fact that the food and beverage sector is one of the most secretive industries out there with regard to methods and recipes, will only elongate the process.

Innovation will therefore mean major investment – new lines, new teams of consultants brought in to help existing specialists, branding, testing, packaging costs, and so on. However, what many drinks manufacturers don’t fully appreciate is that this investment needn’t represent a 100% loss. Much of this innovation can be claimed for under the UK Government’s Research & Development tax schemes.

What is particularly important for businesses is being aware of exactly what constitutes R&D in the eyes of HMRC. In this instance, research into new sugar substitutes and recipes is relatively obvious. However, its scope also reaches far beyond this, to efforts we less readily associate with ‘innovation’. For example, on

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 2 7

the manufacturing side, the costs of activities such as trying different production methodologies, through to the design and development of equipment can be claimed for under the R&D tax credits schemes. Similarly, developments to do with packaging, and advances in logistics and delivery for instance, can also be eligible. Even something as seemingly peripheral as new software to help machines and systems ‘talk to each other’ more efficiently, can count too. And let’s not forget that time and money spent on ‘failed’ projects can be potentially eligible as well.

For many drinks companies the next two years will be a period of intense innovation. For commercial reasons, many will have no choice but to embark on a substantial and involved period of product experimentation in order to reduce the sugar content of their products, without reducing their profits. The least they can do to offset these necessary costs, is ensure they receive the tax breaks they are entitled to, in full.

THE INNOVATIONS OF TOMORROW The last century has been a period of innovation and development. Since 1900, the way we live our day to day lives has changed dramatically due to the progress seen in technology. It is important to recognise how far society has come; at the same time, it is exciting to look ahead to the next developments that may occur in the coming months and years. With that in mind, read on to discover some of the biggest changes posed to alter our everyday existences.

By Daisy Reece

Radio and television are just two of the biggest innovations the media industry has seen over the last century. In recent years, we have seen the world become increasingly more digital. As a result, information is becoming more accessible and many books, journals and newspapers are finding their way to online archives. Yet to ignore books in paper form and journals from the past that may not be online would be to overlook a wealth of information when completing research. Undoubtedly, research is the most time consuming aspect of any project - especially when it comes to books that are not yet online.

But could all that be about to change? It may sound like the stuff of dreams, but scientists at the MIT lab are on the verge of streamlining how long it takes to read a book - and they’ve done it by inventing a camera that can read books without even opening the cover. The age old mantra tells us not to judge a book by its cover, but the camera’s use of terahertz radiation allows it to do just that. The various chemicals the terahertz radiation distinguishes when scanning the book give rise to different reactions, which is how the camera can identify the words and content inside the book’s pages. For now, the prototype of the camera can differentiate between twenty pages and process the content on the first nine pages, but scientists are hoping to develop the technology until entire books can be scanned. Its invention means that we might one day be able to discover the contents of books from eras long before ours, whose delicate, aged pages demand that we not touch them for fear of damage.

2 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

The Egyptians are well known for their invention of papyrus and for their innovative construction techniques. However, did you know that it is also thought that the Egyptians were the first to develop prosthetic limbs? Recently, scientists discovered an Egyptian Mummy with a functional prosthetic toe. Prosthetic limbs have been developing and changing for hundreds of years.

Some of the biggest advances came after the American Civil War, as many veterans were frustrated with the lack of provision for those who had lost a limb. It wasn’t until the Second World War, however, that large scale advances began to take place and scientists started to use aluminium and plastics when creating limbs. Recent times have seen micro processors, computer chips and robotics advance prosthetic legs even further than before. You may have seen Viktoria Modesta in the closing ceremony of the Paralympics in 2012 - her prosthetic leg mirrored the Snow Queen design of the set. It isn’t just the aesthetic that has developed; prosthetic limbs are more comfortable and efficient than before, but now scientists are going even further and working towards wrapping prosthetic limbs in electric skin. This would mean that their material would feel have the same elasticity and responsiveness as your own skin - even as sensitive as the skin on your hands. This is achieved by combining rubber with electronic materials alongside the use of carbon to create the touch sensors. One polymer that the lead developer has used has the ability to heal itself once cut - something unheard of before in the world of prosthetics. The next required stage of the development process is the invention of circuit signals which will send the responses of the skin to the nervous system. Such an advance would be game changing for medicine - amputees would once more be able to experience physical touch the way in which they were once accustomed.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 2 9

Technology has begun to revolutionise the way that art is being created. Tablet devices are providing designers and illustrators with a completely new method of putting pen to paper. In cases such as the new Lenovo tablet, the model constitutes two tablets positioned side by side. One side of the tablet is an Android tablet and the other is a Wacom tablet, which the user can draw on with a pen. The Android tablet shows the design being drawn - a very high tech drawing pad.

The Lenovo tablet isn’t the only option for designers who hope to save their handwritten notes and designs to a digital space.

Wacom has recently released a line of sketchpads that automatically save notes taken by hand, doodles, designs and plans to cloud services and the Wacom Inkspace app. Tablets aren’t the only form of technology changing art around the world - 3D printers are changing the way that we see and experience art. A tool that can make a design a real life structure has never existed From 3D printed replicas of artefacts and 3D printed self portraits to 3D printed garments, it is certainly the case that traditional art forms are not the only way that artists will be expressing their ideas in the future. Another way that art exhibitions are changing with the times is through the inclusion of virtual reality. Virtual reality offers users the chance to interact with a virtual experience - an example of this is the exhibition currently being hosted by Somerset House. The Björk Digital exhibition lets those wearing a headset witness a private performance of the first track of Björk’s Vulnicura album. Innovations in the arts field allow us to be closer to art and the creative process - it is easy to wonder what changes the next year will bring to the already fast developing art scene.

Have a chore or job to do? Trying to make a lifestyle change? Chances are, an app already exists that will make the process much easier. From finding somebody to do your D.I.Y to tracking your diet plan and completing last minute shopping, a single tap of your finger can deliver exactly the service you need. In the last few years, apps for all fields have been growing consistently, and the academic field is no different. For students who are trying to track their timetables as well as upcoming assignments, there are apps that can keep on top of all the information they might need. No less useful for those who have stopped studying and are working, timetable apps are slowly changing students’ approach to studying - remember the days we would keep our timetables in a paper diary? Organisation isn’t the only challenge faced by students and those with long term projects alike - sometimes the hardest part of completing a task is actually starting. Are you a procrastinator? If you find yourself checking your social media feeds constantly whilst completing other work, you just might find that you fall into that category. But don’t worry - there’s an app for that too! You can now download applications that block websites that might be a potential distraction for a certain period of time. Be sure that you can commit for the time period you set yourself however, as such settings are not easily undone. Another growing trend in studying apps are flashcard based applications - users can create their own, and test themselves on the program. Besides exam revision help, assignment help is also available in the form of apps that collect and create your references for you. There’s no doubt that technology is changing our approaches to studying. Until scientists work out how information can be downloaded and stored directly in the brain, it might be your best aid in performing your studies well.

3 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

There are some household items that we are all guilty of taking for granted. When was the last time any of us gave our iron or tumble drier a second glance after using them? Innovative technologies have a way of entering our lives and making us forget that we ever lived without them. Hand washing clothes, for example, is now a thing of the past. The washing machine fast became a staple household item that many would struggle to live without. Often, we opt for a low temperature wash in order to be environmentally friendly. But until now, we have been unable to control how much water is used when we complete a load of laundry. Imagine the money that could be saved if the amount of water used each cycle was cut by say, 80%? That’s exactly what the Xeros Bead Clean domestic appliance will offer users - as well as savings on up to 50% on the cost of heat and detergents. It already seems to be too good to be true, but the new Xeros appliance will also run at a lower temperature and be gentler on clothes, making it a more sustainable practice all round. How will the product achieve these feats? The polymer material the beads are made of absorbs the stains from the clothes, meaning that less detergent is necessary than a machine that uses only water and detergent. Plus, the beads only need to be replaced after hundreds of washes - and their material is entirely recyclable. As excited as we are to revolutionise Sunday night laundry? Unfortunately, the machine is currently only available to businesses across the U.K and North America, but a release date for the domestic version has yet to be confirmed.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 3 1

TOP 10 INNOVATIONS OF THE CENTURY

World- changing innovations have been making life easier for the human race for hundreds of years and could not be possible without inventors with passion and originality. Most of these inventions have become critically important for life as we know it, whilst others have simply enabled humans to communicate effectively. You might picture an inventor as some dishevelled lone genius locked away in some laboratory somewhere, and in some cases this is true (think Einstein and that hairdo). It is also true that many people are needed to get a brilliant idea from the mind of a genius to having real world applications.

In this article, we’ll take a look at the shining innovations of yesterday and today, taking a glimpse at the top 10 inventions of the century, and how they changed the world.

By Candy Lebby AEROPLANE The early 1900’s saw the blooming of a new century and an eagerness and desire in man to explore new methods of transportation. Cars and trains were helpful for humans but finding a way to travel long distances without the difficulty of terrain was yet to be discovered. That is until two brothers, Orvile and Wilbur Wright, designed and built the world’s first successful aircraft in 1902. Named the Wright Glider, the aircraft had controls which allowed a pilot to roll the wings left or right and pitch the nose up and down. The Wright brothers changed the world of aviation forever with their unique invention, and although aeroplanes look very different now compared to then, the flying technique invented by the Wright brothers stayed the same.

TELEVISION Most of us have a television in our homes or have owned one at some point. Many of us find daily entertainment in the television and it’s all thanks to Scottish scientist John Logie Baird - also known as “The Father of Television”. Baird first started experimenting with his invention in 1920, following a brief business spell in London. In 1925, Baird had his breakthrough when he achieved television pictures with light and shade. After demonstrating the working television to members of the Royal Institute in 1926, Baird began having his images transmitted by the BBC although he paid them to do this! The world’s first mass produced television called the televisor was brought out by the Baird company in 1930 and was incredibly popular. Baird created the first television set which was rather bulky and not very easy on the eye. Today we can watch the football on 50 inch sleek plasma screens with 3D effects. If you can afford it, that is.

3 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

NUCLEAR ENERGY Supplying more than 11% of the world’s energy, nuclear power is virtually unlimited, doesn’t pollute the environment and is far more efficient than burning fossil fuels. The potential of nuclear power was first discovered in 1942 when physicist Enrico Fermi created the first selfsustaining nuclear reaction using control rods and uranium. Uranium is the fuel that powers nuclear energy, and is incredibly expensive to extract.

It can also be highly unstable and its radioactive qualities can be harmful to humans, animals and plants. Nuclear power is a controversial topic and though there are many benefits to using it, there is a dangerous and expensive aspect to using this powerful energy source.

RADIO The invention of radio is closely related to the invention of two other inventions: the telegraph and the telephone. This triangle of wireless communications were all discovered and cultivated in the same time period.

It all started with the realisation that radio waves existed, and that we could use these electromagnetic waves to transmit music, pictures, speech, and other data, invisibly through the air. Again, more than one person contributed towards the emergence of radio, and Italian inventor Guglielmo Marconi was one of them. In Italy 1895 he proved the feasibility of radio communication and sent and received the first radio signal.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 3 3

MOBILE PHONE Imagine if there were no mobile phones for us to communicate with friends and family? Well if it had not been for American engineer Martin Cooper, mobiles phones wouldn’t exist. In 1973, Martin Cooper and his team at communications company Motorola created the first cell phone. Cooper envisioned people being free to talk on a portable device and so along with his team they spent three months building the prototype for the portable device, which Cooper went on to publically demonstrate in 1973. Ten years later the company’s first mobile phone the “DynaTAC” went on sale.

c 1

2 abc

3 def

4 ghi

5 jkl

6 mno

7 pqrs

8 tuv

9 wxyz

o

#

INTEGRATED MICROCHIP It is unlikely that computers would have become so common without the invention of the microchip. Apart from inside our computers, we can also find microchips in cars, CD players, televisions and mobile phones. The invention of the microchip was a key stage in the development of computers.

This critical invention is credited to two individuals- Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce. The integrated circuit or microchip is an interconnected set of electrical components which are etched onto a tiny chip. In 1958 the first successful demonstration of the microchip took place.

HALOGEN LIGHT BULB Ever wondered what light bulbs are used at your workplace, or in television studios? Think it’s your garden variety Edison light bulb? If you said yes, you’d be wrong. Many light bulbs used today are halogen lights which use less energy, are made with stronger glass and cost less to produce. The halogen lamp was developed in 1955 by Elmer Fridrich and Emmet Wiley at American company, General Electric. Whilst many others had tried to build halogen lamps they could not figure out how to stop the light bulb from turning black.

Fridrich found that solution when he figured out that you could apply iodine to the surrounding area of the tungsten filament, allowing the bulb to burn at elevated levels.

3 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

ANTI-BIOTICS The discovery of the world’s first anti-biotic Penicillin marked a huge turning point in human history: doctors finally had a tool that could cure their patients of deadly diseases. The story goes that in 1928 in London, bacteriologist Dr Alexandra Fleming returned from a holiday to find a lab that looked like it had been hit by a tornado. Upon examining some bacteria, Fleming noticed that a mould called Penicillin had contaminated his petri dishes and that it prevented the bacteria from growing normally.

After many years of testing, cultivating and researching on the penicillin, the anti-biotic was used during the Second World War where the death rate from bacterial pneumonia went from 18% to 1%. Thanks to his brilliance in finding a much needed cure for many diseases, Fleming was awarded the Noel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. In his now famous acceptance speech he did however warn the world that overuse of Penicillin would lead to bacterial resistance, something that is becoming prevalent today, which is why further innovations in this area are and will always be of vital importance.

DNA Arguably one of the most significant scientific discoveries of the 20th century was the discovery of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953. The two Cambridge students were two of many scientists working on and figuring out the structure of DNA. After much research and hours in science labs the due figured out the correct model for DNA structure: the double helix model. The model they created explained how DNA replicates and how hereditary information is coded in it.

Their findings set the stage for the rapid advances in molecular biology which still continue on today. It is said that when Watson and Crick made the discovery they walked into a local pub and exclaimed “We have found the secret of life!”

LITHIUM-ION BATTERY Power-on-the-go. That’s the promise that batteries deliver. Without rechargeable batteries we wouldn’t be able to use many of our electronics at home. These are popular, high energy, low cost must-haves in the modern home and we wouldn’t have them if it were not for English chemist M.S. Whittingham. Lithiumion batteries have built in electric controllers that control how they charge and discharge. The great thing about lithium-ion batteries is that they prevent overcharging and overheating, which can sometimes cause batteries to explode.

+

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 3 5

KEEPING PACE

WITH THE UK’s CLINICAL RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT As technologies advance and therapeutic areas advance, so do clinical trials. The ways in which we do research are changing. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network the research delivery arm of the National Health Service (NHS) speaks to Innovation Today about conducting commercial trials across the UK’s evolving clinical research landscape.

M

eet Dr Matt Cooper, Business Development and Marketing Director for the NIHR Clinical Research Network. Having worked for the Clinical Research Network since 2006, and for an NHS Trust and AstraZeneca before that, he’s well placed to reflect on how the clinical research operating environment has developed in recent years.

“The role of the Clinical Research Network is to support high-quality research in the NHS, both commercial and non-commercial. Since it was established in 2006 the Network has constantly grown and evolved. As an organisation we have always been driven to adapt and meet the needs of our customers and the clinical research environment we operate within. Just last year the Network completed a significant restructure which will enable us to better serve the research community in the coming years. It’s an ongoing process. We are constantly reviewing and improving the services we offer and looking for new and better ways of doing things so that we can keep pace with the changes that are happening around us.

3 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

REAL WORLD RESEARCH

“Take the Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT), for example. This has been the gold standard of research for over 70 years. It is by far the most scientifically robust model. But the strict inclusion/exclusion criteria that are used to isolate the effects of a specific medicine don’t reflect real the experiences of patients who often have multiple conditions and medications.

“Then came the Salford Lung Study, the first ‘real world’ trial of its kind globally, which continues to be successfully delivered here in England. It combines the scientific robust methodology of an RCT with the benefits of an observational study and involves ‘real’ patients in their normal care environment.

This progression is crucial because treatments developed in this way will ultimately work better and consequently offer much better value for money for the NHS.” “Delivering research in this way is not as straight-forward as the traditional RCT. It requires deeper collaborations and more ground work. This requires a different approach to existing drug development pathways and life-sciences industry business models. But society is demanding new, more effective medicines and quickly. Our role is to demonstrate to the life-sciences industry that there are alternatives to the standard RCT and help them make that transition.”

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 3 7

THE PRECISION PLATFORM

S

imilarly, advances in the delivery of precision medicine trials in the UK which offer a more cost-efficient and potentially faster route to drug registration are gathering momentum. Cooper continues:

“Rapid progress in genomics, particularly in oncology, has led to an increase in the volume of experimental cancer drugs being developed. We needed a logical, systematic way to quickly and efficiently find out which drugs effectively target which tumours in which patients. Here in the UK, the research community has begun using an ‘adaptive platform approach’ to test stratified novel therapeutics.

“It involves a setting up a framework, or ‘platform’, for trials in a specific disease area. Starting a new trial is usually a two year process. But in the platform approach, when a new drug/biomarker combination is developed by a new company, we don’t start a new trial, we simply add a new arm to the existing platform by means of a protocol amendment. This prevents the two year study set-up delay. Built-in flexibility also allows the biomarker definitions to be refined. So the trial will adapt as the science evolves.”

“The vision is to facilitate the platform trial approach across more disease areas as genetic technology and capability expands. Companies seeking biomarkers in a rare patient cohort could then add their study to a platform and tap into wider screening programmes which will identify patients with rare biomarkers faster and more efficiently.”

This approach has sparked interest across the commercial world with Pfizer and AstraZeneca firmly on board and a number of other companies joining the conversation. Cooper extols the virtues of the NHS in making this vision possible.

“Freedom from commercial pressures and a real motivation for collaboration makes the NHS the ideal environment for this next step in clinical trial design. We need life-science companies to recognise that this is the future and to be prepared to adapt, collaborate and participate in the vision.”

3 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

A

further development in the UK is the gradual shift of clinical workload from secondary to primary care – from hospital settings to general practice.

“Many disease areas are safely and solely managed in primary care, such as type 2 diabetes and COPD”, explains Cooper. “Research overheads tend to be less in primary care and advances in information systems and big data have made searches for suitable participants a less complicated process. These factors make primary care fertile ground for clinical research. Our data shows that approximately 40% of UK general practices now participate at in clinical research at some level.

PRIMARY FOCUS

“However, in some ways this shift has outpaced those designing the research. We often encounter protocols and recruitment strategies that have been developed by global life-sciences companies for conduct in hospital settings even though the target patient populations are mostly found within general practice here in the UK. Companies planning to deliver research in the UK can overcome this by engaging with the Clinical Research Network at an early stage. We can advise if they need to develop a protocol with primary care in mind and help them get the right trial to the right place.”

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 3 9

ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL

As these services are free-of-charge and also of benefit in terms of improving study performance, Cooper firmly believes that some companies are missing a trick if they do not engage with the Network: “The Clinical Research Network is part of the NIHR; a globally unique organisation in terms of infrastructure, government funding and commitment and scale. We are pioneers and should be viewed as a test-bed for the life-sciences industry to try out new ways of working in a national healthcare system.

“But some global corporations prefer a ‘one-size fits all’ approach and are ambivalent about country differences - even if they represent positive improvements. This is particularly true of the larger multi-national companies whose size can prevent agility and nimbleness when responding to innovation.”

It’s true to say that some companies have been slow to respond to the Clinical Research Network offering in the UK, but Cooper is confident that there is light on the horizon: “Pharmaceutical companies need to be less constrained and more readily open to innovate and keep pace with the changing environment. Often their large size is a hindrance; we find smaller companies are more able to remain agile to the changing, improving landscape allowing them to take advantage of the unique service provided by the Network.”

“That said, we are also beginning to see success in convincing the bigger corporations to work with us in the same way so that they can enjoy the same benefits. Some of the approaches described here are disruptive and transformative not only to the drug development pathways but also to life-sciences industry business models.

But with progress comes change. We are on a journey and we want to take the life-sciences industry with us.”

NIHR Clinical Research Network Study Support Service

Phone: 00 44 113 34 34 555 | Email: supportmystudy@nihr.ac.uk | Web: www.supportmystudy.nihr.ac.uk

4 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

The Clinical Research Network is the research delivery arm of the NHS The NIHR Clinical Research Network is a government-funded organisation providing infrastructure to support delivery of clinical research in the UK’s National Health Service across all areas of disease and healthcare.

Supporting life-sciences companies to deliver high quality clinical research is an organisational priority. We offer a exible package of free-of-charge services to support development of your study from the outset, or to enhance studies that are already underway. From study set-up to delivery, our dedicated research support workforce aims to ensure your studies complete on time and target, whatever their size or therapeutic area.

In 2015/16 we recruited 605,000 people into clinical research studies. Nearly 35,000 of those participants took part in studies sponsored by the life-sciences industry.

Feasibility

Commercial costing templates

Study set-up

www.supportmystudy.nihr.ac.uk

Model agreements

Study management

There is no cause more worthy than the fight against disease

The discoveries of pioneers such as Alexander Fleming in 1928 and Crick and Watson in 1953 helped to shape the state of modern medicine. Who will follow in their footsteps and shape the state of medicine for future generations?

Situated in a small town named Bayreuth in Germany, SIMFO GmbH are one potential candidate.

Founded in 1996 by Dr. Ulrich Pachmann and with contributions from family members, SIMFO GmbH has developed an effective weapon to help detect and characterize tumour cells in the blood: the Maintrac method.

What if you could detect the presence of cancerous cells sooner rather than later? What if you could determine which treatment might work best for the patient? What if you could catch cancer quicker in the case of a relapse?

The presence of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) in the patient’s blood are accurate biomarkers for cancer. When a patient has a cancerous tumour, the tumour will spread these CTCs into the nearby surrounding blood.

Microscopic view: Relevant living CTC stained with a fluorescent antibody (green), non relevant dead CTC (red and green).

Using the innovative technology which they have christened the maintrac method, these CTCs are detectable earlier and more effectively than with other diagnostic tools. Even in 95% of primary cancer patients maintrac can detect CTCs. If CTCs are found in a patient earlier then treatments can be deployed faster. During treatment, if the CTC count is found to keep increasing, then the treatment can be discarded faster and replaced with a more effective one. After the cancer has gone into remission, CTC count can be monitored and any potential relapse can be dealt with straight away. Also the CTCs can be tested in a quantitative manner for certain characteristics to determine if

medication will work or can be applied, i.e. PDL1, Her2/ neu-Amplification, etc..

With faster detection comes faster prevention, faster treatments and improved relapse discovery where applicable.

The Maintrac method is backed up by clinical proof: more than 600 patients analysed in 13 clinical trials with a focus on breast cancer detection and more than 280 patients were monitored during maintenance therapy (Tamoxifen, Trastuzumab, etc.) and after therapy had completed. The trials demonstrated that detection of CTCs led to an improved diagnosis of whether a treatment should be continued or replaced with another. The importance of the improved clarity afforded to doctors by the Maintrac method cannot be understated.

To further spread their ground-breaking method of tumour cell detection, SIMFO GmbH applied and were accepted for funding via the Horizon 2020 EU Research and Innovation programme. They are now seeking investment so they can further commercialise their technology through refinements to make the process increasingly automatic and also meet all the clinical guidelines required for mass usage. They are aiming to expand their presence outside of Europe and into the Middle Eastern, USA, Russian and Asia-Pacific regions whilst forming partnerships with handpicked laboratories and investment partners worldwide.

The difference between a successful and unsuccessful treatment can be a margin of weeks, even days. The Maintrac method helps to buy patients and doctors more of their most valuable asset... time. More time to diagnose, more time to treat, more time to detect – and hopefully, more time to share with their loved ones.

For further contact information please see below.

Bayreuth, Dr. med. U. Pachmann, Kurpromenade 2, 95448 Bayreuth | +49(0)921/730052 | mail@simfo.de

4 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

he German association for knowledge and technology transfer

echnologieAllianz is the German association for knowledge and technology transfer. The alliance ombines patent marketing and technology transfer agencies, universities and public research ganisations in a single network – a nationwide association representing more than 250 scientific stitutions with over 130,000 scientists.

TECHNOLOGIEALLIANZ

echnologieAllianz – new impulse for knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) echnologieAllianz aims at accelerate the knowledge and technology transfer between science nd industry by offering new impulse and initiatives such as promoting the development of ofessional standards and news tools. The association focuses on improvement of KTT wareness, exchange, qualification and framework and contributes to the recognition and gistration of tech transfer professionals in Germany. Additionally, TechnologieAllianz and its embers TechnologieAllianz are striving towards increasing the IP awareness of scientists by offering technology is the German association for knowledge and technology transfer. The alliance combines ansfer/knowledge trainings and conferences to continue professionalize people working patent marketing and technology transfer agencies, universitiesto and public research organisations in a singlein this network – a nationwide association representing more than 250 scientific institutions with over 130,000 scientists. ey field.

THE GERMAN ASSOCIATION FOR KNOWLEDGE AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

echnologieAllianz – the commercialization network for German academic inventions echnologieAllianz offers professional technology transfer at the interface between science and TechnologieAllianz – new impulse for knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) to the entire range of evaluated and arketplace.

The association provides enterprises with access atented research results from German universities andtransfer research institutions.

TechnologieAllianz aims at accelerate the knowledge and technology between science and industry by offering new impulse and initiatives suchmembers as promoting have the development of professional and news tools. The association focuses echnologieAllianz and its developed a linestandards of customer-oriented services to make on improvement of KTT awareness, exchange, qualification and framework and contributes to the recognition and registration erman high-tech to start-ups, SMEs and and large companies.

Those can of tech transferinventions professionals inavailable Germany. Additionally, TechnologieAllianz its members are striving towards increasing the find a IP awareness of scientists by offering technology transfer/knowledge trainings and conferences to continue to professionalize oad scope of interesting inventions at www.technologieallianz.de, the biggest German website people working in this key field. th IP-protected technology offers from German Research. All inventions (the current portfolio – theare commercialization for German academic inventionsrights have been professionally mounts TechnologieAllianz to over 2,000) centrally network accessible, their property ecured, and they have been prepared in a customer-oriented manner. Moreover, about TechnologieAllianz offers professional technology transfer at the interface between science and marketplace. The association 40 innovation managers withtoproven market and and industry expertise available for qualified provides enterprises with access the entire range of evaluated patented research results are from German universities and research institutions. TechnologieAllianz and its members have developed a line of customer-oriented services to make ssistance.

TechnologieAllianz also offers the Invention Store, a free automatic e-mail service for German high-tech inventions available to start-ups, SMEs and large companies. Those can find a broad scope of interesting utting edge from German research.

Interested companies can register at inventionsinventions at www.technologieallianz.de, the biggest German website with IP-protected technology offers from German Research.

All inventions (the current portfolio amounts to over 2,000) are centrally accessible, their property rights have ww.inventionstore.de with their profile of interests and will then receive free of charge been professionally secured, and they have been prepared in a customer-oriented manner. Moreover, about 140 innovation otifications about offers newly uploaded the database and matchingalsotheir managers withtechnology proven market and industry expertise are available to for qualified assistance. TechnologieAllianz offersrequests. the

Invention Store, a free automatic e-mail service for cutting edge inventions from German research. Interested companies can register at www.inventionstore.de with their profile of interests and will then receive free of charge notifications about echnologieAllianz theuploaded German for international technology offers– newly to thepartner database and matching their requests. technology transfer associations

order to strengthen the network, exchange ideas and experience and push key topics, TechnologieAllianz – the German partner for international technology transfer associations echnologieAllianz has developed collaborations with several national and international networks.

In order to strengthen network, exchange ideas and experience and push key topics, has developed echnologieAllianz is fortheinstance a member of ASTP-Proton and TechnologieAllianz of the Alliance of Technology collaborations with several national and international networks. TechnologieAllianz is for instance a member of ASTP-Proton ransfer Professionals and of the Alliance of(ATTP).

Technology Transfer Professionals (ATTP).

TechnologieAllianz conference 2016 – Transfer 3.0 as an innovation model for the high-tech strategy: 31st Mai 2016,

Frankfurt am Main, Germany echnologieAllianz conference 2016 – Transfer 3.0 as an innovation model for the high-tech st rategy:Scientific 31 Mai 2016, Frankfurt am Main, Germany and industry deciders, political and university representatives, industry and research associations together with cientific prominent and industry deciders, political university industry and research keynote speakers will discuss about howand new innovation modelsrepresentatives, should look like to improve transfer between science and industry. ssociations together with prominent keynote speakers will discuss about how new innovation odels should like to improve transfer between science and industry.

Programlook and registration: www.technologieallianz.de rogram and registration: www.technologieallianz.de

hnologieAllianz e.V. TechnologieAllianz e.V. n office +49 (0) 208 94 15 89 70 Main office PROvendis GmbH info@technologieallianz.de 11-15 lossstr. 11-15c/o PROvendis GmbH Schlossstr. www.technologieallianz.de D-45468 Muelheim an der Ruhr 5468 Muelheim an der Ruhr www.inventionstore.de

+49 (0) 208 94 15 89 70 info@technologieallianz.de www.technologieallianz.de www.inventionstore.de

COLOUR BREATHING RELAXATION TECHNOLOGY

By Alison Bourne In March, I was delighted to be asked to write the very first White Paper for Innovation Today. In 1997, I invented the Colour Breathing Disks©, which has evolved into a mental health and technology innovation. Nineteen years of research and development has created a psychological therapy system with related products to improve patient access to behavioural health. Wellbeing and prevention programmes will soon have the ability to deliver practical and effective CBRT™ (Colour Breathing Relaxation Technique©) Relaxation Support Sessions - which being structured - can demonstrate ‘measurable outcomes’ and also provide users with a tool kit for use at home. The full UK Patent “Apparatus for Use in Colour Breathing” was granted in 2000. CBRT™ also successfully completed the NHS National Innovation Centre Technology Scorecard Process in 2012 (score 92.53%.)

Martin Fish, Director of Innovation Today also introduced me to Titanium Capital PTE Ltd. I am therefore delighted that the offer of 70% funding for an initial £10 million Titanium Capital CBRT™ Programme for global research and company expansion has been made. It is anticipated that CBRT™ will quickly become a global billion dollar business as Titanium Capital are active in 61 countries with a wide management network infrastructure. CBRT™ HIS Ltd is now due to release ≤30% equity upon completion of a professional IPR valuation. Please contact CBRT Healthcare Innovation Systems Ltd directly if this investment opportunity is of interest to you.

UK AND GLOBAL MENTAL HEALTH

In the UK, mental health conditions cost the UK economy £105bn and it is suggested those with severe conditions may have 15-20 years shorter life expectancy. There is a lack of enough money, Doctors, Psychological Therapists and time for quality human interaction in mental health provision. A ‘Parity of Esteem’ pledge was made in 2014 yet UK media carries frequent health stories about individuals in distress - all need caring human contact and social interaction for health and wellbeing. Recent NHS England statistics reveal that of the 1 in 4 people1 who experience mental health problems each year , 75% receive no help despite the NHS spending £9.2bn per year. With a growing number of ‘online supports’ being offered to patients with mental health conditions, technology does not always provide a best solution. It is suggested that up to 70% of GP appointments are stress related conditions. Despite increasing investment where NHS Patients receive talking therapy , there are still areas in the country where patients wait more than 4 months to receive CBT - Cognitive Behavioural Technique. The NHS IAPT programme uses CBT as it is a NICE evidence based psychological therapy intervention to offer NHS patients. There are a growing number of mental health professionals ‘speaking out’ who do not believe that CBT is always effective.

Mental health is a global issue and of growing public health concern. Poor mental health and lack of any appropriate provision can exacerbate anxiety, depression and long term conditions. Depression (major depressive disorder or clinical depression) is a common but serious mood disorder as it causes severe symptoms that affect how you feel, think, and handle daily activities, such as sleeping, eating, or working.

Also called major depressive disorder or clinical depression, it affects how you feel, think and behave and can lead to a variety of emotional and physical problems.

The World Health Organisation projects the global cost of depression will be £30T by 2030. Mental health conditions impact individuals, their families, local communities and the national socio-economic landscapes. A recent study by the California Mental Health Services Authority (CalMHSA) used social marketing to reduce the stigma and discrimination associated with mental illness. They found evidence that their campaign efforts to reach California residents in psychological distress were successful and 120,000 residents may have received services as a result of exposure to their mental health education campaigns. The social media action helped people to not feel inferior or flawed about having a mental health condition and to ‘take positive action.’

CBRT™ (COLOUR BREATHING RELAXATION TECHNIQUE) IS A FIRST TIER MENTAL HEALTH PREVENTION STRATEGY AND RELAXATION SUPPORT INTERVENTION FOR ALL MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMMES

The Colour Breathing Disks® were first created to promote natural relaxation in a book kit form, with Audio and Music CDS and a set of Affirmation Cards. Initial trials with 125 members of the public prior to publication 1998 - 2000 found that looking at the colour breathing Disks was found easier and more effective than creative visualisation.

CBRT™ further evolved with a two day Practitioner Training Programme recognised by the BCMA in 2004. To date, CBRT™ has been used in the UK to support local community based initiatives for stigma and discrimination reduction, suicide prevention, life after cancer and student mental health. Positive users feedback from recent usage in Northern Ireland continues to demonstrate how CBRT™ provides valuable support in recovery and rehabilitation programmes.

4 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

CBRT™ IS A DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION FOR POSITIVE CHANGE

CBRT™ is working to improve mental health outcomes for individuals, families, and communities through having CBRT™ Practitioners available in communities - creating an accessible national grassroots ‘support team’ and network of CBRT™ Relaxation Support Sessions. It has the potential to transform mainstream mental health provision and health prevention programmes and provide effective, low cost therapy treatments for patients experiencing anxiety, depression and long term conditions.

An easy to learn technique, CBRT™ can deliver measurable outcomes as part of clinician led mental health and wellbeing programmes. More importantly - being straightforward and easy to use, people appear to enjoy using the tools .

CBRT™ IS STARTING TO BECOME NHS EVIDENCE BASED

CBRT™ RSS will soon be delivered and evaluated within a community primary care general practice setting by an NHS General Mental Health Practitioner with 25 years experience. The clinical lead has completed the CBRT™ Training Programme, assessment paper and case studies. He estimates that “at least 80% of his known Patients will have already experienced CBT” and of these NHS Patients “most have only found a ‘minimal to moderate’ improvement and are still facing ‘major’ mental health issues.”

Of the NHS patients on record, it is estimated that only 20% have found any form of ‘long term remission’ from their difficulties through using CBT. It is anticipated that many of the trial group participants will not have experienced Colour Breathing or mindfulness based practices before. Each Patient will receive between 4 to 8 individual ‘One to One’ sessions as part of their treatment, with possibility of future inclusion of small CBRT™ group sessions (> 5 patients) for ongoing support. CORE –OM* is a known system of choice for routine outcomes measurement in psychological therapies in the UK and helps fulfil NHS IAPT KPIs* and data standards and requirements and CORE 34 will be used as the Patient outcome measure. It will gauge the effectiveness of the treatment in terms of the way it was viewed by the participants and also whether their mental health conditions or sense of well-being has been improved.

The premise is that this innovation, in which the application of colour is part of the clinical practice, will provide Patients with a new mental health intervention for long term support and create the first NHS evidence base.

USE OF ANTIDEPRESSANTS

The UK now has the seventh highest prescribing rate for antidepressants in the Western world, with around four million Britons taking them each year.

The Quality Watch report “Focus On: Antidepressant prescribing Trends in the prescribing of antidepressants in primary care” provides detailed analysis of this trend.

In 2014: i) There were 53 million prescriptions - twice as many as a decade ago; ii) The Health and Social Care Information Centre found NHS spending on anti-depressants had risen by 33.6 per cent since the previous year, to £282 million.

NHS guidance says anti-depressants should not be offered as the first resort for people with mild to moderate depression, and that such cases should instead be referred for “talking therapy” such as cognitive behavioural therapy. The Telegraph newspaper reported “Staggering rise in prescribing of anti-depressants” mentioning mental health charities ‘concerned that people suffering from depression were being given drugs because other help – such as counselling, which was sometimes more appropriate – was not available.’

WHY IS HEALTHCARE AND INNOVATION TREATED SO DIFFERENTLY IN THE USA?

In the USA, the consumer population spends $38 billion USD a year on CAM (Complementary Alternative Medicine) with a growing use of yoga and meditation for ‘self help’ and wellbeing. It is estimated that over 50 million USA population have an interest in having a holistic and ‘mind-body-spirit’ approach to health. The USA health press often feels 20 to 30 years ahead of the UK as the benefits of ‘quantum healing’ and ‘energy psychology’ are discussed. Providers of holistic practice also have additional business support via a state-wide “Holistic Chambers of Commerce.”

Investment in technology innovation is also different in the USA where failure and ‘mistakes’ made along the way by entrepreneurs. There is also far more support for ‘blue sky’ thinking – surely this is what innovation is all about? A recent start-up called ‘Shyp’ raised a whopping $63 million USD during its start-up phase.

INNOVATION FUNDING SUPPORT NEEDS TO CHANGE - AS A LONE INVENTOR YOU HAVE TO FUND EVERYTHING

CBRT™ has experienced how public innovation funding can bias towards its own people and ‘not for profits’ - many already receiving grant funding from charitable foundations and EU programmes. The ‘small print’ prevents private innovation which has a limited budget. UK Angel investment networks with whom contact has been made - feel that ‘mental health is a matter for the NHS to solve.’ UK investment networks currently seem to focus in technology start-ups, genetics, bioscience, digital/APPs and telemedicine - especially where there are incentives e.g. working with universities and the NHS.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 4 5

Many grants can only be applied for if there is collaboration with academic groups or universities – both already funded by the public. At last, with the investment programme – CBRT™ will be able to apply for an ‘Innovate UK’ grant – as this grant requires the ability to provide a form of matched funding.

CBRT™ HAS CREATED A ‘LEADING EDGE’ RELAXATION INTERVENTION AND COMPACT PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPY WHICH IS USER-FRIENDLY

During 19 years there have been many meetings with people who have the word ‘innovation’ in their titles.

The words ‘innovation’ and innovator are sometimes used freely by people who have never actually invented anything, often protected in a well paid day job, highly privileged positions. Sheltered from the risks of innovation, they often fail to appreciate how ‘time is of the essence’ in the private sector.

With lifestyle costs covered (salary, pension, holiday pay) and innovation outgoings (offices, equipment, meetings, cars, travel, conference costs/ overnight stays, time to research, writing grant applications) being ‘there to use’ – it is no wonder there is a total disparity with private innovation .

A TECHNOLOGY WHICH USES COLOUR SCIENCE

CBRT™ was recently invited to present at the PICS 2016 conference at UCL London with an Abstract paper written about the forthcoming CBRT™ NHS pilot study.

Research indicates how >70% of the population are visual learners. CBRT™ is based on a set of seven compelling/radiant “Colour Breathing Disks©, each with a unique gradient design - as the primary focus - whilst users become aware of how their physical body feels and breathing pattern. Colour Breathing provides a unique form of visual mindfulness, using pure colour as presented in the Colour Breathing Disks® for the focus in relaxation, awareness of the physical body and correct breathing whilst using affirmations (positive psychology) in the ‘present moment.’ The Colour Breathing Disks© system provides an easy to follow gradual body relaxation.

The Colour Breathing Disks© are seven circles of pure colour (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple and magenta) each with a distinctive varying gradient design. They are each presented in individual settings on a white background in the order of (R, O, Y, G, B, P, M) in an easel card, ‘stand alone’ format, with a wire-o-bind attachment mechanism, which enables each CB Disk to be viewed and changed in the correct sequence during the relaxation session.

Each colour relates to a different areas of the body the base of spine, pelvic area, stomach, heart/lungs, throat, forehead and crown areas.

CBRT™ also uses positive affirmations - there are currently 70 CBRT™ Affirmation Cards used during the relaxation process. The user selects which Affirmation cards they wish to use with each Colour Breathing Disk© as part of the process. Professionals have found that users feel more engaged and involved in their relaxation session.

The CBRT™ Initial Response Sheets (IRS) created over 7 years have been found to encourage open dialogue and free communication between the practitioner and the user. Part of the unique CBRT™ relaxation ‘experience’ for individual users is completion of the CBRT™ IRS with their Practitioner before their first and last CBRT™ RSS. IRS form the foundation of how CBRT™ can be used as a ‘Talking Therapy.’ Patients often learn new self care skills and feel self empowered after sessions.

Colours can have a strong emotional or visceral effect and can affect our psychological state.

There is also increasing evidence that colour can

4 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

impact upon health and well-being. The use of light to treat depression and seasonal affective disorder is well established. There is evidence that light of particular colour can have a particular effect on e.g. the human circadian rhythm - linked to various diseases including some cancers, diabetes and depression.

There is growing interest in using colour-related methods as way to alleviate problems caused by anxiety, depression and degenerative conditions such as Dementia as a more sustainable treatment path when compared with drug prescription. The effects of using CBRT™, with any resulting neuroplasticity (and neuropharmacology ‘pre and post treatment’ requirements) are potential areas of future CBRT™ research interest with partners in bioscience and neuroscience.

WHAT IS CBRT™?

CBRT™ is a suitable training programme and intervention for many different levels of professionals working within nursing, allied healthcare, education, social care, counselling CAM, yoga and sports motivation.

The two day CBRT™ Practitioner Training Programme currently requires the post training completion of 40 question assessment paper and 10 case studies.

CBRT™ Practitioners are trained to deliver a quality structured 45 minutes relaxation support session experience, suitable for both 1 to 1 (Practitioner and individual session) and group settings of up to 20 people. The CBRT™ Practitioners trained during the R & D stages often work within mental health, social care and education in their communities.

Dr. K T Birinder trained in 2005, is an NHS GP who uses CBRT™ with her Patients in her Barnsley GP Practice.

OTHER DRIVERS: COMPLEMENTARY HEALTH IS OFTEN NOT ‘REGULATED ENOUGH’ TO PROVIDE A MORE HOLISTIC CHOICE AND SOLUTIONS IN CLINICAL SETTINGS.

Regulation is an area CBRT™ intends to take the lead.

The Colour Breathing Apparatus and Practitioner Training Programme is being prepared for Quality Management Systems ISO: 13485 (Class 1 Medical Device); CE mark for EU healthcare sector, FDA (USA compliance registration) and CPD Training Accreditation with The Royal College of Nursing and other key training organisations. In 2004, Colour Breathing was accepted by the BCMA (British Complementary Medicine Association) as a relaxation technique and training programme. The CBRT™ Practitioner Code of Conduct came into effect and is based on the UK midwifery code.

CBRT™ SUPPORTS INTEGRATED CARE AND IS A BRIDGE BETWEEN CAM AND TRADITIONAL PSYCHIATRIC THERAPIES

An easy to learn technique, CBRT™ has the potential to deliver measurable outcomes as part of clinician led mental health and wellbeing programmes. More importantly - it is a straightforward, easy to use, low cost psychological therapy which people appear to enjoy using.

THE NHS AND GOVERNMENT MUST SUPPORT PRIVATE HEALTHCARE INNOVATION SEEKING PILOTS FOR EVIDENCE

The CBRT™ focus has always been to train nursing, allied healthcare staff and healthcare assistants in the CBRT™ technique so they can deliver CBRT™ Relaxation Support Sessions for NHS patients and create NHS evidence.

Colour Breathing has bootstrapped all costs of concept , research and development since 1997 including 3 years participation in a national schools programme for EI (emotional intelligence) skills called the “Discovery Programme” based in Portsmouth.

The children responded very well to using Colour Breathing as a technique for both relaxation, concentration and focus skills. Colour Breathing also became part of community based mental health & wellbeing programmes in Belfast and Northern Ireland (2005 to present) training groups of Colour Breathing Practitioners with one of the largest charities “Action Mental Health” and “NHS Southern Health Care Foundation Trust.”

In 2009, a SEHTA (South East Health Technology Alliance) Consultant suggested Colour Breathing focus on serving the ‘home healthcare market sector’ first, through NHS entry and create the acronym “CBRT™.”

Since 2010, CBRT™ has prepared for NHS entry and selected by the Department of Health Innovation Policy Team , showcased at the very first 2011 Healthcare Innovation Expo. This was followed by national meetings with NHS Directorate, clinicians and NHS NIHR research teams - all trying to help find suitable funding pathways to create NHS clinical evidence. An NHS NIHR Manager suggested a budget of at least £20 million would be required for the NHS to create a similar new psychological therapy intervention.

Over 18 months, three detailed CBRT™ NHS QIPP Initiatives were written as this was felt to be the way forwards and to seek central funding for the pilots.

These were supported by senior management within the NHS and DH Innovation Policy Team.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 4 7

QIPP National guidelines were included to create cost savings whilst improving quality improvement, productivity and prevention in mental health provision for NHS patients. The three initiatives were written to create NHS evidence for three key groups of patients: those who experience anxiety and depression, children and young people, older people and dementia.

In 2012 CBRT™ was introduced to the DH Innovation Commercial Procurement Team. CBRT™ completed the NHS NIC (National Innovation Centre) Technology Scorecard Process (92.53% score) as a medical device (technology) and psychological therapy system taking four months to complete. The Colour Breathing products and Practitioner Training Programme were included in the review. The initiatives were also verified by other senior NHS Management . Yet despite these outcomes there was no suitable NIC funding for the initiatives!

A Senior NHS Psychological Therapies Commissioning Manager who reviewed the initiatives wrote : “The principles of building confidence and socialisation are good, as commissioners we understand how important this is for a patient’s recovery. The proposal is very good and well presented, with a good evidence base and clinical outcomes. On paper, the savings are good, a reduction in primary care presentations, and this is similar to IAPT where we also know there are reductions in referrals to secondary care.”

For five years, CBRT™ was totally stuck in a ‘chicken and egg situation’ as it was impossible to raise any bank funding to action the NHS pilots and the many letters to different NHS organisations requesting funding support were often ‘lost in the system.’ Our local MP wrote to the Prime Minister David Cameron and Chairman and Chief Executive of NHS England about the situation asking to support CBRT™ as a small healthcare innovation company. There has always been a strong grassroots support for the CBRT™ initiatives - for if you don’t get to pilot something new - how will you ever find out if it actually helps patients?

In 2013, the NHS England National Director of the IAPT (Improving Access to Psychological Therapy) Adult Programmes suggested CBRT™ write to The Secretary of State for health and include that “CBRT™ is a policy matter of national interest.”

The Secretary of State wrote to suggest that CBRT™ apply for a grant with the £5 million RIF Fund (Regional Innovation Fund) and CBRT™ duly submitted 3 applications, one for each initiative - each headed up with a Chief Executive of an NHS Clinical

Commissioning Group as named ‘clinical lead.’

Many were stunned when nothing became of any of the applications. The deadline dates also changed so the £5million innovation money awarded in the January had to be used by 31 March the same year.

CBRT™ was then advised to apply for the next £2.5 million RIF Fund but the criteria had changed and the 3 applications had to be re-written to a maximum £200,000 grant per project. It was then discovered that the criteria had been reverted to a maximum £250,000 grant per project and the deadline dates changed again. It was a chaotic process and CBRT™ had to write to ask what had become of our applications - one application we still don’t know the outcome!

The CBRT™ initiatives can now finally become actioned with investment. These might happen in the NHS but we can now look to run pilot programmes in the USA, Middle East and Australia. It is still very hard to understand why in the 5 years of preparation for NHS entry that no funding could be found - only that the NHS is a closed shop. A senior NHS England clinician did advise me that “In normal circumstances... this type of innovation only happens with clinicians and front line staff”.

Five months of independent NHS due diligence by ‘NHS South of England’ not only supported and recommended the piloting of CBRT™ as an innovation but also aligned the potential NHS patient benefits with the NICE Quality Standards for depression.

It confirmed that the initiatives could potentially help many thousands of patients learn how to relax naturally and perhaps prevent them from having to be given medication and save the NHS more than £18 million per year.

CBRT™ was also selected for poster presentation by an independent BMJ and NHS England panel for the 2013 “Future of Health Conference” for Long Term Conditions.

LONE INVENTORS - NEED FAR MORE ££ SUPPORT FROM THE UK GOVERNMENT AND UNDERSTANDING FROM HIGH STREET BANKS

There is an unsaid presumption in healthcare invention that a scientist or clinician will always invent something superior to the unknown lone inventor. Yet some of the very best inventions were created by ‘lone inventors’ such as Charles Goodyear, Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, etc. Life experiences can contribute to innovation.

The UK Government supports mostly start-up companies and those achieving substantial turnover.

4 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

Many grants are for use in collaboration with universities - who already have their own innovation agenda and are public funded.

Until there is real thirst for culture change and genuine understanding of the actual difficulties involved in private innovation - small UK innovation will continue to suffer - mainly through lack of investment.

LONE INVENTORS NEED IP AND LEGAL SUPPORT WHEN THEIR RIGHTS ARE EXPLOITED. THE UK INTELLECTUAL OFFICE NEEDS TO PROVIDE SOME PRACTICAL SUPPORT IN THE FORM OF SOME IPR INSURANCE COVER. THIS COULD BE INCLUDED IN THE ANNUAL COST OF THE PATENT FEES

This is written from a real and costly experience.

In 2003, a major challenge happened to Colour Breathing at the Frankfurt Book Fair. At this stage, Colour Breathing was in the final stages of finalising the first co-edition contract for publication rights in the USA when a Korean publishing house “Healing Society” had copied my work. The previous year - Hye Seon Kim, chief director Healing Society - had requested a Colour Breathing kit be sent and to include a co-edition contract for these. A FedEx receipt provided signed proof of receipt. Despite Colour Breathing having full copyright and registered Patent , Dr. Ilchi Lee (leader of Dhan Yoga movement in Sedona) claimed full copyright on his version of my work of then 6 years - naming it “Healing Chakra.” A multimillionaire, his version launched (albeit in poor quality print editions) with a 17 state USA tour to his “followers.”

Our first co edition contract (worth an initial £135,000) had to be cancelled due to legal action Legal costs for the next 3 years ran into thousands of pounds and as I had just had a child we did not have the £200,000 minimum legal purse required to take him to court in Arizona. It was estimated that a minimum £1.5 million pounds profits were made in Year One sales of “Healing Chakra” in the USA alone, not including other related activities or language editions.

Just imagine - losing a contract which is ready to sign, then the anticipated income from forecasted future sales (£1.635 million) then also having to fund legal costs. There was no support available from the UK Government (IP Office) or our business bank (RBS) If there had been some form of ‘mechanism’ to support the company to take legal action- there is an excellent chance that some of the initial losses could have been recovered. Our case was deemed ‘strong’ due to factual printed evidence. (Nobody can even guess what the long term company losses could amount to.)

Media attention suggests the UK government

C

BRT™ is working to improve mental health outcomes for individuals, families, and communities.

supports entrepreneurs and female innovators yet the reality is - there is no support from UK Banks. When starting the concept stage of Colour Breathing - our Bank ‘then’ - ‘RBS’ - would not consider any form of long term ‘R & D’ loan. So due to the size of the project finance requirement, we were left with no option but to mortgage and re-mortgage our home - many times - with any profits made having to go straight back into the R & D process. Just think how innovation could be transformed if UK Banks started to support inventors and allow their IPR (valued by specialists) for collateral use against a long term government backed loan? Why not? How much government money is wasted each year in abandoned public technology or health research programmes? The public sector and pharmaceutical industries dominate innovation and research funding. CBRT™ has yet to meet any other healthcare inventors who have been made to face quite so many challenges.

CHANGE IS FINALLY ‘ON THE CARDS’ FOR CBRT™ - THANKS TO THIS £10 MILLION GLOBAL INVESTMENT PROGRAMME OPPORTUNITY

Investors interested in helping to make a real difference in the world of mental health please contact Alison Bourne. CBRT™ has over 60 new consumerfriendly products to launch, many suggested by mental health professionals. CBRT™ strategy includes collaboration through international brand licence agreements and alliances to complete a wide interest Colour Breathing product range for global markets.

With growing consumer interest in yoga, mindfulness, self- help tools and training programs in many territories, CBRT™ will initially launch in the USA , Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and The Middle East. CBRT™ will have its own research teams for new patent applications and exciting research programs. The CBRT™ Advisory Board is currently being formed.

To become part of this global reaching healthcare investment opportunity contact : Alison Bourne, Director CBRT Healthcare Innovation Systems Ltd E: invest@colourbreathing.com | T: 01425 629602

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 4 9

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: Awareness and understanding of intellectual property (IP) is a fundamental driver to growth. The way you create, protect, commercialise and regenerate your ideas is what will set you apart from the competition and give your business an edge. The first step is building a strong, effective and lasting IP portfolio. And it’s not just about the paperwork. It’s about an ongoing, evolving approach that tracks every step of your IP’s lifecycle and wrings every last drop of value from it.

M

y job has evolved considerably over the 30 years I’ve been in practice. It’s farther-reaching, broader-minded and, above all, commercially-focused. And that makes it more rewarding because, together with my clients, I’m helping to generate real, tangible results that actually make a difference.

For IP law practitioners, it’s not enough simply to fill in the right forms at the right time, or to represent clients as and when needed. We also have to take a broad, long-term, commercial view of their IP, from the initial stages of idea creation right through the lifetime of the eventual product.

We have to work in partnership with clients, offering advice, support and expertise proactively as well as reactively. We have to understand their businesses inside out, to really comprehend their aspirations, and to align ourselves so completely with them that we become a seamless part of their team.

My job has evolved considerably over the 30 years I’ve been in practice. It’s farther-reaching, broader-minded and, above all, commercially-focused. And that makes it more rewarding because, together with my clients, I’m helping to generate real, tangible results that actually make a difference.

Step one involves creating or refreshing their portfolio. Together, we look at existing products as well as new ideas. We put together a team with specialist experience in their field. We

look at where protection is needed, and where there are opportunities to add new value through new IP or new uses for existing IP. We’re then in a good place for an ongoing partnership. The attorneys on the team stay up to date with global legal updates — and with our clients’ needs, which can also change over time. It’s a constant process of re-examination and review, and an ongoing evolution of IP strategies to suit.

The IP attorney’s role is multidisciplinary. Personally, I interact with several points of contact within my clients’ organisations. That gives me a broader perspective on their roles and contributions, on the various aspects of the client’s business, on the technologies or processes they use from day to day. That way I’m always sure I have the right team members, with the right levels of experience, in place to support their needs.

For me, the aim is to demystify the intellectual property process. To provide clear, practical advice to every contact. To create an understanding of what IP is, how it works, how it

5 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

contributes to the company so that everyone concerned can be a part of the strategy.

Most of all, it’s about marrying my approach to the client’s needs.

Interacting with so many different types, — individual inventors, R&D innovators, startups, SMEs, academic institutions and international corporates — means adapting the support I provide to what they specifically need. It also keeps me at the cutting edge of the technologies they’re working on, while at the same time creating and developing innovative IP strategies across a range of sectors.

Our wide-ranging client base is one of the reasons for Murgitroyd’s fluid approach. We’re happy to work inhouse, either as an IP team or with the existing IP team. We’ll place individual support in-house if desired, and always have dedicated support at our own premises for each client. So whether we’re there in person or remotely, the client is assured of immediate attention from someone who knows them and understands their needs.

I am often asked for my one essential

piece of advice. It’s simply this — all organisations, no matter their size, should develop an IP culture. They should ensure all colleagues, partners and third parties like suppliers or distributors are aware of the need for strong, protectable, commerciallyfocused IP. Getting everyone involved could lead to ideas contributed from teams on the ground, who know the business from a different point of view from the corporate team. It could provide an insight into the end user experience that alters how things work. If nothing else, it generates fresh perspective, and that’s always a valuable commodity.

I think there’s a fear out there that IP is complex and not for everyone.

It is complex, but equally, it’s also for everyone. I regularly provide in-person IP training or remote webinars that cover basic IP awareness. The sessions are interactive and engaging, they focus on existing products and reallife situations. They show in practice how an IP policy promotes a stronger business.

To sum up, good IP support covers more than paperwork and filing. It covers the entire process from start to finish and back to the start again. It’s an ongoing, ever-evolving relationship between IP service provider and client, and it adds real value.

It’s not difficult to establish an IP culture. There’s even support out there for smaller companies who want to get started, via local growth hubs, the Welsh government or Scottish Enterprise. They’ll help with the cost and set up of IP audits, which are a great place to start.

An ongoing partnership with an expert IP law firm is the surest way to create a strategy and policy that lasts. I’m always happy to have an initial discussion with companies or individuals who’d like to know more, and there’s plenty of accessible, understandable information on the Murgitroyd website. So there’s simply no reason not to get started.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 5 1

Keith Jones is a Director of Patents with Murgitroyd, one of the world’s leading intellectual property attorney firms.

Established in Glasgow in 1975, it’s now among the largest groups of patent and trade mark attorneys in Europe, with over 60 patent and trade mark professionals, 225 staff, 13 offices in the UK, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland and Italy, and further direct representation rights in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. There are also two client liaison offices in the United States.

KING ABDULLAH

UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (KAUST) SAUDI ARABIA

Thuwal Jeddah

KAUST’S INNOVATION ECOSYSTEM BENEFITING TECHNOLOGY-BASED SMES AND STARTUPS ............................................................

Saudi Arabia is making huge efforts to diversify its economy and attract foreign investment.Since joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2005, the Kingdom has started to open up key sectors to foreign investment and promote diversification in a number of key sectors such as renewable energy and clean technology.Saudi Arabia is also making major investments in the infrastructure and education required to make the Kingdom a destination for innovators, researchers, academics, entrepreneurs and investors from around the world.

KAUST AS AN INNOVATION DESTINATION ............................................................

The Kingdom has created a number of new universities, especially to boost science and technology. One educational institution built to diversify and develop this knowledge-based

economy is King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST).

Established in 2009 by Saudi Arabia’s late King Abdullah, KAUST aspires to be a destination for scientific and technological education and research.

It strives to serve as a beacon of knowledge that bridges people and cultures for the betterment of humanity.

King Abdullah envisioned KAUST to be a modern-day Bayt al-Hikma or ‘House of Wisdom,’ the great Baghdad research and education center of the Islamic Golden Age between the 9th and 13th Centuries, situating the new university in the context of Islamic scientific achievement.

The University is a catalyst for innovation, economic development in Saudi Arabia, especially in four areas of global significance – food, water, energy and the environment.

Its mission is to advance science and technology through distinctive and collaborative research integrated with graduate education. Its three Academic Divisions encompass multiple disciplines and 11 Research Centers.

5 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

THE RESULTS OF AUTHENTIC PARTNERING ...........................................................

A core part of KAUST’s strategy to promote economic growth and diversification is to focus on authentic partnering with startups and SMEs. KAUST enables the creation of startups and the growth of SMEs by engaging them on many levels including research collaboration, helping them establish a presence at the Research Park and providing them with scaling up, technology demonstration, and licensing opportunities. It also puts a high priority in investing in tools and state-of-the-art indoor and outdoor facilities that accelerate the innovation process.

This collaboration has produced some strong results for an institution that has been open for almost seven years.

KAUST has a startup rate that matches top U.S. universities, which is a strong performance indicator. It has seen its disclosure rate double during the last fiscal year, which is significantly higher than benchmarks from the Association

E

stablished in 2009

by Saudi Arabia’s late King Abdullah, KAUST aspires to be a destination for scientific and technological education and research. It strives to serve as a beacon of knowledge that bridges people and cultures for the betterment of humanity.

of University Technology Managers.

Academically, KAUST citations in materials science and energy publications match top U.S. and European academic institutions. It was also listed as one of the top institutions in the Middle East region by Nature Index for high-quality science.

CELEBRATING COMMERCIALIZATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP ............................................................

“KAUST commercializes research through its strategically connected innovation and economic development programs,” says Mark Crowell, KAUST’s Vice President of Innovation and Economic Development.

“This ecosystem accelerates both early stage and market ready technologies and provides our partners with a gateway for strategic growth,” adds Crowell.

For example, a variety of entrepreneurship and accelerator programs are offered at the University’s Entrepreneurship Center. KAUST also has state-of-the-art indoor and outdoor facilities. Innovators can use the University’s Proof of Concept Funding Program to accelerate and commercialize their startups.

The KAUST Research and Technology Park is an integral part of the campus.

It provides an environment for technology-based businesses to access the University’s laboratories, technology development facilities, and faculty and student talent.

Several KAUST startups have now grown to a point of leasing space within the Park.

In addition, KAUST’s Industry Collaboration Program or ‘KICP’ provides members with exclusive access to the University’s research, emerging technologies and thriving network of fellow industry partners to collaborate with. Partners come from a variety of important sectors and include Saudi Aramco, SABIC, Boeing, Dow and many others.

PROVIDING FUNDING FOR TECHNOLOGY-BASED STARTUPS ............................................................

The University is also committed to developing startups through a variety of funding options.

KAUST’s Innovation Fund and the newly-established Beacon Fund invest

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 5 3

in high-profile international technology companies willing to establish their operations in Saudi Arabia and benefit from KAUST’s research activities.

The Fund is one of the very few players in Saudi Arabia making venture capital investments in technology-based startups from seed to early-stage.

In November 2015, KAUST hosted a Tech Tour regional event for leading venture capitalists, hightech entrepreneurs and industry and government influencers.

Over the course of three days, 50 teams, including several KAUST startups, pitched to an audience of over 100 investors from Saudi Arabia, the region and the world. To continue developing this ecosystem, a similar Arabian Venture Forum event will also be held in late 2016.

All of these startup efforts and KAUST’s wider innovation ecosystem are starting to get recognized. In October 2015, KAUST received a ‘High Impact Incubator’ award from UBI Global for startup incubation activities in the Kingdom. A number of KAUSTrelated startups were listed as top 100 innovative startups at a Forbes Middle East Event in Riyadh, including three in the top 10. In addition, two KAUST entrepreneurs were recently recognized as “Innovators Under 35” at the MIT Enterprise Forum Arab Startup Competition.

In an era when many institutions worldwide have limited funds or limited ambition, KAUST’s innovation ecosystem allows innovators to collaborate, innovate, thrive and do some bold experimenting.

By establishing a presence at KAUST’s Research and Technology Park, startups and SMEs have direct access the University’s industry partners, laboratories, technology development facilities, and faculty and student talent.

It is an ‘innovation playhouse’ designed for creative collision and knowledgesharing.

DRIVING BUSINESSES FORWARD THROUGH INNOVATION Leading innovation and opportunity is central to the University of Wolverhampton’s mission, and the expertise and experience of its academics can make a substantial difference to the competitiveness of SMEs that engage with it. Research underpins everything the University does, informing teaching, business and society. It’s not just confined to academia; it’s vital for industry success, with research projects involving collaboration with businesses, professional bodies and organisations. The University is fully committed to supporting economic growth through innovation and enterprise, and its research work uncovers findings that translate into real solutions and influence ways of working.

NEW DEVELOPMENTS ............................................................

The University of Wolverhampton Science Park supports business development in science, technology, knowledge-based and creative sectors, with meeting spaces, offices and workshops, as well as support services and close links with academics.

A new £10.1m facility will expand its reach and provide increased opportunities to SMEs. The new Science, Technology and Prototyping Centre is set to provide Category 1 & 2 laboratories on the site for the first time, along with additional workshops and offices. The laboratories will be available for short-term hire as well as longer-term occupancy, an ideal environment in which to capitalise on both the academic resource and physical assets of the University.

The new centre will offer unrivalled specialist space for scientific-based businesses wanting to develop and enhance their research and development activities. It will also allow businesses to access support channels on the Science Park such as the University’s Business Solutions Centre and the Black Country Growth Hub. The facilities and complementary services will be available for partners in critical research programmes such as the Horizon 2020 EU research and innovation programme, enabling them to progress their own projects and growth plans, as well as supporting research programmes.

The three storey development

will provide 4,000 square metres of high quality space and facilities at a premium location on the northern gateway to the city.

The project has been funded through a £4.8m grant from the Growth Deal to the Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership, with the remaining £5.3m coming from the University of Wolverhampton.

University of Wolverhampton Deputy Vice-Chancellor Professor Ian Oakes, said: “This exciting new development will be the only facility of its type in the Black Country and will build on the University’s investment in science and engineering in the last two years.

“It comes at a time when the University has recently completed an investment of some £22m in a new Science Centre on Wolverhampton City Campus, which provides students with world class STEM teaching and research facilities”.

Nigel Babb, Commercial Director at the University of Wolverhampton Science Park added: “The new Science, Technology and Prototyping Centre will attract new businesses to the region involved in science and technologybased areas, helping to support their research and development not only with facilities but by retaining STEM based graduates in the region, who will help these businesses grow.

“Such a development will have a major impact on our local economy through improved competitiveness and new job creation. It will demonstrate the value of investment in research and innovation to the economy and help showcase ambition

5 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

in the City of Wolverhampton.”

Innovative companies who use the Centre, along with those already on the Science Park site, will find opportunities for collaboration, with findings from research and innovation programmes promoted to the tenant base.

EXCHANGING KNOWLEDGE ............................................................

A strong collaborative ethos is key to the success of the University and its work with companies. Nationally, it is one of the leading providers of Knowledge Transfer Partnerships (KTPs) and the Knowledge Exchange and Enterprise Network (KEEN), which are renowned for encouraging innovation and improving profitability within businesses.

The University works closely with companies to solve strategic challenges. This can be because they currently lack the skills or resources to address the challenge or because they are looking to increase the opportunity afforded their business by employing a recent graduate.

Benefits include: • access to University expertise • filling a knowledge gap in the company • engaging a graduate to run a project • adding to existing knowledge in the business • expanding networks

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 5 5

Businesses are offered support from research and development to operations, business processes and market facing customer insights. Many also find the schemes are beneficial from a market competition point of view, to signal a strong University link to both competitors and clients or consumers of their products and services.

As a result of the KEEN programme in the region, businesses which participated benefited from a £25,761 increase in their annual profit, with over 87% of the businesses having created or intending to create jobs for the region.

For SMEs, KEEN has been particularly successful.

Integrated Systems Technologies Ltd (IST), a manufacturer of energy efficient lighting products, is a particular advocate of the programmes.

The company had previously worked with the University of Wolverhampton via classic Knowledge Transfer Partnerships before undertaking a KEEN programme. An initial 18 month project (later extended to 24 months) was devised, to further develop a product design capability to support the company’s research and development efforts.

The project included 3D CAD, securing the new product design process, bringing new products to market, developing prototyping and testing facilities and support for the sales and marketing operation.

IST was open to new technology

and innovation, and product design expertise from the University enabled them to see wider possibilities, including new concepts and new methods of working. New products were produced and the additional profit meant the graduate affiliate secured a permanent position on completion of KEEN. INCREASING INFLUENCE ............................................................

The University has continually retained the European Commission HR Excellence in Research Award. The highly respected award demonstrates a commitment to good working conditions and career development for researchers.

In addition, the last round of assessment for research excellence in the UK saw the University of Wolverhampton ranked at its highest ever level, with all areas submitted having world-leading elements.

University of Wolverhampton researchers are well respected and many take on high profile advisory roles as a result of their work and reputations in their field. Professor Andrew Pollard, from the Faculty of Science and Engineering, is part of a European Technical Committee responsible for setting EN Standards for Construction Products.

The role reflects Professor Pollard’s reputation as a technical expert in the durability of composite materials as well as his engagement with small

5 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

manufacturing companies in the West Midlands.

He acts as a technical expert representing the interests of small manufacturers throughout Europe that have to comply with the new standards.

The University’s research community is growing in size and reputation, making a difference in a number of significant areas regionally, nationally and internationally, and collaborating with industry on large scale projects.

With extensive experience and a proven track record of success in working with business to increase competitiveness, more and more companies understand the benefits of collaborating with the University of Wolverhampton.

For more information on the business support services available contact Business Solutions: T: 01902 321272 E: info@businesssolutionscentres.co.uk Web: businesssolutionscentres.co.uk For information on the University of Wolverhampton Science Park, including details of the new Science, Technology & Prototyping Centre contact: T: 01902 824000 E: enquiries@wolverhamptonsp.co.uk Web: wolverhamptonsp.co.uk University of Wolverhampton Science Park, Glaisher Drive, Wolverhampton, WV10 9RT.

STRATA OUR VISION Our vision is to be the preferred partner to commercial organisations, research institutes and academia for the supply of bespoke laboratory-scale equipment, skid mounted rigs and pilot plants.

OUR MISSION Our mission is to provide world class quality turnkey solutions through bespoke design, manufacture, installation, maintenance and inspection activities in a commercially sustainable manner.

ABOUT US As one of the UK’s leading specialist engineering companies, Strata Technology designs, manufactures, commissions, inspects and maintains custom laboratory-scale equipment, skid mounted rigs and pilot plants in the petroleum, petrochemical, pharmaceutical, fine chemical, subsea, nuclear and water treatment industries, to name but a few, along with working with many of the world’s leading universities.

Strata’s highly qualified and multi-disciplinary project teams of electrical, mechanical, chemical and process engineers work alongside skilled mechanical and electrical technicians to provide its customers with innovative and cost-effective installations for the generation of reliable test data or the manufacture of products, typically in a process-engineering environment.

The company also offers problem-solving consultancy services, including feasibility studies and project evaluation, and inspection services to advise on statutory requirements and carry out preventative maintenance examinations and certification of plant and equipment for health, safety and environmental assurance.

The company is accredited under ISO 9001:2008 for quality management and ISO 17020:2012 for inspection services and is currently working towards the adoption of ISO14001:2015 and OHSAS 18001:2007 quality standards along with Fit for Nuclear (F4N) and Investors in People.

We are the authorised distributor for Quizix Pumps both the UK and France.

As well as the United Kingdom, Strata has worked with customers in the United States, Latin America, Continental Europe, Asia, the Middle East and Australasia.

“

Strata designs and builds pilot plants and bespoke equipment. Our experienced team of Process, Electrical and Mechanical engineers work with you to deliver precision engineered rigs, assembled by our in-house craftsmen. Strata specialises in innovative solutions to unusual or challenging requirements that cannot be met through use of off-the-shelf equipment.”

Rob Courtney, Process Engineer Strata Technology

WWW.STRATA-TECHNOLOGY.COM Contact us on +44 (0) 1932 732 340 or email enquiries@strata-technology.com and find out how we can help you.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 5 7

COMMUNICATION IS SHOUTING, MARKETING IS LISTENING

The Science-to-Business Marketing Research Centre at Münster University of Applied Sciences is world recognised for the development of strategic approaches towards successful commercialisation of research competencies, capacities and results.

The Science-to-Business Marketing Research Centre at Münster University of Applied Sciences is world recognised for the development of strategic approaches towards successful commercialisation of research competencies, capacities and results.

The basis of the centre’s approach is the conviction that market mechanisms also work on research markets. All successful companies are working with marketing strategies. A basic principle of their success is that these companies know exactly the demand of their customers and that they adjust their research, developing

and production to their customers’ needs.

Science-to-Business Marketing aims at a successful marketing of research competencies, capacities and results.

The objective of the Research Centre “Science Marketing” is to develop, test and provide new models, instruments and proceedings for research commercialisation that enable universities to market their research more effectively.

The centre’s field of expertise ranks around and combines three main topics, namely Marketing, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

5 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

Organisation: Science-to-Business Marketing Research Centre Type: Research Centre Address: Johann-Krane-Weg 27 48149 Münster Country: Germany Phone: +49 251 83-65594 Website: www.science-marketing.com Email: denise.becker@fh-muenster.de Contact: Denise Becker

More precisely, the focus topics include but are not limited to: • Science-to-Business Marketing • University-Business Cooperation • Innovation in and through university-industry interaction • Entrepreneurial thinking and acting in universities (Entrepreneurial Universities) • Business development in research organisations • Innovation Management • Knowledge and Technology Transfer

Through successful, large scale national and international research projects, workshops and its own international conference series, the centre is highly experienced in projectdelivery for all stakeholders of the research and innovation ecosystem.

One example of the successful work at the Science-to-Business Research Marketing Centre has been the execution of the largest study into cooperation between Higher Education Institutions and Public and Private Organisations in Europe yet completed (over 6,200 responses) published as The State of European UniversityBusiness Cooperation Report and delivered for the DG Education and Culture in the European Commission.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 5 9

The centre has just recently been awarded with the follow-up project “University-Business Cooperation in Europe: drivers, challenges, and opportunities” of the DG Education and Culture of the European Commission.

Over the course of the project (22 months 15.12.2015-15.10.2017) a Europe-wide study on cooperation between universities and business (UBC) will be undertaken.

For more information on the various activities and outcomes of the Scienceto-Business Research Marketing Centre visit: http://www.science-marketing. com/index/activitiesoutcomes Since the foundation in 2002, the centre has become and is recognised as a key stakeholder in shaping today’s knowledge landscape.

To find out more about the Scienceto-Business Research Marketing Centre please visit our website (www.sciencemarketing.com) or download our latest brochure via: http://www.sciencemarketing.com/pdf/newslettermedia/ s2b_brochure_2015_print.pdf

AFRICA:

THE NEXT FRONTIER FOR DIGITAL INNOVATION

By Professor Barry Dwolatzky, Director: Joburg Centre for Software Engineering (JCSE) at Wits University, Johannesburg

DIGITAL TECH. INNOVATION LIFE CYCLE SKILLS DEVELOPEMENT BUSINESS MODEL DEVELOPEMENT

COMMERCIALISATION

IDEATION

This image is reproduced with the permission of Brainstorm magazine, photographed by Karolina Komendera

THE DIGITAL ECONOMY THRIVES ON INNOVATION. FOR HALF A CENTURY A SEEMINGLY INEXHAUSTIBLE STREAM OF NEW PRODUCTS, DEVICES AND SYSTEMS BASED ON DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY HAS IMPACTED ALMOST EVERY SECTOR OF THE ECONOMY AND HUMAN ENDEAVOR. ESTABLISHED INDUSTRIES HAVE BEEN TRANSFORMED, DISRUPTED AND, IN SOME CASES, DESTROYED BY THE BITS AND BYTES OF THE DIGITAL REVOLUTION. NEW INDUSTRIES HAVE EMERGED AND HAVE CHANGED THE WORLD IN UNEXPECTED WAYS. ............................................................

The digital economy is based on four broad clusters of technology, namely digital hardware, content, software and connectivity. In the coming years, digital hardware innovation will result in the rapid growth of smart devices, wearable technology and the Internet of Things.

Content innovation has resulted in a world in which almost every form of information is collected, manipulated, shared and stored in a digital format.

Software is the glue that brings hardware and content together. And all of this happens in an increasingly

connected world.

It is important to appreciate how and where digital innovation happens in the 21st Century. We are constantly learning new things. The rapid development of new technology implies that there is a constant need for practitioners to acquire new skills. In learning these new skills some practitioners find novel solutions to existing problems – in other words, they innovate. Some of these solutions may be commercialised via existing companies or new startup enterprises. It is then that the magic happens. Each new product or service leads to a new round of learning new skills and the cycle is repeated.

There are two important things about this “digital innovation lifecycle”. It is rapid – an idea can become a new product in weeks – and it requires multidisciplinary inputs. For these reasons it seldom happens in “Mom and Dad’s garage”. Nor does it happen in large corporations (because it is too rapid and often disruptive). In the 21st Century digital innovation happens mostly in “hubs”, “innovation zones” or “co-working areas”. Almost every city in the world now has an area where

6 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

digital enthusiasts gather, innovate and launch startups. London has Silicon Roundabout, Boston has Kendal Square and Nairobi has the iHub. In Johannesburg, South Africa, University of the Witwatersrand, known as Wits University – one of only two African University’s ranked on the international list of top research universities – is setting up a large digital innovation hub, called the Tshimologong Precinct in the Braamfontein inner-city area.

“Tshimologong” is the Setswana word for “place of new beginnings”.

In setting up Tshimologong, we at Wits believe that while Africa certainly has its fair share of problems in search of a solution, we also have a new generation of digital innovators who will find creative solutions to some of these problems. The Tshimologong Precinct, and the strategic partnerships that Wits is setting up around its creation, will provide a conducive space and attract a community of digital innovators into the heart of Africa’s major business hub. Johannesburg could well become the next frontier for the world’s wave of digital innovation.

Africa is rising!

Johannesburg – Africa’s most important and sophisticated business centre is the Hub for Digital Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

At the heart of Johannesburg’s rapidly transforming inner-city centre, Wits University’s Tshimologong Precinct is Africa’s newest Digital Innovation Hub.

Opportunities are available at the Digital Innovation Hub. Become part of Africa’s digital revolution: individuals, companies and organisations from across the world are invited to join our partnership program.

See www.tshimologong.joburg/Partnerships for details.

STRATEGIC FOUNDING PARTNERS Microsoft | IBM | Gauteng Province Dept of E-Government | City of Johannesburg Telkom Future Makers | MMI Group | Airports Company SA (ACSA) Technology Innovation Agency (TIA) | CISCO | Teraco | KMJ Services | Datacentrix

www.tshimologong.joburg/Partnerships

WOMEN IN LEADERSHIP

AT TRANSITIONING/DEVELOPING MARKET ECONOMIES The debate surrounding gender diversity and women’s issues in the professional workplace been fiercely fueled of late. Many have applauded initiatives such as Cheryl Sandberg’s Lean In; debates at the World Economic Forum, EU quota but simultaneously, still, critics are insisting that even the most powerful companies, like Apple, aren’t doing enough to encourage women in their top-level management (Santarino 2014). Yet, many feels that even the debate is organized from the aspect of women at developed markets and again, women peers stem from transitioning or developing market economies are at the periphery. In this qualitative research, CEU Business School attempts to do its homework and figure the opinion of its own ecosystem, the wide circle of talents, students and alumna 70% stem from transitioning and developing market economies to see how they relate to the issue and what is their opinion on the experiences and initiatives women counterparts take and talk about at the developed market economies. The Women in Leadership Research Group at Central European University Business School takes an exploratory view of the global debate; the group has chosen 23 professional women by a set of criteria (including authentic leadership experiences at least 5 years at both, developed and developing market economies) and have posed a set of questions reflecting on the worldwide discussion, and here within, to present the results which aims to set basic hypotheses for further quantitative research and analyses and helps a focused debate on the perspectives of women professionals in transitioning/ developed market economies.

The findings of the research offer some insight into the complexity surrounding the situations and challenges of women in leadership in transitioning countries. In particular, interesting insights were gained into women leaders who change geographic locations, moving from Eastern cultures to Western cultures, or the reverse. This research examines a set of the most pressing key challenges perceived by such women.

Perhaps the most practically applicable and urgent finding of this exploratory research highlighted a need for the discussion itself to take place in an open and productive fashion, both through further academic research, corporate activity, and on an individual scale. One further challenge cited by respondents, when asked to name some of their biggest problems as women in leadership roles in transition economies, was a lack of childcare options or work-life balance support.

Interestingly, the university has access to a wide network of alumni stem from more than 100 countries (more than 70% transitioning/developing market economies and many with mixed cultures) which is a great base for exponential access to peers of alumni at their own further circles, boosting the possibility for data collection, and it is this unique network that comprises the sample population of the survey. Thus, the survey respondents were female alumna of CEU Business School and further members of their personal networks, working in professional management or leadership positions with dual experiences at leadership roles in both developed and developing market economies. Approximately 80% of these respondents originally stem from transitioning economies, but all have had firsthand experience living and/ or working in transitioning levels of economic development.

Furthermore, many of these respondents have a dual perspective from working and/or residing in both developed Western economies and transition economies.

Women in Leadership Research Initiative co-directed by Judit-H Hajos Director of External Relations and Executive Director of the Innovation Project at CEU Business School and Professor Caterina Sganga CEU&CEU Business School www.business.ceu.edu/institute-for-entrepreneurship-andinnovation

6 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

SECTION

WWW.BUSINESS.CEU.EDU

Frankel Leo U. 30-34 1023 Budapest, Hungary E: info@business.ceu.edu

THE 10 MAIN FINDINGS, BASIC HYPOTHESES RESULTED OF THE SURVEY: .........................................................................................

1.

2. 90% respondents think that leadership roles at developed market economies differ to leadership roles at transitioning/developing market economies 3. 100% respondents think that having a dual developed market economy and transitioning economy experience in leadership is an absolutely necessary value-add for any career at any place 4. 90% respondents think that access and opportunity to leadership roles and promotion for women stem from developing market economies are more difficult to obtain at both developed and developing market economies then for their “women and men competitors” stem from developed market economies 5. 95,2% respondents see that entrepreneurship is an alternative to career advancement even if corporate “glass ceiling” is a drawback

6. 63,6% respondents think that access to responsibility, ownership and capital is more difficult for women from transitioning/developing market economies then to developed market economy born and educated women peers

7. 50% respondents think that leadership style difference between women stem from transitioning/developing market economies and developed market economies is not a gender issue 8. 90 % respondents agree that women from developed market economies are closer to power circles in general, given the nature of the global economy and 72 % think this is a fundamental reason why politics and society are less in support of women stem from transitioning/developing economies 9. 72% respondents experience that when portraying good examples (role models) and successes of individual performance on any woman leader from transitioning/ developing market economy the gender differences are recognized but the origins rarely (the fact that career advancement is different and often more difficult to advance due to the nature of transitioning/developing markets)

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 6 3

BREXIT: WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR EU GRANT FUNDING? Dr Caroline Elston-Giroud, European Grants Manager, Ayming UK

Unless you have been asleep for the last few weeks, you will know that the UK is coming to terms with postBrexit politics. No matter which way you voted one thing is certain - that uncertainty reigns. Politicians, citizens, businesses, EU neighbours and global on-lookers are all waiting with baited breath to see what will fill the current void and who will bring ideas and stability to the table.

SO WHAT ABOUT UK SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION IN ALL OF THIS? ..........................................................

From universities, to R&D centres, to business, the UK has been extremely successful in receiving European science funding for over the last twenty years, and Britain’s vote to leave may jeopardise participation in EU funding programmes. Between 2007 and 2013, the UK was second only to Germany in the amount of EU money received for R&D projects. Some would argue that it filled a funding gap left by decreasing National Government funding over the same period.

Since 2014, UK universities have received over 5 billion Euros of funding according to European Commission data. Our innovative SMEs have been equally successful at winning funding in this competitive environment.

The vote for Brexit understandably creates uncertainty over the future status of UK organisations receiving funding for R&D in key areas, from climate change to big data and security.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? ..........................................................

For the foreseeable future, it’s business as usual, but UK organisations will need to get ready to adapt quickly.

During the two years of negotiations once Article 50 is triggered, the UK theoretically maintains the current conditions. Until political leaders decide on the UK’s future path, UK stakeholders should be able to participate in European projects. But where will the money come from?

In practice, Brussels and European leaders do not want to make it easy for the UK, and they will be keen to dissuade other EU countries from following suit.

Across the world, science, technology and innovation are considered vital indicators of a country’s overall health & prosperity. The UK is a key player in all of these fields on the global scene.

Once the dust settles this position should not change, and our politicians must pull-out all the stops to maintain it.

The European Commission has a precedent for this tough approach: in 2014, Switzerland was kicked out of the EU science and technology funding club when they voted to limit immigration. Two years later, the Swiss Government is still paying the price and self-funding the participation of Swiss partners in pan-European technology projects.

We could also come up with outof-the-box, home-grown ways of maintaining financial support for science and innovation. For example, UK companies can currently claim tax credits from the state for their Research & Development activities, but not for their innovation activities.

Perhaps opening doors to different types of funding or extending the activities that can receive financial support could help to maintain our excellent global position in the future.

MAINTAINING THE UK’S STRONG SCIENTIFIC POSITION ..........................................................

Whatever the outcome of the next few years, it’s essential the UK Government outlines concrete measures to maintain access to participating in EU-wide science and technology projects. Furthermore, they must take necessary steps to keep money flowing to researchers and innovators.

Ultimately, the UK has the second largest EU economy and makes major contributions to the overall budget, so there will also be repercussions for the next pan-European science and research funding programme that follows Horizon 2020. In a post-Brexit situation, the UK should seek to make itself a reliable and stable neighbour, rather than an awkward family member.

6 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

© Illustration by Achraf Amiri

Justin Arnesen, Director: R&D Tax & Grants, Ayming UK

Britain’s decision to leave the European Union sent shockwaves through the UK economy and beckoned a period of intense uncertainty. Until Britain’s new relationship with the EU is defined and new trade deals implemented, many UK-based businesses will be preparing for the unknown. This is especially relevant for businesses that benefit from the UK’s R&D tax relief schemes.

HMRC’s R&D tax credit schemes have always been intended to encourage innovation in the UK and increased spending on R&D activities. An incentive adopted by most major economies, R&D tax schemes demonstrate that the country in question is an attractive place to do business.

Initially only available to SMEs, the UK R&D tax schemes now extend to companies of all sizes providing that they are investing in qualifying project activities, are a going concern and are subject to Corporation Tax. Essentially, they offer businesses reductions in payable corporation tax, or even cash credits in some instances, against costs incurred whilst developing new, or improving existing products, services or processes.

WHAT DOES BREXIT MEAN FOR R&D TAX RIGHT NOW? ..........................................................

At the moment, the result of the EU referendum does not have an immediate impact on the R&D tax schemes.

A common misconception is that the funding for UK R&D tax credits comes from the EU. In reality, it’s the UK Government providing the funds for the R&D tax schemes, so this will not be affected by the decision to leave the EU. The news that George Osborne is planning to reduce corporation tax to 15% is, however, an indication that

Government is already encouraging businesses to remain in the UK. Whilst a corporation tax reduction will have a small impact on the net tax benefit available for SMEs under the R&D tax schemes, given that claims are submitted retrospectively and are linked to the corporation tax rates in the year the expenditure occurred, this will not have an immediate impact on businesses’ R&D tax relief.

regulation, meaning they received less tax relief.

This planned alteration to corporation tax should be taken as positive news.

It means changes are being made to maintain Britain’s attractiveness for businesses. This could mean that similar amendments are on the cards to improve the generosity of the R&D tax schemes, in order to encourage continued investment in the UK during a highly uncertain period.

Naturally we don’t know exactly what the post-Brexit Government will choose to do. However, businesses should be reassured that we are highly unlikely to see any government put a stop to the R&D tax schemes.

WHAT WILL THE IMPACT OF BREXIT BE LONGER-TERM? ..........................................................

Once Article 50 is triggered and our two years of negotiations are complete, the UK will officially leave the EU. At this point the UK’s R&D tax schemes will no longer be bound by EU regulations.

One element that may be affected by this change is the impact of the EU’s State Aid regulation on UK R&D tax. At present, businesses that have successfully received other State Aids supporting their innovation have had to reduce the value of their R&D tax claims because of EU State Aid

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 6 5

In a post-Brexit world, the Government will be able to determine exactly how it wants its R&D tax schemes to be structured, with no restrictions from Europe. This could well result in more generous and inclusive R&D tax schemes.

With investments in innovation having a significant impact on GDP and private rates of return averaging 30 per cent, it’s immediately clear why you would want to continue to incentivise R&D and innovation expenditure. In reality, now more than ever, we will need to be ensuring that the UK remains an attractive place to invest in innovation. Given that the UK’s schemes are currently less generous than elsewhere in Europe (France and the Netherlands are particularly lucrative) we will need to do more to continue to attract international investment and maintain strong business growth. From our perspective, businesses should be reassured that the outlook for R&D tax relief in the UK is a positive one.

THE ARAB INVENTORS A COMPANY TO TURN THE ARAB PATENTS INTO PRODUCTS FOR THE ARAB AND GLOBAL MARKET

It started with a meeting at the HQ of the Arab League in Cairo in 2013. Present was the secretary general of The Arab League Dr Nabil Al-Arabi , the second secretary general Dr. Mohammed Altwaijry, the ambassador of Arab culture Mr. Abdullah al Khashramy, various ministers, ambassadors, officials, and businessmen. The First Conference Of The Arab Inventors has been organised by The Arab science club and Dr Henry Abdo CEO of Titanium Capital Pte ltd. It was the inaugural meeting of what was to become the Arab Inventors Company, and it was to be a ground breaking meeting.

For Dr. Henry Abdo, just one item stood atop of the agenda. The Arab failure to take advantage of and make the best of the hundreds of thousands of skilled young people pouring out of universities not only in the Arab World but in top centres of education throughout the world, especially having in mind that we do not lack any human, scientific or economic capabilities. Many of these people have the skills and the intellect to take their people forward. Their inventions, however, inevitably finish up at the bottom of drawers left to rot for ever.

Or even worse to be sold to companies in the West for a pittance and then see them sold back for a fortune.

Dr Al-Arabi made it clear that it was time for those with the power to act for the sake of the coming generations.

He encouraged all the attendants to Imitate Titanium in its efforts towards supporting Arab minds to develop and produce advanced technologies within Arab lands and make a positive difference.

The second Secretary General, Dr. Mohammed Altwaijry, stated that it was time to put an end to slogans; that now was the time to activate Arab Patented Innovations by applying and connecting them to Arab technology, economy, and development.

The agreement that things needed to change started immediately, with The President of the Arab Culture and Information Centre and founder of the Arab Science Club Mr Abdullah Alkhashramy stressing the importance of having a consumer led economy.

The aim is to become a producer led one , with science as the answer. He expressed gratitude to Titanium Capital for sponsoring the conference and H.E. Dr. Al-Arabi, Dr. Altweijry, Dr. Henry Abdo, Dr. Mohammed Alnaschie, Dr. Ibrahim Fawzi, Dr. Wafaa Amer, Dr. Mostapha Othman, Dr. Mamdouh Saad, Dr. Mahmoud Sami, and others for all their valuable inputs.

6 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

D

r Henry Abdo proposed the building of thousands of factories in the 22 member countries. Surely the effort and money could be found to take on turning the thousands of patents registered by Arab entrepreneurs into real live businesses.

THE PROPOSAL: Dr Henry Abdo proposed the building of thousands of factories in the 22 member countries. Surely the effort and money could be found to take on turning the thousands of patents registered by Arab entrepreneurs into real live businesses. He then promptly offered to fund 70% of all costs. His one condition was that the company had to be registered outside the Arab World so no one country could claim ownership and to ensure global transparency.

Dr Al-Arabi agreed that the traditional way of public funding in The Arab World had failed and was now outdated.

Dr. M. Altweijry confirmed that there is unremitting need for supporting the researches and innovations, and that the Arab countries had to match the effort put into innovation by USA and EU, businessmen and institutions.

THE DECISION 1- Creating the company THE ARAB INVENTORS, 44% owned by the Arab World (2% per country) including Golden Shares to be presented to the Arab leaders , 5% public shares, 51% owned by Titanium Capital For investing 70% of the total cost, while 30% of all profits will be split between the inventors, and 70% for The Company.

2- The Arab Science Club will be the host and referral body for all the Inventors.

3- Supporting the Inventors financially and morally in order to create an economic platform to promote regionally and globally and protecting them according to the governing laws

4- A relaxation of government red tape to enable the inventors to get on with their work and not be tied up by bureaucracy.

5- Creating a centralised information platform for the Arab Inventors of the Arab Science Club and to develop the website for them to connect.

6- Sponsoring the innovative, ingenious and brilliant minds and achieve the right patenting for them.

7- Work on issuing new laws and acts that support and protect the Arab innovative Intelligence and retain it locally.

8- Establishing a legal agreement between The Arab Science Club and the Arab Inventors so that the Club can exclusively promote the inventions in their best economical and scientific formats known globally to insure the best Quality.

9- Establishing connections with Arabic universities and technical academies and organising field trips to introduce The Arab Science Club and select competent sponsors who can help ensure that local authorities stick to the decisions of the Arab Summit for Human Resources and Development held in Riyadh in 2013.”

10- To launch branches and offices for the Arab Science Club and the Arab Inventors Company in all the 22 Arab countries.

11- Establishing a technical scientific committee to evaluate, certify, evaluate, and produce accurate economical feasibility studies.

12- Building thousands of factories all over the Arab World.

13- Establishing a Project Control Committee to oversee executing the projects in a timely manner.

14- Inviting The Arab League in coordination with the Arab Ministries of Education to initiate “The Little Inventor” program book, and include it in the School Educational Programs in order to educate the future generations about the importance of Inventions.

THE ACTIONS

1- Hundreds of meetings were held with the concerned parties all over the World.(2013-2016)

2- Tens of thousands of patents were gathered and filtered to pick the Best and most feasible ones.(2013-2016)

3- Hundreds of patents were tested and turned into dummy products.(2013- to present.)

4- Hundreds of plans have been drawn up for the future construction of factories. (2013- to present.)

5- The Arab Science Club for Inventors was legally registered in the United States of America in 2013 and recently in the UK - soon to be done in every country involved with the project.

6- The funds are being set aside by Titanium Capital Pte Ltd for the completion of projects as well as the global marketing budget including a long term strategy in alliance with BLS Global.

7- Serious negotiations were made with prime banks to host the company accounts as the expected start up capital is 50 Billion USD.

For more info, please contact : sam@thearabinventors.com

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 6 7

DSRT - VR – AR - ANIMATION Over view of Titanium Studios

W

hether it’s a building pre visualisation or a new style of door lock we, have the ability and expertise to deliver state of the art visuals.

The team at Titanium have merged with Darkside Studios and other award winning studios. Having worked together for a long period - in some cases nearly 25 years - we are extremely experienced in producing high end graphics at every level. From major Hollywood films (Lost In Space, Deep Blue Sea, Eye In The Sky etc), through to some of the best known shows on TV (Spooks, Hustle, Strikeback, Outcasts, Yonderland, Horizon etc), the Titanium team created the effects that helped bring these shows and many more to life.

Currently we are working on 4 effects heavy TV series and a major animated feature film for Universal Studios, making us one of the busiest and in demand facilities in London. This expertise enables us to deliver tailored solutions for all areas of business not just TV and Film. It might be the visualisation of a new piece of engineering or a photo real depiction of car design not yet created (We did this with the Range Rover LRX that later became the Evoke).

So whether it’s a building pre visualisation (122 Leadenhall St), or a new style of door lock (Maco Locks award winning AR presentation), we have the ability and expertise to deliver state of the art visuals.

We have a reputation for always delivering on time and on budget.

6 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

CUTTING EDGE NEW TECHNOLOGY Titanium Studios Real-Time Rendering The Titanium team are recognised as extremely pioneering, being the first company to commercially use HDR (High Dynamic Range lighting) in a commercial (Launch of the Range Rover mk3 in 2002) and introducing many other new technologies to the market, from photo real terrain generation and fully dynamic smoke visualisation, through to the new Darkside Real Time system (DSRT).

This pioneering spirit has led Titanium Studios to launch the first production ready pipeline solution for rendering animated TV shows in real-time (DSRT). Titanium in conjunction with Epic (Creators of Unreal Tournament) to create a solution that can deliver up to 4K animation at the highest quality ever delivered within typical TV budgets. The aim is to develop this to eventually deliver the standards required for full theatrical film.

An additional feature of the pipeline, is the inclusion of the Otoy Octane GPU render system. This isn’t real-time, but is up to 20 times faster than traditional CPU based rendering solutions and delivers a real world accurate rendering solution that can deliver extremely realistic renders at unprecedented speeds. Titanium are a prime beta test site for this technology along with our film partners Universal Studios.

The DSRT system is at the forefront of rendering technology and is also fully compatible with AR and VR output, giving for the first time a true 360 multi versioning solution within realistic budgets. When combined with our traditional CPU pipeline, Titanium have the ability to create any look from cartoon through to photo-real.

This real-time rendering technology could be applied to architectural or engineering visualization, but is particularly good for real-time interactive walkthroughs where wall colours and furniture choices could be made as you walk around.

It could provide full interactive colour and mechanical changes to a car configuration system, both on location or online at home.

This technological jump has partially been enabled by Titanium leveraging the use of state of the art GPU’s, as opposed to the traditional use of CPU’s in rendering.

The GPU (Graphic Processing Unit) has traditionally been used by the games industry and gamers, but the level of graphic quality and fine detail such as lip-sync and antialiasing have been too low in quality for TV output. So whilst GPU rendering has been used for some visualisation it hasn’t really reached the maturity needed until now.

We have been developing the technology for nearly two years, refining or eliminating the weaknesses traditionally associated with this style of rendering. But it’s also been important for us to look ahead and estimate where the technology would be as we developed the pipeline. This has enabled us to deliver specific levels of quality to match or exceed industry expectations.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 6 9

EXISTING TECHNOLOGY – ONLY BETTER Augmented Reality & Virtual Reality

As a natural extension of our 3D and special effects capabilities we have the ability to create both AR and VR output.

We have been using AR for in house marketing and 3rd party visualisations for 6 years. We were the company who created the AR second screen tests for Channel 4 (Shameless) and have created AR for Coke Cola, Bloodhound, MACO locks, our own film “The Kitchen Games”, which enters production at the end of the year, and many more.

The technology pipeline we use to create AR & VR originate from the new Titanium Real-Time system and so is part of a true 360 degree solution for delivering content across multiple delivery systems. This cutting edge multi versioning pipeline could be applied to engineering or architecture, where a model is first produced for a traditional computer generated experience and is then output for a VR and AR experience with minimal extra cost and of course acts as additional marketing content.

Traditionally each of these additional outputs would require a substantial reworking and subsequently much larger budgets. But with the DSRT it is simply an output option.

AR gives us the ability to use a mobile device as a viewing system of a virtual object triggered from an image on a printed page. The AR object could be an animated character within a set that the viewer can walk around, or a mechanical device that can explode into its component parts for use within a high tech demonstration.

AR could be used for visualising a 1 to 1 scale item such as a settee or a television that a customer needs to see in position in their home.

AR could be used for 3 dimensional viewing of objects in an online catalogue. Simply point the mobile device at a trigger on a printed page, poster site or live on a monitor or TV and the end user can instantly see the product as though real and floating in front of the trigger.

2016 is the launch year of mass market VR, the next 12 months will see its acceptance grow considerably.

7 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

A

t Titanium Studios we love pushing the boundaries and always want to deliver the highest possible visual quality.

There are two major forms of VR created, live action 360 degree camera shoots or fully CG immersive environments such as those created for the game world. The real world applications for this technology are only limited by the imagination.

A virtual tour of a building that’s to be built is an obvious use of the technology, but virtual tours of distant venues such as a world famous museum, a Palace or a long lost city could be a wonderful immersive educational system.

Perhaps a virtual tour of the body or a flight around the wonders of our universe.

MOTION GRAPHICS Whilst 3D in all its forms are our passion, we also have an incredible 2D motion graphics department handling Matte painting, texturing and of course motion graphics. We have been creating motion graphic presentations for the corporate sector for as long as we have done 3D animation. The team currently create work for companies such as Cap Gemini, ACCA, Network Rail, Nationwide and WWF to name but a few. So whilst we may not shout about it as much it is in fact one of the best motion graphics teams in the UK. At Titanium Studios we love what we do, we love pushing the boundaries and always want to deliver the highest possible visual quality obtainable within a given budget. The new state of the art render systems enable us to raise the bar and deliver all your future requirements.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 7 1

EUROPEAN INNOVATION SCOREBOARD

The European Innovation Scoreboard evaluates the innovation levels of European Member States, other European countries, and areas in the region, as well as providing the reader with a detailed comparative analysis. By way of presenting the strengths and weaknesses of national approaches to innovation, the overview highlights the areas that countries should improve or focus upon.

Low business investment and framework conditions limit innovation in the EU. Despite these conditions, the EU continues to rival global innovation, with Sweden leading at the forefront of European innovation. Sweden is closely followed by Denmark, Finland, Germany and the Netherlands. In terms of growth, the four fastest developing innovators are Latvia, Malta, Lithuania and the U.K.

Sourced from

66

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Austria Austria is a Strong Innovator. Innovation performance increased until 2010, but declined strongly in 2011, followed by a strong recovery in 2012 and 2013. In 2014 and 2015, performance has declined once again. The performance relative to the EU peaked at 119% in 2010 and is at 13.3% above average in 2015.

Austria performs better than the EU in most dimensions, except in Economic effects because of poor relative performance in License and patent revenues from abroad and Exports of knowledge-intensive services. In terms of indicators, relative strengths for Austria are particularly International scientific co-publications, Public-private copublications, Community designs, R&D expenditures in the business sector, and Community trademarks.

Most dimensions and indicators show positive growth. The strongest increases in performance are observed for International scientific copublications (7.1%) and Community trademarks (3.6%). Significant declines in performance are observed in Sales share of new innovations (-4.6%) and SMEs with product or process innovations (-4.1%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four indicators.

The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.591 to 0.609 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

7 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Belgium Belgium is a Strong Innovator. Innovation performance gradually increased over time and then declined in 2015. Over time, performance relative to that of the EU has improved to almost 116% in 2015.

Belgium is performing well above the EU average in Linkages and entrepreneurship. Also Belgium’s research system is performing well in particular due to a high number of International scientific co-publications.

Relative weaknesses are in Intellectual assets, where performance is somewhat below the EU average for all four indicators, and in the dimension Economic effects.

Performance has improved most strongly in Open, excellent and attractive research systems (4.4%) and has worsened in Finance and support (-3.8%). For nine indicators, performance has declined, in particular in Venture capital investments (-11%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 7 5

47

48

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Bulgaria Bulgaria is a Modest Innovator. Innovation performance increased over time until 2012, after which it strongly declined in 2013 (due to strong declines in Venture capital investments and Non-R&D innovation expenditures), to increase again in 2014 and 2015. Performance relative to the EU is at 46.3% in 2015.

Bulgaria’s relative strengths are in Human resources and Intellectual assets.

Bulgaria has relatively high shares of highly educated people and performs well in applying for Community trademarks and designs. Linkages and entrepreneurship and Finance and support are the main weaknesses, in particular due to low Venture capital investments. For all indicators, except for Youth with upper secondary level education, Community trademarks and designs, Bulgaria is performing below the EU average.

For 12 indicators, growth has been positive, most notably for Community designs with a growth rate of 32% and R&D expenditures in the business sector (21%). Strong declines in performance are observed in Venture capital investments (-23%) and the Sales shares due to new product innovations (-12%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four and worsened performance for two indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.242 to 0.248 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

7 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Croatia Croatia is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance improved until 2012 and then declined. After a decline until 2010, innovation performance improved until 2012 and then declined again. Performance relative to the EU was above 60% in 2008, but has fallen to less than 54% by 2015.

Croatia is performing below the EU average in most dimensions. It only performs above the EU average in Human resources, due to aboveaverage performance in Youth with upper secondary level education. The weakest performing dimensions are Open, excellent and attractive research systems, Innovators, and Intellectual assets. Non-R&D innovation expenditures is the best performing indicator.

Performance increases in dimensions are observed in Finance and support (6.8%) and Open, excellent and attractive research systems (4.3%), with the largest improvement at the indicator level for Community trademarks (29%). Performance has worsened in Linkages and entrepreneurship (-9.4%), Economic effects (-2.6%) and Innovators (-2.3%), with the indicators declining most being PCT patent applications in societal challenges (-14%), Public-private copublications (-9.4%) and PCT patent applications (-9.3%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four and worsened performance for two indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be small with the index possibly increasing from 0.280 to 0.281 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 7 7

57

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Cyprus Cyprus is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance fluctuated over time, with a peak in 2012. The performance relative to the EU peaked in 2011 (95%), but has declined to 86.5% in 2015.

Cyprus performs below the EU average for most dimensions. At the indicator level, performance is well below average in License and patent revenues from abroad, R&D expenditures in the business sector, PCT patent applications in societal challenges, and Non-EU doctorate students. Relatively strong performance is observed for Community trademarks and International scientific co-publications.

Performance has improved in some dimensions, in particular in Open and excellent research systems (7.7%) and Human resources (7.6%).

The indicator with the strongest growth is New doctorate graduates (23%). Performance has worsened most in Economic effects and Firm investments, in particular due to strong growth declines in License and patent revenues from abroad (-42%) and Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-17%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

7 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

59

47

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

This profile does not fully coincide with the country profile included in the EIS 2016 report as revised CIS 2014 data were made available after the editorial deadline.

Czech Republic

The Czech Republic is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance increased until 2012, declined in 2013, and increased again in more recent years. The performance relative to that of the EU shows a similar trend. Performance relative to the EU is at 83.1% in 2015.

Relative strengths compared to the EU average are in Human resources, Firm investments, and Finance and support. Relative weaknesses are in Intellectual assets and Open, excellent and attractive research systems. In the former, quite a diverse pattern can be observed with below-average performance for Most cited scientific publications and Non-EU doctorate students, and above average performance for International scientific co-publications.

0.44

85

0.43

84

0.42

83

0.41

82

0.40

81 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Innovation index

Innovative SMEs… Product/process innovators Organisational/…

Sales share product…

Provisional CIS 2014 vs CIS 2012 (=100)

2.2% 3.7% 3.2%

0.1%

110 64

6.0% 9.0% 1.4% 7.7%

144 70 29 -14%

91 121 20

7.1% -30% 1.3% 5.5%

95 86

2.7% 7.0%0.3% -0.1 - % 7.0%

106 89 95 113 41 60

4.0% 2.7% 3.7% 8.9% 0.6%

26 24 63 70

-0.5 % -0.5 % -2.6 %

90 101 83 98 88 91

1.6% 3.4% 1.8% 0.3% 1.6%

114 65

-1.3 %

108 44 40

60

80

100

100 110 120 130

SMEs innovating in-house

77

20

90

Non-R&D innovation exp.

98 91

120 140

-40%

-20%

15% 0%

20%

Indicator growth rate

Relative performance to EU

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 7 9

80

Relative to EU

80

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for three and worsened performance for three indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.434 to 0.436 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not changes revised CIS 2014 data were made available after the editorial deadline.

0

86

0.39

Performance has improved most in Open, excellent and attractive research systems (6.0%). The fastest growing indicators are License and patent revenues from abroad (15%), International scientific co-publications (9.0%) and Community trademarks (8.9%). A strong decline is observed in Venture capital investments (-30%).

HUMAN RESOURCES New doctorate graduates Population with completed tertiary educ.

Youth upper secondary level education OPEN, EXCEL. RESEARCH SYSTEMS International scientific co-publications Most cited scientific publications Non-EU doctorate students FINANCE AND SUPPORT R&D expenditures in the public sector Venture capital investments FIRM INVESTMENTS R&D expenditures in the business sector Non-R&D innovation expenditures LINKAGES & ENTREPRENEURSHIP SMEs innovating in-house Innovative SMEs collaborating with…

Public-private scientific co-publications INTELLECTUAL ASSETS PCT patent applications PCT patent appl. societal challenges Community trademarks Community designs INNOVATORS SMEs product/process innovations SMEs marketing/organisational innov.

Empl. fast-growing firms innovative…

ECONOMIC EFFECTS Employment knowledge-intensive…

Exports medium & high tech products Exports knowledge-intensive services Sales share of new product innovations License and patent revenues from…

0.45

40%

50

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

This profile does not fully coincide with the country profile included in the EIS 2016 report as additional CIS 2014 data were made available only after the editorial deadline.

0.72

136

0.70

134

0.68

132

0.66

130

0.64

128

0.62

126

0.60

70

Denmark is an Innovation Leader. Innovation performance increased until 2012. Performance then declined in 2013 and 2014, and increased again in 2015. Performance relative to the EU has increased from 26% above the EU average in 2008 to 34% in 2015.

Denmark is performing above the EU average in all dimensions, most notably in Open, excellent and attractive research systems, Linkages and entrepreneurship, and Intellectual assets. In particular in International scientific co-publications and Publicprivate co-publications, the country is performing well above the EU average. Relative weaknesses are in Non-R&D innovation expenditures.

124

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Innovation index

Denmark

Relative to EU 85

100

115

130

145

Performance has improved for 14 indicators and on average most strongly in the dimensions Human resources (5.3%) and Economic effects (3.4%). Performance has declined in Finance and support (2.0%), due to a relatively sharp decline in Venture capital investments (-9.0%).

Non-R&D innovation exp.

SMEs innovating in-house Innovative SMEs collaborating

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for one and worsened performance for three indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be small with the index possibly keeping the same value of 0.700 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Product/process innovators Organisational/ marketing innovators Sales share product innovations Provisional CIS 2014 vs CIS 2012 (=100)

HUMAN RESOURCES New doctorate graduates Population with completed tertiary educ.

Youth upper secondary level education OPEN, EXCEL. RESEARCH SYSTEMS International scientific co-publications Most cited scientific publications Non-EU doctorate students FINANCE AND SUPPORT R&D expenditures in the public sector Venture capital investments FIRM INVESTMENTS R&D expenditures in the business sector Non-R&D innovation expenditures LINKAGES & ENTREPRENEURSHIP SMEs innovating in-house Innovative SMEs collaborating with others Public-private scientific co-publications INTELLECTUAL ASSETS PCT patent applications PCT patent appl. societal challenges Com munity trademarks Com munity designs INNOVATORS SMEs product/process innovations SMEs marketing/organisational innov.

Empl. fast-growing firms innovative sectors ECONOMIC EFFECTS Employment knowledge-intensive activities Exports medium & high-tech products Exports knowledge-intensive services Sales share of new product innovations License and patent revenues from abroad

5.3%

122

13% 2.5% 0.9% 3.2% 9.5%

176 121 89 164

450

-0.7%

126

1.0%

85

-2.0%

134 150

5.5% -9.0%

94

-1.5%

108

1.5%

150

-4.4%

54

2.3% 0.0% 2.1% 2.3%

162

106

167 424 142

-1.5% -1.9% -6.0%

177 204

3.5%

137

-1.3% -0.9% -0.7% -1.6% -0.4%

181 119 111 112 107 124 111

3.4% 0.6% 2.3%

85

0.0%

119

11%

178

3.4%

131 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

Indicator growth rate

Relative performance to EU

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

8 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

20%

52

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Estonia Estonia is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance increased at a steady rate until 2012, but started to decline since 2013.

Estonia’s performance relative to that of the EU has improved from 84% in 2008 to 86% in 2015, with a peak of 97% in 2012.

Estonia’s relatively strong dimensions are Finance and support and Firm investments. Estonia performs well above average on Non-R&D innovation expenditures, Venture capital investments, International scientific co-publications, and Community trademarks. Performance is well below the EU average for License and patent revenues from abroad, PCT patent applications in societal challenges, and Publicprivate co-publications.

Performance has improved most strongly in Venture capital investments (18%), PCT patent applications in societal challenges (15%), and Community trademarks (15%). Strong performance declines are observed for Public-private co-publications (-16%), Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-10%) and Sales share of new product innovations (-7.7%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 8 1

72

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Finland Finland is an Innovation Leader. Innovation performance has decreased since 2010, with a small increase in 2014, followed by a decrease in 2015. Finland's performance relative to the EU has also been declining from its peak of 134% in 2008 to 124.5% in 2015.

Finland is performing above average for all dimensions except Economic effects, and for most of the individual indicators. The strongest relative strengths are in International scientific co-publications, License and patent revenues from abroad, PCT patent applications, and Publicprivate co-publications. Relative weaknesses are in Non-R&D innovation expenditures, Non-EU doctorate students, Exports of medium & high tech products, and Exports of knowledge-intensive services.

Performance in Open, excellent and attractive research systems has increased the most with 8.4%. Performance in less than half of the indicators has improved. Particularly high growth is observed for Non-EU doctorate students (17%) and License and patent revenues from abroad (16%). Notable declines in performance are observed for Innovative SMEs collaborating with others (-8.9%), Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-5.8%), and Venture capital investments (-5.5%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.649 to 0.660 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

8 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

56

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

France France is a Strong Innovator. Innovation performance increased between 2008 and 2012, declined in 2013-2014, and increased again in 2015. The performance level relative to the EU reached a peak of almost 10% above the average in 2010, and is at 9% above the EU average in 2015.

France’s relative strengths are in Open, excellent and attractive research systems and Innovators. The best performing indicator is Non-EU doctorate students. France is experiencing relative weaknesses in Firm investments and Intellectual assets.

Performance is particularly weak in Non-R&D innovation expenditures, Community trademarks, and Community designs.

France has experienced positive growth for most indicators, particularly in License and patent revenues from abroad (6.1%), International scientific co-publications (4.9%), and New doctorate graduates (3.9%). The sharpest performance decline is observed for Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-3.1%) and Community designs (-2.8%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for all four indicators for which data are available. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.568 to 0.578 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 8 3

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Germany Germany is an Innovation Leader. Innovation performance increased up until 2012, after which it started to decline. Relative to EU, performance was highest at 28% above the average in 2012, but has dropped to 21% above the EU in 2015.

Germany’s strongest dimensions are Firm investments and Innovators.

In all other dimensions except Open, excellent and attractive research systems, the country is also performing above the EU average. Relative weaknesses are in Non-EU doctorate students and License and patent revenues from abroad.

Performance has improved most strongly in License and patent revenues from abroad (32%), Non-R&D innovation expenditures (6.3%), and International scientific co-publications (6.3%). Strong performance declines are observed for Non-EU doctorate students (-5.8%) and Sales share of new product innovations (-5.5%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show worsened performance for four and improved performance for two indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be negative with the index possibly declining from 0.632 to 0.629 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

8 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

51

54

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Greece Greece is a Moderate Innovator. Over time, its innovation performance improved until 2014, followed by a strong decline in 2015. Relative performance to the EU reached a peak of 76% in 2014, but has declined to 70% in 2015.

Greece performs below the EU average on all dimensions. Relative strengths are in Human resources and Innovators. Performance in Finance and support and Intellectual assets is particularly lagging relative to the EU. Low performing indicators include Venture capital investments, License and patent revenues from abroad, and PCT patent applications (in societal challenges). Greece performs above the EU average on NonR&D innovation expenditures, SMEs with marketing and/or organisational innovations, International scientific co-publications, and Innovative SMEs collaborating with others.

Performance in Intellectual assets has experienced the highest growth (7%). Highest indicator growth is observed for License and patent revenues from abroad (16%), Community designs (14%), and Community trademarks (12%). Performance has declined strongly in Venture capital investments (-28%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four and worsened performance for two indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.364 to 0.374 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100. No data for non-EU doctorate students.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 8 5

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Hungary Hungary is a Moderate Innovator. The country’s innovation performance, despite some fluctuations, has improved between 2008 and 2015. The performance relative to the EU also had fluctuations, over time it has declined from almost 70% in 2008 to 68% in 2015.

Hungary performs below the EU average for all dimensions, and nearly all indicators, especially for Community designs and Non-EU doctorate students. Relative strengths in terms of indicators are observed in License and patent revenues from abroad and Exports of medium and high tech products.

For more than half of the indicators, performance has improved. High growth is observed for R&D expenditures in the business sector (10%), Community trademarks (8.1%) and Population with completed tertiary education (6.3%). Notable declines in performance are observed in PCT patent applications in societal challenges (-7.2%), Community designs (-4.3%), and Sales share of new product innovations (-4.1%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

8 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

63

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Ireland Ireland is a Strong Innovator. Irish innovation performance increased until 2012. Performance declined strongly in 2013, after which it increased again in 2014-2015. Performance relative to the EU shows a similar trend, with a significant drop in 2013, and increased relative performance in 2014-2015.

Ireland’s relative strengths are in Innovators and Human resources.

Ireland performs well above the EU average on License and patent revenues from abroad and International scientific co-publications.

Other strong performing indicators are Exports of knowledgeintensive services and Employment in knowledge-intensive activities.

Relative weaknesses are in Community designs, Non-R&D innovation expenditures, and R&D expenditures in the public sector.

Performance has increased considerably in License and patent revenues from abroad (29%), International scientific co-publications (7.3%), and New doctorate graduates (6.3%). Performance has declined most in Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-12%) and Venture capital investments (-8.8%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 8 7

53

58

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Italy Italy is a Moderate Innovator. Its innovation performance increased steadily until 2011, experienced a decline in 2012, and increased again in 2013-2014. Performance declined slightly in 2015. Italy has been increasing its innovation performance relative to the EU from 78% in 2008 to almost 83% in 2015.

Italy performs below the EU average in most dimensions, in particular in Finance and support and in Firm investments, with the worst relative performance in Venture capital investments and License and patent revenues from abroad. In the Innovators dimension, Italy performs better than the EU average.

Italy has experienced performance increases for most indicators. Growth has been strong in the dimension of Open, excellent and attractive research systems (7.4%), due to performance improvements in NonEU doctorate students (14%) and International scientific co-publications (6.9%). Performance has also increased strongly in License and patent revenues from abroad (19%). A strong performance decline is observed in Venture capital investments (-9.5%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for one and worsened performance for three indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be negative with the index possibly declining from 0.432 to 0.414 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

8 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

60

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Latvia Latvia is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance increased until 2012 but dropped in 2013. In 2014, the innovation index recovered and increased sharply in 2015. The performance relative to the EU shows a similar trend.

Latvia performs well below the EU average for most dimensions, particularly for Linkages and entrepreneurship, Open, excellent and attractive research systems, and Innovators. The relatively worst performing indicators are Public-private co-publications and License and patent revenues from abroad. Relative strengths for Latvia are in NonR&D innovation expenditures and Venture capital investments.

Performance is increasing for about two-thirds of the indicators. High growth is observed for Non-EU doctorate students (40%), Community trademarks (12%), New doctorate graduates (9.4%), and International scientific co-publications (9.3%). A large decline in performance is observed for Public private co-publications (-14%) and License and patent revenues from abroad (-12%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show worsened performance for five indicators.

The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be negative with the index possibly declining from 0.248 to 0.249 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 8 9

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Lithuania Lithuania is a Moderate Innovator. Despite some minor fluctuations, the overall innovation performance has been improving since 2008, with a small decline in 2015. The performance relative to the EU has also been improving with a small decline in 2015.

Lithuania performs below the average of the EU for most dimensions, except for Human resources and Finance and support. Relatively worst performing indicators are Public-private co-publications, NonEU doctorate students, License and patent revenues from abroad, PCT patent applications in societal challenges, and PCT patent applications.

Performance above average is observed for Non-R&D innovation expenditures, Population with completed tertiary education, Venture capital investments and Youth with upper secondary level education.

Particularly high growth is observed for License and patent revenues from abroad (96%), Non-EU doctorate students (70%), and Venture capital investments (41%). The largest performance declines are for Public-private co-publications (-14%) and Sales share of new product innovations (-11%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for five and worsened performance for one indicator. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.282 to 0.359 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

9 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

61

62

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Luxembourg Luxembourg is a Strong Innovator. Performance declined in 2010 and 2011 (due to a much worse performance in Non-R&D innovation expenditures), but more than fully recovered in 2012 and 2013. However, in 2014 and 2015 there is again a significant decline, and the innovation index in 2015 is even below the level of 2008. The performance relative to the EU has declined over time from 28% above the EU in 2008 to about 15% above the EU in 2015.

Luxembourg performs best on the dimensions Open and excellent research systems and Innovators. Relative strengths for Luxembourg at the indicator level are Community trademarks, International scientific co-publications, Community designs, and License and patent revenues from abroad. Luxembourg performs well below the average on the dimension Firm investments, in particular at the indicator level on Non-R&D innovation expenditures.

Performance in Luxembourg's research system has been growing strongly (9.3%), mainly because of high growth in International scientific co-publications (15%) and Most cited publications (11%).

Strong declines are observed in Venture capital investments (-28%), Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-23%) and R&D expenditures in the business sector (-9.7%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9 1

64

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Malta Malta is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance was fairly stable until 2012 after which it increased strongly in 2013 to 2015.

The performance relative to the EU was 69% in 2008 and reached almost 84% in 2015.

Malta is performing below the average of the EU for most dimensions and indicators. The strongest relative weaknesses are in Venture capital investments, Non-EU doctorate students, and Public-private scientific co-publications. Relative strengths are in particular in Community trademarks, License and patent revenues from abroad, and Community designs.

A strongly growing innovation dimension is Intellectual assets, in particular the indicators Community designs and Community trademarks. Performance for most indicators has improved, with other large increases observed in International scientific co-publications (20%) and New doctorate graduates (8.5%).

Declining performance is observed in particular for Venture capital investments (-19%), Sales share of new product innovations (-11%) and Public-private co-publications (-10%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

9 2 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

The Netherlands The Netherlands is an Innovation Leader. Performance improved steadily up until 2012, then increased strongly in 2013 (among others due to an increase in the share of product or process innovators), and after an increase in 2014 it declined in 2015. The performance relative to the EU is at 21% above the EU average.

The Netherlands is performing above the EU average for most dimensions, except for Firm investments, because of poor relative performance in Non-R&D innovation expenditures. Excellent relative performance is observed in License and patent revenues from abroad, International scientific co-publications, and Public-private co-publications. Relative weaknesses are in Non-R&D innovation expenditures and Community designs.

Performance has improved for most dimensions and indicators. High growth is observed, in particular, for International co-publications (7.9%), PCT patent applications in societal challenges (5.9%) and New doctorate graduates (5.7%). Significant declines in performance are observed for Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-6.5%) and Venture capital investments (-3.1%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for two and worsened performance for four indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be negative with the index possibly declining from 0.630 to 0.618 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9 3

65

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Poland Poland is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance has been somewhat volatile within a relatively narrow range. Compared to 2008, performance has increased marginally. Poland's relative performance has declined from 59% in 2009 to 56% in 2015.

Poland is performing below the EU average in all dimensions, particularly in Linkages and entrepreneurship and Open, excellent and attractive research systems. For most indicators, performance is also below the EU average, with largest relative weaknesses in Non-EU doctorate students, Public-private co-publications, PCT patent applications (in societal challenges), and License and patent revenues from abroad.

Relative strengths are in Non-R&D innovation expenditures and Community designs.

Performance has increased for most of the dimensions and indicators.

High growth is observed for R&D expenditures in the business sector (15%) and License and patent revenues from abroad (15%). Fairly strong declines in performance are observed in Innovative SMEs collaborating with others (-12%) and SMEs with marketing or organisational innovations (-9.7%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for four and worsened performance for two indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.292 to 0.305 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

9 4 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

67

68

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Portugal Portugal is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance has increased over time with a large increase in 2014. Performance relative to the EU declined until 2013. In 2014 and 2015, performance relative to the EU has increased to 80% of the EU average.

Portugal performs below the EU average in most dimensions, except in Human resources. In the dimensions Innovators, Open, excellent and attractive research systems and Finance and support, performance is close to the EU average. Performance for most indicators is also below average, in particular for License and patent revenues from abroad, PCT patent applications, Public-private co-publications, and PCT patent applications in societal challenges. Relative strengths for Portugal are in New doctorate graduates, International scientific co-publications, SMEs with product or process innovations, and SMEs innovating in-house.

High growth is observed for the dimension Open, excellent and attractive research systems (7.3%). High growth in performance at the indicator level is observed for International scientific co-publications (11%), NonEU doctorate students (8.6%), and PCT patent applications in societal challenges (6.7%). Notable declines in performance are observed in Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-6.4%) and SMEs with marketing or organisational innovations (-3.1%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9 5

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Romania Romania is a Modest Innovator. Innovation performance increased until 2010, after which it has been declining. Innovation performance in 2015 is at a significantly lower level than in 2008. The development of Romania's relative performance to the EU has closely followed the development of the innovation index. Over time, the relative performance has worsened from almost 50% in 2008 to 34.4% in 2015.

Romania is performing well below the average of the EU on all dimensions and all indicators. The weakest relative performance in terms of dimensions is Linkages and entrepreneurship, while in terms of indicators, the worst relative performance is observed for PCT patent applications in societal challenges and PCT patent applications. Romania performs similar to the EU average for a number of indicators, in particular Youth with upper secondary level education, Exports in medium & high tech products, and Employment in fast-growing firms in innovative sectors.

Performance has increased the most for the innovation dimension Human resources (4.4%). High growth at the indicator level is observed for License and patent revenues from abroad (17%) and Community designs (14%). The strongest declines in performance are observed in Venture capital investments (-23%), Sales share of new product innovations (-21%), Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-17%), SMEs innovating in-house (-17%), and SMEs with product or process innovations (-17%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for two indicators.

The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.180 to 0.188 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

9 6 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

69

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Slovakia Slovakia is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance has increased between 2008 and 2015, but declined in 2011 and in 2012.

The performance relative to the EU shows a similar trend. Performance relative to the EU reached a peak in 2014 at almost 68% of the EU average, and is at 67% in 2015.

Except for Human resources, Slovakia performs below the EU average for all dimensions, and also for most indicators. Large relative strengths in terms of indicators are in Sales share of new innovations and New doctorate graduates. Large relative weaknesses are in License and patent revenues from abroad, PCT patent applications in societal challenges, Non-EU doctorate students, Venture capital investments, and PCT patent applications.

Performance in most dimensions and most indicators has improved. The highest growth in terms of indicators is observed for Non-EU doctorate students (16%), Community trademarks (12%) and R&D expenditures in the public sector (11%). A very strong decline in performance can be observed in License and patent revenues from abroad (-25%) and NonR&D innovation expenditures (-8.8%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for one and worsened performance for five indicators. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be negative with the index possibly declining from 0.350 to 0.342 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9 7

71

70

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Slovenia Slovenia is a Strong Innovator. Innovation performance has been steadily increasing with minor declines in 2013 and 2015. Slovenia’s relative performance to the EU has improved from 90% in 2008 to 93% in 2015.

Slovenia performs close to the EU average with performance for three dimensions being above and for five dimensions being below the average. Particular relative strengths are in International scientific co-publications, New doctorate graduates, and Publicprivate co-publications. Strong relative weaknesses are observed for Venture capital investments, License and patent revenues from abroad, and Non-EU doctorate students.

Performance in most dimensions and indicators has improved. The fastest growing dimension is Human resources (6.7%), followed

by Open, excellent and attractive research systems (5.0%). The fastest growing indicators are License and patent revenues from abroad (20%) and New doctorate graduates (16%). A strong decline in performance is observed in Non-R&D innovation expenditures (-12%).

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

9 8 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Spain Spain is a Moderate Innovator. Innovation performance improved steadily until 2013, after which the innovation index has declined. In 2015, performance is at a significantly lower level compared to 2008.

Spain’s gap with the EU has increased over time. In 2008, the relative performance level was at its highest at 77%, whereas in 2015 it has decreased to 69%.

For most indicators, Spain is performing below the EU average.

Performance in Open, excellent and attractive research systems is close to the average performance of the EU, mainly because of strong relative performance in International scientific co-publications. In relative terms, the weakest indicator is License and patent revenues from abroad.

Performance has improved most in the dimension of Human resources (3.8%). The indicator that has improved most is License and patent revenues from abroad (13%), and Venture capital investments (-11%) has declined most.

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for five indicators and worsened performance for one indicator. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.361 to 0.372 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 9 9

55

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

Sweden Sweden is an Innovation Leader. Its innovation performance increased until 2013, but has been declining since, with the decline being rather sharp in 2015. The performance relative to the EU has been declining over the whole period from its peak of 141% in 2008 and 2009 to 135% in 2015.

Sweden is performing above the EU average for all dimensions.

Performance in nearly all of the indicators is also above the EU average, especially in International scientific co-publications, Public-private copublications, License and patent revenues from abroad, and PCT patent applications (in societal challenges).

Performance has improved strongly in Open, excellent and attractive research systems (5.3%) but declined most notably in Finance and support (-4.1%). Performance for the indicators has shown significant positive growth in Non-EU doctorate students (7.6%), License and patent revenues from abroad (7.4%) and International scientific co-publications (7.2%). A strong decline in indicator performance can be observed for Venture capital investments (-10%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for five indicators and worsened performance for one indicator. The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.704 to 0.714 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

1 0 0 | I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY

73

74

European Innovation Scoreboard 2016

The United Kingdom The United Kingdom is a Strong Innovator. Its innovation performance has been improving at a steady rate between 2008 and 2015. The performance relative to the EU has also been on the rise in the period 2008-2015. The performance was 6% above the EU average in 2008, and is more than 15% above the average in 2015.

The UK performs better than the EU average for most dimensions, and above or close to the average for the indicators. The best performing dimensions are Open, excellent and attractive research systems and Human resources. Relative best performance is in International scientific co-publications, Innovative SMEs collaborating with others, Non-EU doctorate students, and Venture capital investments. A relative weakness is the dimension of Firm investments, especially due to bad relative performance in Non-R&D innovation expenditures.

Performance in most dimensions and indicators has improved, although in most cases growth is modest. Performance has improved most clearly for Innovative SMEs collaborating with others (11%) and Sales share of new product innovations (7.5%). A strong decline in performance is observed in the dimension Finance and support (-3.6%), mainly due to a strong decline in Venture capital investments (-6.7%).

Provisional CIS 2014 data show improved performance for five indicators.

The overall impact on the innovation index is expected to be positive with the index possibly increasing from 0.602 to 0.627 assuming that for the other indicators performance would not change.

Note: Performance relative to the EU where the EU = 100.

I N N O VAT I O N T O D AY | 1 0 1

B2BEUROPE is a cutting-edge conference production company located in the heart of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Our multicultural team has a global mind-set, and we are experts in business intelligence and hard-core industry research which brings everyday a great success to our clients from all over the world.

We are specialists in qualifying most influential speakers, producing a value driven agenda, carrying out logistics and hosting conferences that are breading ground for new ideas to transform the world.

We are a Change maker.

imed st Accla o M r, la u

and

l Event

fluentia Highly In

op Hugely P

WORLD INNOVATION CONVENTION BERLIN 6-9 December 2016

We are excited to write to you and tell you all about the World Innovation Convention. To be held December 6-9 2016 in Berlin, Germany, the WIC represents a valuable opportunity to interact and engage and collaborate with most influential innovators and thought leaders from around the world.

Our continuous journey for 7 years in search for excellence has turned our platform for innovation leaders into the highly acclaimed and hugely popular conferences globally; it has become the industry reference in delivering practical and actionable insights.

The inherent value of a WIC comes from the chance to meet and greet directly with businesses who have delivered a long and sustained record for innovation throughout their history. From MasterCard to McLaren, Coca Cola to IBM, Sony Music to Philips. Giants of industry and ingenuity shall be on hand to showcase how they use their long term and solid platform for growth to propel their brands into the future.

Alongside this, the WIC shall also feature OI Engine

by IDEO, Lego, UNICEF, Tom Tom, Vodafone, and numerous other brands who will detail their experiences of navigating in the future, and their aspirations and plans for growth in a new era of fast changing technology. In sum, the WIC is an investment in interaction and close engagement with innovators and industry leaders from within Europe and around the world.

The four inspiring days of conference are totally dedicated to transforming strategies, how to get funding for your projects, identifying challenges, problem solving, design thinking, project management and how to become an innovation leader is giving you the opportunity to take the leap into the future.

Format is diverse and engaging with lots of interactive sessions: • Though provoking keynotes by leaders • Industry sessions delivering in-depth intelligence • Story telling caters to building brand experiences • Digital transformation landscape • Play session is designed to maximize creativity • Outdoor and Indoor collaboration • Certification The core value of the WIC experience is built upon three principles; innovation, practicality, proof. WIC shall celebrate those who had time and time again generated new ideas and innovations that have been industry leaders. At the same time, it shall detail and explain in-depth the practical aspects of innovation, how it is done day by day, and how an idea progresses towards an outcome.

Accordingly, the WIC shall offer concrete case studies and foundational examples of how ideas and ingenuity have delivered landmark innovations. It shall do so with numerous industry-leading speakers, innovation thought leaders, think tanks, brand ambassadors, designers, experts and many more.

Proudly held in the city of Berlin, the WIC shall also offer attendees the chance to engage directly ‘on the ground’ with the German, European, and wider international innovation community. As the largest city in Germany, the second largest metropolis in the European Union, and a veritable hub of culture, design, and style and start-ups, the WIC and its host city offers an unforgettable and truly essential experience for all who aspire to lead anew the next era of innovation in business.

Further details about the WIC can be found at: www.inno-world.com

reinnovating banking and finance ¡ Aggregate

¡ Cyber security

¡ Pharmaceutical manufacturing

¡ Agriculture

¡ Ecofarming

¡ Pharmaceutical research

¡ Airport Construction

¡ Education

¡ Port management & construction

¡ Airport Terminal Concession Development

¡ Engineering & Construction

¡ Power plants

¡ Architecture

¡ Environmental Solutions

¡ Property

¡ Auditing

¡ Environmental development

¡ Real Estate

¡ Aviation

¡ Fashion manufacturing

¡ Recycling

¡ Aviation Security

¡ Finance

¡ Refining - Oil & Gas

¡ Banking

¡ Gold & Hedge funds

¡ Satellite broadcasting management

¡ Border control

¡ Hospital construction

¡ Satellite manufacturing

¡ Branding

¡ Hospitality

¡ Security Solutions

¡ Broadcast facility construction

¡ Hybrid Engine technology

¡ Ship building

¡ Building material

¡ Infrastructure

¡ Shipping

¡ Cable manufacturing & laying

¡ Insurance

¡ Software development

¡ Cargo Terminal Planning

¡ International Trade

¡ Sponsorship

¡ Clothing Design

¡ Management

¡ Strategies

¡ Coastal Terraforming

¡ Marina development

¡ TV & Film

¡ Coins Minting Facilities

¡ Maritime Development

¡ Technologies

¡ Commodity trading

¡ Marketing

¡ Telecommunications

¡ Construction

¡ Mills

¡ Tunnel Construction

¡ Consultancy

¡ Mining

¡ Water Management

¡ Currency Printing Facilities

¡ Mobile Network Construction

¡ Water Treatments

WE TURN YOUR GREAT IDEAS INTO REALITY WITH UP TO 80% FUNDING Albania | Algeria | Angola | Antigua | Argentina | Armenia | Australia | Austria | Azerbaijan | Bahamas | Bahrain | Bangladesh Barbados | Belarus | Belgium | Benin | Bolivia | Bosnia & Herzegovina | Brazil | Brunei | Bulgaria | Burkina Faso | Cabo Verde Cameroon | Canada | Central African Republic | Chad | Chile | China | Colombia | Comoros | Congo | Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire | Croatia | Cuba | Cyprus | Czech Republic | Denmark | Djibouti | Dominica | Dominican Republic | Ecuador | Egypt El Salvador | Equatorial Guinea | Estonia | Ethiopia | Fiji | Finland | France | Gabon | Gambia | Georgia | Germany | Ghana Greece | Grenada | Guatemala | Guinea | Guinea-Bissau | Guyana | Haiti | Honduras | Hungary | Iceland | India | Indonesia Iran | Iraq | Ireland | Italy | JamaicA | Jordan | Kazakhstan | Kenya | Kosovo | Kuwait | Kyrgyzstan | Laos | Latvia | Lebanon Liberia | Libya | Liechtenstein | Lithuania | Luxembourg | Macedonia | Madagascar | Malaysia | Maldives | Mali | Malta Marshall Islands | Mauritania | Mauritius | Mexico | Moldova | Monaco | Montenegro | Morocco | Mozambique | Myanmar Namibia | Nepal | Netherlands | Netherland Antilles | New Zealand | Nicaragua | Niger | Nigeria | Norway | Oman | Pakistan Palestine | Panama | Paraguay | Peru | Philippines | Poland | Portugal | Qatar | Romania | Russia | St. Kitts and Nevis | St. Lucia St. Vincent & The Grenadines | Samoa | San Marino | Sao Tome & Principe | Saudi Arabia | Senegal | Serbia | Seychelles Sierra Leone | Singapore | Slovakia | Slovenia | Somalia | South Africa | South Sudan | Spain | Sri Lanka | Sudan | Sweden Switzerland | Syria | Tajikistan | Tanzania | Thailand | Trinidad & Tobago | Tunisia | Turkey | Uganda | Ukraine United Arab Emirates | UK | USA | Uruguay | Uzbekistan | Venezuela | Vietnam | Yemen | Zambia | Zimbabwe

www.titaniumcapitalpte.com

Gallery 4, Lloyds Building, 14 Leadenhall Street, London EC3 Email: info@titaniumcapital.org Phone :+44.(0)2.072.543.707 | Mobile :+44.(0)7.936.936.777

A sister company of THE SPECIALISTS - HENRY ABDO & CO