Open Innovation Entering the Mainstream

Open Innovation in Global Networks (OECD 2008) is a 132 page (2.5 Mbyte PDF). Ironically, while advocating openness in research, the OECD have issued their report as a read only PDF file (with a copyable executive summary). The PDF e-Book version is sold for US $22 and the print paperback edition, including the PDF version, for US $33. There is a
short readable article from the OECD staff "Making the Most of Open Innovation in Post-crisis Era" (Andrew WYCKOFF & Miriam KOREEN).

Table of Contents

Executive Summary
Introduction

Chapter 1. Open Innovation in Global Networks

The concept of open innovation Applications of open innovation: user innovation, lead markets and open source Open innovation in the innovation literature Drivers of open innovation: demand and supply factors Global networks and innovation ecosystems Open innovation across industries Modes of open innovation The advantages and disadvantages of global innovation networks Global innovation networks and intellectual property

Chapter 2. Empirical Measures of Open Innovation

Case studies and surveys

Trends in R&D collaboration
Innovation surveys: the role of networks and collaboration
Patents: co-inventions and co-applications
Trends in licensing
Some tentative conclusions

Chapter 3. Insights from the Company Case Studies

General overview
Quantitative findings on the globalisation of innovation
Qualitative findings: open innovation on a global scale
Towards an integrated model of open innovation

Chapter 4. Policy Implications

Policy issues related to globalisation and open innovation
Policy responses
Towards a different innovation policy? ...

Executive Summary

Globalisation increasingly affects how companies in OECD countries
operate, compete and innovate, both at home and abroad. Global competition
drastically shortens product life cycles, while the growing integration of
different technologies makes innovation riskier and more costly. Companies
more and more internationalise knowledge-intensive corporate functions,
including R&D, and simultaneously open up their innovation process to
collaborate with external partners (suppliers, customers, universities, etc.).
This clearly has important implications for policy making, given the
contribution of (business) innovation to economic growth.

In order to match the growing demand for innovation from customers,
suppliers, etc., with the worldwide supply of science and technology, (large)
companies increasingly adopt so-called “ecosystems of innovation” across
countries. They link into these global innovation networks with people,
institutions (universities, government agencies, etc.) and other companies in
their own or different countries to solve problems, source knowledge and
generate ideas. These global innovation networks include own R&D facilities
abroad as well as collaborative arrangements with external partners and
suppliers, in which firms depend in various ways on the expertise of the
different partners.

While open innovation is not totally new, the organisation of innovative
activities (technological as well as non-technological) across firm boundaries
is clearly on the increase, with more balance between internal and external
sources of innovation. Other terms have also been used to describe this trend,
and all stress to some extent the openness of innovation activities: open
source, open standard, open research, user-driven innovation, etc. The fact
that the term “open” is usually thought of as cost-free creates confusion;
however, in contrast to open source, for example, open innovation typically
implies the payment of licence fees as well as other financial arrangements. In
this context, therefore, open does not mean free.

New evidence on global innovation networks based on case studies as
well as on large-scale data sets shows that:

• The main reason for locating research and/or development facilities abroad
  is the proximity of large and growing markets. Other important factors are the availability of engineers and researchers, and the company’s proximity
  to other activities (production, sales).
• Suppliers and customers are the most sought-after innovation partners.
  While universities and public research institutes are generally considered
  an important source of knowledge for companies’ innovation activities,
  especially in more upstream research and exploration activities, they
  represent only a small share of innovation collaborations.
• Larger firms innovate more openly than small firms. Innovation survey data
  indicate that large companies are four times more likely than small and
  medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to collaborate on innovation.
• Geographical proximity matters in global innovation networks. Companies
  seem to prefer innovation partners that are geographically close. As the
  only information available concerns the number of collaborations, however,
  the fact that companies may enter collaborations with more distant
  partners only if they are strongly motivated by market demand or
  excellence seeking may be masked.
• Differences among industries are significant. Collaboration on innovation is
  important in manufacturing as well as in services, notwithstanding some
  differences among countries. Industries such as chemicals,
  pharmaceuticals and information and communication technology (ICT)
  typically show high levels of open innovation.

The degree of openness in innovation models differs, depending on
factors such as the importance of the technology, the strategy of the firm, the
characteristics of the industry, etc. Companies traditionally seek to retain
their core capabilities and determine what to outsource or with whom to
collaborate. Their core competencies (in technology and markets) are
developed internally to the greatest extent possible, but open innovation may
be a faster, less risky alternative to internal development in order to diversify
(in terms of technology and/or markets).

In industries characterised by rather short technology life cycles, e.g. the
ICT, electronics and telecommunications industry, companies have sought
external partners in order to keep up with new developments in and around
their industry. In industries characterised by rather long technology life cycles
and strong protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) (e.g. pharmaceutical,
chemical and materials industries), companies mainly look outside the firm to
keep up with research. In industries in which patents are important but can be
more easily circumvented (e.g. the transport equipment industry and the fastmoving
consumer goods industry), companies set up collaborations to keep
pace with new developments. They seek technologies or products that have
proven their market potential, which they can improve, scale up and
commercialise.

The largest benefit of open innovation is a much larger base of ideas and
technologies. Companies source external knowledge in various ways:
partnerships with external parties (alliances, joint ventures, joint
development, etc.); or acquisition or sale of knowledge (contract R&D,
purchasing, licensing). In addition to these common modes, open innovation
is increasingly realised through corporate venturing (equity investments in
university spin-offs or in venture capital investment funds).

Open innovation is not only about sourcing external knowledge
(“outside-in”) as companies look for ways to generate additional revenue
from in-house innovations (“inside-out”) especially when the technology
has future potential but is not part of the firm’s core strategy. Companies
also increasingly use venturing to find external partners for
commercialising innovations that are not used internally (divestment, spinout,
spin-off).

Theft of intellectual property (IP) is seen as the most important risk to
global innovation networks. Unique knowledge may be revealed to external
partners that may later become competitors. Working closely with external
partners can create uncertainty about the appropriation of the benefits of
technology collaboration. When collaborating with larger companies, SMEs
especially may face larger risks because they typically have fewer resources
and limited expertise in IPR issues. The effective management of IP is crucial
for identifying useful external knowledge and particularly for capturing the
value of a firm's own intellectual property rights (IPR).

Successful open innovation also depends on the open character of the
business model. As knowledge has become companies’ key resource, open
innovation needs to be embedded in an overall business strategy that
explicitly acknowledges the potential use of external ideas, knowledge and
technology in value creation. Owing to the integration of different
technologies, industry borders are shifting or even disappearing, necessitating
new business models and organisational structures, including the effective
management of human capital (open culture, diversity, etc.).

Global innovation networks significantly influence national and regional
innovation systems. The ecosystems or networks of innovation of
multinational enterprises (MNEs) create cross-border nodes between regional/
national systems of innovation. MNEs also link S&T actors in different
countries, and their ecosystems often span clusters and industrial districts in
specific industries across countries. In this context, geographical proximity
permits localised learning.

Science, technology and innovation policies can no longer be designed
solely in a national context. As a country’s attractiveness as a location for R&D
and innovation activity becomes a priority, framework conditions that affect the location of production as well as costs (production, labour, tax) become
critical. Appropriate structural policies, such as labour market and
competition policies, as well as the public infrastructure for innovation and a
highly skilled workforce, are essential.

In addition, global innovation networks have some more specific policy
implications:

• Universities and public research organisations increasingly play a
  significant role in the open innovation strategies of firms both as a source of
  basic knowledge and as potential partners. Support for basic research must
  therefore continue. Given the scarcity of public resources and competition
  to attract R&D-related foreign direct investment (FDI), countries must
  balance their research efforts and investments in specific fields with the
  need to be open and develop sufficient absorptive capacity in a range of
  fields.
• World-class clusters and networks remain important but integration across
  fields and borders may require different interfaces and competencies. The
  potential for innovation depends on how well knowledge flows and how
  well the system is connected: policies to foster or enable the development
  of world-class clusters and networks.
• Sharing intellectual property may require different kinds of management
  tools in firms and public research organisations. Companies participating in
  national R&D programmes may need to share IP with foreign subsidiaries/
  partners or seek to commercialise it in foreign markets, but may be
  constrained by national regulations.
• Investing in people and fostering cross-functionality and mobility and a
  “culture of innovation” is crucial, as open innovation implies that people
  must be able to work in networks and across borders, sectors and at the
  interface of converging technologies. It also requires openness to a
  geographically mobile workforce.
• Open innovation stresses the broad characteristics of innovation. Much
  public support for innovation still focuses on R&D and technological
  innovation and less on non-technological innovation or other forms of
  user-driven innovation. While open innovation involves service firms,
  much public support for innovation still targets manufacturing firms.
  Policy attention focuses more on the supply side of innovation and less on
  building market demand for innovation (e.g. through publ ic
  procurement).
• National R&D programmes need to be more open while ensuring benefits
  via reciprocity and cost-sharing agreements. Also arising from open
  innovation is the question of capturing national benefits from cross-border
  spillovers of the ecosystems of innovative firms. Potential national benefits
  must be communicated and demonstrated to public stakeholders.
• Building a strong knowledge base is necessary to develop next-generation
  innovation policies and best practices. A strong knowledge base will be
  necessary to identify policy implications and develop next-generation
  innovation policies and best practices. OECD work over the coming years
  will seek to address these issues. ...

From: Open Innovation in Global Networks, OECD 2008

Meet ICT Company Founders in Canberra

National ICT Australia (NICTA) is running a "Meet the Founder Series" talk every two months in Canberra. These start with Mr Murray Rankin, Founder of The Distillery and Rankin Securities on 9 March 2010.

Meet the Founder Series
Entrepreneurs sharing their experiences
Mr Murray Rankin
Entrepreneurial Pitfalls – Look Before You Leap
When: 5.30pm for Canapes
9th March

Murray Rankin has extensive domestic and international experience in both the public and private sectors. He is best known as a Founder of The Distillery, a Canberra based global technology success story.

Murray was responsible for growing the Distillery from two founders in 1997 to a global company with 130 employees operating in the ACT, US, UK, NZ, South Africa and Asia.

Where: NICTA Seminar Room, Ground Floor, 7 London Circuit, Civic

RSVP: Annetta.Hend@nicta.com.au by Thursday 4th March

Upcoming Talks

• Mr Ken Kroeger - Founder Healthcube and Catalyst Interactive, 4th May
• Mr Bob Quodling - Founder Simmersion Holdings Pty Ltd, 13th July
• Mr Brand Hoff - Founder Tower Software, 14th September
• Mr Scott Rashleigh - Founder AOFR, 9th November

Australian National Enabling Technologies Strategy

Innovation Minister, Senator Kim Carr, yesterday launched the National Enabling Technologies Strategy with $18.2M to upgrade the National Measurement Institute, $10.6M for policy and regulatory development, industry uptake, international engagement and strategic research and $9.4M for public awareness and community engagement.

See:

• National Enabling Technologies Strategy
  
• Fact Sheet
• Discussion Paper

1. A national approach
   Through the Strategy, a collaborative effort and joint activities will be encouraged between Federal, State and Territory governments and agencies and a wide range of stakeholders, consistent with the aims of the Strategy. More information is available on the Stakeholder Advisory Council and the Commonwealth State Working Group which are being established under the Strategy.
2. Balancing risk and reward
   The Strategy will support the appropriate coverage of enabling technologies in policy and regulatory frameworks, and support Government agencies to ensure that Government policy is informed by an understanding of health, safety, environmental, social and economic considerations. More information is available on the HSE activities taking place under NETS, and also on the international engagement activities taking place under NETS.
3. Engaging with the public
   The Enabling Technologies Public Awareness and Community Engagement program will provide balanced and factual information on enabling technologies to inform public debate, and to encourage greater community engagement in debates about the development and use of enabling technologies.
4. Developing measurement capabilities
   The National Measurement Institute (NMI) will develop measurement infrastructure, expertise and standards for nanotechnology and biotechnology (nanometrology and biometrology).
5. Using technology for a better future
   The Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research will increase government, industry and the community's understanding of the ways in which applications of enabling technologies may help to address major global and national challenges and increase industry productivity, and will encourage the responsible development and uptake of these technologies.
6. Planning for the Future
   The Strategy will assist Government, researchers, industry and other stakeholders to prepare for the advent of new technologies by undertaking foresighting activities and supporting the development policy and regulatory frameworks. An Expert Forum of 8 to 10 people will be established in 2010 to guide the Strategy’s technology foresighting activities.

Peer-to-Patent Project

QUT have joined the New York Law School's Peer-to-Patent project to addresses the examination and quality of business methods and computer software patents. They are looking for volunteers to review patents.

The first time I got this I asked "why should I help someone make money out dubious patents?". Ben McEniery, Project Manager at Queensland University of Technology explained that the project is about stopping dubious patents:

Peer-to-Patent Australia (www.peertopatent.org.au) is a project that aims to re-establish the rightful balance between the interests of the public and and the rights of patentees. The project seeks to protect the public's right to access new ideas by ensuring that patents that lack novelty or the requisite degree of inventiveness are not granted.

The project addresses the examination and quality of business methods and computer software patents.

We are looking to build a community of volunteers to review participating patent applications and bring relevant prior art to the attention of IP Australia’s patent examiners.

The project is based on the Peer-to-Patent project run by the New York Law School (NYLS) and is the result of the collaborative efforts between QUT and NYLS. The project will initially run as a six-month pilot that will focus on the rapidly advancing technology areas of business methods and computer software. Up to 40 business method, computer software and related patent applications that have been filed in Australia and which are open for public inspection will each be posted on the Peer-to-Patent Australia website for a 90-day period. During that time, members of the community can review those applications, submit prior art references and comment on the relevance of any prior art that has been put forward.

At the end of the review period, Peer-to-Patent Australia will forward the top 10 prior art submissions for each application, as selected by the community of reviewers, to IP Australia for consideration in the examination process. The review process in no way abrogates the responsibility of the patent examiner to assess a patent application. Prior art submitted by Peer-to-Patent Australia is solely designed to assist a patent examiner, who remains the arbiter of whether a patent is to be granted.

There are currently 15 patent applications from seven companies open for review. The participating companies include IBM, Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited, General Electric Company, Hewlett-Packard, Residex Pty Ltd, Yahoo and CSIRO.

Since the focus of the pilot is on business methods and related applications, there is an interesting array of new ideas and technologies in the applications that are open for review. Those applications include methods, systems and apparatus for:

• converting a decimal number to a binary representation based on processor size;
• detecting behavioural patterns related to the financial health of a business entity;
• an arrangement where a customer enters into an agreement with a lender to share equity in real estate property;
• efficient cooling of server farms;
• refining mobile device search results using location modifiers;
• integrating browsing histories with media playlists on a media playback device;
• interactive specification of context-sensitive service level agreements;
• controlling a network of trains; and
• gaming machine systems and methods.

Those wishing to review participating patent applications can register at: www.peertopatent.org.au.

At the moment, we are looking to build our community of reviewers. Any assistance you might give by promoting the project would be greatly appreciated.


Regards
Ben McEniery

Lecturer
Peer-to-Patent Australia Project Manager
Faculty of Law
Queensland University of Technology
CRICOS Institution Code: 00213J
GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Queensland 4000
http://www.law.qut.edu.au/staff/lsstaff/bmceniery.jsp

TED: Technology, Entertainment, Design

For years people have been mentioning TED to me. But it was only after hearing about it on radio that I signed up (thus the power of old media). TED standards for "Technology, Entertainment, Design" and is a not for profit organisation which has been running conferences since 1984. They now have a web site where anyone can watch videos or inspiring speakers and enter discussions. There are also two annual conferences, in California and Oxford and some in Asia.

TED is not perfect. It has a bit too much of that USA East Coast enthusiasm in it for my liking. Also I had some difficulty with the web site, which is a little too Web 2.0 to work well on my low bandwidth wireless set-up. I was not able to upload a photo for my profile.

While I was at it I ran some tested on the TED home page. It gets a poor score of 30/100 on the W3C Mobile test. The page has 48 errors on a W3C HTML test. It had 4 Priority One and 7 Priority Two problems on the TAW automated Accessibility test. These are things TED need to fix if they want to achieve their aims of speeding ideas more widely across the world.

Cambridge Phenomenon

In looking for material on e-learning at Cambridge, I stumbled across a reference to something I wrote in 1996 about "The Cambridge Phenomenon" (Segal, Quince and Partners, 1985). This was a study of why high technology start-up companies had been so successful around Cambridge University (UK). In 1996 I visited Cambridge University and discussed start ups with Sir Peter Swinnerton-Dyer. He mentioned the report, which I found in the ANU Library, wrote a summary of and then used in a presentation to the ACS: "Canberra: Cambridge or Thebes?". Because the original report was not available online, Ross Anderson and others at Cambridge University had referecned this summary. But what I have now noticed is that the talk itself was reverenced in "A pilot study on the emergence of university-level innovation policy in the UK" by Finbarr Livesey, Eoin O’Sullivan, Jonathan Hughes, Rob Valli and Tim Minshall (Working Paper 2008/1, Centre for Economics and Policy, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, March 2008).

Creative Ecologies and New Business Models

John Howkins, author of "The Creative Economy: How People Make Money from Ideas" (2002) and the forthcoming "Creative Ecologies: Where Thinking is a Proper Job" (UQ Press, April 2010) will talk on "Creative Ecologies and New Business Models", in Canberra, 26 November 2009:

How can we harness creative ecologies and discover the business environments in which creativity and innovation best thrive?

The Creative Industries Innovation Centre, in partnership with the University of Canberra, invites you to attend a special event by world-renowned creative industry expert, John Howkins. He will be joined by University of Canberra graduate, Michael Tear, who is a member of the CIIC Advisory Board and Managing Director of Bearcage Productions.

"Creative Ecologies and New Business Models"

Thursday 26 November 2009
4.30pm start for 5pm-7pm

The University of Canberra
Innovation Centre Foyer
Building 22
University Drive South

RSVP: Tracy Doherty
Email: events@canberra.edu.au

Phone: (02) 6201 5995
Disability access is available.

Parking information: Parking is available in the car park directly across from the Innovation
Centre (see map attached).

http://www.canberra.edu.au/university/maps

Startups in Sydney

Greetings from "Startup BarCamp Sydney" at the Australian Technology Park as part of Global Entrepreneurship Week 2009. I volunteered to talk on "Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT" at 12:30pm. But I broadened this to talk about the process Innovation ACT uses to teach entrepreneurship to students at the Australian National University and University of Canberra and ended up with "Entrepreneurs for climate change mitigation".

The BarCamp is being held in the Innovation Centre at the ATP. For me this is a bit like coming home. In 1998 I used the ATP as an example of how technology innovation should be done in Australia. This was meant to be just an example, but the government appeared to take this advice literally and set up the National ICT Centre of Excellence (NICTA) in the building. I was last here for the CSIRO ICT Centre conference two weeks ago. What I didn't realise is that the ATP is home to ATP Innovations, which is part owned by the ANU.

This Bar Camp has a wider range of participant than BarCamp Canberra, which was focused on web and government. At this event there is one delegate is selling coconuts (for eating and drinking) and another solar thermal power stations.

Startup BarCamp Sydney

"Startup BarCamp Sydney" is being held 21 November 2009 at the Australian Technology Park for Global Entrepreneurship Week 2009. I have volinteered to talk on "Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT", which I talked to Innovation ACT about a few monts ago . For those not familiar with the BarCamp format, it can be a bit bewildering. In addition to the celibrity speakers, anyone can present. The rohbust audince participation can also be a bit confronting. The event is free, funded by the sponsors. To participate you edit the home page to add your details and proposed topic. This can see a bit like the Merry Pranksters meet the Calfornian Business Assocation.

Social Networking System for Innovation in Canberra

Greetings from launch of the Innovation ACT Portal at "spacedock" (aka John Curtin School of Medical Research) the Australian National University in Canberra. This is a new social media enhanced web site designed to help students and staff at the ANU and University of Canberra to get together to turn their research into products and services. The new web site will be used in the Innovation ACT program which teaches innovation and then has a competitive process. The ACT Department of Business and Industry Development has funded a new web portal.

This year I talked to the Innovation ACT participants about "Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT". Next year the Innovation ACT Portal will include a boot camp for new entrepreneurs and an "i-Prize" for addressing an important social issue.

"No matter what your achievements or future plans, chances are you will need to operate within the world of business. Whether you are planning to be the next high flying entrepreneur, an eminent scientist or one of the literati, you will need to attract funding, obtain industry support or get your own business running to disseminate your ideas.

InnovationACT will give you the skills you need to understand all aspects of business and commercialisation, as well as the chance to be awarded up to $20,000 for your business plan.

InnovationACT provides eight weeks of seminars and mentoring from industry leaders and business professionals. Each team will be guided through the process of writing a professional business plan and could be awarded up to $20 000 by our panel of judges.

Open to all staff and students at the Australian National University and the University of Canberra, with no costs and no strings attached. Come along to learn and mingle with industry professionals or put together a winning team and submit a business plan.

Multidisciplinary teams are encouraged and we provide team formation opportunities. ..."

From: InnovationACT, Innovation ACT Ltd., 2009.

Social Networking for Teaching Innovation

InnovationACT is a program for Australian National University and University of Canberra students to learn entrepreneurship.
The ACT Department of Business and Industry Development has funded a new web portal, to be launched 27th October 2009 at 6pm in the Finkel Lecture Theatre at The John Curtin School of Medical Research. The web portal will use social networking for teaching innovation. For catering purposes please RSVP to InnovationACT@gmail.com

Innovation and carbon emissions

Greetings from Innovation ACT at the Finkel Lecture Theatre, John Curtin School of Medical Research, ANU campus, Canberra. Staff and students of the Australian National University and the University of Canberra are learning how to turn their inventions into products and services. I will be talking at about 7pm on "Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT". The session is being recorded and will be available via the Innovation ACT web site. Also I am trying to use a Web Meeting for this.

Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT

I will be talking on "Innovating to lower costs and carbon emissions with ICT" at the Innovation ACT Seminar , 6pm, 3 June 2009 at the Finkel Lecture Theatre, John Curtin School of Medical Research, ANU campus, Canberra (Map). For catering purposes please RSVP to InnovationACT@gmail.com. This is a free event sponsored by the Australian National University and the University of Canberra:

Innovation ACT promotes the learning and understanding necessary for the development and commercialisation of a viable product. One area entrepreneurs can seek to commercialise are socially and environmentally sustainable business practices. An example of this are new methods, ideas and products which can reduce carbon emissions by the use of computers and telecommunications (ICT).

The generally accepted figure is that ICT contributes 2% of carbon emissions, but could achieve a 15% reduction in overall emissions by 2020. The ANU will be teaching Masters students how to do this from July 2009, in the course COMP7310: Green ICT Strategies Students can do the course from anywhere in the world, via the web.

About Innovation ACT:

All University staff and students are invited to attend seminars on commercialisation and business planning given by invited speakers from the business community in the ACT and NSW.

We encourage all everyone to come along to learn about all aspects of business and commercialisation.

Participating teams are required to register and are assigned a business leader as a mentor. Interdisciplinary teams are encouraged and a team formation evening - in the form of a speed dating evening will be held. So come along and find a team to offer your services to.

Each team will produce an executive summary and a professional business plan under the guidance of their mentor and will submit this to be judged. Two opportunities are also given to present their ideas in the form of an elevator pitch, where the teams are given a few minutes to pitch their idea, and a longer presentation prior to awards being given.

All aspects of commericalisation and business planning will be covered during the program. Seminars will be provided on the following topics:
- Introduction to Innovation
- Intellectual Property
- Product Definition
- Market Sizing and Validation
- Taxation and Company Structures
- Financials and Resources
- Environmental and Social Sustainability
- Business plan writing and presentation

Additionally, web based resources will be provided throughout the program.

Innovation ACT Launch

Greetings from the launch of Innovation ACT at "spacedock" (aka John Curtin School of Medical Research) the Australian National University in Canberra. This is a program to teach innovation to students at the ANU and University of Canberra. The guest speaker was fabric artist Benjamin Shine, with hsi work including a portrait of President Barack Obama. As well as art, Benjamin does commercial design work, including the logo for the Aphasia Alliance (a topic I was lecturing on today). After a series of seminars on how to turn an invention into a product or service, the students (and staff) from teams, prepare proposals and compete. The winners receive practical experience to implement their idea. One innovation with the program is that it is no confined to profit making patented idea, but can include non-profit open source community benefit idea. John H. Howard, author of Innovation, Creativity and Leadership talked at the launch. The program events are open and a entertaining as well as informative. As part of the program I will be speaking at the "Environmental and Social Sustainable Seminar",6pm, ednesday, 3rd June. My postings from last year's program are also available.

Date	Event	Speaker
30th April	Introduction to Innovation Seminar	Benjamin Shine
6th May	Intellectual Property for Innovation Seminar	Robert Miller (Spruson and Ferguson)
13th May	Team Formation Evening
20th May	Product and Market Definition Seminar	John Hemphill (Pyksis)
27th May	Financial and Resource Management Seminar	Nick McNaughton (Blue Cove Ventures)
3rd June	Environmental and Social Sustainable Seminar	ANU Green
10th June	Business Plan Writing and Presentation Seminar	Lachlan James
1st July	Elevator Pitch Competition
Monday 20th July	Business Plans and Presentations Due
22nd July	Business Plan Presentations
29th July	Gala Awards Dinner

From: Schedule, InnovationACT, 2009

Innovation Competition in Canberra

InnovationANU, a business and commercialisation program, will be run again at the Australian National University, with the University of Canberra. Staff and students from the universities are coached on how to turn their bright ideas into products and services. They then form teams and compete in an elevator pitch competition. The winners receive financial and other support for developing their ideas. Participation in the event is free. The 2009 program starts with an Innovation ACT Launch, 6 pm Thursday 30th April, at the Finkel Lecture Theatre, Building 54, The John Curtin School of Medical Research, ANU. RSVP to InnovationACT(a)gmail.com

All University staff and students are invited to attend seminars on commercialisation and business planning given by invited speakers from the business community in the ACT and NSW.

We encourage all everyone to come along to learn about all aspects of business and commercialisation.

Participating teams are required to register and are assigned a business leader as a mentor. Interdisciplinary teams are encouraged and a team formation evening - in the form of a speed dating evening will be held. So come along and find a team to offer your services to.

Each team will produce an executive summary and a professional business plan under the guidance of their mentor and will submit this to be judged. Two opportunities are also given to present their ideas in the form of an elevator pitch, where the teams are given a few minutes to pitch their idea, and a longer presentation prior to awards being given.

All aspects of commericalisation and business planning will be covered during the program. Seminars will be provided on the following topics:
- Introduction to Innovation
- Intellectual Property
- Product Definition
- Market Sizing and Validation
- Taxation and Company Structures
- Financials and Resources
- Environmental and Social Sustainability
- Business plan writing and presentation

Additionally, web based resources will be provided throughout the program.

From: About InnovationACT, ANU, 2009

Date	Event	Speaker
30th April	Introduction to Innovation Seminar	Benjamin Shine
6th May	Intellectual Property for Innovation Seminar	Robert Miller (Spruson and Fergusson)
13th May	Team Formation Evening
20th May	Product and Market Definition Seminar	John Hemphill (Pyksis)
27th May	Financial and Resource Management Seminar	Nick McNaughton (Blue Cove Ventures)
3rd June	Environmental and Social Sustainable Seminar	ANU Green
10th June	Business Plan Writing and Presentation Seminar	Lachlan James
1st July	Elevator Pitch Competition
20th July	Business Plans and Presentations Due
22nd July	Business Plan Presentations
29th July	Gala Awards Dinner

From: Schedule InnovationACT, ANU, 2009

Intellectual property webinar

The Lighthouse Business Innovation Centre hosted a web based online seminar (webinar) on "IP Growth Cycle of Early-Stage Companies", 11 November 2008. This was free and a useful event, although it did not cover open access/open source. I wanted to ask about that but the event suddenly ended twenty mintues early, before I had a chance to. The "webniar" format pfoved useful, apart from the abrupt end. But then an IP seminar whi9ch doesn't address open source in the first 30 mintues is of little value.

After I signed up for the event online I was sent a message with a web address for joining. I tried clicking on the link straight away but just got a response saying the site would not be available until the scheduled time. This was frustrating as when it can to that time I found I had to download and install software. This took several minutes so I was late joining the event.

The event used Citrix 's GoToMeeting. This was used with audio broadcast to the participants and synchronised Powerpoint type slides. There was no video used. One problem was that there was no image of the speaker and so less sense of who they were (a still image would have done). Also there was only one voice talking all the time, which gets tedious. It would help to have a different person talking.

The system provides a text back channel for asking questions and for when there are problems with the audio. This arrangement works well, as you do not need to interrupt the speaker. Also there is a "raise your hand" function to get attention.

The audio worked well (I was using the ANU's high bandwidth Internet link so problems would not be expected). It is also possible to use a telephone conference with the Internet used for the slides and text chat.

Other Internet based products provide similar facilities. Also one integrated e-meeting product may not be the best approach. With the synchronised slides you can't go back a slide or skip forward to see how may are left: you are stuck looking at the slide the presenter wants you to. Also you can't read or search the actual text of the presentation (particularly important if you a re blind), as all you have is an image of the slide, not the slide itself. So it might be more useful to simply provide the slides and have people follow along themselves. A separate text chat and audio system can be used, perhaps with the text saying what slide the speaker is talking about occasionally.

Using multiple tools would also make the abrupt end which occurred with the IP webinar less likely. What happened with the Citrix software was suddenly I had a message saying the event had ended and then the application disappeared, along with the slides and text chat. This would be useful for those wanting tight control for a presentation. But for most events it would better iof the slides did not suddenly disappear and the text chat could keep going after the audio ended.

Intellectual property online seminar

The Lighthouse Business Innovation Centre is hosting a web based online seminar (webinar) on "IP Growth Cycle of Early-Stage Companies", 11 November 9:30am Canberra time. Registration online is free:

Licensing of intellectual property (IP) can allow early-stage companies to acquire the rights to commercialise new technology, accelerating their R&D program and their go-to-market plans. In addition, many companies view licensing of their technology as a viable path to market. In each of these cases, the decisions and structuring of license agreements can greatly impact a company’s financing options, its organisational structure, as well as its exit strategy.

This webinar will discuss the stages that companies often go through, from the decision to acquire seed IP, to the decision to commercialise IP through licensing, to what can happen during M&A discussions. Case studies from several companies that highlight the issues and lessons learned will be used to make this webinar a practical, real-world look at the issues as well as the opportunity to monetise technology through licensing.

YOUR FACILITATOR

Martin Suter - Vice-President of Business Development, BelAir Networks.

Bringing to BelAir Networks an impressive track record of wins over a 20 year span, Martin is a results-driven, intellectually agile, strategic business development and technology licensing executive with extensive experience in developing corporate strategy, building asymmetrical strategic relationships and negotiating complex transactions. Previously, Martin was the CEO at Cohda Wireless, where he raised the company’s profile and negotiated a licensing deal with a Fortune 100 vendor in its core franchise.

Prior to Cohda, Martin was Vice President, Business Development at MeshNetworks, Inc., a classic tech transfer/disruptive technology success story that achieved a major liquidity event for its investors in Q4/2004 with its acquisition by Motorola.

Prior to MeshNetworks, Martin was responsible for building several high profile alliances with and for leading technology companies, including Fujitsu, Microsoft, Netscape, SUN Microsystems, and Teradata.

Additionally, Martin has successfully negotiated technology transfer, distribution and/or licensing deals with companies like 3Com, BioChem Pharma, Dow Chemical, Exodus, Fujitsu, IBM, Microsoft, Motorola, Netscape and SUN.

Martin’s blog can be found at www.iplicensing.net ...

Technology Transfer Seminar in Canberra

Tom Hammond and Victor Pantano from the Office of Commercialisation will talk on Technology Transfer at the ANU, Canberra, 2pm 28 October 2008:

Technology Transfer at the ANU
Tom Hammond and Victor Pantano (The Office of Commercialisation, ANU)

DATE: 2008-10-28
TIME: 14:00:00 - 15:00:00
LOCATION: RSISE Seminar Room, ground floor, building 115, cnr. North and Daley Roads, ANU

ABSTRACT:
The Office of Commercialisation provides a number of technology transfer related services to the ANU, with the objective of finding paths beyond traditional sponsored research funding to support ANU research with commercial potential.

Members of the Office of Commercialisation Physical Sciences Team will present a short seminar on the support the Office provides in protecting and managing IP to facilitate research and commercial objectives; identifying and evaluating the commercial potential of research outcomes; and travelling the most appropriate path from research to technology transfer in the physical sciences. ...

From: Technology Transfer at the ANU, CECS, ANU

Dr Victor Pantano (Physical Science)

Before moving to the Office of Commercialisation in March 2006, Victor was based at the University of Warwick where he lead a number of projects associated with technology transfer into the UK automotive industry. Based at the International Automotive Research Centre in the West Midlands, his role involved facilitating the development of industry-based relationships with Centre researchers as an outlet for technology transfer. This included the formation of SME-based technology transfer clusters as a means to enhancing regional development. Prior to this, he completed his industry-based PhD with Ford Motor Company, based in various locations including Australia, India and the US. Victor holds a Bachelor of Science (Chemistry) and a Bachelor of Engineering (Honours) from the ANU.

...

Dr Tom Hammond (Physical Science)

Tom comes to the Office of Commercialisation with academic experience in Zoology and Science Communication, and a career in the craft brewing sector.

After completing a BSc (Hons) in Zoology in 1998, Tom spent some time working in wildlife conservation in Western Australia, before completing a PhD in 2002, focusing on the acoustic behaviour of bushcrickets. An interest turned into a career in the craft brewing industry for several years, before Tom came to the ANU to study a Masters in Science Communication at the ANU. Tom brings a sound technical background, an appreciation of the processes of science communication, and an understanding of the requirements of industry to his role in the Office of Commercialisation. ...

From: Office Team, Office of Commercialisation, The Australian National University

Review of Australia's National Innovation System

Senator Kim Carr, the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, has released the Green Paper report of the expert panel on Australia's national innovation system. The Minister has announced the Government will release a white paper in response by the end of 2008. Unfortunately the report has been provided in a difficult to read format and so is of little value. This appears to have been done deliberately to impede analysis of the report.

Unfortunately the report of the Review has the clumsy title of "venturousaustralia - building strength in innovation". The contraction "venturousaustralia" looks like a misprint and is hard to make sense of ("VenturousAustralia" or "Venturous Australia" would have been better). This perhaps indicates the major problem with the Australian approach to innovation: trying to be too cleaver for our own good.

The panel have provided

1. Report overview and recommendations (1MB of PDF)
2. Full report: venturousaustralia - building strength in innovation (3MB of PDF)

There are also assorted media releases and transcripts from the launch. Unfortunately little thought seems to have gone into making this information available in an easy to understand and systematic way. This also seems to be a common proble with the Australia approach to innovation: assuming that a clear idea is self explanatory.

There is no list of the reports main recommendations provided on the web page and the detailed report is offered to the reader, followed by the smaller, but still too large overview. This material is then followed by a list of annexes, but the reader is given little idea what is in the annexes, as they are labeled 4 to 12 (what happened to 1 to 3?).

It is a shame that a lot of work by some very cleaver people has been largely wasted. Normally I would extract the summary of recommendations from the PDF of the report and convert them to text format for easy access. However in this case this is not possible as the security features of the PDF document have been set to block copying of text from the document. This is occasionally done with company documents to impede those attempting to misuse intellectual property. However, it is difficult to see why this was done in a government report, other than an attempt to make it difficult to disseminate the information and carry out a detailed analysis of the report. It would appear that the report's authors do not want the report looked at in detail.

I suggest that the Minister reject the report and begin the process again using a new panel. There is nothing to be learnt from this report, apart from how not to do a report on innovation.

The ACT Government also commissioned a Report on the ACT Innovation System, which is available online.

Innovation and Technology Statistics

The Australian Bureau of Statistics has released "8101.0 - Innovation and Technology Update" 29/07/2008. This includes stats on ICT in Australia, R&D and "innovation" They also have an ICT Theme page.

1. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Statistics
2. Research & Experimental Development (R&D) Statistics
3. Innovation Statistics
4. Business Characteristics Statistics
5. Other

Innovation ANU Final Round of Judging

The ANU has been running "Innovation ANU": an education program and competition to encourage researchers to commercialize their work. Six teams will present business plans a panel of judges for the finals this week. Interestingly some of the teams chose to develop not-for-profit projects, by adapting the business skills being shown. The projects range from very technical ones (fleets of miniature robot submarines) to ones involving the arts (encouraging music). The program started out with seminars on business issues and intellectual property and then moved on to fun presentations from the teams.

This Wednesday evening 23rd July will be the final evening of
InnovationANU 2008. After four months of hard work six teams will be
presenting their final business plans to our panel of judges and you are
all welcome to attend to see the impressive ideas that have emerged.

Date: Wednesday, 23rd July
Time: 5.30pm for 6.00pm start
Venue: Finkel Lecture Theatre, John Curtin School of Medical Research

Each team has been allocated ten minutes for their presentation, with
5-10 minutes for discussion with the judging panel following. For full
details about the talks and timing please see the attached agenda.

The InnovationANU program this year has been a success thanks to all of
you who got involved attending lectures, preparing and delivering
elevator pitches and finally preparing and submitting business plans.
From all the organisers we would like to extend our thanks to the over
100 participants who have been involved in InnovationANU in some
capacity this year. We hope this is the first of many years for this
program and we wish you all the very best in your future entrepreneurial
endeavours and hope to see you next year for InnovationANU 2009.

Kindest Regards,

The InnovationANU Organisers

Business Development Program
Team Presentations
Wednesday, 23rd July 2008
5:30pm
Finkel Lecture Theatre
John Curtin School of Medical Research

Agenda

5.30pm Drinks
6.00pm Welcome and Opening Remarks
6.15pm Presentation 1: One Corp - Generation Y Receipt Storage
6.40pm Presentation 2: Fault Technology - Blind minerals exploration
7.05pm Presentation 3: Photos Inkorporated - Online community photo-sharing and printing
7.30pm Break
7.45pm Presentation 4: Harp Centre Australia - A Centre for Harp in the Nation’s Capital
8.10pm Presentation 5: Cardishield - Cardiac protection
8.35pm Presentation 6: Serafina - Swarms of submarines
9.00pm Closing Remarks

Neither Microsoft nor Netscape started the web revolution

"Bill Gates: How A Geek Changed The World" a BBS interview with Bill Gates was broadcast by SBS 8 July 2008 (online video from SBS). This was a more than a puff piece with some criticisms of Gates included.

One point made was that Microsoft was late embracing the Internet. Microsoft had to scramble to create a web browser in response to Netscape. But not mentioned was that it was the Mosaic web browser developed by the non profit National Center for Supercomputing Applications which popularized the web. Both Netscape and Microsoft then licensed Mosaic to make their Navigator and Internet Explorer browsers. Early versions were little different from Mosaic or from each other. And I must be about the last person in the world who paid for a copy of Netscape Navigator, shortly before they decided to give it away. ;-)

Program Synopsis
TV Show Name:
Broadcast Date: Tuesday 8 July 2008
Channel: Free to Air / SBS
Broadcast Time: 8.30 pm
Classifications: Other, (CC)
Timeslot Duration: 60 mins
Official title / weblink if available: CUTTING EDGE: BILL GATES

How A Geek Changed The World - After two years of negotiations, BBC filmmaker Fiona Bruce pulled off a rare coup: a candid full-length interview with Bill Gates. For many years the richest man in the world and the founding genius of Microsoft is set to step down from his company and get on with the business of giving away £12 billion through the charitable foundation he runs with his wife Melinda and father William Gates Sr. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation aims to improve the quality of life for people in the US and around the globe, with a focus on tackling health problems in the developing world and improving access to drugs. Bruce's interview and her meetings with Gates' friends and rivals uncover a sometimes irascible character, who has long prided himself on corporate aggression and is only recently said to have begun mellowing. (From the UK, in English)

From: ebroadcast.com.au

Canberra Open Coffee

Canberra Open Coffee is an informal meeting for designers, bloggers, developers, investors and anyone interested in start-ups to get to know each other over coffee. First Saturday on the Month. Venue: Essen, Garema Place, Civic Saturday 5 July from 3pm Contact: Rohan Mitchell ... Email: rohan(a)rohanmitchell.com

Innovation ANU Elevator Pitches

Greetings from the Innovation ANU Elevator Pitches in Canberra. This is the culmination of a series of evening courses to educate university people in how to turn an idea into a product. Earlier each person with an idea presented and then formed teams. About a dozen of those teams now get two minutes each to present their idea. Two judges, from the venture capital industry, select the best for an award and then for development.

The presentations are entertaining. It is remarkably difficult present an idea in two minutes. One part I found surprising was that few of the teams used props for presentations. Most presentations were someone standing at a lectern talking. This makes me appreciate the quality of the presentations which the ANU software engineering present.

Topics of the presentations were aids for home finance, puzzles, teaching English, B2C, photo printing, fast food catering. At that point the next presenter, Felix Schill woke me up by pulling a miniature robot submarine out of their backpack and said these would cost $15,000 each. This is the Serafina, developed by ANU (sort of an underwater Aerosonde).

The next presentation was the EtherDVB", video over Ethernet product. That was followed by the BushLAN system for long distance broadband (might be useful for the last few percent of the population with the government's broadband system). This was followed by a proposal for electronic medical records. Then gold prospecting.

At that point the presentations changed outlook to one with a "non-profit" proposal. The first was about reconciliation and learning about indigenous culture.

When then flipped back to a proposal for keeping track of receipts. There was then a second food proposal. One of the few medical proposals was for a drug to reduce deaths due to heart disease. We then had a proposal for bio-gas for developing nations using cow manure for cooking. There was then a second proposal for e-health records. A less usual proposal was for a low cost harp to be sold online (bit like the OLPC, but for music). The last presentation was for asthma treatment: a counter for dispensers and a test kit to check the medicine is present. It was claimed that these are already protected by patents.

The one hour of elevation pitches went very quickly. The judges are now considering their decision.

... first round of judging and awards and will require teams to submit a two page executive summary and a 2 minute (maximum) elevator pitch. Details about both of these submissions are outlined below. Executive Summary submission will be by midday, Tuesday 22nd April (the day before the judging evening), to give the judges plenty of time to read the executive summaries. The elevator pitch will be conducted on the evening and the order of the teams will be selected randomly on the evening. Both the page and time limits are fixed and teams will be asked to strictly abide by these.

The elevator pitch is a two minute pitch to sell your vision/idea of a product, service or project. The name reflects the fact that an elevator pitch can be delivered in the time span of an elevator ride. The elevator pitch should be delivered without visual aids (pictures, powerpoint presentations, etc.) and within the required time limit, after which the team will be asked to stop immediately.

Investors will often judge the quality of an idea and team on the basis of the quality of a short pitch such as this as any weaknesses are often easily exposed in this process. An effective elevator pitch is designed to give the audience just enough information that they will have a sense of what you are talking about and want to know more. Second, and just as importantly, it is designed to not give the audience so much information so that they feel overwhelmed (and tune you out). There is an overview of the requirements for the elevator pitch on the resources page of the Innovation ANU Website (www.anu.edu.au/InnovationANU). There is also a good overview of an elevator pitch at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq0tan49rmc.

An executive summary is similar to a written version of the elevator pitch and outlines many of the relevant elements of your concept and idea and why it will be a success. This should be a two page document without images or other visual elements. There is an overview of the requirements for the executive summary on the resources page of the Innovation ANU Website (www.anu.edu.au/InnovationANU). The executive summary should be submitted in word (.doc) or pdf formats by midday, Tuesday 22nd April. Late submission will rule participants ineligible for this award.

Innovation ANU Elevator Pitch Awards Evening

The Australian National Unviersity is having an evening of "elevator pitches" by budding entrepreneurs on Wednesday in Canberra. This is part of a program to educate university people in how to turn an idea into a product.

The first awards evening is upon us this week and we are in for a very exciting evening. The evening will commence at 6pm in the foyer and later in The Finkel Lecture Theatre of The John Curtin School of Medical Research this Wednesday 23rd April.

The first elevator pitch will commence at 6.30pm and the order of teams will be randomly chosen on the evening. Refreshments will be served all evening. Each elevator pitch will be followed by a short question and answer time. At the conclusion of all the pitches the judges will award the winners of both the elevator pitch and executive summaries with their awards.

Failure to submit an executive summary or elevator pitch may make participants ineligible for the major awards at the conclusion of the program. The following details were sent out last week and are included as a reminder of what is required this week.

* Please note the deadline of the executive summary submission is midday, Tuesday 22nd April, which is the day before the awards evening this week.

* If any more information is required please contact us, otherwise we look forward to seeing you all there.


Regards
The Innovation ANU Organisers


Next week will be the first round of judging and awards and will require teams to submit a two page executive summary and a 2 minute (maximum) elevator pitch. Details about both of these submissions are outlined below. Executive Summary submission will be by midday, Tuesday 22nd April (the day before the judging evening), to give the judges plenty of time to read the executive summaries. The elevator pitch will be conducted on the evening and the order of the teams will be selected randomly on the evening. Both the page and time limits are fixed and teams will be asked to strictly abide by these.

The elevator pitch is a two minute pitch to sell your vision/idea of a product, service or project. The name reflects the fact that an elevator pitch can be delivered in the time span of an elevator ride. The elevator pitch should be delivered without visual aids (pictures, powerpoint presentations, etc.) and within the required time limit, after which the team will be asked to stop immediately.

Investors will often judge the quality of an idea and team on the basis of the quality of a short pitch such as this as any weaknesses are often easily exposed in this process. An effective elevator pitch is designed to give the audience just enough information that they will have a sense of what you are talking about and want to know more. Second, and just as importantly, it is designed to not give the audience so much information so that they feel overwhelmed (and tune you out). There is an overview of the requirements for the elevator pitch on the resources page of the Innovation ANU Website (www.anu.edu.au/InnovationANU). There is also a good overview of an elevator pitch at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq0tan49rmc.

An executive summary is similar to a written version of the elevator pitch and outlines many of the relevant elements of your concept and idea and why it will be a success. This should be a two page document without images or other visual elements. There is an overview of the requirements for the executive summary on the resources page of the Innovation ANU Website (www.anu.edu.au/InnovationANU). The executive summary should be submitted in word (.doc) or pdf formats by midday, Tuesday 22nd April. Late submission will rule participants ineligible for this award.

Innovative Ideas Forum on Mobile Internet and Archives

The third annual Innovative Ideas Forum started at the National Library of Australia in Canberra this morning. This is a one day event for librarians and other information professionals. There is almost a full house in the NLA theatre. It is very pleasant to be able to just sit here and let someone else do the organizing, after last week's Open 2020 Summit.

The proceedings are being recorded and will be podcast by the NLA, along with copies of the speaker's slides next week.

The ideas forum is a curious blend of the old and the new. Demetrius of Phaleron, librarian at the ancient Great Library at Alexandria, would have felt at home at the NLA; it looks like a temple for books. If you look closely, some of what was on paper, such as catalogs and signs, have been replaced with electronic screens. But the operation and feeling remains the same. No doubt Demetrius would have attended forums on "papyrus 2.0". ;-)

The event was opened by Professor Gerard Goggin on Internet and Mobile Phone. He described broadband as a "totem" for the new government and asked what it might be used for and the role of wireless. Roger Clarke got a mention in recording the history of the Internet. Gerrard pointed out that scientists figured prominently, but activists should be mentioned. My recollection from around the early 1990s is that we deliberately clothed any social activism of the Internet in scientific language to make it politically palatable. Having, for example, someone who had been jailed for their political activism did not seem a good way to get the government onside.

Professor Goggin mentioned several Internet historians and activists. But he did not mention Carl Malamud's "Exploring the Internet : A Technical Travelogue" (1992), which was about trip around the world visiting Internet pioneers, including those in Australia. This book has a large effect on me. Much of what is advocated has happened. Some of open access to documents may be about to happen.

Professor Goggin asks for histories of how and when the Internet developed in different parts of the world. However, he proposes to approach this from that of the key figures involved. The problem with this is that the people saying things publicly in traditional forums were not necessarily the people actually key to the process. Many of the key strategists were not public figures, relying on others to put the message out. Also the technology was used, so that the work was done by loose online groups which did not necessarily have leaders or formal structure. Those involved in this process may not necessarily know who did what.

This distributed approach still applies to Internet development. As an example, a few weeks ago I was part of a process to tell the government that it was not a good idea to give each school child a laptop. Within 24 hours, a cabinet minister said this to the media. It is not clear who said what to who and for this form of political communication to work, the lines of communication need to remain unclear.

It was not clear in the 1990s that "the Internet" would be a success and their were many alternatives which were proposed, failed and forgotten. It is very much the case with the Internet and the web that the victors have written the history. The other forgotten histories are buried in electronic archives, yet to be dug up by Internet archaeologists.

Professor Goggin pointed out that exciting new developments in the use of mobile phones in developing nations do not get considered. He also said that exactly what would be done with broadband on mobiles in Australia was not yet clear.

The commons approach then got a mention (of which Creative Commons is an example). He argued that the commons approach to mobiles has not been explored. This is relevant to broadband development in Australia, as the Australian Government recently cancelled the Opel contract to build a wireless broadband network in regional Australia. The government has no viable strategy to replace that network. A commons approach may help solve a looming political problem for the government. The opposition could get political traction around the perception that regional Australia is missing out on broadband access.

At question time I asked if historians needed to adopt analytical techniques to discover the history of the Internet. I suggested reading what people wrote in old fashioned paper books is not the way to do it. Also reading Wired magazine is not the way to do it (described by my technical colleagues as "The Dolly magazine of the computer industry"). The Internet Archive and others have kept records which can be analyzed to see who said what first. Professor Goggin replied that both approaches were needed. He was working on an analytical analysis of how Australian youth use mobiles, but it was also important to look at what historians say about topic.

Next there was Kris Carpenter Negulescu from the Internet Archive. She started off pointing out that the archive has more than just copies of old web pages, with books, music and video. Alos the use of the archive for research was emphasized, with "content as infrastructure" and "examination of primary data". She mentioned challenge with archives linking together with APIs. One aspect of interest was the risk of patent which risk the use of common approaches, such as a US company patenting the us of a thumbnail of a web page next to a reference to it. As an expert witness I have used the Internet Archive to check the prior art for such patents.

One interesting development was the use of Zotero in place of End Notes to keep research references. Mellon is funding an extension to this to allow a social network of researchers to exchange their references in a closed group or publicly.

Also it is interesting that data can in the archives can have analysis. An example Kris gave was of the use of the term "Cube Farm" to refer to an open plan office with low partitions. In passing she mentioned that Herman Miller was horrified that his idea of a more comfortable more flexible office layout turned into the confined cube farm.

Kris pointed out that the trend in research funding in the USA was to require the researchers to plan for sustaining the results of their work beyond the end of the funding. In Australia there has been some limited discussion of doing this, with researchers having to put their data in an institutional repository and pay for its upkeep.

Product and Market Definition for Innovation

Greetings from the Product and Market Definition seminar by John Hemphill from Pyksis. This is one of a series by ANU Innovation to encourage staff and students to innovate:

This seminar will focus on the difference between an idea and a product and going from an idea to the product. It will then focus on the right market to target, market segmentation and the right approach to market analysis and validation.

Last week's seminar was replaced by a "speed dating" event, where budding innovators presented their ideas and then invited others to join there team. This was entertaining, as well as informative.

As well as the educational content of these events, there is excellent catering from "The Vanilla Bean" cafe. One extra source of entertainment this week is that four people were working on the electronic information sign in the foyer, next to the Jackie Chan Research Center. The people had the front of the electronic sign open and were working on the display.

This week's seminar was a conventional format with slides and talk by John Hemphill. This went through the process of working out if an invention is a good idea: what problem does it solve? Who has done it before? Will people pay for it? My favourite comments from the evening, was a quote from motoring writer Jeremy Clarkson on the topic of Tata India buying Range Rover: "What would Ghandi say?".

Also mentioned:

• Presentation by John Hemphill

• Market size estimator by John Hemphill

• The InnovationXchange (IXC)
• Nine Sigma
  

Review of the National Innovation System

An expert panel reviewing Australia's national innovation system. Senator Kim Carr, the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, set a deadline for a Green Paper from the panel by July 2008, but set himself no deadline for the White Paper from Government in response.

... The Panel will identify gaps and weaknesses in the innovation system and develop proposals to address them. In particular, it will:

• Identify a set of principles to underpin the role and participation of the public sector in innovation.
  
• Develop a set of national innovation priorities to complement the national research priorities, ensuring the objectives of research programs and other innovation initiatives are complementary.
  
• Identify regulatory and other barriers to innovation and recommend ways to minimise these.
  
• Examine the scope for simplifying and reducing program duplication and ensuring that any support provided is well-targeted and easy to access.
  
• Consider the appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency of the Research and Development (R&D) Tax Concession Scheme in promoting innovation and make recommendations to improve innovation outcomes.
  
• Consider ways to improve the governance of the national innovation system to support higher expectations of government agencies and industry.
  
• Assess the appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency of the Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) Program and make recommendations to improve innovation outcomes.

In conducting the review the Panel is to have regard to relevant reports and studies, including the Productivity Commission's Report on Public Support for Science and Innovation. ...

From: Terms of Reference, Review of the National Innovation System, Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, 2008

The panel is:

Dr Terry Cutler (Chair)	Principal of Cutler & Company
Dr Nicholas Gruen	CEO of Lateral Economics
Prof Mary O'Kane	Executive Chairman of Mary O’Kane & Associates Pty Ltd
Prof Steve Dowrick	Professor, School of Economics, the Australian National University
Ms Narelle Kennedy	Chief Executive of the Australian Business Foundation
Prof Glyn Davis (AC)	Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the University of Melbourne
Ms Catherine Livingstone (AO)	Director – Future Directions International - Macquarie Group Ltd - WorleyParsons Ltd - Telstra Corporation Ltd - Macquarie Graduate School of Management Pty Ltd
Dr Megan Clark	Vice President Technology, BHP Billiton
Professor John Foster	Head of the School of Economics, University of Queensland
Dr Jim Peacock (ex-officio) (AC)	Chief Scientist
Ms Patricia Kelly (ex-officio)	Deputy Secretary of the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

The experts announced to help the panel are: Prof Alan Hughes, Prof Richard Lester, Prof Stan Metcalfe and Prof Keith Smith.

The web page for the review has a lot of useful links to materials. Really there are too many links on the page and it reminds me of a Chinese newspaper web site and could do with some rearrangement. ;-)

Here are some of the items:

1. Minister Carr's Speech - New Agenda for Prosperity, to the Australian/Melbourne Institute 2008 Economic and Social Outlook Conference.
2. Review Submission Process- Information on the process for providing submissions to the Review.
   
3. Consultation Presentation - The presentation made by Dr Terry Cutler at each of the stakeholder consultations is now available.
   
4. Video Presentations - An introduction to the Review from Minister Carr and Review Panel Chair Dr Terry Cutler
5. Letter from the Chair of the Expert Panel
6. Outcomes of Feb 21 Expert Panel Meeting
7. Working Group Membership
8. Chair's Speech to the Australian Industrial Research Group - the text of Dr Terry Cutler's speech on 25 February 2008.
   
10. Review Submission Process
11. Submissions Received - submissions will be made available here

Questions and Answers about the Review

Review Fact Sheet

Review of the Australian Textile, Clothing and Footwear industry

Review of Australia's Automotive Industry

Review of Australian Higher Education

Review of Export Policies and Programs

The ACT Government also commissioned a Report on the ACT Innovation System, which is available online.