To increase the level of entrepreneurial activity -- specifically technology transfer -- at Cornell, the university should be more attentive to the factors that motivate professors in this pursuit, demonstrate how professors can balance business and academic duties and increase awareness of key campus resources, according to a field study by a Cornell management professor.
The recommendations are contained in the study "What Aspects of the Culture of Technical Professors and the Structure of Research Universities Help or Hinder the Transfer of Technology to Start-Up Ventures?"
"It's quite clear that there are various forces, even ones universities can influence, that dictate how successful a university will be as a source for start-up ventures," said the study's author, David BenDaniel, the Don and Margi Berens Professor of Entrepreneurship at Cornell's Johnson Graduate School of Management. "I believe this report will clarify certain issues confronting research universities as they debate how supportive they should be in fostering and supporting a climate that makes entrepreneurial opportunities for faculty realistic."
The study compares the research cultures at Cornell and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and enables researchers to record which factors are specific to each university and which are shared. Both schools are similar in that they have nationally ranked departments of biotechnology and electrical engineering, but the scope of start-up venture activity differs dramatically. The study's findings are based on interviews conducted last spring with 38 faculty members at M.I.T. and 33 at Cornell in the areas of electrical engineering, computer science and the biological sciences.
Faculty at both schools cited the benefits of start-ups and technology transfer as providing direction for future research, greater control over one's discoveries and increased income to professors, departments and universities. Others said the ability to show commercialization of research was necessary to win federal funding.
Despite the benefits, not all faculty are in
agreement about whether creating start-up ventures is part of
a
professor's vocation. The study noted that some faculty
are ambivalent toward entrepreneurial activity, while
others oppose the process and believe it's a "depurification" of
the academic environment.
"Some oppose the activity but have no problem with others involved in start-up ventures, so long as there is no misuse of the process," BenDaniel said. "Some are inclined to go into business, but haven't yet, others are entrepreneurial and think the process is legitimate and they do it simultaneously with their academic work, and still a few have left academe to devote all their time to their business."
Sponsored research and consulting contracts are common among faculty at both schools, and many viewed the latter as an example of technology transfer. Few of those interviewed, however, hold university-based patents, which many professors see as restricting the dissemination of information.
The study found that entrepreneurial activities at Cornell are limited while at M.I.T. such activity is "conspicuous."
Cornell, according to the faculty interviews, has an atmosphere where faculty are less likely to seek out start-up opportunities. There are fewer role models to encourage entrepreneurial activity and the school's rural geographic location restricts opportunities.
Professors said they were not familiar with the capabilities of the Cornell Research Foundation (Cornell's patent office) and the Cornell Office for Technology Access & Business Assistance (COTABA). Some professors believe Cornell's policies are ambiguous, especially when noting what behaviors are appropriate in the development of faculty businesses. Without clear direction, faculty said they simply don't get involved in start-up ventures for fear of violating university policy.
Concern also was raised about the possible misuse of academic resources for personal financial benefit. The issue becomes muddied when professors hold equity in a business based on their research. To circumvent inappropriate behavior, M.I.T. prohibits the acceptance of a research grant from a company if the investigator holds equity. Cornell, the report said, has no such rule.
Faculty at both schools were concerned about the level of student involvement in commercial work and of the potentially awkward situations that might arise from student help. The norm at M.I.T. is that professors do not employ students in their companies. The report said Cornell, on the other hand, has no standard that dictates the level of student involvement in a professor's business.
Another concern shared by faculty was how to balance business needs with academic responsibilities. Cornell professors thought that developing a start-up business would call into question one's commitment to the university.
To reduce the factors that deter faculty from pursuing start-up ventures and to create an atmosphere in which such activity can flourish, the report offers a series of recommendations that BenDaniel said are based on faculty responses. They include the following:
·Cornell and M.I.T. should pay more attention to certain factors that motivate faculty to pursue start-up ventures. The report suggests that professors are more likely to support a patent and licensing system whose stated primary mission is to disseminate technology rather than obtain a profit.
·Cornell needs to make information on how to develop start-ups more readily available internally and externally if it wants to encourage business start-ups.
·Cornell should review how patents and licensing support are in conflict with the academic goal of disseminating information. Patents on software "should be considered in light of the balance in benefits between having widespread dissemination of research and having control over use. In all cases, the university should retain the right on behalf of its professor to use and further develop the software," the report notes.
·Cornell should clarify how professors can engage in business formation activities while maintaining their academic duties. The university should make it easier for research professors to take up to two-year leaves of absence to start businesses. At M.I.T. faculty members must take a leave of absence to serve as an operating officer of a company.
·M.I.T. and Cornell should formulate specific policies with regard to students and commercial work.
Norman R. Scott, Cornell vice president for research and advanced studies, said the differences between M.I.T. and Cornell are significant. He noted that more than 80 percent of Cornell's federal research funding is earmarked for basic research, unlike the greater emphasis on mission-oriented research at M.I.T. "Nonetheless, Cornell fully supports the mission of technology transfer and provides assistance and support to faculty who want to participate in small business development," Scott said.
BenDaniel's study was sponsored by the Johnson Graduate School of Management and the Ewing Marion Kauffmann Foundation's Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.