How Venture Philanthropy Helps Move Rare Disease Research Forward with Tim Brent

Getting discoveries out of the lab is only part of the commercialization journey. At some point, a promising idea reaches the stage where investment decisions can determine whether the science moves forward, stalls out, or becomes something that can truly reach patients. That moment is especially important in rare diseases, where the path to market can be long, complex, and difficult for traditional capital to support.My guest today is Tim Brent, Venture Principal with Pathway to Cures, the venture philanthropy fund of the National Bleeding Disorders Foundation. Tim brings experience across patient advocacy, specialty pharmaceutical operations, and venture investment, along with a personal family connection to rare disease communities. In his role, he sources and evaluates investment opportunities, supports diligence and transactions, and helps manage relationships with biotech companies after investment.We also discuss the practical side of the work, including how Tim finds opportunities, what makes a founder conversation stand out, and where promising science can start to lose momentum. He shares what patient input adds to diligence, why clear milestones and a strong mechanism of action matter, and how venture philanthropy can sometimes help early-stage programs keep moving when traditional capital is not quite ready to step in.In This Episode:[02:06] Tim Brent shares how his nonprofit career led him into the bleeding disorders space and mission-driven life science investing.[03:05] How his long connection to the bleeding disorders community and his daughters’ diagnoses add personal intensity to the work.[05:20] How Pathway to Cures works with university spinouts, licensed technologies, scientific advisors, legal counsel, cap tables, and investment documents during diligence.[08:17] Why patient perspective is central to Pathway to Cures and how the history of the bleeding disorders community shapes the way new therapies are evaluated.[10:02] Risks traditional investors may overlook, including treatment burden, side effects, patient preferences, and whether a new therapy is compelling enough to replace existing options.[11:52] How patient engagement shows up in diligence through the National Research Blueprint, lived experience experts, and the newer Bleeding Disorders Research Collaborative.[13:33] The importance of engaging patients and community members early, rather than waiting until a company is close to clinical trials.[14:24] What makes university tech transfer offices easier to work with, especially when researchers are genuinely excited about the discovery and open to scientific discussion.[15:55] What can slow deals down, from scheduling the first meeting to unclear founder pitches, slow NDAs, missing data room reports, IP questions, and unclear mechanisms of action.[18:11] What the relationship looks like after Pathway to Cures invests in a startup, including milestone check-ins, consultant referrals, and support without becoming a distraction.[19:46] Why very early-stage companies often need more post-investment support than later-stage companies.[20:22] Post-deal challenges that can come up unexpectedly, including slow decision-making, sudden management changes, and questions about cash burn.[21:09] Where promising programs can lose momentum, fall behind on timelines, or run out of capital before reaching the next funding round.[22:10] How venture philanthropy can help bridge the “valley of death” by taking on more risk, supporting rare disease markets, and helping companies de-risk early science.[25:00] Advice for tech transfer offices that want to make early-stage opportunities more attractive to mission-focused investors.[27:15] The future role of patient registries, patient-reported outcomes, access for underserved communities, affordability questions, and stronger partnerships.[28:36] A personal way to think about science, investment, and patient impact by asking what you would want if someone in your own family had a chronic disease or condition.Resources: AUTMPathway to CuresTim Brent - Pathway to CuresTim Brent - LinkedInBridging the Early-Stage Funding Gap in Innovation with Teri Willey

Industry partnerships can look very different depending on which side of the table you’re sitting on. For technology transfer professionals, the work often centers on preparing the opportunity, supporting the inventor, protecting the IP, and finding the right commercial partner. For companies like Thermo Fisher Scientific, the question is slightly different: does this technology solve a real problem, fit an existing product area, improve on something already in the market, or open the door to a new capability?My guest today is Hsiaoli Chen, Senior Manager of Corporate Innovation Partnerships at Thermo Fisher Scientific. Hsiaoli brings nearly 20 years of experience in business development, technology scouting, and licensing across the life sciences and pharmaceutical industries in the U.S. and Europe. She started her career as a biomedical researcher, and that scientific foundation still shapes how she evaluates new opportunities, talks with inventors, and looks at the evidence behind an emerging technology.In this conversation, Hsiaoli shares how Thermo Fisher works with universities, startups, researchers, and tech transfer offices to identify promising technologies and build productive partnerships. We talk about what catches her attention in a technology offering, why benchmarking against an existing product can make a disclosure easier to evaluate, and how validation data helps industry partners understand what still needs to happen before a technology can move forward.We also get into the practical side of licensing, including timelines, royalty expectations, contract templates, and the flexibility needed to get deals done. Hsiaoli also shares her perspective on global differences in university partnerships, the technology trends she’s watching in AI, automation, proteomics, spatial biology, and cell and gene therapy, and the simple things TTOs can do to stand out as strong, prepared, and collaborative industry partners.In This Episode:[02:03] Hsiaoli Chen shares how her path from academic biomedical research to a startup in Munich opened the door to business development, licensing, and technology commercialization.[03:31] Her research background still shapes how she evaluates new technologies, especially when looking at the science, experiments, and validation behind an invention.[05:12] Thermo Fisher’s university partnerships often begin through researchers who already use the company’s products or through introductions from tech transfer offices.[07:06] Benchmarking a university technology against an existing Thermo Fisher product can help the right internal team quickly understand where the opportunity fits.[08:42] Early-stage academic technologies may still be worth evaluating when inventors can clearly identify what additional validation or development work is needed.[10:02] Licensing conversations with Thermo Fisher often look different from biopharma deals because many technologies may reach the market within 12 to 24 months.[11:28] Royalty expectations, contribution from multiple technologies, and royalty management mechanisms can all affect whether a university deal makes commercial sense.[12:36] Flexibility around contract templates can help reduce friction and move licensing conversations forward more efficiently.[14:03] Global partnership structures vary, with U.S. tech transfer offices often taking the lead while some European inventors may have more direct influence over commercialization.[15:48] AI, automation, and predictive models for peptides, proteins, and antibodies are becoming increasingly important in chemistry and biology screening.[16:52] Proteomics, single-cell analysis, spatial biology, and cell and gene therapy manufacturing workflows are among the university research trends Thermo Fisher is watching closely.[18:39] Thermo Fisher uses a robust internal funnel to evaluate technologies coming from universities, startups, biotechs, and even other companies.[19:34] Product managers, R&D colleagues, IP counsel, business teams, and legal partners may all become part of the evaluation process as an opportunity advances.[21:07] A strong tech transfer partner often provides complete information up front, including benchmarking, publications, and public patent details when available.[22:21] Some promising technologies do not move forward because exclusivity is unavailable, consortium terms are limiting, or the deal structure does not fit the business needs.[23:38] A technology that looks strong on paper may still fail to advance if it does not perform well under Thermo Fisher’s internal technical evaluation conditions.[24:36] Hsiaoli’s advice for tech transfer professionals is to prepare clear, concise technology offerings, stay flexible on negotiation terms, and keep building relationships through conferences and direct engagement.Resources: AUTMHsiaoli Chen - LinkedInThermo Fisher Scientific

Technology transfer is often described through patents, licenses, startups, and commercialization strategy, but rarely through the lens of a board game. In this episode of AUTM on the Air, we talk with Guru Venkatesan, a business development manager at Fred Hutch and the creator of Royalty Stacks, a tech-transfer-inspired game built around patents, licenses, and leverage. The game gives players a chance to take ideas, decide how broadly to protect them, and choose whether to bring them to market through startups, exclusive licenses, or non-exclusive partnerships, all while navigating knock-offs, hostile takeovers, shifting market conditions, and the occasional boost from a rich uncle’s seed fund.Guru’s own path into technology commercialization has been anything but linear. He grew up in a small town in India with an early interest in visual arts, but after a classic family plot twist, he studied engineering instead. He earned his bachelor’s degree in India, moved to Tennessee for a PhD in Biomedical Engineering, and later founded Tech Carnivol, a Coachella-style festival for science and engineering during graduate school. His introduction to technology commercialization came at the University of Minnesota, where he worked under Leza Besemann and quickly fell in love with the field.The conversation explores how Royalty Stacks turns the everyday decisions of tech transfer into something people can actually sit down and play. Guru shares how he designed the game to balance strategy, humor, and education, why accessibility mattered as much as authenticity, and how concepts like patent enforcement, licensing pathways, portfolio building, collaboration, and market risk show up around the table. He also reflects on AI’s growing role in tech transfer, the challenge of explaining the profession to people outside the field, and what he hopes players will better understand about the long, risky, and often creative journey from idea to product.In This Episode:[03:00] Guru Venkatesan shares how his early interest in visual arts, a missed medical school cutoff, and encouragement to pursue engineering eventually led him to biomedical engineering.[06:13] The idea for Royalty Stacks came during a late-night moment when Guru realized tech transfer naturally behaves like a strategy game built around patents, licensing, risk, timing, and market forces.[09:43] Student-led technology festivals in India inspired Guru to create Tech Carnivol, a U.S. event with competitions, hackathons, robotics, and other hands-on science and engineering activities.[12:18] The challenge of explaining specialized fields to broader audiences leads into how Royalty Stacks makes patents, licensing, and commercialization easier to understand.[15:02] Guru walks through the basic gameplay of Royalty Stacks, including idea cards, patent filing, development, launch cards, play money, and power cards.[18:57] Patent regions, licensing territories, and revenue payouts are simplified for gameplay while still pointing toward real tech transfer concepts.[21:50] Launch Knock-Off and Enforce Patent introduce competition, copycats, and patent enforcement, with rock-paper-scissors adding a quick and lighthearted way to settle disputes.[25:25] Hostile Takeover and Collaborate create both adversarial and cooperative paths, giving players a chance to attack, protect, partner, or take strategic risks.[29:23] Corporate Roulette brings advanced gameplay into the mix through market events, windfalls, risks, moats, and humorous cards that can help players or disrupt opponents.[31:25] New players often begin to understand that patents matter, but also that protection alone is not enough without enforcement and commercialization strategy.[34:12] The game’s two winning conditions create more strategic tension by allowing players to win through cash or through a diversified portfolio and a late-game acquisition.[36:25] Guru sees Royalty Stacks as a tool for the AUTM community, whether for family play, office team building, faculty engagement, or startup incubator education.[39:20] Guru reflects on the irony of being a tech transfer professional commercializing a product about tech transfer, while relying more on copyright, branding, and a possible trademark than patents.[42:33] AI could reshape licensing and portfolio management roles by reducing time spent on document review and creating more space for marketing, relationship management, and overlooked technologies.[44:40] Royalty Stacks is launching on Kickstarter, with the campaign planned for June 16 through July 17 and expected delivery to backers in January 2027.[45:18] Guru hopes players walk away with a better appreciation for the work, risk, and execution required to move an idea from concept to product.Resources: AUTMGuru Venkatesan - LinkedInFred HutchRoyalty Stacks Creator IntroRoyalty Stacks Kickstarter

University-industry partnerships often sound straightforward from the outside. A promising discovery is made, a company sees potential, and a collaboration begins. But anyone who has worked inside these agreements knows the reality is far more complex. Research goals, publication timelines, IP rights, background technology, data sources, and internal review processes all have to be understood before a partnership can move forward in a productive way.My guest today is Dr. Yogesh Sharma, Global Head of External Research Collaboration at Novartis. In this role, he works at the intersection of academic research and corporate R&D, helping shape the structures that allow early-stage research collaborations to succeed. With deep experience in technology transfer, licensing, IP management, alliance governance, research agreements, and term sheet negotiations, Dr. Sharma brings a practical view of what it takes to build partnerships that protect innovation while still allowing science to move.We talk about how Novartis approaches external research collaboration, where alignment and friction often show up between universities and industry, and why relationships matter just as much as contracts. Dr. Sharma also shares his perspective on background IP, publication review, AI, and data-source diligence, and the importance of keeping the tech transfer office and PI aligned from the earliest stages of a collaboration.In This Episode:[01:32] Dr. Yogesh Sharma defines external research collaboration at Novartis as work focused on early-stage research rather than clinical trials, with an emphasis on understanding disease biology and identifying new therapeutic possibilities.[04:30] Dr. Sharma explains how his background in academic technology transfer helps him understand pressure points on both sides of the table, especially when universities and corporate partners approach collaboration with different needs.[06:00] The conversation turns to friction around the use of research results, including why Novartis may need flexibility for research programs or regulatory filings while universities need to preserve academic research and publication rights.[09:11] Dr. Sharma describes the recurring issue of non-exclusive royalty-free licensing and explains why Novartis does not ask for broad rights in every agreement, but may need them when important clinical drugs or pipeline compounds are involved.[10:27] Strong collaborations depend on more than contract language, with Dr. Sharma emphasizing the importance of trust and communication between the PI and company scientists when research changes direction or results do not go as planned.[12:39] Dr. Sharma discusses the practical realities of review cycles, publication timelines, and internal approvals at a large company, including the importance of giving industry partners enough time for IP attorney review.[14:30] Background IP becomes a major focus as Dr. Sharma explains how Novartis may take an option and help cover ongoing patent costs when existing university IP is important to a proposed collaboration.[17:19] The discussion shifts to AI, platform science, and data ecosystems, with Dr. Sharma noting that AI is already shaping drug discovery, chemistry, target identification, data analysis, and research collaborations.[19:10] AI collaborations require careful diligence around data sources, existing tools, open-source licenses, and whether any restrictions could limit what Novartis can do with collaboration outputs.[21:35] Dr. Sharma offers advice to tech transfer professionals, stressing the need for early alignment with the PI around the research plan, diligence, data sources, deliverables, and what each side is bringing into the collaboration.[23:45] After a deal is signed, Dr. Sharma explains that larger collaborations require continued engagement, project management, kickoff meetings, and a reliable point of contact beyond the PI’s lab.[25:27] The episode closes with a look at how larger collaborations may involve structured alliance management, while smaller projects are often handled directly by scientists unless a problem arises.Resources: AUTMNovartisDr. Yogesh Sharma - LinkedInNovartis Biomedical Research / Novartis ResearchHelmholtz Munich Launches Collaboration on AI-Driven Kidney Disease Research

There’s a stretch of time in innovation where things feel the most uncertain, when the science is promising but the path forward isn’t clear and the capital hasn’t quite caught up. It’s a space that can quietly stall even the most compelling ideas. In this episode, the conversation zeroes in on that early stage gap and what it really takes to move something forward when the usual funding sources aren’t ready yet.My guest today is Teri Willey, founding managing director of Pathway to Cures, the venture philanthropy fund of the National Bleeding Disorders Foundation. Teri has worked across nearly every part of the innovation ecosystem, from leading tech transfer offices to building venture funds and advising investors. That range of experience shapes how she thinks about translation, especially the less obvious pieces that influence whether a deal comes together or falls apart.We talk about how venture philanthropy works in practice and why it’s becoming an important tool for advancing therapies that might otherwise struggle to find early support. Teri also shares why understanding human behavior can matter just as much as understanding the science, how patient input can change the trajectory of a company, and what tech transfer professionals can do to better align with early-stage investors. It’s a grounded look at how progress actually happens and what it takes to keep it moving.In This Episode:[02:17] Teri Willey reflects on her career and the common thread of working between for-profit and nonprofit worlds to commercialize early-stage science.[03:13] Why science, IP, and funding alone aren’t enough, and how human behavior plays a critical role in getting deals done.[04:27] Practical advice on managing stakeholder dynamics and keeping negotiations focused on shared outcomes.[05:12] Defining venture philanthropy and how it differs from traditional venture capital and grant funding.[06:24] How Pathway to Cures reinvests returns to support future innovation rather than distributing profits.[07:08] Inside the fund: small team, targeted focus, and leveraging expert advisors and volunteers.[08:19] Reviewing hundreds of opportunities and acting as both investor and resource for companies in the space.[09:26] The value of deep scientific advisors and staying close to emerging, sometimes stealth-stage innovations.[10:53] Where therapies most often stall, especially in the seed and Series A funding gap.[12:07] Why early patient engagement is critical for clinical success and long-term adoption.[13:34] The structure of Pathway to Cures and how independence within a foundation enables flexibility.[14:57] How tech transfer offices can think of venture philanthropy funds as partners or potential licensees.[16:11] What investors look for and why understanding an investment memo can help TTOs evaluate opportunities.[17:23] The importance of speed and clarity in licensing negotiations to avoid losing momentum.[18:49] Strategies for anticipating capital needs across different types of technologies.[20:16] How IP is viewed as the starting point, not the endpoint, of building a company.[21:38] Defining success beyond returns, focusing on delivering real therapies and patient impact.[22:52] The growing role of disease-focused foundations in venture investing.[24:18] Why traditional investors value foundations for their patient access and domain expertise.[25:27] How TTOs can better collaborate by engaging early and asking what makes a project investable.[26:33] What keeps Teri optimistic despite challenges across funding, regulation, and commercialization.[27:41] Closing reflections on progress, persistence, and the growing impact of innovation.Resources: AUTMPathway to CuresTeri Willey - LinkedIn

Early detection is everything when it comes to Alzheimer’s, but for years, the tools available have made that nearly impossible at scale. Today’s conversation takes a closer look at a breakthrough that could change that equation in a very real way. My guest is Dr. Yuanbing Jiang, also known as Jason, a research assistant professor in the Division of Life Science at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. His work sits at the intersection of neuroscience, proteomics, and large-scale data analysis, with a focus on finding practical ways to detect and understand neurodegenerative disease much earlier than we’ve been able to before.We talk about the development of a 21-protein blood biomarker panel for Alzheimer’s disease, a test that’s reaching about 96% accuracy in detecting early-stage cases and has already been used in clinical settings in Hong Kong. Jason walks through how advances in high-sensitivity proteomic assays made it possible to measure thousands of proteins at once, and why moving beyond a narrow focus on amyloid markers has been key to improving accuracy. We also get into what it actually means to stage Alzheimer’s biologically, not just diagnose it, and how that changes the way clinicians think about treatment timing.There’s also a broader story here about access and impact. This blood-based approach is faster, less invasive, and significantly more affordable than traditional methods like PET imaging, which opens the door for wider use in different healthcare settings around the world. We discuss what earlier diagnosis means for patients and families, how it could accelerate drug development and clinical trials, and why this kind of innovation is a strong example of what can happen when academic research, technology transfer, and real-world application come together at the right moment.In This Episode:[03:47] Jason explains why Alzheimer’s begins developing 10–20 years before symptoms appear and why patients often miss the treatment window.[04:31] Traditional diagnostics like PET imaging and spinal fluid tests are effective but too expensive or invasive for widespread use.[05:12] The idea emerges to create a simple blood test that could be faster, cheaper, and accessible to a much broader population.[06:08] New high-sensitivity proteomic technology makes it possible to measure over 1,000 blood proteins with dramatically improved accuracy.[06:56] His team identifies more than 400 potential biomarkers and narrows them down to a 21-protein panel for detection.[07:43] Different biomarkers reveal distinct stages of Alzheimer’s, with immune system changes appearing earlier than neurological decline.[08:37] The test doesn’t just detect disease, it helps determine what stage a patient is in, which is critical for treatment decisions.[09:41] Early-stage identification becomes essential as certain drugs only work when intervention happens before major decline.[11:03] Two key innovations drive the breakthrough: ultra-sensitive detection technology and a whole-body view beyond amyloid markers.[12:06] Expanding beyond amyloid to include immune, metabolic, and vascular signals improves both accuracy and disease understanding.[13:02] High diagnostic accuracy reduces misdiagnosis, which can significantly impact patient outcomes and care planning.[13:58] Validation across Chinese and Spanish cohorts shows the test works consistently across different populations.[15:02] The blood test reduces diagnostic costs by up to 88%, making early detection more feasible in resource-limited settings.[16:07] Earlier diagnosis allows patients to access treatment sooner and gives families time to plan and prepare.[16:53] Blood-based biomarkers streamline clinical trial recruitment by quickly identifying qualified patients.[17:36] Pharmaceutical companies can now screen large populations more efficiently, accelerating drug development timelines.[18:22] The next phase focuses on large-scale validation, regulatory approval, and expansion into global healthcare systems.[19:28] AI is expected to enhance diagnosis, risk prediction, and therapeutic development using biomarker data.[20:34] Jason shares optimism that earlier detection and better tools could significantly change Alzheimer’s outcomes in the next decade.[21:12] The conversation closes with the broader impact, and how this innovation could reshape diagnosis, treatment, and patient care worldwide.Resources: AUTMYuanbing JIANG - The Hong Kong University of Science and TechnologyYuanbing JIANG - Google Scholar

Most people focus on the breakthrough, but there is a massive gap between a scientific discovery and a product that actually reaches the public. Today, we’re stepping into the "engine room" of one of Africa’s premier research institutions to see how that gap is bridged. My guest is Ravini Moodley, Director of the Technology Transfer Office at Stellenbosch University’s Innovus. She has a background in microbiology and a Master’s in Technology and Innovation Management. She also has the ability to speak both the technical language of the scientist and the strategic language of the market.At Innovus, she leads a specialized team tasked with finding the "gems" buried within university research and polishing them for the real world. While the broader commercial strategy is set at the executive level, Ravini manages the ground-level pipeline that moves ideas from the lab bench to a functional spin-out. This role requires constant navigation between social impact and economic viability. While ensuring that complex science doesn't just sit on a shelf, but transforms into a solution that can survive a competitive global landscape.We discuss building a high-functioning TTO and why empathy is the most underrated skill in the field. We also learn why South Africa’s unique geography shapes their strategy. Rather than trying to out-compete institutions like MIT or Oxford in every category, Stellenbosch is doubling down on agricultural and sustainability technologies where they can lead the world simply by connecting the right people. We look at what it takes to turn research into something the world can benefit from.In This Episode:[02:27] Ravini walks through the rhythm of her day, from early meetings on contracts and licensing to coordinating closely with research management and her team.[05:10] Much of the work centers on connecting researchers with industry while balancing reporting, policy review, and the constant flow of new opportunities.[08:20] Identifying strong IP is both proactive and reactive, with the team building relationships in labs to spot promising ideas before publication.[11:05] A sustainability case study highlights enzyme-based technology for breaking down bioplastics, developed through a collaboration with the University of Padova.[14:35] Ravini explains how projects move from disclosure through IP protection and early business analysis before transitioning to the LaunchLab incubator.[17:42] Empathy plays a key role in guiding researchers, especially when navigating tough conversations around patentability and commercialization paths.[20:02] While tech transfer challenges are similar globally, South Africa faces unique hurdles due to market size and geographic distance, making global partnerships essential.[22:00] She shares her excitement around sustainability and agricultural technologies, where local impact can often happen more quickly with the right connections.Resources: AUTMRavini Moodley - Stellenbosch UniversityRavini Moodley - LinkedIn

One of the biggest shifts in technology transfer over the past decade isn’t just the pace of innovation. It’s the realization that value isn’t created at a single moment. It builds over time, shaped by how well research, intellectual property, and real-world application stay aligned. The challenge isn’t only generating strong ideas. It’s understanding how those ideas evolve, how they’re protected, and whether they ultimately solve problems people care enough about to adopt and pay for.My guest today is Ram Krishnan, Senior Director of Engineering in Qualcomm’s Government Affairs Group, where he focuses on global IP ecosystem development. Ram's career has taken him across engineering, business, and intellectual property in standards-driven industries such as wireless communications, AI, XR, and autonomous driving. Now he works with universities, startups, and government organizations around the world, focused on how innovation gets taught, protected, and turned into real products and technologies that can actually scale.We talk about what it means to think about innovation as a full lifecycle rather than a single breakthrough, how strong IP portfolios are built over time, and why the most durable technologies consistently solve meaningful, “pay-for” problems. Ram also shares how industry approaches long-term university partnerships, what signals a tech transfer office is thinking beyond a single transaction, and why early education around IP can change the trajectory of entire ecosystems. It’s a grounded look at how ideas move from research labs into global standards and what makes that journey successful.In This Episode:[02:30] How wireless R&D runs on long innovation cycles, where each generation from 3G to 5G builds over time through continuous problem-solving.[04:15] Ram describes his current work at Qualcomm, focusing on global IP ecosystem development and engaging universities, students, and startups around innovation and entrepreneurship.[05:55] What successful technologies have in common early on, centering on solving real problems that people are willing to pay for.[06:57] Looking back at 3G, we reflect on how bringing internet access to mobile phones once felt groundbreaking, even if it seems routine now.[07:35] We discuss 4G and 5G, and how video, content creation, and network demands evolved with each wave.[08:25] A look ahead to 6G, where AI and wireless technologies are expected to become increasingly intertwined.[09:21] IP strategy, with an emphasis on building strong portfolios across the lifecycle rather than relying on single patents.[11:05] Universities come into the picture, especially their strength in foundational research and the growing need to translate that into commercially useful IP.[12:35] A deeper look at university relationships shows why long-term, trust-based partnerships tend to outperform one-off engagements.[14:10] Programs like the Inventors Patent Academy come up as examples of how early education around IP is being built into the pipeline.[15:45] The balance between standards and proprietary innovation is explored, showing how both play a role in scaling technology globally.[18:00] In areas like AI and 6G, universities are engaging more deliberately, including increased participation in standards development.[20:05] Internal alignment across engineering, legal, and business teams is highlighted as a key factor in making external collaborations run smoothly.[21:30] Strong university partners tend to stay aligned on outcomes and connect their research to real-world problems, even as projects and people change.[23:03] Expanding a single invention into adjacent use cases comes up as a practical way to build a more valuable and durable IP portfolio.[24:10] When universities reach out, things like entrepreneurial culture, maker spaces, and spinout track records signal whether there’s real alignment.[25:45] Ram reflects on lessons learned, especially the importance of being disciplined about IP disclosure before sharing ideas in collaborative settings.[26:43] Tech transfer works best when it takes a full, 360-degree view from early education all the way through commercialization.Resources: AUTMRam Krishnan - LinkedInQualcommThe Inventor’s Patent Academy

There’s a moment every tech transfer professional recognizes, when a discovery feels like it could matter, but you can’t quite see how it gets from the lab into the real world. That gap is where a lot of promising ideas stall out. In this episode, the conversation takes a closer look at that in-between space and asks a simple but uncomfortable question: what if the problem isn’t just funding or timing, but the lack of the right kind of institution to carry these ideas forward?This is our 300th episode, and I’m happy to introduce Ben Reinhardt, founder and CEO of Speculative Technologies. His career has taken him through academia, NASA, startups, and venture capital, and that perspective shapes how he thinks about innovation. We talk about what he calls “big-if-true” technologies, how to recognize them, and why the current system often struggles to support them. Ben shares why the traditional, linear view of innovation breaks down in practice and how different environments each bring strengths that don’t always connect the way we assume.We also get into the structural gaps that leave technologies stranded in the valley of death, what earlier models like Bell Labs actually got right, and why simply recreating them isn’t realistic today. Ben walks through how his organization approaches early-stage ideas, from identifying the biggest risks to thinking ahead about how something eventually reaches the market or becomes a public good. It’s a thoughtful look at how innovation really happens and what might need to change to help more ideas make it all the way through.In This Episode:[03:02] Ben Reinhardt shares how frustration across academia, NASA, startups, and venture capital led him to create a new kind of research institution.[03:55] The idea behind Speculative Technologies emerges from seeing the same barriers repeated across every innovation environment.[05:28] Why recognizing breakthrough ideas often starts with a researcher’s intuition before it can be clearly articulated.[07:05] A dual strategy for sourcing ideas: high-touch conversations and broad outreach signals to attract unconventional thinkers.[08:15] Lessons from working across institutions and why innovation doesn’t follow a simple linear path.[10:22] How different environments excel at different types of work, from deep research to rapid execution.[11:30] Why many promising technologies get stuck in the valley of death due to a lack of system-level ownership.[13:45] Revisiting Bell Labs and similar models, and why modern equivalents need to look very different.[14:50] The importance of combining small exploratory teams with the ability to scale successful ideas.[17:05] Why large corporations no longer sustain these labs due to financial pressure and changing incentives.[18:20] How innovation has shifted toward universities and startups as primary sources of new technology.[20:10] Breaking down the four phases of Speculative Technologies’ research model from idea to transition.[21:05] Why identifying the biggest technical risk early is more important than showing incremental progress.[22:10] The “monkey and pedestal” analogy for focusing on what actually matters in early-stage research.[24:45] The complexity of intellectual property and when it may or may not be the right tool.[27:20] Why universities are not structured to fully develop or commercialize most technologies.[29:10] Signals that a technology is ready to move beyond exploration into real-world application.[31:05] The risks of pushing technologies out too early and damaging their long-term potential.[32:10] Emerging areas of excitement, including advanced manufacturing, AI-enabled science, and new transportation systems.[34:10] The value of embedding real-world practitioners into research environments to guide direction.[35:00] Why breakthrough innovation requires new systems, incentives, and ways of thinking.Resources: AUTMBen ReinhardtSpeculative Technologies

Collaboration is one of the defining strengths of the technology transfer community, and it often becomes even more important when resources are limited. This conversation takes a closer look at what it really means to operate in a small or under-resourced office, where the work can feel both expansive and unpredictable. From managing intellectual property to handling budgets, compliance, and stakeholder relationships, the scope of the role is broad, and no two days look quite the same.My guests are two leaders who have spent a great deal of time thinking about how these offices not only function, but find ways to grow and succeed. Caitlin Long is Director of Technology Transfer and Innovation at Alvernia University and serves as the AUTM Small Office co-chair and an AUTM Foundation board member, with a focus on translating ideas into real-world health impact through a student-powered, community-engaged model. She is joined by Sanaz Shahi, Administrative Director of Intellectual Property at Rowan University and co-chair of the AUTM Small Offices Committee, who also plays an active role in supporting diversity, mentorship, and professional development across the AUTM community.We talk about the realities of wearing multiple hats, the unexpected responsibilities that come with running a small office, and the moments when you realize you need help that may not exist within your own institution. We also explore the role of the AUTM Small Office Special Interest Group as a practical, day-to-day resource, along with strategies for avoiding burnout, building support systems, and learning from others instead of starting from scratch. We take a grounded look at how collaboration, shared knowledge, and community can turn what might feel like an isolated role into something far more connected and sustainable.In This Episode:[02:09] A look at what day-to-day work actually involves in a small tech transfer office, where one person often handles multiple roles at once.[03:10] How responsibilities can range from licensing and IP strategy to stakeholder engagement and student supervision.[04:20] The challenge of constantly switching between big-picture strategy and detailed operational work is explored.[05:05] Real-world examples show how deadlines, competing priorities, and limited time can create pressure in small teams.[06:10] A surprising aspect of the role is the amount of financial and administrative work involved, including budgets and legal invoices.[07:15] Early career moments are shared where there was little internal support and a need to seek guidance externally.[08:05] The importance of the broader tech transfer community becomes clear as a source of advice, mentorship, and practical solutions.[09:20] Fellowship experiences are discussed as a way to gain knowledge, build confidence, and connect with experienced professionals.[10:30] The idea of becoming “trilingual” in science, business, and law is introduced as a key skill in tech transfer.[11:40] A discussion on why the community is so willing to share knowledge and support one another.[12:50] The AUTM Small Office Special Interest Group is introduced as more than a forum, but a support system for under-resourced teams.[13:40] Examples of real, practical conversations within the group, including patent strategy, budgeting, and compliance challenges.[14:50] The value of sharing templates, workflows, and real-world examples to avoid reinventing the wheel.[16:00] A shift toward sustainability and the importance of managing workload to prevent burnout.[17:10] Strategies for setting boundaries and building support systems, even when staffing is limited.[18:05] Creative approaches to staffing, including the use of student workers to extend capacity.[19:00] The feeling of isolation in small offices is addressed, along with encouragement to connect with the broader community.[19:50] Practical advice on building relationships, asking questions, and reaching out for one-on-one support.[20:40] Reflections on how being part of the AUTM community changes decision-making and leadership approach.[21:20] A reminder that collaboration and shared knowledge are key to long-term success in tech transfer.Resources: AUTMCaitlin Long - Alvernia UniversityCaitlin Long - LinkedInCaitlin Long - AUTMSanaz Shahi - Rowan University Sanaz Shahi - LinkedIn