Academic Inventions Generate More Income than Government Ones

Universities and federal laboratories often license their inventions to industry as a way to commercialize those technical advances. Which generate higher royalties?

Recently released data from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM) indicates that the average university invention brought in significantly more in licensing income than the average invention from a federal laboratory in 2009, the latest year for which data are available.

The chart below indicates that the average license made by an academic institution earned nearly three times the income of the average license made by a federal government laboratory, $99,385 versus $36,512.

Of course a simple comparison like this doesn’t tell us why university inventions generate more royalties. Perhaps the average university invention has been licensed for longer, allowing it to generate more income. Maybe universities license more of their inventions to companies in industries that pay higher royalties. Perhaps university technology licensing officers drive better bargains than their counterparts in federal labs. Maybe the terms of university technology licensing agreements are different from those of federal labs.

I would not be surprised if all of these factors account for some of the difference in royalties earned by university and federal laboratory inventions. But I’m curious if readers know of others.

About the Author

Scott Shane is A. Malachi Mixon III, Professor of Entrepreneurial Studies at Case Western Reserve University. He is the author of nine books, including Fool's Gold: The Truth Behind Angel Investing in America ; Illusions of Entrepreneurship: and The Costly Myths that Entrepreneurs, Investors, and Policy Makers Live By.

 

View the Original article

Free Conference on Government Contracting in Dallas

If you’ve ever wondered whether government contracting is right for your business — or you’re already in government contacting and want to make networking connections and learn more about finding government opportunities — then next week’s Victory in Procurement event in Dallas, Texas is worth checking out.

It’s a free event. It will be on October 18, 2011 from 8:00 am to 3:30 pm, at the Marriott Dallas City Center. I’m going to be there — I hope to see you there.

The Victory in Procurement events are like a traveling show that visits cities throughout the U.S..  Over the past year I’ve attended several, including one in Los Angeles last month.  American Express OPEN (a long time sponsor here) produces the events, and asks me to attend to cover the action via social media and through blog articles.

There’s something for everyone, whether you’re a complete novice or already have some experience in government contracting.  Concurrent sessions catering to both levels of knowledge.  Topics include:

• Government Contracting 101
• Getting on the GSA Schedule
• Leveraging certifications for a competitive edge
• Researching the right opportunities
• Developing effective teaming relationships
• Creating a powerful capabilities statement to pitch successfully

There are buyer/seller matchmaking sessions.  SCORE counselors are on hand for business counseling sessions, too.

The speakers are always excellent.  The Dallas event will feature Mark Oliver from the U.S. Department of Interior, and Joe Jordan from the Small Business Administration.

Although the event is complimentary, you must register in advance at Vipgovtcontracting.com.  Don’t wait!

About the Author

Anita Campbell is the Founder of Small Business Trends which has been following trends in small businesses since 2003. She is host of the weekly Small Business Trends Radio Show, with over 400 interviews logged; and owner of BizSugar, a social media site for small businesses.

Connect with Anita Campbell:

 

View the Original article

Freelancers Ask Government to Count Independent Workers

This is a guest post by Bloomberg Businessweek reporter Victoria Stilwell.
The number of so-called contingent workers hasn't been measured since 2005, when the Bureau of Labor Statistics last calculated the population. And now that the bureau has requested funding to resume the headcount, the Freelancers Union advocacy group is calling for changes in the way these workers are labeled and how their contribution to the U.S. economy is measured.
In a new policy paper, Freelancers Union argues that the government is "ignoring a crucial, and growing, segment of the economy that is transforming the U.S. workforce."
The BLS's contingent work supplement was discontinued six years ago due to lack of funding. That year, contingent workers, which the BLS defines as laborers who consider their jobs temporary, made up about 4 percent of total employment.
But Sara Horowitz, founder of the Brooklyn, N.Y.-based Freelancers Union, says the BLS figures don't accurately represent the many types of workers outside of permanent, full-time employees. She says the survey should be reinstated with a broader definition of what a contingent worker is, what the Freelancers Union calls an "independent worker." By this definition, independent workers constitute at least 30 percent of the workforce, based on a 2006 report from the Government Accountability Office. The GAO included the following categories of workers:

self-employed workers
temps
contract workers
day laborers
on-call workers
part-time workers

"What I find so profoundly unsettling is that the number one issue that human beings are having in America right now is the lack of work," says Horowitz, whose union boasts almost 160,000 members. "And to not have a clue about how people are really working, and that this isn't a huge focus -- why isn't the Department of Labor making this front and center?"
The debate hinges on the lack of legal protection afforded to contingent workers, such as unemployment insurance, minimum wage and overtime protections, and anti-discrimination laws, according to the GAO report. Furthermore, these workers are less likely to have access to the health insurance or pension benefits that traditional full-time workers have.
Tom Nardone, assistant commissioner for current employment analysis at the BLS, says the bureau funded the supplement for each odd numbered year beginning in 1995 until money ran out in 2005. He says there have been other proposals to have the supplement re-funded, but Congress didn't pass them. The BLS has requested to reinstate the supplement in President Barack Obama's 2012 budget submitted in February, though Congress has yet to act on it.
Nardone says BLS data has been interpreted in different ways to get the higher numbers that the GAO and the Freelancers Union report. He says that while the bureau doesn't have a monopoly on the definition of contingent, some of the categories that other groups like the union are adding don't "square" with the concept of contingency. For example, the broader measure counts all part-time workers alongside full-time business owners who work for themselves.
"Someone could have a restaurant and be self-employed," Nardone said. "Do you want to count that person as a contingent employee because they don't have an employer? It's not for us to say that's incorrect, but the onus is on them to make sure they're being transparent in terms of what they're doing."
Horowitz argues that the term "contingent" is outdated and should no longer be used to describe workers. If the supplement is reinstated, she says people should be categorized as independent based on their work, not whether they think of themselves as business owners.
"It shouldn't matter what your mental state is," Horowitz said. "It should matter what your action is. You should be asking questions that are: What are you doing now? How are you filing your taxes? How many hours do you want to be working, and how many hours are you working?"
]]>

View the Original article