The research university as we know it today is, in many ways, a direct result of the needs of the nation during World War II. In response to the war effort, the federal government of the United States launched into an unprecedented expansion of investment in science and engineering‐based research in, of all places, academic institutions. Powerhouse institutions, such as MIT and the University of California, Berkeley, led the way in developing significant technical advances that had a direct impact on the outcome of the war.

Because of the success of the partnership between academe and the federal government, Vannevar Bush, the head of the Office of Scientific Research and Development at the time, was asked to develop a plan to maintain and enhance federal programs for research. The result was the creation of his seminal work: “Science: The Endless Frontier.” In it, Bush described the difference between so‐called basic and applied research and made the case that the federal government should establish a systematic way of supporting basic research in academic institutions. Under this model, applied research was left to the private sector and industry.

The bargain that was struck in separating basic/academic research from applied research is the genesis of the so‐called Valley of Death. This phenomenon is common to those who support the commercialization of technology out of academic labs and is a direct result of the structure Vannevar Bush used to distinguish between the type of research that takes place in academic institutions and the type of research that takes place in industrial settings.

For decades after World War II and in spite of the Valley of Death, the United States led the world in its ability to transform basic research into products and services to advance human progress. This ability is widely recognized as a source of comparative advantage around the world and has aided in the development of innovation hubs centered around leading institutions: most famously Silicon Valley in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Evidence suggests that technology can effectively be spun out of academic labs. The question before us now is can we do it better. My strong belief is that the answer to this question is yes, and Academic Entrepreneurship helps to point the way.

My work at the National Science Foundation (the brain child of Vannevar Bush), first as a program manager in the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and then as the founding lead program director for the Innovation Corps (I‐Corps), has given me insight into business creation from academic institutions. During my time at NSF, I had an up‐close and personal view of over 400 companies encompassing software and services, many of which had a direct connection to academic work. Through the I‐Corps program, I was privileged to be involved with approximately 200 additional teams, all academic, and in multiple disciplines.

What I have found is a profound difference between the capacity for research and the success of innovation. Recognition of this difference is the key to improving the transformation of ideas into successful businesses.

Geoff Nicholson the former vice president of 3M had a saying, “Research is turning money into knowledge. Innovation is turning knowledge into money.” It is true that great researchers are not necessarily great innovators and successful innovators are not necessarily competent researchers.

From my work with many academic spinouts, I have found the following things to be true. Academically trained scientists and engineers excel at discovery. Faculty, postdocs, and students have certain skills that enable them to identify potential commercial opportunity. They are able to ask, “Does this new technology provide value to potential customers?”

Despite the ability to ask and answer the important “exploration” questions, these highly creative teams struggle to pull resources together to turn their creative pursuits into valuable enterprises. It is this challenge that Academic Entrepreneurship addresses.

Academic institutions, with their vast intellectual resources, should be a breeding ground for great leaps forward in innovation. We need to break down the barriers of false dichotomy that exists between the separation of basic and applied research. We know that technology transfer from research institutions is a powerful source of human progress, but there is room for improvement. The future potential of academic venture creation is vast and not at odds with the endless frontier.

In the following pages, Michele explores the elements that lead to turning knowledge into money. Academic Entrepreneurship explores the importance of IP, customer discovery, team building, and early‐stage financing. It is a significant contribution to our understanding of the commercialization process and represents an area of practices that deserves our attention.

What do Bose, Genentech, and Gatorade all have in common? They are all companies that were founded based on technology from academic research.

Academic research is fascinating. It allows you to explore and discover to the farthest reaches of your imagination and scientific skills. Academic researchers are trained through graduate school and often postdoctoral studies with a system of apprenticeship or mentorship under an advisor who guides the research. Under this system, we are taught the scientific method, how to pose relevant questions, critically review prior work, analyze data, report findings, financially support the work through grants, run a lab, and train the next generation of researchers.

Today, there is considerable interest of university faculty, national lab researchers, medical doctors, postdoctoral and graduate students in expanding academic research toward development of products or services that can directly serve society and drive economic development. More often than not, our graduate student and postdoctoral mentorship did not and does not include a systematic approach for translation of research to commercialization.

This book is intended as a guide to help you navigate the process of commercializing your academic discovery. While there are numerous outstanding books on entrepreneurship (see Suggested Reading), the academy offers some unique challenges to commercializing technologies for those on the inside. It’s difficult to find a clear translational path to follow. The paths vary institutionally and geographically across the country. This book serves as a guide to academic entrepreneurship with all of its exciting opportunities as well as real challenges. Consider it a “how to” commercialize your academic findings.

The motivation for consolidating this “how to” was numerous requests for advice from colleagues in my university and across the country who were starting companies. From my position as a Professor of Materials Science and Engineering, I have been a cofounder of two start‐up companies from my academic work and have cofounded a technology company outside of the university system. Work with my start‐up companies has given me intimate insights into the start and in one case so far, to the finish line of the commercialization process. In addition, I’ve served in the university provost’s office developing programs to better help researchers translate their scientific discoveries. My work was not done at Stanford or MIT, who have had great systems in place for translating research for decades, but at a top 100 university that was and is developing its methodologies around commercialization. So whether in Silicon Valley, Boston, or any other academic location, the strategies in this book will help to guide you through this exciting process.

But one person’s perspective is limited, so I’ve interviewed numerous colleagues in university start‐up ecosystems across the country to learn about their experiences and have included their insights as inserts in the chapters. You’ll hear from technology transfer officers, regional economic development partners, venture capitalists, attorneys, faculty members, and students who have founded companies to translate academic research.

My hope is that this book will give you a framework for your technology commercialization. There is no “right way” or “only way” to proceed, but some considerations discussed here will make the commercialization path smoother for you and give you a foundation on which to base your many decisions. From my own experience in biomaterials and medical device research, it has been a great satisfaction to see a research concept evolve into a real patient treatment.

The book begins with a brief review of academic entrepreneurship for those interested in some historical context and data. In each of the subsequent chapters, you will find information on protecting your intellectual property, exploring market need, negotiating with the university technology transfer office, providing proof of concept for your product or service, assembling your management team, making postdoctoral and graduate students as founders of academic start‐ups, hiring incubators/accelerators, and financing your company. In a final summary, the top reasons why start‐ups fail (academic and nonacademic) as well as examples of how some succeeded are analyzed.

Additional topics addressed that are unique to academic start‐ups include conflicts of interest (among you, the university, and the start‐up company), tenure, and promotion considerations for faculty members in light of entrepreneurial activities, challenges, and opportunities, having academic colleagues as business partners, managing relationships between advisors and students in academic start‐ups, keeping your day job while founding a company, or deciding to leave the academy entirely.

My hope is that by learning about the processes, stumbling points, successes, and general experiences of numerous people in the academic entrepreneurship ecosystem, you will have a roadmap to successfully commercializing your important research discovery. Welcome to the entrepreneurship community.

I would like to thank numerous friends and colleagues who have provided advice and feedback during the writing of this book. From casual conversations to lengthy sit‐down discussions, your input was essential. Each of the people in the university entrepreneurship ecosystem who agreed to provide an interview for this book helped to shape and bring the book personal insights from a variety of perspectives. Many thanks to each of you. As you all are extremely busy and talented people, your time and candor in our discussions were a great gift.

I appreciate the thorough reading of the manuscript by Tom Edwards and Errol Arkilic whose helpful feedback was both thoughtful and encouraging.

Thank you also to Leslie Campion who provided essential support in the preparation of the manuscript for publication and used her tremendous talents to create the cover art for the book. This necessary work takes a special skill to complete, and there is a good likelihood that without her talents the manuscript would not have been fully and finally published.

A special note of thanks goes to my family. My husband, Paul, and my sons, Noah and Dan, for their support of my sitting at the kitchen counter for many hours lost in the manuscript. Noah was especially kind to use his keen literary skills to edit the manuscript of the book before it could ever be given to the editor.

Thank you as well to Wiley for the editorial and production staff who were encouraging as well as skillful in finalizing the publication in every aspect.

Dr. Michele Marcolongo, Ph.D., P.E., is the department head and professor of Materials Science and Engineering at Drexel University in Philadelphia. She has been a leader in the university entrepreneurship ecosystem where she has previously served as associate vice provost for research, associate dean of intellectual property development for the College of Engineering, and senior associate vice provost for translational research. She served on the Operations Boards of the Nanotechnology Institute and the Energy Commercialization Institute, which directed proof‐of‐concept commercialization funds for 14 universities in Pennsylvania. Dr. Marcolongo’s field of research is biomaterials or materials that can be implanted into the body to replace diseased or damaged tissues. Dr. Marcolongo has cofounded two companies with from her research in biomaterials: the first, Gelifex, was sold to a major orthopaedics manufacturer, and the second, MimeCore, to commercialize a platform technology of biomimetic proteoglycans. In addition, she cofounded the health IT company, Invisalert Solutions. She is a fellow of AIMBE and Alpha Sigma Mu. Dr. Marcolongo received her doctorate in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Pennsylvania.