What is the future of innovation and can it be predicted and predetermined?
It seems to me as if the technology is way faster than our rate of adaptation to it or our capability to foresee and respond to its implications. The arena in which the game is being played has changed but it seems as if the rules still have a lot of catching up to do and will perhaps never be able to catch up to it. Are we playing a global game with local rules?
I will state my case by considering the differences in the open innovation models and their implications in the case of Linux and Innocentive and I don’t claim to have read many books on the topic but this is what I understand so far.
Looking at the case of Linux (or others like MySQL, or Apache, Firefox), all these products have been created by the independent innovators and have proved to be mutually beneficial, but what about the model of Innocentive? It is being hailed as a great change a great concept that will make the companies more competitive more profitable and so on. But is it really a win-win situation??may be and may be not.
The implications of obtaining solutions through websites such as Innocentive :
- The companies don’t have to hire a full research team, or invest in up gradation or long term investments. It is in a way a quick fix solution for companies.
- One lump-sum payment is given to the innovator, no need to provide benefits and other perks, which means again huge cost saving for the companies.
- The number of supporting staff that is hired for the R&D teams is not needed any more.
- So one can actually run a virtual company with a staff of 5-8 people in a small office space or just from home, by outsourcing, R&D, manufacturing, and admin. Support.( various companies are already doing it, such as Point Therapeutics ( recent news ref. www.Biospace.com)) both as a cost cutting measure and the core model.
This may result into:
- Lesser permanent jobs
- Lesser jobs for the local populations ( esp. in countries like Canada where the min wage is $8 per hour…that’s in Alberta, can we compete with countries with R&D capability of same calibre and wages 1/10 th of Canadian wages?)
- An overall reduced private R&D base ( due to lesser incentive for investment in long term organizational R&D capabilities)
And wait a minute…what about other government policies such as temporary worker policies? The Canadian laws require a foreign worker to have a clearance from HRDC to the effect that the person being hired is not taking away a job from equally qualified Canadian. Recently US senate debated (I am not sure if it passed a bill yet) on limiting the outsourcing, the question is do these regulations apply on companies based on the model of Innocentive?
I know I sound sceptical, when most people are upbeat about the future of open innovation, but either I am grossly misinformed or there is an urgent need to limit the expanse of the open innovation, because we still don’t have completely porous borders and a min wage of $8 per hour (and same labour laws) throughout the world. Waiting to hear your comments.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Report card on Canada gives it "D" for innovation
Nothing too surprising here as plenty of topics in class revolved around how innovation could be better fostered and encouraged. Article here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070613/wl_canada_nm/canada_reportcard_col_2;_ylt=At9pCvuZ9uVVp2CN6kxVu5QE1vAI
Reasons given in article for lack of innovation:
Not sure I know what the government could do to increase science and technology degrees. I guess it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. If there were more innovation in private sector, there would be more demand and higher wages for those types of degrees, hence greater enrollment. But I know a chemist who was earning $30k/year with a BSc. and 5 years experience working with hazardous chemicals, while a teachers starts with over $40K/year and 2 months holidays a year. Who wants to be a chemist?
The part about relying on natural resources makes it sound like Canada uses them like a crutch, where I would argue that free market made that the economic driver of choice. Sure exploration and extraction aren't as glamorous as high tech, but Canada is renowned for its expertise in those areas and should be proud of it. Not to mention there has been plenty of innovation in those fields as well.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070613/wl_canada_nm/canada_reportcard_col_2;_ylt=At9pCvuZ9uVVp2CN6kxVu5QE1vAI
Canada's socio-economic performance is mediocre and it lags other developed countries when it comes to innovation and the environment, the Conference Board of Canada said in a report card published on Wednesday.
Reasons given in article for lack of innovation:
In innovation, the report said Canada doesn't invest enough in knowledge and not enough students graduate with science and technology degrees. As well, it relies too much on its natural resources and has a shortage of skilled labor.
Not sure I know what the government could do to increase science and technology degrees. I guess it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem. If there were more innovation in private sector, there would be more demand and higher wages for those types of degrees, hence greater enrollment. But I know a chemist who was earning $30k/year with a BSc. and 5 years experience working with hazardous chemicals, while a teachers starts with over $40K/year and 2 months holidays a year. Who wants to be a chemist?
The part about relying on natural resources makes it sound like Canada uses them like a crutch, where I would argue that free market made that the economic driver of choice. Sure exploration and extraction aren't as glamorous as high tech, but Canada is renowned for its expertise in those areas and should be proud of it. Not to mention there has been plenty of innovation in those fields as well.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Stephen Harper boosts funding for tech commercialization by $1.9 billion to $9.2 billion
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070517.wscience0519/BNStory/Science/home
While this type of funding certainly is useful and has its place, I'm not sure how it's going to increase enrollment in computing science and mathematics. Comes back to the usual issue of how do you encourage business to set up shop in one locale over another. Targeted funding like this seems to me like a bandaid fix and ends up giving only temporary boosts until the money is gone.
Maybe the government would be better off fixing our capital markets by consolidating regulatory bodies and improving enforcement to gain some international respect, thereby improving access to capital for companies.
“Our strategy will seek to expand government and business partnerships so new
investments can move quickly out of the laboratory and into the marketplace. We
will focus our efforts on Canada's inherent strengths and Canadians' primary
interests, including preserving the environment, improving public health,
developing natural resources and producing new information and communications
technologies.”
While this type of funding certainly is useful and has its place, I'm not sure how it's going to increase enrollment in computing science and mathematics. Comes back to the usual issue of how do you encourage business to set up shop in one locale over another. Targeted funding like this seems to me like a bandaid fix and ends up giving only temporary boosts until the money is gone.
Maybe the government would be better off fixing our capital markets by consolidating regulatory bodies and improving enforcement to gain some international respect, thereby improving access to capital for companies.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Brazil Takes Steps To Import Cheaper AIDS Drug Under Trade Law : Chilling Signal to Researchers or Heroic Action to Save Lives?
Brazil does it again, read the whole story on
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=614&res=1024&print=0
"The government of Brazil has issued a license that will allow the importation of cheaper versions of a patented HIV/AIDS drug after negotiations failed to bring about agreement on price reductions with Merck, the US company holding the patent. Merck said it was “profoundly disappointed,” as Brazil’s action sparked a flurry of positive and negative reactions. "
"Thailand offered three compulsory licenses in late 2006 and early 2007 for two HIV/AIDS drugs (including efavirenz) and a heart disease drug (IPW, Public Health, 12 March 2007). Among other countries that have issued CLs for pharmaceuticals are Canada, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia and Mozambique, the Brazilian Health Ministry said. "
Remember Canada did it in the times of Anthrax scare, when Apotex manufactured huge stocks of Ciprofloxacin (patent held by Bayer) ...
Seems like other countries might follow the suit....Novartis is fighting a court case in India for another patent violation...The IP battle in pharmaceuticals is really heating up....
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=614&res=1024&print=0
"The government of Brazil has issued a license that will allow the importation of cheaper versions of a patented HIV/AIDS drug after negotiations failed to bring about agreement on price reductions with Merck, the US company holding the patent. Merck said it was “profoundly disappointed,” as Brazil’s action sparked a flurry of positive and negative reactions. "
"Thailand offered three compulsory licenses in late 2006 and early 2007 for two HIV/AIDS drugs (including efavirenz) and a heart disease drug (IPW, Public Health, 12 March 2007). Among other countries that have issued CLs for pharmaceuticals are Canada, Indonesia, Italy, Malaysia and Mozambique, the Brazilian Health Ministry said. "
Remember Canada did it in the times of Anthrax scare, when Apotex manufactured huge stocks of Ciprofloxacin (patent held by Bayer) ...
Seems like other countries might follow the suit....Novartis is fighting a court case in India for another patent violation...The IP battle in pharmaceuticals is really heating up....
Friday, May 4, 2007
Pharmaceutical sector In Edmonton: Is the glass half full or half empty??
The Pharmaceutical sector in Edmonton has still to realize its full potential. with population expected to double in next 3-4 years (at the rate of 10% growth), the need for drug products is going to increase significantly. In addition to that the intensive research at the drug molecule level will demand the formulation of such drug substances, in order to take them from labscale to clinic for trials and market. this represents an opportunity for people in field of Pharmaceutics, Analytical sciences, regulatory fields and training institutions.
Talking of profits, the pharmaceutical sector has always been a very profitable venture with very steady growth rates rivaled only by IT in term of magnitude (not steadiness).
As a personal interest, I am looking into specific opportunities in the field and perhaps prepare a report that can then be used by interested parties. If any of my fellow bloggers are interested in partenering on such a project, please give me a shout......or let me know if such a report already exists...
Talking of profits, the pharmaceutical sector has always been a very profitable venture with very steady growth rates rivaled only by IT in term of magnitude (not steadiness).
As a personal interest, I am looking into specific opportunities in the field and perhaps prepare a report that can then be used by interested parties. If any of my fellow bloggers are interested in partenering on such a project, please give me a shout......or let me know if such a report already exists...
Alberta invests $130-million in ‘the science of small’
What are your thoughts on how these resources should be most effectively used??
The following is part of press release by Alberta Advanced Education and Technology on May 2, 2007. ..
Investing in ‘the science of small’ will help generate huge returns for Albertans, said Premier Ed Stelmach, unveiling the province’s strategy to capture a $20-billion market share of the world’s burgeoning nanotechnology market.
“Our $130-million investment today will help Alberta represent part of the competitive nanotech market by 2020,” Stelmach said. “That investment can grow to an estimated $20-billion in new economic activity, helping build a stronger Alberta.”
Doug Horner, Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, said the three-pillar strategy to grow new nanotech businesses, garner nanotech talent and build nanotech infrastructure will propel Canada to be among the top five countries in the world for nano-based economic activity.
“Nanotechnology lets us discover the unique properties of materials and how we can manipulate them at molecular levels to develop products that are stronger, faster or smarter,” he said.
The province already enjoys a solid nanotechnology base because industry, government and academic institutions collaborate on research and innovation. A new $5.5-million entity called nanoAlberta will further that collaboration.“nanoAlberta will guide partnerships with industry, post-secondary institutions and government, and it will look for opportunities to make the biggest economic and social impact for Albertans,” he added.
“Alberta has shown a commitment to the future of the province by taking its investments in nanotechnology to the next level,” said Dr. Peter Hackett, President and CEO, Alberta Ingenuity. “Alberta Ingenuity is strongly aligned with the province’s plans, and we are looking at this as an opportunity to transform the research landscape in Canada by recruiting exceptional people to the province, providing exceptional support and creating exceptional results that benefit all Albertans.”
The province expects nanotechnology will accelerate innovation in Alberta’s traditional sectors of energy, agriculture and forestry as well as environmental, health and medical technologies.
Candace Toews, Communications
Alberta Advanced Education and Technology
Candace.Toews@gov.ab.ca
The following is part of press release by Alberta Advanced Education and Technology on May 2, 2007. ..
Investing in ‘the science of small’ will help generate huge returns for Albertans, said Premier Ed Stelmach, unveiling the province’s strategy to capture a $20-billion market share of the world’s burgeoning nanotechnology market.
“Our $130-million investment today will help Alberta represent part of the competitive nanotech market by 2020,” Stelmach said. “That investment can grow to an estimated $20-billion in new economic activity, helping build a stronger Alberta.”
Doug Horner, Minister of Advanced Education and Technology, said the three-pillar strategy to grow new nanotech businesses, garner nanotech talent and build nanotech infrastructure will propel Canada to be among the top five countries in the world for nano-based economic activity.
“Nanotechnology lets us discover the unique properties of materials and how we can manipulate them at molecular levels to develop products that are stronger, faster or smarter,” he said.
The province already enjoys a solid nanotechnology base because industry, government and academic institutions collaborate on research and innovation. A new $5.5-million entity called nanoAlberta will further that collaboration.“nanoAlberta will guide partnerships with industry, post-secondary institutions and government, and it will look for opportunities to make the biggest economic and social impact for Albertans,” he added.
“Alberta has shown a commitment to the future of the province by taking its investments in nanotechnology to the next level,” said Dr. Peter Hackett, President and CEO, Alberta Ingenuity. “Alberta Ingenuity is strongly aligned with the province’s plans, and we are looking at this as an opportunity to transform the research landscape in Canada by recruiting exceptional people to the province, providing exceptional support and creating exceptional results that benefit all Albertans.”
The province expects nanotechnology will accelerate innovation in Alberta’s traditional sectors of energy, agriculture and forestry as well as environmental, health and medical technologies.
Candace Toews, Communications
Alberta Advanced Education and Technology
Candace.Toews@gov.ab.ca
Sunday, April 22, 2007
THE NEED FOR DIALOGUE AND MORE EFFECTIVE NETWORKING
There is an important conversation happening about technology commercialization in Alberta. Doug Horner, the new Minister of Advanced Education and Technology recently established a task force on Productivity, Value Added and Commercialization to evaluate how to accelerate economic diversification via technology commercialization. While this task force is reaching out to many key stakeholders, we need wider democratic participation on these issues.
What are the key issues and what are some possible solutions? Many emphasize the problem of the lack of capital. Perhaps it would be useful to create a government sponsored venture fund. Perhaps we do need more angel investing. But this Province has a great deal of wealth with many latent angels--so perhaps the techcom community has not figured out how to cultivate enough attractive opportunities that are being developed with experienced managers and entrepreneurs?
We have a lot of great science and technological development at universities such as U of A, but much of this sits on the shelf and never gets connected to people with business experience to move it towards commercialization effectively. How can we catalyze such processes and enable knowledge flows and entrepreneurialism to occur at the interstices between university and industry, scientists and graduating MBAs, nascent organizations and patient capital.
While I believe that there many gaps in the techcom infrastructure that need to be addressed, we also have many valuable resources in the form of great scientists and technoscientific ideas, small and medium enterprises, and seasoned managers and entrepreneurs. We also have many diverse initiatives across various institutions. Much could be gained by harnessing these extant resources much more effectively through the creation of denser networks of interaction. Perry Kinkaid's efforts in creating the Alberta Council of Technologies is ememplary in this regard, but we need many more such initiatives and many more Perry Kinkaids. In addition to industry development via cluster building, we need entrepreneurial opportunity development through networking and efforts to create networks of networks, fostering the creation of brokers who act as links across different networks.
A key problem is information asymmetry and the ability to link, for instance, the scientist with her useful technological idea to the right business mind who can see how to translate that upstream idea into an application and product. Organizations like TEC Edmonton and UTI are obviously key elements in this translation of idea to product, but have limited capacity. We need to build a broader networking infrastructure to make this happen. Communication modalities such as this blog can help to seed this, but the community needs to crescively emerge. It cannot be forced or strategically managed. DIALOGUE IS THE STARTING POINT! WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
What are the key issues and what are some possible solutions? Many emphasize the problem of the lack of capital. Perhaps it would be useful to create a government sponsored venture fund. Perhaps we do need more angel investing. But this Province has a great deal of wealth with many latent angels--so perhaps the techcom community has not figured out how to cultivate enough attractive opportunities that are being developed with experienced managers and entrepreneurs?
We have a lot of great science and technological development at universities such as U of A, but much of this sits on the shelf and never gets connected to people with business experience to move it towards commercialization effectively. How can we catalyze such processes and enable knowledge flows and entrepreneurialism to occur at the interstices between university and industry, scientists and graduating MBAs, nascent organizations and patient capital.
While I believe that there many gaps in the techcom infrastructure that need to be addressed, we also have many valuable resources in the form of great scientists and technoscientific ideas, small and medium enterprises, and seasoned managers and entrepreneurs. We also have many diverse initiatives across various institutions. Much could be gained by harnessing these extant resources much more effectively through the creation of denser networks of interaction. Perry Kinkaid's efforts in creating the Alberta Council of Technologies is ememplary in this regard, but we need many more such initiatives and many more Perry Kinkaids. In addition to industry development via cluster building, we need entrepreneurial opportunity development through networking and efforts to create networks of networks, fostering the creation of brokers who act as links across different networks.
A key problem is information asymmetry and the ability to link, for instance, the scientist with her useful technological idea to the right business mind who can see how to translate that upstream idea into an application and product. Organizations like TEC Edmonton and UTI are obviously key elements in this translation of idea to product, but have limited capacity. We need to build a broader networking infrastructure to make this happen. Communication modalities such as this blog can help to seed this, but the community needs to crescively emerge. It cannot be forced or strategically managed. DIALOGUE IS THE STARTING POINT! WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)