Joining Forces in a World of Open Innovation: · PDF fileJoining Forces in a World of Open...

Joining Forces in a World of Open Innovation:

FOR COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH

AND KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER

BETWEEN SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY

GUIDELINES

Revision 1.1 October 2009

RevisionHistory

March2005 Initialrelease,version1.0

October2009 Version 1.1, updated to reflect the conclusions of the December 2007 Conference and subsequentanalysisof issuessuchasSMEs,StateAid,HumanFactors; thegrowingmaturityof theknowledgeexchangesystem;the2008CommunityRecommendationsonIPRmanagement;andresultsfromtheDOC-CAREERSprojectpublishedin2009.

SupportingInstitutions

TheResponsiblePartneringInitiativewaslaunchedin2004bythefollowinginstitutionalorganizations: •EuropeanUniversityAssociation •EuropeanAssociationofResearchandTechnologyOrganizations •EuropeanIndustrialResearchManagementAssociation •ProTonEurope

Otherorganizationsmayelecttoendorsetheinitiativeanditsrecommendationsbyinformingthecoordinatingteamviaoneoftheaddressesgivenonthebackcover.Suchorganizationswillbekeptinformedofdevelopments,includingplannedrevisionstothisHandbook,andmaysubmitsuggestionsandcomments,although,forpracticalreasons,it isnotpossibletoensurethatendorsementsalwayscorrespondtothelatestversionoftheHandbookorthatallsubmittedsuggestionsandcommentshavebeenaddressed.

Theinitiativeandits2005recommendationshavebeenendorsedby:

•BUSINESSEUROPE •EuropeanCommission,CommissionersPotocnikandVerheugen

October 2009Revision 1.1

Contents

Definitions 5

1. ScopeandPurpose 6

2. CollaborativeResearchandKnowledgeTransferasKeySourcesofInnovation: ChangingPatternsandChangingObligations 8

3. HowtobeaResponsiblePartner 10

4.TheHumanAspectsofEffectiveCollaboration 14

5. IdentifyingGoodPartners 16

6.ConstructingtheCollaborativeResearchAgreement 17

7. OtherLegalAspectsofCollaboration 21

8. ConcludingRemarks 25

Appendix:ImplementationGuidelinesandChecklists 26

References 29


This Handbook describes a voluntary programme of Responsible Partnering aimedat improving strategic collaboration and knowledge exchange between companiesand publicly-funded research organizations (for convenience, referred to as PROs),including Universities, Research and Technology Organizations and other publicand semi-public bodies which engage in R&D. It addresses the organization andmanagement of collaborative research and knowledge exchange, and the contexts(including education) in which these activities take place. The Handbook provides“selfhelp”guidelinesintendedtohelpseniorstaffdevelopandimplementeffectiveapproaches to these activities, develop the right professional skills and achieve aneffectiveinternalorientationdirectedtowardsaddressingtheorganization’sobjectivesthroughpartnership.

Society benefits when the fruits of research are exploited for social and economicpurposes. Responsible Partnering reflects the belief, which is widely substantiated,thatwell-managedcollaborationbetweenpublicandprivatesectorbodiesbenefitseveryone.Taking a strategic approach to collaboration enables the development ofradically new products and services and better innovation, thereby creating morevalue from the investments made and greater effectiveness as well as efficiency.Furthermore,byestablishingbetterfoundationsforsuccessfulresearchpartnershipsandknowledgeexchange, it reinforces thevalueof thePROwithinsociety, therebyenhancingtheprospectforcontinuedtop-qualityresearchandeducation.

When this Handbook was first being written, the consequences of global, openapproachestoscienceandinnovationwereonlystartingtobecomeapparent.AmajorbenefitoftheResponsiblePartneringexercisehasbeenthecontinuinginvolvementof the main stakeholders, resulting in a significantly increased appreciation of theissues involved in the development of long term strategic partnerships. Alongsidethis increased experience and understanding, major policy initiatives have beenlaunched to establish and strengthen the European Research Area and underpinregional capabilities. But ultimately the success of these initiatives depends uponwhat happens at “grass roots” level. This revision aims to bring the Handbookup-to-datewiththesedevelopmentswithoutfundamentallychangingtheprincipalrecommendations.

Responsible PartneringJoining Forces in a World of Open Innovation:

Guidelines for Collaborative Research and Knowledge Transfer between Science and Industry

5

RESPONSIBLE PARTNERING · GUIDELINES FOR COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER BETWEEN SCIENCE AND INDUSTRY


ResponsiblePartnering A voluntary initiative to improve the effectiveness of collaborative researchandknowledgeexchangeinvolvingthepublicandprivatesectors.ResponsiblePartnering addresses situations in which participants from the public andprivatesectorseachmakesignificantcontributions to theeventualsuccessofcollaborativeresearch.TheprinciplessetoutinthisHandbookhavebeenobtained by examining factors shown to lead to sustainable “win-win”situations.

Implementing these principles depends on appropriate organizationalstrategies and professional management skills. In adhering to ResponsiblePartnering, players recognize that their interests overlap and establishprocedures to work together effectively. This Handbook provides guidanceforhandlingthesesituationsandisnotarulebook.Complianceisvalidatedthroughinternalself-assessmentanddialoguewithpartners.

Publicly-FundedResearchOrganization(PRO) Any institution (Universities, Research and Technology Organizations andothers)thatcarriesoutR&Dforbroaderapplicationandbenefit,toasignificantextentusingpublicfunding.

CollaborativeResearch Activities where several parties are engaged in research towards sharedobjectives,collectivelybuildingontheirindividualbackgroundandsidegroundinthecreationofnewforegroundknowledge.

CollaborativeResearchAgreement Thecontractualdocumentsettingoutthepurpose,objectivesandconditionsoftheintendedcollaborativeresearchprojectorprogrammeofprojects.

ContractResearch Activitieswhereoneormorepartiesperformataskforanotheratanagreedpriceandoncontract.ContractResearchtendstobeshorter-terminnature,andbedrivenbydifferentdynamicsthanCollaborativeResearch,andrequiresspecific types of agreement that reflect the straightforward nature of thebusinessdeal.Theterm“ContractResearch”isformallydefinedintheEuropeanStateaidrules.AlthoughmanyoftheprinciplesofResponsiblePartneringarerelevantforContractResearch,thisHandbookisnotprimarilyconcernedwithsuchactivities.

OpenScience The traditional paradigm of public-sector research based on the freecollaborationandrapidpublicdisclosureofresultswithnorestrictionsonuseotherthanacknowledgingthesource.

OpenInnovation The emerging paradigm for innovation, involving business models thatuse partnering, licensing and venturing to combine internal and externalresources,ideasandtechnologies.

Definitions

6



1.1 ThisHandbookofResponsiblePartneringdescribesavoluntaryprogrammedesignedtohelpCompaniesandPublicly-FundedResearchOrganizations(PROs)improvetheeffectivenessoftheircollaborativeresearchactivitiesandknowledgeexchange.Itisprimarilywrittenforusebyseniormanagerswhohavestrategicoroperationalresponsibilitiesforsuchworkandisorganizedasfollows:

•ScopeandPurpose •Collaborative Research and Knowledge Transfer as Key Sources of Innovation: Changing Patterns and Changing

Obligations •HowtobeaResponsiblePartner •TheHumanAspectsofEffectiveCollaboration •IdentifyingGoodPartners •ConstructingtheCollaborativeResearchAgreement •OtherLegalAspectsofCollaboration Theappendixprovidesachecklistofstepsthatorganizationscantaketoimplementtheguidelinesgiveninthebody

oftheHandbook.Referencesareprovidedtootherreportsandwebsitesthathelpmaketheoutlinedapproachmoreconcrete.CopiesofthisHandbookandsupportingmaterialcanbeobtainedatwww.responsible-partnering.org

1.2 ResponsiblePartneringreflectsthebelief,alreadywidelysubstantiated,thatwell-managedcollaborationbetweenpublicandprivatesectorbodiesbenefitseveryone.Itisimportanttounderstandthat(withtheexceptionofthelegalpointscoveredinchapter7)theapproachrecommendedhereisbaseduponinternalcommitmentandself-assessmentratherthanexternalcertification.InordertobeaResponsiblePartner,aCompanyoraPROcommitsitselftothespiritoftheseguidelinesby:

•Implementing a structured process that is consistent with the principles of Responsible Partnering, defines clearand equitable objectives in respect of collaboration and knowledge exchange and then achieves the desired levelof performance by using learning from others, regular feedback from partner organizations and documented self-assessmentstoensurethequalityofactivepartnerships.

Achievingdurablepartnershipsrequiresconsiderablemutualunderstanding,respectandgive-and-take,andagreatdealofprofessionalismandhardwork.Theprocessbeginsbyassessingthepartthatcollaborativeresearchandknowledgetransfer activities make in meeting a Company’s or PRO’s strategic objectives and continues by considering how toimplementtheseactivitiesinwaysthatwillbeeffectiveinmeetingthisstrategyandalsobeconsideredequitablebythedesiredpartners.

ResponsiblePartneringprovidesaframeworkforthecompanyorPROtoestablishobjectives,prioritiesandapproachesthatarerelevanttoitssituationandobjectives.ReadersareencouragedtousetheHandbooktoinformandguidetheirownapproaches,nottoimposetheirvaluesonpotentialpartners.

Responsible Partnering as part of Effective Knowledge Exchange

1.3 TheResponsiblePartneringinitiativebuildsontheexperiencessharedduringaseriesofeventsinvolvingthemembersof Europe’s leading associations for research-based companies (EIRMA), universities (EUA), research and technologyorganizations (EARTO) and knowledge transfer organizations linked to these PROs (ProTon Europe), including SpecialConferencesheldin2004and2007[1]andanextensivevalidationexercisecarriedoutin2006withabroadgroupofstakeholders.ThefindingsoftheseactivitiesprovidethecontextforthisHandbook.

1.4 Companies and PROs have different missions, but their combined activities in the fields of education, research,development,innovationandknowledgetransferactivitieshelptounderpinthediversityandvitalityofoursocieties.TheeventsthatlaunchedResponsiblePartneringdemonstratedawidely-sharedbeliefinmaintainingthedistinctmissionsofpublicandprivatesectorbodies;highlightedchangeswhichbringsomeaspectsofthesemissionsclosertogether;butalsoconfirmedthatthechallengesassociatedwitheffectiveknowledgeexchangeareaninevitableconsequenceof

1. Scope and Purpose

7



thedifferentmissionsandaccompanyingmindsets.Handlingtheconsequencesisbecominganincreasinglyimportantfeature of the development of advanced knowledge and skills, the conversion of knowledge into useful, innovativeproductsandservices,andthecontinuedprovisionofcadresofwell-educatedandinformedpeople.

1.5 Atfirst,theResponsiblePartneringinitiativefocusedonthechangingpatternsofresearchcollaborationbetweenlargerPROsandcompanies,mediatedby(oftennewlyestablished)technologytransferoffices.Thisscopehasbeenextendedtoincludetheexperiencesofsmallercompaniesandinstitutionsandsubsequentlydevelopedfurthertoaddressaspectsofeducation,inparticularjointdoctoraltraining.Thisdevelopmentinthescopeofknowledgeexchangeisexpectedtocontinue,mirroringchangesintheenvironmentssupportingeffectiveeducation,researchandinnovation,andaimingalwaystowardsachievingstrongandsustainablelinksbetweenthepublicandprivatesectors.

1.6 Asbuildingblocks,ResponsiblePartneringdefinestwoprinciplesgoverningtheuseofknowledgethathasbeencreatedbyPROsusingpublicfunding.Itemphasizestheneedtomaximizethelocalbenefitsobtainedfromknowledgegeneratedthroughpublicinvestments(forexampleachievedthroughstrengtheningthelocalresearchandinnovation“ecosystem”)andtheneedtoadoptresponsibleapproachestothistask.Usingtheseprinciples,theHandbookdevelopsguidelinesforstrategicandoperationalmanagementandaself-assessmentcomplianceprocesstailoredtoreflectthedistinctneedsandactivitiesofCompanies,UniversitiesandResearchandTechnologyOrganizations.

Durable Partnerships

1.7 Experienceindicatesthatresearchandinnovationactivitiesaremostproductivewithinrelativelystable,yetalsodynamic,environmentsthatencouragethemobilityanduseofideasandarepunctuatedfromtimetotimebysignificantnewchallenges.Someauthorsusethephrase“ResearchandInnovation-FriendlyEcologies”todescribetheseenvironments.However, it is trust and stability – not only the individual research contract or excellent facilities – that provide theprimaryconditionsforestablishingprogrammesthatmeetpartners’needs.Goodoutcomesarearesultofdemonstratedcommitment.

1.8 Durablecollaborationscantakemanyforms: •Continuingaffiliationsthatsustainasuccessionofprojectsandunderpinkeyskillsandresources. •Long-term strategic efforts, perhaps involving a dynamic group of players. The human genome project is a good

example. Figure 1 classifies different forms of collaboration according to the degree of organization (primarily individual or

institutional) within the Company and the PRO. Responsible Partnering is mainly concerned with encouraging moreactivitiestotakeplaceinthetoprighthandcornerofthismatrix(institution-to-institution).

1.9 “Contract Research” tends to be driven by different dynamics, shorter-term in nature and requiring specific types ofagreementtoreflectthestraightforwardnatureofthebusinessdeal.AlthoughmanyoftheprinciplesofResponsiblePartneringarerelevantforContractResearch,thisHandbookisnotprimarilyconcernedwithsuchactivities.

Figure1:ScalesofCollaboration(source:Philips)

•Parttimeprofessors•Academicsabbaticals•Secondments•Governingboards

•Industrialaffiliation•Strategicconsortia•Jointsprogrammswith

publicco-funding

•Peer-to-peercontacts•Conferencevisits•Guestlectures•Commitees

•Students(MSc/PhD•Postdocs•Industrialsabbaticals•Advisors

PRO

Inst

itutio

nal

Indi

vidu

al

Individual InstitutionalCompany

8



2.1 Many typesofknowledgeandskillssustainoursocieties.Universitiesserve thepublic interest through theirpursuitand dissemination of understanding, thereby providing advanced education and training, carrying out research andfacilitatingknowledgeexchangeandtransfer.Theirprimarymeasuresofqualityrelatetopublicationrecords,teachingstandardsandintellectualrigour.However,theyandotherpubliclyfundedResearchOrganizations(especiallythoseofanon-academicnature)areunderpressuretobecomemoreself-sufficient,insomecasesmovingfrompublictoprivatesectorstatus,andtodemonstratethattheinstitute’sknowledgeandskillshavebroadervalueandaremanagedanddevelopedprofessionally.Inturn,companiesuseknowledgeandskillstosatisfycustomerneeds,maximizeshareholdervalueandrespondeffectivelytocompetitionandproductcomplexity.Speed,consistencyandpredictabilityarecentraltoreducingtherisksinherentintheiractivities.

2.2 Traditionally, the public sector’s knowledge-generating capacity has been measured by the number and quality ofpublicationsandtrainedstudentsthatemerge.Insuchan“OpenScience”model,researcherscollaboratedcloselybutoftenwithout toomuchregard tosecuringwidereconomicvalueandsocialbenefits.Today,moreattention isbeing

giventowaysofvalorisingthesebenefitsandtoorganisingadvanceddegreessuchasdoctoratesinwaysthataddressindustrialinterest,involvejointsupervisionandprovideawiderrangeofskills.Inmanycountries,theircontributiontoinnovationisnowregardedaspartofuniversities’mission,andtheyareexpectedtoensurethatintellectualpropertyarisingfrompubliclyfundedresearchisidentifiedandcommercialisedforthebenefitofthetax-payerandtheeconomy.Metricsrelatingtoknowledgetransferandinnovationareincreasinglyseenasimportantintheallocationofresearchandotherfundingforuniversities,aswellasforresearchandtechnologyorganizations.

2. Collaborative Research and Knowledge Transfer as Key Sources of Innovation: Changing Patterns and Changing Obligations

Figure2:ChangingPatternsofR&DOutsourcing(source:TNO)

9



2.3 At thesame time,newpatternsof industrial innovationhaveemerged (oftenreferred toas“Open Innovation”) thatemphasize the joint use of internal and external resources achieved through a combination of collaboration andcompetition[2].Companiesareseekingtoobtainknowledgemorequicklyfromexternalsourcesandusemoreoftheirresultsassourcesofinnovation.andresearchandtechnologyorganizationsarebecomingmoremarket-oriented.

2.4 Inseekingtoachievebeneficialoutcomes,itisimportantthatallpartiesfullyunderstandthetrendsanddriversandtaketheseintoaccountintheapproachestheytake.Industryneedstorecognisegovernments’intentthatuniversitiesplayagreaterpartinthecommercialisationofresearchandthecreationofnewventures.Universitiesneedtounderstandhowindustryoperatesinordertoremaincompetitive.Governmentsneedtoensurethattheydonotplacecontradictorypressuresontheresearchandinnovationsystem.

2.5 Figure2illustrateschangingpatternsofcollaborationamongcompaniesandbetweencompaniesandPROs.Addressingthesetrendshasrequiredchangesinthewaysthatintellectualassetsarehandledandprotected.ManyPROs,forexample,haveimplementedprocessesthataddressthreemainareas:

•Leveragingtheirknowledgeandskillsbyworkingcollaborativelywithindustry; •Managingtheknowledgetheygenerateas(tradable)IntellectualPropertyRights(IPRs);and •Stimulatingthecreationofnewcompaniesthatcanseedlonger-termeconomicrejuvenation. Thefirstofthese,collaborationwithindustry,iswidelyconsideredtohavethegreatestimpactinthemediumtolong

term with regard to the development and use of advanced knowledge and skills, although (particularly in times ofrecession)universitiesmaybeunderpressuretocommercialisesuchIPthroughstart-upcompaniesinanefforttooffsetunemployment.

2.6 These developments have been described in reports sponsored by the European Commission and OECD [3, 4]. TheEuropeanCommissionsubsequentlypublishedaRecommendationandCodeofPractice[5]concerningthemanagementof intellectual property in knowledge transfer activities involving publicly funded research organizations, which hasbeenendorsedby theCouncilof theEuropeanUnion.Nationalgovernmentsandnational industry federationshavealso developed codes of conduct that describe the handling of IP generated by publicly funded research and groupssuchasAURIL,ProTonEurope,ASTPandTIIhavedescribedtheprofessionalskillsrequiredbyaPROinordertohandletheknowledgetransfertaskwellandprovideregulartrainingcoursesfornewtechnologytransferprofessionals[6].

2.7 Whileitisimportanttoengagewiththechangesthataretakingplace,thisshouldbedonebyactinginwaysthatreflectgoodunderstandingofwhereandhowthebenefitsofresearchaccrueandwherethecostslieintranslatingandapplyingknowledge.ThecontractualarrangementssurroundingthemanagementofIPRshaveprovedtobeacommonsourceofcontentioninwhatareotherwisestraightforwardnegotiations.Forexample,whileitisgenerallyrecognisedthattheindustrialpartnershouldbegivenfirstoptiontocommercialiseinitsareaofcommercialinterest,theuniversity’sneedtofacilitateexploitationinareaswhicharenotofcommercialinteresttothecurrentindustrialpartner(e.g.bylicensingtoothercompaniesorbyestablishingnewstart-upventures)isoftenseenasproblematic.

2.8 ThosewhodevelopedtheirprofessionalskillsinaworldofOpenScienceoftenask“WhyshouldPROsprotectintellectualproperty?”(Appropriateanswersare“Toencouragetheeconomicapplicationsoftheirdiscoveriesforthebenefitofthepublic”and“Tohelpmakeresearchmoreattractiveandbettersupported.”)ButablanketpolicyofpatentprotectionbyPROswouldbejustasinappropriateasapolicyoflaissez-faire,sinceIPRhastobemanaged,defendedandinsomewayappliedbeforeitcanachieveeconomicvalue.SomePROsinEuropeareequippedtoprovidetherequiredlevelofmanagementskillsbutmanystillneedtoprogresstoenhancetheirquality.Tothemorefundamentalquestion,“Whatareuniversitiesfortoday,”wepointtoarecentpublicationbytheLeagueofEuropeanResearchUniversities[7]toremindusthat,whilechangesandreformsareneeded,theyshouldnotbeimplementedinwaysthatharmthecentralpartsofthePRO’smission.

10



3.1 ResponsiblePartneringaimstoimprovetheeffectivenessofcollaborativeresearchandknowledgetransfer,encouragegreatertake-upoftheresultsofresearchandmoreeffectiveadvancededucationandtraining.Theprogrammeaddressesthestrategicroleandorganizationoftheseactivitiesandtheoperationalhandlingofprojectmanagement,knowledgeand intellectualproperty.Principlesandguidelinescomefromanalysingexamplesofsuccessfulcollaborationsfromaroundtheworld.Sustainable“win-win”structuresarearesultoftakingactivestepstoensure:

•Continuedproductionofgoodscienceandpublicationofresultswithoutunreasonabledelay; •Contributiontothegeneraleducationandtrainingofnewgraduates; •Generationofvaluableformsofknowledgeandintellectualpropertythatsupportinnovation; •Competentuseofavailableknowledge,includingforapplicationsthatwerenotoriginallyenvisaged; and •Appropriateandeffectivestepstosecurecommercialisationinwaysthatareconsistentwithnational,corporateand

institutionalpriorities.

3.2 Achievingthispositiveoutcomerequiresovercomingcommondifficultiessuchasdivergingcultures,volatilerelationshipsandthehumantendencyto“keepthingsclosetothechest.”Oneofthemainchallengesistoaligninterestssufficiently,sothatpeoplecanconcentrateonaddressingtheirsharedresearchobjectives.Thisrequiresthateachpartnerunderstandsandrespectswhatistrulyimportanttoothersaswellastothemselvesandbewillingtotakestepsto:

•Eliminate problems during project and IP management such as speed of negotiation, ownership of results, andexclusivityofuse;and

•Provideforequitablecompensation,includingwhereappropriateforindirectcostsandbackgroundknowledge,and/orwithfairreturnsintheeventofsuccessfulcommercialisationbasedonarealisticunderstandingofvalueandcosts.

3.3 Althoughthesepointstendtoapplyregardlessofthenatureandtimescaleofajointprogramme,ResponsiblePartneringaimstoestablishtheconditionsfordurablecollaborations.ThepotentialbenefitsdependuponitsvoluntaryadoptionbyasufficientnumberofPROsandcompaniesinordertodemonstratethatasystematicapproachprovidesbetterresults,improvesconsistencyandoverallprofessionalism,andmakesitmoredifficultforsomeplayerstobenefitfromanyflawsinthesystem.

3.4 InordertobeaResponsiblePartner,aCompanyoraPROcommitsitselftothespiritofthisHandbookbyimplementinga

structuredprocessthatisconsistentwiththeprinciplesofResponsiblePartnering,definesclearandequitableobjectivesinrespectofcollaborationandknowledgeexchangeandthenachievesthedesiredlevelofperformancebyusinglearningfromothers,regularfeedbackfrompartnerorganizationsanddocumentedself-assessments toensure thequalityofactivepartnerships.

Principles Underpinning Responsible Partnering

3.5 TwoprinciplesunderpinResponsiblePartnering.TheseareelaboratedintotenguidelinesamenabletoimplementationbycompaniesandPROs,dependingonthenatureandprioritiesoftheorganization.TheAppendixsuggestcheckliststhatcanenableastagedapproachtotheirimplementation.

3.5.1 MaximumBeneficialUseofPublicResearch Publicmoney is invested in thecreationofnewknowledgeandskills tohelpsocialandeconomicdevelopment.The

benefitsoftheseinvestmentsonlyappearwhenknowledgeisdisseminatedandbroughtintoproductiveuse.Inadhering

3. How to be a Responsible Partner

11



toResponsiblePartnering,thepublicandprivatesectorpartners: •recognizetheimportanceofcontinuedpublicinvestmentinknowledgecreationandtheimportanceofquality; •understand the need to achieve maximum beneficial use of the knowledge and skills generated through public

sponsorship; and •committoworkinginwaysthatsupporttheseobjectives.

Thisrequirestheadoptionofpoliciesthatreflectanunderstandingof: •theroleofPROswithintheircommunitiesandtheirrelationshipswiththebusinesssector; •theneedtogenerateknowledgeandskillsappropriatetostakeholders’needs; •theneedforeffectivemechanismsfordisseminatingandtransferringknowledgeandskills;and •theneedtoprotectknowledgeandskillsinwaysthatencourageproductiveapplication.

3.5.2 ResponsibleUseofPublicResearch Many forms of knowledge and skills are used in the development of useful products and services. In adhering

to Responsible Partnering, public and private sector bodies recognize that their own success depends on others’contributions and are also realistic about their own contributions and the importance of sharing responsibility forcommercialisingresearchoutput.ThisleadstopoliciesthatconcerntheResponsibleUseofPublicResearch:

•theresponsibilitytobediligentindevelopingresearchresultsandinventions; •theneedforpartiestobelievetheyaresharingequitablyintherightstoresultsandinventions; •theneedtoensurethattheuseofresultsobtainedfrompublicinvestmentsalsoservesthegeneralpublicinterest; •theneedtoorganizecollaborationsinwaysthatfostertheirlong-termvitality; and •assurancethatethicalaspectsofresearchandresearchmanagementaretakenfullyintoaccount.

Guidelines that turn these Principles into Action

3.6 Actionableguidelinescanbeobtainedfromtheseprinciples.CompaniesandPROs(andalsogovernments)shouldtakestepsthat:

3.6.1 Treatcollaborationstrategically ItisimportanttodevelopastrategicviewofthepartthatcollaborativeR&Dandknowledgetransferareexpectedto

playinmeetingthePRO’sandcompany’sobjectives.Thisallowseachtoestablishexplicitpoliciesandtakestepstoensurethatthesepoliciesarecommunicated,understoodandactedupon.Theplacetotakethesedecisionsisatthehighestleveloftheorganization.

3.6.2 Aligninterests Effectiveknowledgeandskillstransferdependsuponbeingabletoalignthevariouspartners’interests.Companiesand

PROscanonlycollaborateeffectivelywhentheirresearchersandotherstaffareempoweredtoworkinthiswayandcanspendsufficienttimeandefforttounderstandwhateachhastoofferandeachrequires.

3.6.3 Organizeforlastingrelationships There is abundant evidence that collaborative research is most effective within long-lasting relationships. The

commitmenttosustainandfundsuchprogrammesdependsupondevelopingageneralsenseoftrustandunderstandingthatresultswillmatchexpectations.

3.6.4 Providetherightprofessionalskills Effective management of collaborative R&D and knowledge transfer requires high quality professional supporting

skills,andhenceacommitmenttoestablishorprovideaccesstotheseresourcesandtotrainpeopletoanappropriatelevel.

12



3.6.5 Establishclearintent Whenplanningcollaboration,thefirstpriorityisforthepartnerstoexploreandagreewhattheyexpecttoaccomplish.

Thisimpliestheadoptionofopenprocessesthatestablishclearintentandeliminatehiddenagendasandabuseofbargainingpower.

3.6.6 Usestandardpracticesandcommunicateregularly Adoptingstandardpracticeshelpstoencouragethedevelopmentofeffectiveframeworksforlong-termcollaboration.

Thestumblingblocksindevelopinggoodcollaborativeresearchprojectsarewidelyrecognized.Thebestwaytoavoidthemistoworkwithotherswhohavealreadydiscoveredwhatworksandwhy.Thisalsofreesuptimetodiscussthepointsthataremostgermanetothecurrentcollaboration.Regularsharingofgoodpractices,atahighenoughlevelandaspartofprofessionalmanagementdevelopmentisanimportantaccompanimenttooperationaleffectiveness.

3.6.7 Achieveeffectivemanagementofintellectualproperty Effective management of Intellectual Property (IP) is central to the knowledge transfer process, particularly since

the emergence of new types of knowledge-based industry is straining the IP system, and involves protecting theirIntellectualPropertyinwaysthatfacilitatevaluecreationinacontextofOpenInnovationandmaximisethepotentialforcommercialisation,andusing(andcontributetoimprovingtherelevance,qualityandunderstandingof)publicIPsystemsinwaysthatencouragefutureinvestmentinpublicandprivateresearch.

3.6.8 Providerelevanttraining EffectiveknowledgetransferrequirescompetenciesandskillsinmanyfieldsbeyondknowledgeandIPmanagement.

Forexample,projectmanagement,entrepreneurshipandbusinessdevelopmentskillsarealso important.Providingthesecompetenciesrequires thatcompaniesaswellasPROsdevelopprogrammesandsafe learningenvironmentsin which people can learn the skills and common language appropriate for the world of open innovation. (Thesetakemanyforms.Atoneendofthescale,schemessuchastheMarieCurieprogrammehaveprovidedmanyyoungpeoplewithopportunitytobroadentheirexperiencesbyworkinginothercountries.Attheotherendarerole-playingexerciseswithinuniversityandbusinesscoursesinwhichparticipantslearnaboutcreatinganddevelopingstart-upcompanies.TheestablishmentoftheInstituteofKnowledgeTransferisanimportantinitiativeinincreasingthestatusandrecognitionoftheknowledgetransferprofession.)

3.6.9 Viewinnovationasatrans-disciplinaryactivity Innovation is not simply about technological advance.The development of innovative business models, designs or

organizationalstructuresissometimesmoreimportantthanbeingthefirsttodiscoverorinvent.Similarly,scientificskillsmustbecombinedwiththehumanities,economics,sociologyandlaw. It is importanttorecognizethis trans-disciplinarynatureofinnovationandorganizeaccordingly.

3.6.10 Fosterstronginstitutions Continued access to world-class knowledge and skills depends upon maintaining strong, well-managed and well-

connectedpublicinstitutionsabletocarryoutadvancedresearch,providehighstandardsofeducationandtraining,andtheeffectivecommercialisationofthisknowledgerequirescompetentknowledgetransferprofessionals,investmentin knowledge transfer offices and related support services particularly in universities, and an effective IPR systemconsistentwithcurrentapproachestoinnovation.

13



A Structured Approach is needed to Implement these Guidelines

3.7 ResponsiblePartneringisavoluntaryprogramme,assuredthroughself-assessment.Itisunrealistictoexpectthattheprinciplesoutlinedherecanimmediatelyturnintoeffectiveoperationalroutines,orthateventhemosteffectiveroutinescanresolveallsituationstothesatisfactionofallpartiesinvolved.(Assessingthevalueofatechnologyforapplicationbyoneindustrialpartnercomparedtoitspotentialvalueforother,asyetunidentified,applicationsindifferentareasisalwayslikelytoproveproblematic.)Instead,astructuredapproachisrequiredthatemphasesorganizationallearningbasedonexperience.

3.8 Implementationprocedureswillalwaysreflectthechoices,prioritiesandstrategyoftheindividualcompanyorPRO,butmustalsoprovidetheconsistent,equitableconditionsthatwillfacilitateworkingwithothers.AfirststepistodecidewhetherandatwhatleveltoadoptResponsiblePartnering,basedonitsperceivedrelevancetoorganizationalneeds.TheintentionisthatthesePrinciplesandGuidelinescanstimulatediscussionabouttheroleofcollaborativeresearchandknowledgetransferactivitiesinmeetingstrategicobjectives.

3.9 Implementation,assuranceandimprovementprocessesturnthedecisionintoaction.Theself-assessmentchecklistsintheAppendixcanbeusedtoconstructtheseprocesses.Thechecklistsprovidefordifferentiatedlevelsofimplementation,enablingtheCompanyorPROtotestitscurrentandplannedlevelsofadhesionandsetoutaplanforimprovement,startingwithabasicframeworkandmovingontoprogressivelymoreadvancedandchallengingformsoforganizationandco-ordination.DependingonthenatureoftheCompany’sorPRO’sactivitiesandstrategicinterests,itmaynotbenecessaryorappropriatetomoveamoreadvancedlevelofimplementation.

3.10 Theapproachesthatarerecommendedherereflecttheexperiencesofmanypublicandprivateorganizationsworldwide.Someaspectsareknowntopresentpracticaldifficulties,includingtheidentificationofgoodpartners,theconstructionofgoodcollaborativeresearchagreementsandthehumanskillsthatsupporteffectiveday-to-dayprojectmanagement.Subsequentsectionsoftheseguidelinessuggesthowthesecanbeaddressed.

14



4.1 Introduction Partnershipsarerunbypeople.Knowledgeexchangehappensthroughpeople.Organizationsmustthereforeattendto

selectingtherightpeopleandmakeclearhowthesepeoplecontributetoorganizationalobjectives,whatisexpectedfromthemandwhattheystandtogaininreturn.Theywilltakestepstoorganizecollaborativeresearchinwaysthatwillallowtheindividualsconcernedtoblossomanddeveloptheirskills.Itmustsurelygowithoutsayingthattheywillbeawareof,andfollow,therequirementsofemploymentlawandgoodemploymentpracticesandapplytheseinrespectoftheirpartnershipsaswellasinternally.

For the individual, being involved in partnership activities provides many personal benefits, including the possibilitytobuildandmaintainnetworks,learnfromothersandenhancecareerperspectives.Itisimportantthatorganizationspromote these benefits, that people receive incentives to contribute to Responsible Partnering and that they areadequatelyrewardedfortheircontributions.

4.2 EducationaswellasResearch Trainingininnovationandentrepreneurshipisbecomingamorecommonelementofmanyuniversitycourses.Furthermore,

whenCompaniesandPROsundertakejointresearchprogrammes,asignificantpartoftheworkwillbecarriedoutbyyoungerresearcherswhoarestilltrainingforadoctoralormaster’sdegree.Inthesecircumstances,attentionshouldbegiventotheeffectivenessofthetrainingthatisbeingreceived,includingmatterssuchasjointsupervision,transferrableskillsandconditionsofemployment.TheguidelinesgivenintheAppendixincludeasectiondevotedtodoctoraltraining,takenfromthefindingsoftheDOC-CAREERSproject[8]carriedoutinparalleltotheResponsiblePartneringinitiative.

4.3 SkillDevelopment Theskillsrequiredtocarryoutcollaborativeresearchprojectseffectivelyarenotalwaysthesameatthoserequiredto

handlein-houseactivities.Forexample,workingwellacrossorganizationalboundariescanconflictwiththedesireforrecognitionofpersonalexpertisethatisthehallmarkofmanyscientistsandengineers.Thetraitsassociatedwiththe“T-shaped”person,whocangoindepthaswellasworkacrossbroaderorganizationalboundaries,seemmorelikelytodevelopandflourishinenvironmentsthatencouragemultidisciplinary,team-basedapproachestoproblems.

4.4 EffectiveEnvironments Personaldevelopmentandstrategicengagementarefacilitatedbyproximity,physicalaswellasintellectual.Partnership

arrangements that work well in one area may be less suitable in another. As illustration, underpinning long-termrequirements for fundamental technological understanding may involve establishing centres of excellence thatconcentrateonspecificcoretechnologies.Forapplicationsintheconsumergoodsarea,itmaybebettertoconcentratepartnerships on solving practical problems that can lead to the formulation of new research areas. More generally,temporary staff exchanges can be a highly beneficial way to establish the skills and understanding that underpineffectivecollaboration.

4.5 TailoringSkillDevelopmenttoOrganizationalSize ApproachesthatworkwellbetweenlargergroupsmaynotbeeffectiveforasmalleruniversityworkingwithlocalSMEs.

Inthelattersituation,“SkillsScholarships”schemescanbeeffective,wherestructuredprogrammesprepareandtrainindividualstocontributetoresearchasprofessionals,whileincreasingtheresearchcapacitiesofSMEsbylinkingwithaPh.D.projectandtherebyencouragingSMEstoundertakeresearchandrecruitresearchers.

4. The Human Aspects of Effective Collaboration

15



4.6 OvercomingDistanceProblems Whenworkingonproblemsforotherorganizations,thereisalwaysariskthatthepartnersseemuninterestedinthe

results. Commitment and quality of outcome are likely to improve when steps are taken to raise awareness of themutual interest in theoutcome.Oneof thebestways toaccomplish this is throughregularreviewprocedures,withstraightforwardmetricsthatconcentrateonwhathasbeenaccomplished,whathasbeentransferred,whatintellectualpropertyhasbeensecured,andhowpeoplehavedeveloped.

4.7 Partner-OrientedMindsets Organizationsthatexpecttheirstafftoaimforahighlevelofstrategicengagementwithothershavealsotoconsider

howtoestablishtheinstitutionalmindsetsthatunderpinthatstrategy.Thisentailschangingtheinstitutionalapproachfrombeingprocess-orientedtooutcome-orientedandabletoidentifypartners’expectationsandunderstandwhenitisappropriatefortheorganizationtoseektodeliveraccordingtotheseexpectations.

16



5.1 CompaniesandPROsoftenfinditdifficulttoidentifygoodpartners.Arangeoftoolsandapproacheshavedevelopedtofacilitatethetask.

5.2 ProvideclearCommunicationChannels PROsandcompaniesaregenerallyrathercomplexorganizations.Withoutadetailedinsideknowledgeofthedivision

ofresponsibilities,itisoftendifficulttoidentifywhichgroupsarelikelytobeinterestedincollaborativeresearch,whatcompetenciesandrequirementsexist,andthefieldsinwhichanapproachwillbeencouraged.

Aspartofapolicyofdevelopingcollaborativeresearchandknowledgetransfer,eachorganizationshouldpublicize[forexample,onitswebsite] itspoliciesconcerningtheseactivitiesandhaveclearlyidentifiedcontactpointsofpersons,officesandfunctionsthathandleanddirectenquiries.

5.3 Publications Checkingpublicationsinrecognizedscientificjournalsisoneofthemosteffectivewaystoidentifytheleadingresearch

teams.InternalteamswithincompaniesandPROsgenerallyknowwheretofindresearchpartnersandsoshouldbepartoftheprocessofidentificationandselection.

5.4 Patents Thecontentofapatentdisclosesconsiderableinformationonaninvention.Patentpublicationsarealsoindicativeof

thespiritofinnovationofresearchersandtheirorganization.Evidenceofsuchbackgroundintellectualpropertyandthecapacitytoinnovatearemainconsiderationsinselectingaresearchpartner.

5.5 ScientificConferences Conferencesoffertheadvantageoverpatentsandpublicationsoffasteraccesstoresultsanddirectcontactwiththe

investigators.

5.6 Seminarsandotherformofdirectinteraction Innovationdoesnotnecessarilyrequirenewtechnologies.Existingtechnologiesmaybeappliedinnewwaysandthese

incrementalimprovementsareimportanttosmallandlargecompaniesalike.Itisoftensufficienttobringtogetherfirmsoperatinginagivensectorandacademicresearchersinordertoidentifytheseopportunities.PROsandlocalbusinesscommunitiescanorganizeregularinteractionswitheachother.Manyformshavebeentestedandprovenuseful.

5.7 ProjectswithintheEUFrameworkProgramme TheseprogrammescaninvolvebusinessandacademicpartnersfromseveralEuropeancountriesexcellentopportunities

tostartpre-competitivecollaborativeresearchinnewfields.

5.8 Intermediaries Many intermediary bodies, including the European Commission, membership associations and businesses, exist to

matchbusinessneedswithavailableresearchcapabilities.

5.9 InternalCompanyNetworks Multinationalcompaniescanmakeuseoftheirowninternalnetworkstoobtaincontactsintoforeignsocieties,including

withuniversitiesandpublicinstitutions.Itisoftenhelpfultodesignatefocalpointswhowillassistthisprocess.

5. Identifying Good Partners

17



6.1 TheCollaborativeResearchAgreementprovides thedefinitivedescriptionof thecollaboration,bydocumentingwhatistobedone,therulesofconduct(includingcompletionandtermination)andapplicablelegalarrangementssuchasownership,rightsofuse,managementofintellectualproperty,andthestateofpriorart.

6.2 A number of issues tend to arise when negotiating and applying Collaborative Research Agreements. It is neitherappropriatenorpossibletoproposeformsofwordsheretosolvealltheseissues.Instead,wepointoutthattheunderlyingconcernsarerealandrequireconsiderednegotiationinthelightofthespecificobjectivesthatpartnersareseekingtoachieve.

6.3 Nonetheless,wedoencouragethedevelopmentofstandardapproachesandconditionswherepossible.Establishing“templateswithoptions”helpsallpartiesgetwhattheyarelookingfor,focusattentiononthoseaspectsthatgenuinelyrequirespecialhandling,andgetthedealdone.

6.4 TheEuropeanCommissionandseveralnationalgovernmentshavedevelopedcodesofpracticeformanagingintellectualpropertyfrompublicly-fundedresearch.Somearenowdevelopingrecommendationsandsuggestingmodelcontractsforcollaborativeresearch.Standardpracticesandguidelinesexist forprojectsexecutedwithin theEuropeanUnion’sFrameworkProgramme,althoughnotallEuropean-levelactivitieshaveyetadoptedthesamestandards.Severaltemplatesfor consortium agreements are also available, such as the Lambert models, DESCA and IPCA from DIGITALEUROPE(formerlyknownasEICTA)[6].Greaterattentionneedstobegiventoresolvinginconsistenciesbetweenthesecodesofpracticeandthetermsthatindividualcompaniesconsidertobeappropriatetotheirneeds.

Points to Consider Before Writing a Collaborative Research Agreement

6.5 Before drafting any legal documents (other than preliminary non-disclosure agreements), the key first steps are toestablishwhattheproposedcollaborationisintendedtoachieveandeachpartner’sinterestsandmotivationintakingpart. An appropriate balance also has to be struck between understanding institutional requirements and detaileddiscussionoftechnicalobjectives.

6.6 It is important toobtainprofessionalguidanceevenat thisearlystage.Contaminationof information isoftenakeyconcern;sometimesexclusivityofuseisimportantwhileinothersituations,theprojectservespurelyaresearchpurposefor the company and the agreement can be less rigid; while from the PROs perspective, the ability to attract futureinvestmentandcollaborationsisimportant.Evidently,theapproachmustbelegalinallrespects(forexampleinrespectofStateAidRulesdiscussedinthenextchapter).

6.7 Inallocatingroles,partnersshouldconsidertheircompetencies,experiencesandinternalorganizations.Forexample,thecompanyislikelytounderstandmarketconditionsinitsareaofinterestbetterthanthePROandbemorefamiliarwithhandlingbusinessriskandliabilities,whereasthePROwillhavedeeperunderstandingofaspectsofthesubjectmatterandmayrecogniseotheropportunitiesthatthecompanyhasnotconsidered.Responsibilitiesandproceduresshouldbedefinedaccordingly.

6.8 Collaborative Research will typically be longer-term and more open-ended than Contract Research, which typicallyinvolves a straightforward agreement to complete a well-defined task. Approaches and forms of agreement andownershipdependonwheretheintendedprojectsitsonthisspectrum.

6. Constructing the Collaborative Research Agreement

18



6.9 Bewareof trying toforceadeal inwhichanypartnerfeels it losessomething important.Recognize thatallpartiespossesssignificantbackgroundknowledge:thisisthejustificationforthecollaborationinthefirstplace.Itisamatterofdiscussionandnegotiationhowmuchofthisbackgroundknowledgeistobemadeavailableandonwhatterms.

Points normally covered within a Collaborative Research Agreement

6.10 Collaborative Research Agreements cover a range of standard points. The following remarks suggest possibleformulations,andareintendedtoguidediscussionandshouldnotbetreatedasbinding.

6.10.1 Definitions,identificationofparties,objectivesandpartnerselection AnearlysectionintheAgreementdefinesterms,identifiestheobjectivesofthecollaborationandsetsoutthemain

considerationsusedforselectingpartners.DefinitionsincludetheconceptsofAffiliates,Technology,BackgroundandForegroundIntellectualProperty,ConfidentialInformation,etc.Ensurethatthesedefinitionswillbeworkable.

Generally, companies will wish to extend the benefits of the collaboration to their Affiliates because they work aseconomic unity with these entities. The definition of these Affiliates should be made clear, and the performanceexpectedofthesenon-signatorieswarrantedbytherelevantsignatory.

6.10.2 Confidentialinformation Universitiesarenotwellorganized tokeep tradesecrets,sosomeconsiderationneeds tobegiven toavoiding the

accidentaldisclosureofinformationthathasactualorpotentialproprietaryvalue.Thismightbeachieved,forexample,bydefining“ConfidentialInformation”aswrittendocumentsthatareclearlymarkedasconfidentialandidentifyingthechannelsforexchangingconfidentialinformation(andthentakingadequatemeasurestoavoiddisclosinginformationthatisnotneededforthecollaboration).

6.10.3 Scope This sets out the framework of the collaboration in terms of field, technology, markets or objectives. Usually, the

detailedprojectdescriptionwillbeattachedasanappendix,or(incasetheagreementcancoverseveralprojects)inridersthatareexecutedseparatelyandincorporatedbyextensionaspartoftheframeworkagreement.

6.10.4 Resources Attachments/annexestotheagreementdetailanyspecialneeds,forexampleintermsofpersonnel,equipmentand

materials.

6.10.5 Fundingandpricing Ifapplicable,thispartsetsoutprinciplesforcompensatingtheresearchperformedbythePRO,forcalculatingfinancial

contributions, determining payment terms and making price revisions.The compensation paid will depend on thenatureofthecollaboration,theusethatbothpartnersexpecttomakeoftheresults,andtherightsandbenefitsthateachretains.ThedeterminationofacceptableoverheadsshouldincludeareasonablecontributiontosupervisoryandinfrastructurecostsoffacilitiesmadeavailabletotheprojectbythePRO.Riderstotheagreementdetailtheagreedbudgets.

6.10.6 Governanceandcoordination Thissetsout theroleandresponsibilityof theproject leaders (oftenknownasPrincipal Investigators).Thesection

willdefineandexplain theroleofbodiessuchascoordinatingcommittees(if thesearewarrantedby thesizeandcomplexityoftheprojects)andadministrativefunctions.Thedevelopmentofanadequatecoordinationplanisnowan integral requirement within parts of the Framework Programme. Although everyone will hope that the projectissuccessful, it is important tosetouthowfailureswillbehandled,forexamplethroughearly terminationandinsituationsthatrequirearbitration.

19



6.10.7 Reporting Thisshouldsetouttheexpectedcontentandschedulefortheintermediateandfinalreports,tobedetailedinthe

projectriders.

6.10.8 Publicationsandconfidentiality Theabilitytopublishresultsthatareofscientificinterestisanessentialconsiderationforuniversitiesandsomeother

PROsandcompanies.Publicationshouldnotbedelayedunnecessarily(6monthsisagoodtarget,butthismaynotbepossibleinsomecountriesandcases)inordertopermitfilingforpatentprotection.Whenthescaleofeffortjustifiessuchanapproach,thepartnersmaychoosetoestablishmechanismsbywhichsensitiveresultscanbetakenoutsidethe sensitive context, thereby permitting publication. Inclusion of confidential information belonging to the otherpartieswillrequirepriorwrittenapproval,butthereshouldalsobeageneralexpectationthatthiswillnotbewithheldwithoutgoodjustification.

6.10.9 Accessrightstobackgroundinformation Theavailabilityofbackgroundinformationandknowledgeisakeyconsiderationinselectingthepartners.Consequently,

it is important to agree what access rights will exist, and ensure that these are sufficient to allow the project toproceedsatisfactorilyandtopermitresultstobeputtotheintendeduse.Conditionsandrestrictionsmustbedefinedpriortoenteringtheagreement,totheextentthattheseareknownafterreasonableenquiry.Eachpartyshouldknowthecircumstancesinwhichitsowntechnologiesweredevelopedoracquired,thehistoryofitsownpatentsandthefieldsofitsowntechnologies,sothatitcanwarrantthatitisentitledtograntalicenceonthecontemplateduseandthattoitsknowledgeitisnotawareofpotentialinfringementofthirdpartyrightsotherthandisclosed.

6.10.10Ownershipofforeground A general starting point for collaborations is that each party owns the Foreground that it (or its employees) has

generated.

Carefulconsiderationshouldbegiventotheownershipofinventionscreatedjointly.Whilejointownershipmaybeapossibility,thiscanleadtounintendedproblems,whereasallocatingownershiparbitrarilyisinequitable.Considerationsincludethepossibilitytogainfuturereward,controlsovernewapplications,theabilitytomanagemattersefficiently,andthelegal implicationsofjointownership. Insuchcases,aJointOwnershipManagementAgreementshouldbeagreed.

Itisoftenimportanttodifferentiatebetweenownershipanduse.Givingpartnersefficient(sometimesexclusive)rightsofuseandwaysofdefendingtheserightscanbesufficient,providedtheinventorisabletomanagetheresponsibilitiesthatgowithownership.

Unlessagreedotherwise,eachjointownershouldhavetherighttousejointinventionsandtheForegroundIPthereon.Exceptinspecialinstances,licensingbyeachofthejointownersshouldbepermittedtofacilitatemaximumuse.Allpartiesmusthavetherighttosub-licenceiftheyaretohaveequalrightstocommercialisejointlyownedForegroundIP.

6.10.11 PatentsandotherIP Theusualsituationisthateachpartywilltakestepstoprotectitsowninventionsatitsowndiscretion.Thehandling

ofjointinventionsshouldbediscussed:forexamplewhetherthePROorthecompanyshallfileforprotectionoronlyassisttheotherpartyinfiling;thetermsonwhichlicensesaregranted;whetherthecommercialpartnershallbearthecostsofthePRO’sactivitiesorviceversa;etc.Thepartiesshouldalsoconsiderwhowillberesponsiblefordefendingpatentsandpursuinginfringements.Itisgenerallybetterthatthepartiesdonotplantoactjointlyinthesematters,sincethisapproachriskscreatingadditionaldisputesanddelays,althoughespeciallyinlitigation,theinterestsoftheotherownershouldbeunderstoodandproperlytakenintoaccount.

20



6.10.12Licenceforuse Eachpartywillexpectfaircompensationforthecommercialuseoftheinventionsthatithashelpedgenerate.Deciding

“whatisfair”willdependonthenatureofthecollaborationbutalsoonasenseofrealismaboutfuturecostsandrisks.(Suchfaircompensationmayalsobein-kind,e.g.freeaccesstoeachother’sForeground.)OneoftheconsiderationsofResponsiblePartneringistoensuremaximumbeneficialuseofknowledgethathasbeengeneratedpartlythroughpublicfunding.Thiscanbeachievedbyestablishingnon-exclusivelicencestoseverallicenseesorbygrantingexclusivelicencestothepartneronthoseusesthatheiscommittedtodevelopdiligently.

The granting of exclusive rights to partners in their areas of commercial interest is typically a preferred route foruniversitieswishingtolicenceunexploitedIPtonewventures,asanon-exclusivelicenceisoftennotattractivetonewventuresseekingtoraiseinvestment.

Compensationcantakemanyforms,forexamplelicencefees,milestones,runningroyaltiesorbysharingprofitsandcanbesubjecttoexercisingalicenseoptionondefinedterms,butalsootherbenefitsthatapartymaygetfromthecollaborationsuchasuseofequipmentthattheotherpartyhasmadeavailablefortheproject, theopportunitytopublishcollaborationresultsoreventhecooperationitself.AssignmentofIPispossibleasanalternativetoexclusivelicences, often subject to grant-back of non-exclusive licenses in the non-exclusive field. The agreement shouldgenerallyavoidrestrictingtheuseofresultsforresearchandteachingpurposesbyPROs.

6.10.13Diligence When the agreement grants exclusive rights, this generally involves some expectations of diligence, whereby, if

conditionsarenotmetandnotremedied,theexclusivelicencecanbeterminated.

21



7.1 Researchpartnershipshavenotonlytoreflectinternalinstitutionalobjectives,policiesandpractices,butalsocomplywith legal and regulatory requirements. Although many of these requirements may be clear, some are frequentlymisunderstood.Thischapterdiscusses twoareaswhereparticularcare isadvised.Please recognize that the remarksmadeheredonotconstitutelegaladvice.Theyshouldbereadinconjunctionwith,andasasupplementto,therulesandregulationsconcerned,theterminologyanddefinitionsofwhichhasbeentakenoverasmuchaspossibleinthischapter.

State Aid in Public-Private R&D Partnerships

7.2 Toavoiddistortionofcompetitionandtrade,aprincipleoftheECTreatyisthatMemberStatesmaynotusetheirStateresourcesinwaysthatgiveselectiveeconomicadvantagestoundertakings(e.g.companies)orotherorganizationswitheconomicactivities.Certainderogationsexistfromthisban.TheCommissionistaskedwithcontrollingStateaid;MemberStatesarerequiredtoinformtheCommissioninadvanceofanyplantograntaid;andtheCommissiondecideswhetherthenotifiedmeasuresarecompatiblewiththeECTreaty.Exemptionsexistfromthisnotificationobligation,aslaiddownintheBlockExemptionRegulation1(BER)adoptedinAugust2008,whereitisuptotheMemberState–withoutpriornotificationtotheCommission–todecideiftheaidiscompliantwiththeBER,andthereforecompatiblewiththeTreatyornot.AsofJanuary1,2007,newrules2onStateaidhaveappliedtoResearchandDevelopmentandInnovation(R&D&I),whichmayimpactuponresearchcollaborations.

7.3 Undertakingsandresearchorganizations3areencouragedtodevelopagoodunderstandingoftheserulestorecognizesituationswhereStateaidmaybe involvedandassess towhatextent it iscompatiblewith theTreatyandthereforepermissible.Familiaritywiththerulesfacilitatespartneringwithouttheriskofoverlookingpermissiblepublicfundingopportunitiesormakingarrangementsthatviolatetheserules.

7.4 StateaidforR&Dtakestwoforms: a. DirectStateaid,whenagovernmentisdirectlyfundingeconomicactivities,e.g.throughsubsidies. It is important

tounderstandthatbothundertakingsandresearchorganizationscanberecipientsofdirectStateaid,regardlessoftheirlegalstatus,whentheyengageinactivitiesofaneconomicnature.

b. IndirectStateaid,whichmayexistinteraliaincollaborationswhenaresearchorganizationtransfersitsIntellectualPropertyRights(IPRs)toanundertaking.InthecaseofindirectStateaid,aresearchorganizationmayactasavehicleforStateaidtoanundertaking.

Generally speaking, research organizations and Members States aim to avoid indirect aid. In the absence of indirectaid, theassessmentofStateaidbecomesmuchsimpler:oneonlyneedstoensurethatdirectaidremainsbelowtheapplicableceiling(see7.7).Therefore,thisHandbookfocusesonmethodsthatavoidindirectstateaidasmuchaspossible.Inthefollowing,weputforwardanon-limitativesetofnotesofclarificationontheconditionsfornoindirectStateaidincollaborationsbetweenundertakingsandresearchorganizations.Thesenotesofclarification:

•buildonthespiritofResponsiblePartnering,theUKLambertAgreements4andtheCommission’sRecommendationandIPCodeofPractice5;and

7. Other Legal Aspects of Collaboration

1CommissionRegulation(EC)No800/2008of6August2008declaringcertaincategoriesofaidcompatiblewiththecommonmarketinapplicationofArticles87and88oftheTreaty(GeneralblockexemptionRegulation),OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnionL214,9.8.2008,p.3–47.

2Community framework for state aid for research and development and innovation, Official Journal of the European Union C 323, 30.12.2006, p. 1–26.3AccordingtotheStateaidrules,‘Researchorganization’meansanentity,suchasuniversityorresearchinstitute,irrespectiveofitslegalstatus(organizedunderpublicorprivatelaw)

orwayoffinancing,whoseprimarygoalistoconductfundamentalresearch,industrialresearchorexperimentaldevelopmentandtodisseminatetheirresultsbywayofteaching,publicationortechnologytransfer;allprofitsarereinvestedintheseactivities, thedisseminationoftheirresultsorteaching;undertakingsthatcanexert influenceuponsuchanentity,inthequalityof,forexample,shareholdersormembers,shallenjoynopreferentialaccesstotheresearchcapacitiesofsuchanentityortotheresearchresultsgeneratedbyit.Inpractice,thisdefinitioninmostcasescorrespondstothePublicly-FundedResearchOrganizationsreferredtoasPROsintheotherchaptersofthisHandbook

4LambertToolKitforCollaborativeResearch,http://www.innovation.gov.uk/lambertagreements/5CommissionRecommendationonthemanagementof intellectualproperty inknowledgetransferactivitiesofuniversitiesandotherpublicresearchorganizations;10April2008;

C(2008)1329.

22



•areintendedasaharmonizedreferencetoovercomeunduehesitationsforsettingupeffectiveR&DpartnershipsandforindividualassessmentsofcontractualagreementsbyMemberStates.

7.5 OneofthegeneralcriteriaforidentifyingStateaidisthatitprovidesaneconomicadvantagethattheundertaking(orother organization with economic activities) would not have received in the normal course of business.This impliesa key principle for indirectStateaid:acollaborationofanundertakingwith a researchorganizationbenefiting frompublicfundingforitsR&DactivitiesonlyinvolvesindirectStateaidifthetermsofthecollaborationwiththeresearchorganizationaremorefavourablethantheundertakingwouldhaveobtainedincollaborationswithotherundertakings.Inthisrespect,wewishtostressthatsomearrangementsmaybedisadvantageousfortheresearchorganization,becauseitisinadifferentpositionthananundertaking,e.g.hasfewerpossibilitiestouseIPRsofotherpartiescommerciallyinitsownproducts.However,suchdisadvantagefor theresearchorganizationisnotrelevantforassessingwhetheranarrangementinvolvesStateaid.Thatassessmentisaboutwhethertheundertakinghasreceivedanadvantagethatitwouldnothavereceivedinthenormalcourseofbusiness.Ofcourse,suchunbalanceordisadvantagemaybesomethingtoaddressotherwiseintheframeworkofResponsiblePartnering.

Otherkeyprinciplesunderlyingthenotesofclarificationarethefollowing: a. IntellectualPropertyRights(IPRs)aredeemedtobeownedbytheinventingpartnerunlessthefullcostofthework

thatledtotheIPRswaspaidbyanotherpartner. b. AresearchorganizationmaytransferorexclusivelylicenseitsIPRsatmarketprice. c. Themarketpriceisdeemedtobethepriceagreedinrealnegotiations,withtheresearchorganizationseekingto

obtainmaximumbenefitattheconclusionofthecontract.(Notethatalsonon-monetarybenefitsshouldbetakeninto account, e.g. opportunities to expose research organization staff to a business environment. Also note thatmarketpriceisnotthesameascost,itcanbemoreorless,andcanvaryovertimeaccordingtotheexpectationofextractinganyvaluefromtheresults.Forthisreason,R&Dvaluationissometimesbasedonfinancialoptiontheory.)

d. AnundertakingthathascontributedtotheR&DcostoftheresearchorganizationgetsacorrespondingdiscountonthemarketpriceforIPRsinordertoavoid“payingtwice”.

e. Alternatively,ifpartnershaveexanteagreedtopooltheirresources(e.g.ina“commonpot”),anundertakingthathascontributedtothecostoftheprojectgetsanadvantageoverthirdpartiesintheformofaproportionaldiscountonthemarketpriceforIPRsinordertorecognizeinvestmentsmadeandrisksshared.

f. TheStatedoesnotbecomethe(co-)ownerofIPRsandotherresultsbyvirtueofhavingsupportedsomeoftheR&Dactors. Therefore, any direct State aid to the undertaking or to the research organization is treated as part of itsrespectivecontributiontothecollaborationproject.

Notes of clarification on conditions for no indirect State aid

Theconditionsunderwhichinanycase,accordingtotheStateaidrules,collaborationprojectsbetweenundertakingsandresearchorganizationsinvolvenoindirectStateaidhavebeenreproducedbelowinbold italics,includingtheoriginalfootnotes.Theseconditionsmayapplytoawholeprojectorseparatelytoindividualsubprojects.Basedontheprinciplesoutlinedin7.6,specificnotesofclarificationhavebeenadded.

According to the State aid rules for R&D&I, there is deemed to be no indirect aid in a collaboration project if one of thefollowingthreeconditionsapplies:

(1) the participating undertakings bear the full cost of the project. Note1.1.Condition(1)ismetwhentheparticipatingundertakingsbearthefullprojectcostoftheresearchorganizationand

ownallIPRsandotherresultsfromtheactivitiesoftheresearchorganizationintheproject.Astheresearchorganizationisfullycompensatedforitsprojectcosts,indirectaidisavoided.Whethertheundertakingsthemselvesreceivedirectaidfortheircontributionstotheprojectisnotrelevantinthisrespect.

6‘Fullallocation’meansthattheresearchorganizationenjoysthefulleconomicbenefitofthoserightsbyretainingfulldisposalofthem,notablytherightofownershipandtherighttolicense.Theseconditionsmayalsobefulfillediftheorganizationdecidestoconcludefurthercontractsconcerningtheserightsincludinglicensingthemtothecollaborationpartner.

23



(2) the results which do not give rise to intellectual property rights may be widely disseminated and any intellectual property rights to the R&D&I results which result from the activity of the research organization are fully allocated6 to the research organization.

Note 2.1. Condition (2) is met when any IPRs from the project are fully allocated to the inventing partner, which thengrantsaccessrightstoitsresultstootherpartners.ThisisinlinewiththeusualprovisionswithintheSeventhFrameworkProgramme,whichisexplicitly implementedinaccordancewiththeStateaidrules.Freenon-exclusivelicensesmaybeprovidedforuseof the licensedpartner’sownproject IPRsandalsomorebroadly forallotheruse incaseofbalancedpartnershipscharacterizedbycomparablelevelsofexpertiseandcontributions.

(3) the research organization receives from the participating undertakings compensation equivalent to the market price for the intellectual property rights7 which result from the activity of the research organization carried out in the project and which are transferred to the participating undertakings. Any contribution of the participating undertakings to the costs of the research organization shall be deducted from such compensation.

Note3.1.ThecompensationpayableforthetransferofIPRsshouldalsoapplytoexclusivelicences,whichinpracticeprovidenearlythesameeconomicbenefitsastheownershipofIPRs.However,asdescribedaboveinNote2.1,freenon-exclusivelicencesmaybeprovidedforuseofthelicensedpartner’sownprojectIPRsandalsomorebroadlyforallotheruseincaseofbalancedpartnershipscharacterizedbycomparablelevelsofexpertiseandcontributions.

Note3.2.Incasepartnershaveagreedtopoolfinancialandotherresourcesintheprojectandtheresearchorganizationcarriesoutresearchonbehalfofallpartnerscollectively(“commonpot”),theinvestmentsmadeandriskssharedbytheparticipatingundertakingsshouldbedulyrecognizedbytakingtherelativecontributionsmadebytheundertakingsintoaccountinnegotiationsonthecompensationforIPRspayabletotheresearchorganizationincaseoftransferorlicenseoftheIPRs.Thisapproachfortakingpartners’contributionintoaccountshouldbeagreedexante,i.e.beforethecollaborationprojectbeginsandanypossibleresultsleadingtoIPRsareknown.

Note3.3.Incaseaninventioncannotbesolelyattributedtoasingleinventingpartner,acompensationequivalenttothemarketpriceisonlypayableincaseoftransferorexclusivelicenseoftheresearchorganization’spartofthejointIPRs,withthelatterdeterminedonthebasisofpartners’relativecontributionstotheproject.Non-exclusiveuseofajointinventionmaybeforfree.

If none of the previous conditions are fulfilled, the Member State may rely on an individual assessment of the collaboration project8. There may also be no State aid where the assessment of the contractual agreement between the partners leads to the conclusion that any intellectual property rights to the R&D&I results as well as access rights to the results are allocated to the different partners of the collaboration and adequately reflect their respective interests, work packages, and financial and other contributions to the project.

Note4.1.Forexample,ifmutuallyagreedbeforetheprojectbegins,undertakingsmaycompensatearesearchorganizationforperformingR&Dat less thanitsfullcostwhenthis isfairandreasonable inviewofotherbenefitsaccruingto theresearchorganization.ThismaybeappropriateincasetheeconomicbenefitsofIPRsoftheresearchorganizationarenotfullytransferred,forexample,whenaresearchorganizationretainsaccessrightsfornon-commercialuse,receivesalumpsumforIPRstransferredtoparticipatingundertakings,receivesrunningroyaltiesand/orsuccessfeesforthetransferredIPRs,getsaccesstocertainbackgroundIPRsorknowhowoftheparticipatingundertakings,benefitsfromPublicRelations,etc.

Note 4.2. More generally, any other way for handling IPRs that is agreed in real negotiations between partners asadequatelyreflectingtheirrespectiveinterests,workpackages,andfinancialandothercontributionstotheprojectwouldbeappropriate foravoiding indirectStateaid.Suchcontractualarrangementsshouldbeagreedexante, i.e.before thecollaborationprojectbeginsandanypossibleresultsleadingtoIPRsareknown.

7‘Compensationequivalenttothemarketpricefortheintellectualpropertyrights’referstocompensationforthefulleconomicbenefitofthoserights.InlinewithgeneralStateaidprinciplesandgiventheinherentdifficultytoestablishobjectivelythemarketpriceforintellectualpropertyrights,theCommissionwillconsiderthisconditionfulfillediftheresearchorganizationassellernegotiatesinordertoobtainthemaximumbenefitatthemomentwhenthecontractisconcluded.

8ThisprovisiondoesnotintendtomodifytheobligationoftheMemberStatestonotifycertainmeasuresonthebasisofArticle88(3)oftheECTreaty.

24



7.6 Itisemphasizedthatthesenotesofclarificationarenotintendedtobeexhaustive,andthattheyassumereasonablesymmetrybetweenthepartnersintermsofprofessionalism,withpartnersassumedtoenterthecollaborationagreementvoluntarilybecauseofexpectedmutualbenefits.

7.7 Ifconditions(1),(2)or(3)in7.5arenotfulfilledandtheindividualassessmentofthecollaborationprojectbytheMemberState(s)doesnotleadtotheconclusionthatthereisnoindirectStateaid,thefullvalueofthecontributionoftheresearchorganizationtotheprojectisdeemedtoconstituteindirectStateaidtoundertakings.However,evensuchaidmaybeallowable.Thecombinedaidfromdirectgovernmentsupportand(wheretheyconstituteindirectaid)contributionsfromresearchorganizationstothatprojectmaynotexceedtheapplicableaidceilingforeachbenefitingundertaking.Therelevantaidceilingsarecurrently100%forfundamentalresearch;50%forindustrialresearch;and25%forexperimentaldevelopment.Theseceilingsmaybeincreasedwithcertainbonusesforsmallandmediumsizefirmsandinsomeothersituations.Forexample,incaseofeffectivecollaborationanincreaseof15%appliesundercertainconditions.

Competition and Antitrust

7.8 Competition is a basic mechanism of the market economy and encourages innovation. The EC Treaty prohibitsagreementsbetweentwoormoreundertakingsthatrestrictcompetition,subjecttosomelimitedexceptions.AlthoughR&Dcollaborationsareinprincipleconsideredtobepro-competitive,certainrestrictionsdoapply.OutsideStateaid,themainrulesthatneedtobetakenintoaccountaretheblockexemptionregulationsonhorizontalR&Dagreements9andtechnologytransferagreements10.Theirimpactstronglydependsonthespecificsituationoftheagreementathand,forexampleonmarketsharesofthepartnersandwhethertheyarecompetitors,potentialcompetitorsornon-competitors.TheserulesparticularlyaffectaccesstoandexploitationoftheresultsfromR&Dcollaboration.

9CommissionRegulation(EC)No2659/2000of29November2000ontheapplicationofArticle81(3)oftheTreatytocategoriesofresearchanddevelopmentagreements(TextwithEEArelevance),OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnionL304,5.12.2000,p.7–12.

10CommissionRegulation(EC)No772/2004of27April2004ontheapplicationofArticle81(3)oftheTreatytocategoriesoftechnologytransferagreements,OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnionL123,27.4.2004,p.11–17.

25



8.1 Innovationislikeachemicalreaction.Inprinciple,ithappenswhentherightrawmaterialscometogether,butcatalystsareoftenrequiredtoreducethebarrierstochangeandensurethatusefuloutcomesemerge.

8.2 Theshortageswefacearegenerallynottherawmaterialsofinnovation.Wehavetheseinplenty.Thekeytasksaretoremovebarrierstotheproductivetransformationofknowledgeandtoensuredemandfortheproductsfromwhichtobuildandmaintainleadingknowledge-basedeconomies.Whenthesepointsaredealtwith,thereactioncanbecomeself-sustaining.

8.3 ThisHandbookisofferedasatangiblesteptowardsachievingaself-sustainablereaction.Weencourageorganizationsandpeople toendorseandadoptResponsiblePartneringandtohelpus improve theframework in the lightof theirexperiences.

8.4 Responsible Partnering will only succeed because a sufficient number of actors find it useful. In order to reach thatpoint,weneed investment tobuildcapacity in theformofsupportingskillsand infrastructures–so-calledResearchand Innovation-Friendly Ecosystems.We encourage public authorities to contribute to this capacity-building process,recognisingthatavoluntaryandwidely-adoptedprogrammecanyieldsubstantialpaybacktosocietyasawhole.

8. Concluding Remarks

26



Bydefinition,theresultsofresearchprojectscannotbeguaranteedinadvance.ThepurposeofResponsiblePartneringistoimprovethelikelihoodofsuccessbyeliminatingweaknessesthatareunderanorganization’scontrol,andtherebyprovideassurancethatthemajorityofcollaborationswillbeconsideredtohavebeeneffectiveandworthwhileinmeetingitsownandpartners’objectives.

InordertobeaResponsiblePartner,aCompanyoraPROcommitsitselftothespiritofthisHandbookby:•Implementing a structured process that is consistent with the principles of Responsible Partnering, defines clear and

equitableobjectivesinrespectofcollaborationandknowledgeexchangeandthenachievesthedesiredlevelofperformancebyusinglearningfromothers,regularfeedbackfrompartnerorganizationsanddocumentedself-assessmentstoensurethequalityofactivepartnerships.

ThefollowingtwochecklistssuggestpointstoconsiderwhenimplementingResponsiblePartnering,organizedintermsofincreasinglevelsofengagement.Thefirstchecklistaddressesstrategy,relationshipmanagement,learningprocesses,reviewproceduresandcommunication.Mostofthepointswillberelevanttoalltypesoforganization,butsomeaddressthespecificsituationsofCompanies,UniversitiesandRTOsormayonlyapplyincertaincircumstances.Consequently,manyCompaniesand PROs may consider it unnecessary to address all the points that are suggested. The second checklist is aimed morespecificallyatsituationsthataimtosupportadvancedtrainingandeducation(e.g.collaborativedoctoralprogrammes).

It isalwaysrecommended that the implementationprocessreflects‘SMART’principles: i.e. involvessteps thatareSpecific,Measurable,Attainable,RealisticandTimely.Itwillusuallybemosteffectivetoassessthecurrentsituationintermsofscalessuch as“Not yet begun/Underway/Completed,” and to provide for broad and open discussion of what further efforts areneededtoachieveeffectiveoutcomes.

For example, an organization may begin by discussing the criteria it will use to identify desired partners and introducestraightforwardproceduresformanagingrelationshipswiththesepartners.Atthisstage, itsreviewprocessesarelikelytobequiteinformalandaimedmainlyatlearningaboutcurrentprojects,withthefindingsusedtoimprovemanagementoffutureprojects.Thereafter,stepsshouldbetakentoformalize,butalsosimplify,theapproachwithaviewtoprovidingquickunderstandingofareasofstrengthandweakness,regularauditsofcommercialandotherpotential,andawaytoidentifyandresolveproblems.

Ateachstage,systematiceffortswillbeundertakentocheckthatthepreferredapproachreflectsexternalstandardsof“goodpractice”andgoodunderstandingofpartnerobjectivesandpriorities.Eventually,theorganizationmaydecidetoimplementanumberofstrategicrelationshipswithsomekeypartners,inwhichcasetheserelationshipsarelikelytobemanagedataseniorlevelandextendbeyondtheparametersofindividualresearchprojects.

Appendix: Implementation Guidelines

27



Suggested Checklist Items for Strategic Collaborative Research

Element RecommendationsCorporate/institutionalstrategyandinternalawareness

1.1:Developastrategyforcollaborativeresearch,reflectingtheprinciplesofResponsiblePartnering,settingoutwhyandhowtheCompany/PROintendstoworkwithothers.Ensurethatseniormanagementendorsestheapproachandmonitorsitsimplementation.1.2:Takestepstoachieveamatureunderstandingwithintheorganizationoftheconsequencesofthisstrategy(includinganyethicalandlegalconsiderations).Usethisprocesstostimulateregulardiscussionandideasforimprovement.1.3:Regularlyassesstheimplementationandeffectivenessofthestrategyinthecontextofthecurrentprojectportfolio.Ensurethatpoliciesandproceduresareappliedconsistentlyandconsideredeffectiveandsociallyresponsible,andthatthereisactivemanagementoftheportfolioofcollaborativeresearchactivities.

Operatingprocedures 2.1:Developclearoperatingproceduresthatexplainwhatisrequiredwhenestablishingandrunningcollaborativeresearchprojects,suchaschoiceofpartner,negotiationandcontractualarrangements,projectmanagement,legalandethicalmatters,etc.2.2:Makeroutinechecksthattheseoperatingproceduresarebeingfollowed,andconsideredeffectiveandnotburdensome,bothinternallyandbypartners.2.3:Checkthattheoperatingprocedureshavegenerallyresultedinhighlevelsofmutualtrust,effectiveworkingpracticesandgreaterconfidenceindelivery,internallyandamongpartners.

Training 3.1:Promotea“partner-oriented”mindset.Identifytheskillsandknowledgerequiredtomanagecollaborativeresearchprojects,andtakestepstoprovideappropriatetrainingandpromoteawarenessofResponsiblePartnering.3.2:Establishtrainingprogrammesforresearchemployeesandknowledgetransferprofessionals,withregularrefreshercourseswhereappropriate,whererelevantinvolvingstafffrompartnerorganizations.Usestaffexchangeprogrammestoimprovequalityandmutualawareness.3.3:Activelysupportpublicinitiativesthatdevelopgreaterawarenessofinnovationprocesses,thehandlingofintellectualpropertyandthemanagementofcollaborativeresearch.Contributetoexternaldevelopmentandcertificationprogrammeswhichaimtoimprovethecompetenciesofknowledgetransferprofessionals.

ContractualmattersandIPRprotection

4.1:Establishcontractualprocedures(ideallystandardised)thatprovidefortheequitableandeffectiveprotectionofIPRsandareconsistentwithpartnerrequirements.4.2:Obtainassurancethattheproceduresareeffectiveandnotburdensome(forexamplethataprivatesectorpartnerclaimsrightstoresultsgeneratedbythepublicpartner,includingbackgroundintellectualproperty,onlywhenthesearereasonablyrequiredforpurposesofcommercialisationandonfairandreasonableterms,andthatsuchclaimsaremitigatedbygrantingbackrightsofuseinfurtherresearchorfornon-competingapplications).4.3:Demonstratethatcontractualandoperatingproceduresarerecognizedasconstituting“bestpractice”andprovideequitablecompensationforrequiredexclusiveandnon-exclusiveuserights,eitherthroughlicenceorassignmentofownership.Wheretheseprocedurescommitthecompanytodeveloptheserights,theprocessishandledwithduediligenceandprovidemechanismsforunusedrightstoreturntothepartnersorbecomenon-exclusive.

28



Element RecommendationsCommunication 5.1:EnsurethatcurrentandpotentialpartnerscanreadilyaccessinformationontheCompany’s/

PRO’sapproachtocollaboration,includingforexampleareasofcollaboration,policies,etc.,andencouragereciprocity.5.2:Considerreportingtheimpactandvalueofcollaborationpoliciesopenlyinexternalcommunications.

Other 6.1:Makeappropriatecheckstoensurethatpartnerorganizationpracticesareconsistentwiththecompany’sstatedpoliciesinkeyareassuchassafety,culture,termsandconditionsofemployment,etc.

Suggested Checklist for Situations involving Collaborative Research Training11

1. Identifyknowledge/technologicalneedsandchallengesthatneedR&Dinput

2. Exchangeviewsonknowledge/technologicalchallengeswithuniversity/industry

3. Planmedium-longtermR&Dstrategy(e.g.withinfiveyears)

4. Develophighqualityresearchproposals

5. Knowthecostsofyourresearchandidentifyfundingsources

6. Raiseyourawarenessoftherespectiveresearchenvironmentsinwhichtocollaborateinyourfield(university,industry)

7. Develop/Participateinforumsforsoftwaysofinteractionbetweenstudents,researchersandindustryexpertswithgoodresearchcontent(conferences,fairs,etc.)

8. Organisesmall-sizehighly-specialisedworkshops/meetingsthatpoolexpertsfromdifferentresearchfieldsandsectors

9. Seektherightexpertisetoassistyou(IPRissues,contractualissues,etc.)

10.Formalisedoctoralcollaborationsinsolidandfairagreementscombiningstructureandflexibility

11. Considerphysicalproximityasanassettodevelopmutualtrust–promoteface-to-facedialogue

12.Committoexcellenceindoctoraleducation,researchandmanagement

11Source:DOC-CAREERSreport[8]

29



1. EffectiveCollaborativeR&DandKnowledgeTransfer,Brussels,5-6February2004,ConferenceReport ResponsiblePartneringbetweenScienceandBusiness,Lisbon,3-4December2007,ConferenceReport

2. HenryChesbrough:“OpenInnovation:TheNewImperativeforCreatingandProfitingfromTechnology”HarvardBusinessSchoolPress(2003)

3. Management of Intellectual Property in Publicly Funded Research Organizations:Towards European Guidelines (2003)http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/era/pdf/iprmanagementguidelines-report.pdf

4. TurningScienceintoBusiness(2003)andOpenInnovationinGlobalNetworks,(2008),OECD. BenchmarkingIndustryScienceRelationships,(2002),OECD http://www.oecdbookshop.org/oecd/display.asp?K=5LMQCR2K9FJF&LANG=EN

5. CommissionRecommendationontheManagementofIntellectualPropertyinKnowledgeTransferActivitiesandCodeofPracticeforUniversitiesandotherPublicResearchOrganizations,C(2008)1329

http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/ip_recommendation.pdf

6. CodeofPracticeforManagingIntellectualPropertyfromCollaborativeResearch,IrishCouncilforScience,TechnologyandInnovation(2005)

Contacts, Codex & Contracts - Guidelines for Research Collaborations between Universities and Industrial Companies,DanishConfederationofIndustries(2004)

LambertAgreements-AToolkitforUniversitiesandCompaniesWishingtoUndertakeCollaborativeResearchProjects,UK Government(2005), http://www.innovation.gov.uk/lambertagreements/

Taking advantage of patents - Effective cooperation between companies and universities, Ministry of Economic Affairs,VNO-NCW,VSNU/NFU(2007),

http://www.vno-ncw.nl/web/servlet/nl.gx.vno.client.http.StreamDbContent?download=brochure&code=1824

DESCA:http://www.desca-fp7.eu/

DIGITALEUROPE(formerlyEICTA)http://www.digitaleurope.org/index.php?id=32&id_article=303

7. GeoffreyBoltonandColinLucas,WhatareUniversitiesfor?(2008),LeagueofEuropeanResearchUniversities

8. Collaborative Doctoral Education: University-Industry Partnerships for Enhancing Knowledge Exchange, DOC-CAREERSproject,EuropeanUniversityAssociation(2009)

References

30



ThisHandbookonResponsiblePartneringisissuedbythemainEuropeanorganizationssupportingresearch,developmentandknowledge transferincompanies,universities,andpublicresearchorganizations.

EIRMA46rueLauristonF-75116ParisTel:+33153238310Fax: +33147200530www.eirma.asso.fr

EUArued’Egmont13B-1000BrusselsTel:+3222305544Fax: +3222305751www.eua.be

EARTORueJosephII,36-38,B-1000BrusselsTel:+3225028698Fax: +3225028693www.earto.org

ProTonEuroperuedesPalais44B-1030BrusselsTel:+3222113432Fax: +3222188973www.protoneurope.org

TheEuropeanIndustrialResearchManagementAssociation(EIRMA)aimstoenhanceinnovationthroughmoreeffectivemarket-orientedresearchanddevelopment.Itsuniquefeaturesarenetworkingandpersonalcontactamongcompanies.EIRMAprovidesaplatformfordiscussingideasandexchangingpracticalexperienceacrosstheprofessionalcommunitiesofourmembership.Activitiessupportcompaniesinbenchmarkingandimprovingtheirinnovationprocessesthroughsufficient,well-managedR&D,andestablishEIRMAastheevidentsourceofinsightandinformationintobusiness-ledR&D.

TheEuropeanUniversityAssociation(EUA)isthemainorganizationofEuropeanuniversitiesandtheirnationalrectors’conferences.ItsmissionistopromoteacoherentsystemofEuropeanhighereducationandresearchbasedonsharedvalues,throughactivesupportandguidancetoitsmembers,thusenhancingtheircontributiontosociety.TheaimsofEUAaretoformulateacoherentmessagefromthehighereducationinstitutionsandtostrengthentheroleoftheinstitutionsinthecreationoftheEuropeanHigherEducationandEuropeanResearchAreas.

TheEuropeanAssociationofResearchandTechnologyOrganizations(EARTO)isthetradeassociationofEurope’sspecialisedresearchandtechnologyorganizations(RTOs).Itsmembersbuildbridgesbetweenbasicresearchandindustrialapplications.Theyareinnovativeandcompetitiveproblem-solversforallsectorsofindustryandservices,technologydevelopers,adaptersandtransferintermediaries,helpingtoensuremoreeffectiveexploitationofresearchbytheenterprisesector.TheymakeamajorcontributiontostrengtheningEurope’seconomicperformancebysupportingproductandprocessinnovationinallbranchesofindustryandservices,therebyraisingtheinternationalcompetitivenessofEuropeanfirms.

ProTonEuropeisapan-EuropeannetworkofKnowledgeTransferOfficeslinkedtoUniversitiesandPublicResearchOrganizations.ItissupportedbytheEuropeanCommissionaspartoftheGate2GrowthInitiative.ProTonEurope’sultimateobjectiveistoboosttheeconomicandsocialbenefitsofpubliclyfundedR&DthroughoutEuropebyfurtherdevelopingtheprofessionalskillsofthoseworkinginthisfield.Thisshouldfurthercontributetothecreationofnewproducts,processesandmarkets,improvethemanagementofinnovation,andtherebystimulatesustainableandhighvalueeconomicgrowth,competitivenessandemployment.

Joining Forces in a World of Open Innovation: · PDF fileJoining Forces in a World of Open...

Documents

Transcript of Joining Forces in a World of Open Innovation: · PDF fileJoining Forces in a World of Open...