nies that support university research with a goal of commercializing federally funded research. Larger incentives would be offered for multi-year support that is of adequate length to support graduate student research. These incentives could have a large amplifying effect because it would leverage industry funds rather than government funds to support the commercialization goals. Addressing Innovation Drain: A possible key to addressing the innovation drain is to encourage policies that encourage successful faculty to stay at the university. Closing the culture gap: Policies that address the culture gap were discussed previously, and those same policies may be effective in retaining faculty who are successful in commercialization. Individuals who pursue academic careers often do so because they see the university environment as a place where they can make a difference in the lives of students and in society. Policies that help faculty that are successful in commercialization feel that they are succeeding in making a difference and that they are highly valued, will help them stay at the university in spite of financial enticements to leave. Royalty sharing for faculty: Many universities have policies that allow royalty sharing with university inventors and these programs could be encouraged and increased (e.g. BYU’s policy gives 45% of net royalty income to the inventors, which is higher than most and may be a model for other universities to consider). Federal matching funds for royalty income directed back into university research: Some universities allow faculty to take their share of the licensing income and direct it to their labs rather than take it as personal income. The university will often match those funds from their portion of the royalties (e.g., at BYU if inventors put all 45% of their portion of royalties into research, BYU’s match would bring it to a total of 90% of the licensing income). A federal match for these funds could be an effective use of funds for the following reasons: it is prescreened to support faculty who have been successful in commercialization and who have the experience to mentor students and other faculty, and it rewards faculty who are passionate enough about their work that they are willing to take personal income and direct it back to support their research. This matching would be contingent on the professor staying at the university. Encourage university policies that help retain successful faculty: Some proposals suggest “industrial leaves” for faculty to pursue commercialization. A danger with such policies is that they can have the undesired effect of losing successful faculty. The leave is a way to try the waters in the commercial side and keep one foot in the door at the university in case it doesn’t work out. If the venture is successful, then the professor leaves the university and joins the company. The result is that successful faculty leave the university and unsuccessful faculty return, which is not the ideal situation for building a culture of innovation at the university.
Collective Genius: Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and the Commercialization of University Research
159