What conditions are needed to cultivate innovation in an academic setting? Providing aspiring inventors with the funds and time needed to explore promising research pathways is vital. What other factors can help academic scientists become successful inventors?
Earlier this week at The Tech Museum of Innovation in San Jose, CA, four champions of invention—Carla Shatz of Stanford University, Venkatesh Narayanamurti of Harvard University, Ilan Gur of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and Anne DeGheest of HealthTech Capital—engaged in a passionate conversation about the conditions needed to cultivate successful inventors in academia.
Moderated by Harvey V. Fineberg, president of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the discussion was part of an event celebrating the inaugural Moore Inventor Fellows, a new fellowship for early-career researchers pursuing inventions in science, environmental conservation and patient care.
“Innovation starts with one person saying ‘I see a different world’,” said Ilan Gur, founder of Berkeley Lab’s Cyclotron Road, an incubator for innovation designed to bridge the gap between laboratory research and industry/start-ups.
Gur stressed the need for academic inventors to push themselves outside the traditional boundaries of scientific inquiry, urging would-be inventors to work on their communication skills and educate themselves about relevant aspects of the business world. “Whatever time you think you need to spend learning these skills, multiply it by 50,” he added.
One point of discussion revolved around the tensions generated between the accelerated pace of venture capital funding and the incremental nature of scientific discoveries. Narayanamurti lent his historical perspective to bridging this divide, reflecting on his tenure at Bell Telephone Laboratories and University of California, Santa Barbara.
During his time at Bell Labs, often referred to as an “idea factory,” Narayanamurti noted the people who excelled at invention had a strong background in science but were willing to learn and experiment beyond their comfort zone. “It’s so important to allow your students and postdocs to collaborate across disciplines. To foster a culture of innovation, don’t ask what they know, ask what they don’t know.”
DeGheest emphasized the need for academic inventors to let go of their perfectionist tendencies and not wait for commercialization by endlessly tinkering with prototypes. “Invention is only recognized after it is successful, and it takes many stages,” she said.
The value of invention is more than making money, said DeGheest, but actually contributing something meaningful to society in the long term: “Innovation has no value if it does not create value over time.”
Another theme, first raised by Shatz, was letting risk be part of the equation. “Don’t panic if you don’t know what you want to do yet,” she said.
Shatz also suggested working within the academic structure to “carve out time” for invention, noting her efforts as the director of Bio-X, an interdisciplinary institute that encourages collaboration among biomedical and life science researchers, clinicians, engineers, physicists and computer scientists.
At the end of the event, Fineberg asked the panelists to share one piece of advice with would-be inventors in academia. They all agreed: passion is the key to being a successful inventor.
Message sent
Thank you for sharing.