26 January 2012 - As a young scientist with entrepreneurial ambitions, I seek role models, sources of inspiration and success stories. Steve Jobs, of course, serves as a universal role model. But is there anyone specific in Life science who has championed the use of cutting edge technology to revolutionize this field? A name that springs to mind is Jonathan Rothberg.

Born in 1963, son of a chemical engineer, Jonathan received entrepreneurial head start when his father founded Laticrete International, Inc. a family-owned, global manufacturer of products for the installation of tile and stone. After completing his education from Carnegie Mellon and Yale University, he went on to found several high profile technology companies in Life Sciences. These include, Curagen (acquired by Celldex), 454 Life Sciences (acquired by Roche), Rain Dance technologies and Ion Torrent Systems (Acquired by Life Technologies).

Jonathan’s latest invention, the semiconductor sequencer is in contention to win the $10 million Archon X-prize this year for the extraordinary achievement of sequencing an entire human genome in less than a day for less than a $1000 [1]. In contrast to the Human Genome project, which consumed 10 yrs of global effort and an astonishing 3 Billion dollars, Ion Torrent’s sequencer will accomplish this feat in a day for under $1000 [2]. This accomplishment not only has a tremendous impact on the sequencing industry, but is a potential game changer for diagnostics as a whole, making sequencing a routine diagnostics reality [1].

Besides revolutionizing the sequencing industry, Ion torrent’s sequencer has the potential to usher in a new generation of biodevices in the semiconductor industry, which has been struggling for an infusion of life, as an era of Moore’s law fuelled growth is coming to saturation [3]. Life sciences, diagnostics and medical devices have been recognized as growth drivers for the microchip industry [4]. Incidentally, the microprocessor technology, which has fuelled generations of software coding, is now being used to decode the code of life, DNA. As an acknowledgement of this fact, Ion Torrent sequenced the genome of Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel and the originator of Moore’s Law, which has been the abiding law of semiconductor industry for 5 decades [5].

So what’s Jonathan’s advice to entrepreneurs? In an interview published in Nature in 2011, he advised as follows, “They (researchers) should do the hardest experiment, the one that poses the biggest obstacle to success, first — otherwise they could find themselves ten years later having made little progress. Many people lose themselves by not asking tough enough questions about their own inventions. If you can’t clear the biggest hurdle, you are wasting everyone’s time”.

Powerful advice, easier said than done. Nevertheless, coming from someone who has walked the talk ... so entrepreneurial scientist and engineers should take note.

The article is contributed by Dr. Abdur Rub Abdur Rahman who now works as Prinicpal Investigator, In Vitro Diagnostics Group at Institute of Microelectronics, Singapore. Views expressed in the blog are solely independent and do not represent views of any organisation and affiliate.

References:

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2012/01/10/not-quite-the-1000-genome-but-maybe-close-enough/
[2] http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/ion-torrent-seeks-smart-input-on-new-gene-machine
[3] Fifty years of Moore’s Law 10.1109/TSM.2010.2096437
[4] http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/demand-sophisticated-medical-devices-driving-growth-semiconductor-ic-market
[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/science/21genome.html

04 January 2012 - It'll happen to everyone in university technology commercialization at some point (if you're talented): You'll be invited to serve on a committee that is revising a University policy or drafting a white paper for a group like the Council on Government Relations.

Of course, it is extra work, but it's also flattering that (a) the person organizing the committee thinks you're a thought leader in your field and (b) you name being attached to the project will add credibility to the whole endeavor.  So, you agree and begin your first foray into the wonderful world of "writing by committee" which is not too dissimilar to group work that we had to do in college or graduate school.  Remember how fun that was?

Having been on a number of such committees, it's worth sharing the lessons I've learned (mostly the hard way).

1) All IN or all OUT

Don't agree to be on the committee unless you have the time to contribute in a meaningful way.  Don't just sit there in the corner of the room and take notes!  As with any work-product coming from a committee, compromise is necessary to reach consensus among the group.  But, when the final report/draft/white-paper/policy comes out, it will have your name on it (unless you resign the committee in disgust).  Your name appearing on the document means that you've publicly approved the document and that kinda sucks if you weren't THAT involved in the process.

2) Maintain your commitment

Perhaps the only worse "crime" than agreeing to serve on a committee and then not doing much work is to initially be very involved and then decreasing your commitment as time passes.  It's easy to do.  Sometimes these committees can exist for years before their work product comes out and you might just get too busy.  Or...many times these committees are poorly organized and lack a true "Chairperson" or it might seem fair to pass the baton among the group and treat it like a relay race ("I'll work on this draft since you did the last one".)  When you decrease your commitment over time, you will still be identified as a "chief architect" of the work product, but will have had minimal input on the final form of that work product.  That's kinda dumb.

3) Beware of politics

The greatest abuse of committees is when a person in power knows what they WANT to do, but don't want to be accountable for unilaterally implementing an unpopular decision.  So....they form a committee, steer the committee towards the desired end and then claim they are blameless for the outcome because "the committee has spoken" and the committee is made up of smart people like YOU.  When faced with this scenario, see Advice Item #1 above.  You need to decide whether you CAN and are ABLE TO effect the changes on the policy outcome that someone desires.  If you can't, you might be better off missing a few of the meetings and being able to tell people, "Yeah, I guess I was nominally on the committee, but I think I missed half of the meetings and other people did most of the work.  We should really thank them for their service!"

Now, there are many tremendous things about committees.  They offer an chance for a melting pot of diverse ideas and provide opportunities to interact with (and impress) people outside of the normal technology commercialization sphere.  So, no one should ever have a personal "no committees" policy.  But, it is worth being aware of the potential pitfalls before agreeing to serve.

*Articles are reproduced with permission from Dean Stell, the owner of Technologycommercialization.blogspot.com

09 December 2011 - It would be fun to see how many people in AUTM (the Association of University Technology Mangers....one of my professional associations) have had the following situation happen.

1). Meet entrepreneur.  Hear about their plans to start business with a university technology.
2). They need a deal FAST.  None of that slow shit!  FAST dammit!
3). Out of professional pride you move heaven and the university counsel's office to rapidly get a term sheet or a option/license agreement in the hands of the entrepreneur that "the university is willing to sign".
4). You return to the other work that was unceremoniously shoved aside to accommodate this FAST deal.
5). Weeks pass and still you don't have your signed deal back from the entrepreneur.
6). Reports trickle in about the entrepreneur attending meetings and business plan competitions talking about their "near deal" with the university.   And you wonder, "Where's my deal?"

So, what's going on?  The entrepreneur is shopping your deal around to investors and other knowledgeable people to see if it is good enough.  From a negotiating standpoint, it's pretty smart: I am committed to the deal as written, but THEY can come back and ask for the royalty to be 5% because a venture capitalist frowned when the entrepreneur mentioned that the royalty was 6% in the current "draft".

In what world is this a good business practice?  This is the kind of behavior you expect when you're buying a used car, not what you want from someone who is going to be a business partner for ~20 years (the life of a patent).

What is further astonishing is that the entrepreneurs have no shame when they come back to you asking for changes to what they committed to just a few weeks earlier!  Sometimes I want to ask these jokers if it might be easier if I just negotiated directly with their "friend from college who says that 6% is too high".  Whatever happened to honoring your word?  How can they run a company when they can't even run a deal?

Of course, you can also imagine the hue and cry if universities did the same thing!  What if we had a deal that  was ready for signatures and we THEN took months to ask around about whether it was a good deal and came back with a bunch of changes that we hadn't thought of in the first place?  In fact, we often DO learn about new tweeks to license agreements in the midst of negotiations, but we are decent enough to realize that it would be poor form to force those into an ongoing negotiation.  Those things are saved for "next time".

The most frustrating aspect of this problem is that our country and economy really needs more university innovation to enter the marketplace.  For that to happen smoothly, universities and entrepreneurs need to be on the same page and pulling together.  Those relationships won't always be perfect, but it would help if one side stopped doing things that were intentionally hostile to a good partnership.

They could do a lot better!

*Articles are reproduced with permission from Dean Stell, the owner of Technologycommercialization.blogspot.com