Technological Innovation: Generating Economic Results: Volume 26

This chapter explores the extent to which an innovator is able to capture innovation rents. After examining the two main drivers of such rents, the strength of the appropriability regime and the ownership of specialized complementary assets, the chapter examines how their interaction is so critical in affecting imitation, commercialization options, and firm performance. After reviewing the underlying conceptual framework and empirical evidence, and using a perspective that cuts across both time and industries, the authors then discuss the implications of innovation profits for the resources to be devoted to the discovery of new or improved product and processes.

This chapter is designed for use by commercialization teams evaluating the commercial relevance of a new invention. To be relevant commercially, an invention must create value in one or more markets, which involves solving a problem or satisfying customer needs currently unmet. Unmet needs create market opportunities, and the goal is to identify and evaluate the profitability of these opportunities. The chapter provides an overview of concepts and techniques commonly used in the process. Important distinctions between market and industry concepts are introduced along with common rubrics for categorizing inventions in terms of their technological and market implications. These concepts are then used to discuss the roles of prior experience, lead users, and brainstorming in identifying market opportunities for various types of inventions. Techniques covered include market analysis, Porter’s five forces of industry profitability, analysis of political, economic, social, and technical environments (PEST), and the analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). The use of these techniques is illustrated for two startup commercialization teams.

In this chapter, we focus on the people component of the technology commercialization process. We review how the need for a variety of skills and knowledge sets creates unique challenges and opportunities for the team, particularly given the complexities associated with commercialization and the need for creativity throughout the process. We suggest that simply having a multidisciplinary team in place does not ensure success and highlight the potential benefits and liabilities. In particular, we highlight the relevance of team composition in terms of professional orientation and social network ties. We then review how team composition influences internal team processes.

This chapter provides an overview of the five main modes of intellectual property (IP) protection – patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets, and designs – available in the United States, the European Union, and Japan. After describing the purposes of and principal differences among the five types of IP protection and outlining the advantages of each form, the chapter provides country- and region-specific information. The authors highlight the aspects of IP law in which international harmonization has, or has not yet, occurred, and offer insights into the relative advantages of various national and regional IP protection systems.

From its first patent statute, the United States awarded patents to the first person to invent. The rest of the world eventually adopted “first to file” regimes, in which the first person to file a patent application was awarded the patent. In 2013, the United States moved closer to harmonizing with the rest of the world. The America Invents Act created a “first inventor to file” system, representing the most dramatic change in US patent law in over fifty years. This chapter explores the new provisions by offering a basic operation of how they operate. It then discusses the myriad of new administrative procedures at the United States Patent and Trademark Office that were created in the America Invents Act. These procedures have the potential to challenge patents more cheaply than in litigation. The chapter discusses the various requirements and limitations of these provisions.

This chapter provides evidence on how young technology startups are employing intellectual property (IP) protection when innovating and competing in the United States. Although researchers and teachers of university technology transfer often think only in terms of patents and the Bayh-Dole Act, this chapter suggests that adopting a more nuanced view of IP rights is appropriate. After reviewing the primary non-patent types of IP protection available in the U.S. (copyright, trademark, and trade secret), we explain that while patents are often considered the strongest protection, for some entrepreneurs – particularly those operating in the U.S. software and Internet sectors – patents may be the least important means of capturing value from innovation. We present evidence from the 2008 Berkeley Patent Survey to demonstrate that IP is used by U.S. startups in very different ways, and to different effects, across technology sectors and other company-specific characteristics. Contrary to the common assumption in academic discourse, we show that different forms of IP protection often serve as complements, rather than substitutes.

This chapter focuses on the regulatory scheme used by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve medical products for commercial use in this country. After providing a brief introduction of the role of the FDA and the scope of the products regulated by the agency, the chapter outlines the common characteristics of premarket controls for drugs, medical devices, and biological products, including how clinical trials of these medical products are conducted with humans as part of the premarket approval process. The chapter then provides a detailed examination of the particular regulatory scheme for each product category. The chapter concludes with an analysis of how FDA regulates emerging medical technologies, such as cellular and tissue-engineered products. FDA regulates a variety of products intended to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent diseases or conditions under a legal scheme established in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public Health Service Act and regulations promulgated by FDA. How a product is classified (drug, device, or biologic) forecasts the regulatory approval pathway that must be followed to bring the product to market. This chapter provides education and direction regarding regulatory requirements that must be met to market medical products in the United States.

This chapter introduces the reader to the meaning of competitive advantage and posits that a firm’s strategy is defined as the managers’ theory about how to gain and sustain competitive advantage. The author demonstrates how a firm creates its competitive advantage by creating more economic value than its rivals, and explains that profitability depends upon value, price, and costs. The relationship among these factors is explored in the context of high-technology consumer goods – laptop computers and cars. Next, the chapter explains the SWOT [s(trengths) w(eaknesses) o(pportunities) t(hreats)] analysis. Examining the interplay of firm resources, capabilities, and competencies, the chapter emphasizes that both must be present to possess core competencies essential to gaining and sustaining competitive advantage through strategy. Next, the chapter describes the value chain by which a firm transforms inputs into outputs, adding value at each stage through the primary activities of research, development, production, marketing and sales, and customer service, which in turn rely upon essential support activities that add value indirectly. After describing the PEST [p(olitical) e(conomic) s(ocial) t(echnological)] Model for assessing a firm’s general external environment, the chapter explains Porter’s Five Forces Model. The chapter then describes the strategic group model and illustrates that model by reference to the pharmaceutical industry. The author notes that opportunities and threats to a company differ based upon the strategic group to which that firm belongs within an industry. Finally, the chapter explores the importance of strategy in technology-intensive industries and emphasizes that sustained competitive advantage can be accomplished only through continued innovation.

This chapter provides an overview of the marketing strategy development process in the commercialization of breakthrough technologies. Important concepts and elements that are considered critical when developing market applications are presented with emphasis on three key decisions: target market selection, segmentation, and positioning. These strategic decisions will guide the more tactical considerations relating to the specific elements, or marketing mix, of the product’s marketing strategy. Marketing strategy development is a dynamic process that is impacted by many factors. This chapter highlights the dynamic nature of this process as well as providing insight as to the fundamental considerations in strategy formulation.

This chapter presents a framework for evaluating commercialization strategies available to start-up innovators operating in high-technology industries. We consider strategies ranging from head-on competition with incumbent firms to cooperation. Cooperation can manifest in a variety of alliances, including licensing, OEM relationships, R&D contracts, and joint ventures. We then relate the use of these strategies to alliance transaction costs, the need for complementary assets, and the firm’s intellectual property position. This chapter draws heavily on recent research showing that patterns of cooperation and competition vary markedly across industry sectors, with some form of cooperation with incumbents almost assuredly necessary in healthcare/medical technology. We emphasize the endogenous, dynamic nature of firm choices, and we illustrate the major principles with two case studies of start-up innovators commercializing university-based inventions. One company has developed several medical devices and the other electronics hardware and software. We follow the companies over a 10-year period, showing the evolution of strategy from cooperation to competition.

This chapter addresses the general process of determining the value of a particular company, with additional detail on how valuation processes might be adapted to produce credible value conclusions of emerging technology ventures. There are three primary approaches to business valuation. There is the income approach, which indicates that value is a product of expected future cash flows – cash flows that are discounted to equate them to dollars in-hand (present value). There is the market approach, which attempts to draw conclusions of value based on the market prices of similar companies in the public and/or private markets. Finally, there is the asset approach, which indicates that the value of a company is equal to the sum of the values of its net assets. Specific adjustments are appropriate with respect to each of these approaches where the value of an emerging technology company is concerned. Professional valuation standards require that all of these approaches be considered in the valuation, even if the available information does not permit their credible application. Often, multiple approaches and techniques can be applied. The results of applying multiple techniques often do not overlap, and it is the analyst’s very important task to reconcile differing valuation results, or to decide which result or results should be discarded.

“Tell me the price and I’ll tell you the terms,” is a common axiom among early-stage investors. Investors and seasoned entrepreneurs know that the overall company value is only the half of the valuation story. Investors frequently insist on receiving securities beyond common stock in return for capital financing. Such securities may be convertible debt, or, frequently, preferred shares.

The classic approach to valuing preferred stock as debt frequently understates the value of preferred shares and, accordingly, overvalues the value of common stock. Aside from preferential liquidation rights and dividends, preferred stock frequently carries conversion rights, participation features, antidilution rights, and other enhancements that are designed to give more return to preferred shareholders at the expense of the common shareholders (who are frequently the founders). Preferred share investment terms are so flexible that they can be engineered to completely negate the perceived benefits of a high valuation to incumbent shareholders, and shift the return to the entering, preferred shareholders.

More sophisticated methodologies for allocating equity value among various classes of shareholders are becoming more common in the accounting and regulatory communities, resulting in more robust and credible value conclusions. Such methodologies are discussed in this chapter using specific examples. These methodologies are also expected to eventually propagate to the investment community because of the economic and financial foundations are quite sound. Although some of these techniques are, admittedly, complex, an understanding of early-stage venture valuation is incomplete without, at least, a high-level understanding of such techniques.

Licensing from US universities is done within the overall legal framework of the Bayh–Dole Act of 1980 and the employment agreements of universities. This chapter explains common contracts used by universities to license technologies developed by their faculty and students within the context of these laws. In addition to the legal framework, the nature of license agreements is affected by the embryonic nature of most university inventions, which necessitates faculty and student involvement in development, and the entrepreneurial goals of the university. Universities have diverse goals in terms of revenue, licenses executed, inventions commercialized, patents filed, and number of startups formed. The somewhat obvious problem is that the goals of faculty, students, the university, and the licensee may not be aligned. Common contracts used are meant to align these goals. While some contracts include multiple terms such as upfront fees, running royalties, annual payments, and equity, Express Licenses are increasingly being used to accommodate the entrepreneurial environment. This chapter discusses these issues and also the importance of the rights to sublicense inventions.