CRI Taskforce on Innovation

The Crown Research Institute Taskforce released its findings today. The full report is here.

Most of its recommendations are uncontroversial and make good sense. The report draws particular attention to the difficulties CRIs have with the current contestible funding model. Researchers and scientists spend much of their time fighting over a small pool of money, when that time could be better spent conducting R&D.

A more stable fundng regime would hopefully allow CRIs to engage in more long-term planning, provide certainty to organisations, and boost the morale of staff.

The Taskforce also wants CRIs to focus more on getting technology out into the business community. It recommends technology transfer become a core and measurable responsibility for all CRIs.

There appears to be an acceptance that CRIs should not need to show profitability, only viability. This is a shift from the previous balancing act required of CRIs. Until now they have been expected to conduct public good R&D, while at the same time seeking profits through commercialisation.

The Taskforce says that the focus of CRIs ought to be on getting commercialisation out of their organisations. CRIs are to be discouraged from investing in spin-off companies for profit-maximisation, because these activities are potentially costly and create confusion about what the role of the CRI sector is. Instead, they will be encouraged to develop partnerships and relationships with private companies who need R&D.

Labour's Research Science and Technology spokesperson, David Shearer, has said that the report doesn't really answer the question about how we can increase the commercialisation of innovation. 

While changing the accountability, funding and governance structures for CRIs will provide greater focus and certainty, National must act to ensure there is increased collaboration with universities and businesses to ensure their innovations become commercial viable.

But he appears to have missed the point. If the new commercial focus of CRIs is for them to act as R&D providers for businesses, it will become essential for those CRIs to work more with businesses, more than they already do. It will probably happen out of necessity. I'm really not sure how much more National can do to encourage these collaborations. Shearer is typically vague, as opposition parties always are mid-term. But it would be nice if he told us show he would encourage collaboration with businesses. Does Labour have a better plan?

This is a good start. Not because CRIs are no good at commercialisation, but because the uncertainty about what their role actually is has to date detracted from their ability to make major commercial gains from the IP developed by them. Private businesses don't have the same constraints as CRIs, and are more likely to be prepared to take risks, because they are not using public money.

******

If after that you felt any kind of optimism that maybe for once we were starting to move in the right direction on innovation, you may not want to read this article by Idealog's Vincent Heeringa. He attacks the paucity of imagination displayed by National in dealing with our lack of economic growth. It appears the only country we're closing the gap with is Kazakhstan.

In short, if we continue on the path we're currently on, were screwed.

Worth a read, even if it is depressing.