Show Me the Money

As we saw yesterday, the biosciences can benefit a state’s economy. Thus, states should take the initiative to attract biosciences. There are several avenues that should be explored in order to develop a bioscience industry, which have been nicely laid out in the BIO report “State Legislative Best Practices in Support of Bioscience Industry Development” and summarized here:

• Technology Transfer:

States can put in place technology transfer programs to help with the commercialization process of new technologies developed through research, which will allow the incorporation of knowledge and innovation into the marketplace.

• Specialized Facilities:

Bioscience research requires specialized facilities, which can be costly. State governments can help offset this cost to support small and emerging bioscience companies.

• Venture Capital/Discovery Funds:

Innovative research and its commercialization often require private equity funding. States can help by passing measures that encourage venture capital and discovery fund investments in the bioscience sector.

• Bioscience Workforce Initiatives:

In order to maintain a bioscience industry, there must be an educated and technically proficient workforce. States should ensure that they can educate and retain qualified employees.

• Supportive Business Climate Incentives:

It is the role of legislators to ensure a public policy framework that maintains a stable business climate and allows incentives to attract biotech companies to the region.

Many states have begun bioscience initiatives that cover one or more of these enterprises. What is your state doing to support biosciences and bolster the economy?


This is Part 4 of 4 in our Economic Impact of R&D series.
Part 1 - Economic Impact of Research & Development
Part 2 - Biosciences: Where the Jobs Are
Part 3 - Economic Impact of R&D Ranked by State
Part 4 - Show Me the Money

Basic Research: It Starts With an Idea

Basic research comes from the idea that in order to treat a human condition - like pain, diabetes, or heart disease - we need to learn about that condition first. That's where I come in. Hi, I'm Jackie, and I'm a basic researcher.

As a basic researcher, I look at what we already know about a condition and the treatments that work, and then come up with new ideas to enhance both our understanding of the condition and how best to treat it.

How did we find out that ibuprofen soothes headaches, or that anti-histamines calm an allergic reaction? There was a process involved, and the process began with basic research.

We make hypotheses (educated guesses) to advance our field. Now that sounds all science-y and difficult, but we do our jobs using the same methods that most professionals use.

Take a small business owner; we’ll call her Sarah. Sarah sells sports equipment. As winter approaches, due to changing weather patterns and past history, she knows that she needs to order more ski equipment. But she can’t just order any old skis. She needs to consider what will sell. So she looks back at last year’s inventory, and finds that one company was more popular than any of the others she had carried, and there was a certain type of ski that constantly sold out. Of course, she’s going to use this information to inform her order for this year. She doesn’t just open up her catalog, sing eeny-meeny-miny-mo, and order wherever her finger lands. She hypothesizes that based on the data already available, skis X, Y, and Z will sell best.

To use a more researcher-friendly example, let's assume Dr. Jay's research focus is on heart disease. Like Sarah the business owner, Dr. Jay heads to the books to get started. He reviews already published literature on the disease, and notices that previous research shows an increase in the level of a certain protein in the blood for people who have just suffered a heart attack. Naturally, he wonders if this protein plays a role in the occurrence of that heart attack, and so goes on to figure out what it is, what controls its levels, and what happens when he blocks its production. By asking these questions, he's really wondering can this protein be a target that we can use to decrease instances of heart attack. As a basic researcher, Dr. Jay discovers all of this before applying it to humans, but his research is driven by the intention to use his findings to eventually improve upon public health.

You might not head to Dr. Jay when you have a cold, but his role in trying to keep people healthy is an important one. He starts with an idea, and then research continues from there.*


*Much like this series, which you can read more of next Monday!

Library image courtesy of Wrote.

This is Part 2 of 13 in our From Ideas to Treatments series.
Part 1 - From Ideas to Treatments
Part 2 - Basic Research: It Starts with an Idea
Part 3 - You're an Animal!
Part 4 - Can I care about animals and do research too?
Part 5 - Regulations for Animal Research
Part 6 - Clinical Research Trials
Part 7 - Patient Safety in Clinical Trials: IRB Approval
Part 8 - Recruitment
Part 9 - Health Disparities in Clinical Research
Part 10 - A Brief History of Inclusion Policies
Part 11 - Breaking News: Women and Men are Different
Part 12 - Including Minorities in Clinical Trial Research
Part 13 - Bringing From Ideas to Treatments Home

Let's Take a Look at the Life Science Industry

Welcome to the final installment in our entrepreneurship series. Today, I’ll show you how our case study states, North Carolina, Minnesota, and Kansas stack up in terms of entrepreneurial and economic development indicators.

As I mentioned earlier, it’s difficult to compare these states on their programs alone, so we have to use economic indicators to gain a better picture of where each state stands. I’ll show you three indicators:

• Research funding—remember the importance of research funding as the beginning of the economic development pipeline?
• Venture capital funds—VC is the one of the sources of financing available to help entrepreneurs start a new business.
• Number of life sciences jobs—"jobs, jobs, jobs, it’s all about the job." We’ve heard that plenty of times before. Remember, these are high-paying jobs.

OK, let's take a look . . .

Research funding

You'll notice North Carolina is significantly ahead of Minnesota and Kansas in terms of attracting NIH dollars. Granted, NC has a larger population than MN and KS , but look at the positive slope of NC compared to the rest!! North Carolina has shown significant growth over the past decade.

Even more interesting is the significant drop in North Carolina's research funds between 2007 and 2008. This is because NIH has not released number for 2008's R&D contracts, of which a significant amount go to industry. Add those grants in and North Carolina stays on track for growth.

Venture capital funds

This figure goes to show how sporadic (and unreliable) venture capital is. Up one year, down the next, up, down, up, down . . . . You can't be on it. This is why those sources of public finance that I mentioned earlier as so important. Also look at the spike for Kansas in 2007. This was the first spike Kansas has seen, and it happened after the Kansas Economic Growth Act had be implemented.

Number of life sciences jobs

Finally, jobs, jobs, job. In terms of life science employment as a percentage of total population, these three states are actually pretty comparable. The differences come in terms of actual number. It takes a significant number of business in North Carolina, for example, to account the additional 13,000 life sciences jobs it has over Kansas.

So now that you are an expert in everything and anything about entrepreneurship and the life sciences industry, what do you do with all this information? Here are a few key take-aways:

• First, all states are not the same in terms of the resources and benefits offered for new businesses. It pays to look around and find a states that offers the resources you need. The Battelle/BIO report is a good place to start.
• Second, this may all seem very overwhelming, but don't forget, there is help! The North Carolina Biotechnology Center, Minnesota BioBusiness Alliance, and Kansas Bioscience Authority are examples of resouces centers in each of the states we discussed.
• Finally, and perhaps most important, we can't forget that research funding in the beginning of this entire process. Without reasearch funding, the great ideas that could become a business will never flourish.

I hope this series have been helpful and enlightening. Thanks for reading!

This is Part 8 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

The Benefits and Challenges of Electronic Medical Records

October is “Update Your Medical Records Month,” so we want to take this opportunity to remind you to bring your records up to date, if you haven’t already. It also seemed like an appropriate time to write about electronic health records, a current topic of discussion in the health community.

Electronic health records are one measure that many—and the Obama administration in particular—support as a means of improving patient health care. Although there are many significant benefits to electronic systems, including better access to information and the ability to tailor care, there are also some major hurdles to the implementation of such a system including the initial cost. In 2008, however, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine revealed that only 17% of doctors and 10% of hospitals were using computerized health records (the rest were using a paper based system).

Computerized health records offer a number of benefits to health practices. They can help improve patient care by assisting doctors in finding relevant information more quickly and prescribing the right treatments. “Fully functional” records can provide reminders of care guidelines, helping doctors to avoid problems such as prescribing medications that a patient is allergic to or administering tests for information that has already been acquired through similar tests (which the doctor may otherwise overlook).

In turn, this will cut costs by improving efficiency and eliminating unnecessary procedures. Making depersonalized records available will allow doctors and researchers to look at larger numbers of patients and learn what type of care is most effective for an individual.

Doctors have identified one major challenge to implementing electronic systems: cost. For small practices with only one to three doctors—the type of practice where almost half our country’s doctors practice—the average cost of implementation is $40,000-$50,000. Dissatisfaction with current system options is another barrier: according to the 2008 study 54% of those who had not adopted computerized records said that a major reason was that the existing options did not meet their needs.

The Obama administration has taken strides to reduce the cost by offering $19 billion in incentives to doctors, hospitals, and regional health information networks. Payments can be up to $44,000 per physician for those that demonstrate “meaningful use” of “certified” electronic health records, which means they must demonstrate quality reporting and be able to share information with clinics, hospitals, and government (although the specifics need to be determined). There is also a disincentive to not adopting: if health providers have not switched over by 2015, they may experience a penalty when seeing Medicare or Medicaid patients.

Additionally, providers of electronic records systems are partnering with health providers to make implementation easier.

Patient privacy is the other major concern that needs to be addressed. It will rely on the depersonalization of records, and strong cyber security technology, a necessity for implementation.

Of the physicians, large practices, and hospitals that have already implemented electronic systems, the reviews are overwhelmingly positive: 82 percent said they improved the quality of clinical decisions, 86 percent said they helped in avoiding medication errors and 85 percent said they improved the delivery of preventative care. With help from the government and private industry, the number of health professionals using computerized records is bound to increase in the next few years.

Have you ever used electronic health records? Do you know any doctors who have? How has this affected patient care? Leave a comment and let us know!

And don’t forget to update your own medical records!

Image credit: Ablsa

The Life Sciences in Kansas

Welcome back to Installment 7 in our entrepreneurship series. Today, as promised, a discussion of free money, Democrats and Republicans who actually agree with each other, and flying cows. Where does this all happen??

Kansas—The Sunflower States. Or, as some would like you to believe, the bioscience state.

Kansas isn’t traditionally thought of as a home to outstanding bioscience. However, the state does have an established publicly-funded research infrastructure with the University of Kansas and Kansas State University. In 2004, Kansas put an end to the naysayers who’d say the state wasn’t interested in the life sciences. The republican-controlled state house and senate passed the Kansas Economic Growth Act of 2004, called KEGA for short by state insiders. KEGA passed with an overwhelming majority of both Republicans and Democrats. KEGA was then signed into law by then-governor Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat (and now the Secretary of Health and Human Services).

Democrats and Republicans who overwhelmingly agree with each other—CHECK!

So what, exactly, did KEGA do? In short, a lot! KEGA was an overwhelming piece of legislation designed to spur economic development through entrepreneurship. Here are some of the notable programs created by KEGA:

• The Kansas Bioscience Authority (KBA), an independent entity of the state charged with guiding future life sciences development, was created.
• Financing resources for start-ups are provided.
• Tax incentives for investors and start-ups encourage private investment.
• Matching funds to promote research are provided by the state to encourage researchers to apply for federal grants and to recruit researchers from other states.

Free money—CHECK!

In 2007, Kansas launched a state-led effort to attract the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility (NBAF)—a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) research facility—to Kansas. The NBAF conducts research into biological threats against livestock and the food supply, namely nasty things like Foot and Mouth disease.

DHS was looking to relocate the facility from an island off the coast of New York, and Kansas wanted that facility. Why? DHS estimates that the NBAF would create 450 to 510 total jobs!

To show their determination to win the research facility, Kansas donated nearly 60 acres of land to DHS to build the NBAF. The state also authorized $150 million of revenue bonds to build infrastructure around the proposed NBAF site. Kansas' efforts paid off. This year, DHS announced that the NBAF would be built in Kansas—a major boost to the state’s life sciences industry.

So what about flying cows?? (Ok, I’ll admit I’m taking a little extra creative liberty here.) Recently, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) raised concerns about building a research facility for biological hazards in the middle of tornado alley. The GAO is concerned that the possibility of severe weather spreading biological hazards (like Foot and Mouth disease) was overlooked when studying Kansas as a potential site for the NBAF. The possibility of “flying sick cows” has caused lawmakers to look twice at the NBAF site in Kansas. (See the Kansas delegation's response here.) It’s yet to be seen if the NBAF—and the 500 jobs in brings—will actually be located in Kansas.

So, flying cows—(half) CHECK!

This is Part 7 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

The Life Sciences in Minnesota

Last week, I gave you the 50,000 foot overview of the life sciences industry in North Carolina. As you will recall, 35 states have implemented policies to facilitate the growth of their life science industry. Today, its Minnesota’s turn.

Minnesota—The North Star State

In contrast to the state-guided efforts in North Carolina that I discussed last week, Minnesota has traditionally relied on its research institutions and medical device industry to guide development in the life sciences.

In 2005, the state legislature created the BioBusiness Alliance of Minnesota (BBAM) to guide life sciences development. BBAM is comparable to the North Carolina Biotechnology Center in scope and mission—to guide the development of the life sciences industry within the state. BBAM has established a resource network to help new company establish, and provides business consulting services. BBAM is assessing workforce and educational gaps, but does not have training programs in place to the extent that NCBiotech does. BBAM also lacks many of the financing options that NCBiotech provides.

One of the most striking differences between the life sciences industry of Minnesota and North Carolina is the amount of state support given to each state’s life science centers. BBAM receives less than 5% of the amount of funding that NCBiotech received from the state of North Carolina. NCBiotech is staffed by 61 experts; BBAM has 8 employees. The differences in manpower and resources have an effect on the scope, research and effectiveness of each center. Imagine trying to do the work of 61 expects with only 8 employees!

There was some exciting news for Minnesota last year when biotechnology titan G. Steven Burrill announced a goal of attracting $1 billion of private venture capital to the state for new life science companies. As you will recall, VC is one those all-important sources of financing that new business need.

My 50,000 foot recommendation for Minnesota—it’s time to make a serious investment in the life sciences by providing access to financing for entrepreneurs. Minnesota has great research infrastructure in place, but the financing options and incentives just aren’t there for new businesses. And to the researchers at those great research institutions—quit playing Minnesota nice in your labs! Let’s see some cut-throat research with the goal of commercialization!

Next week, I’ll provide an overview of our final state—Kansas. Stop back then for a discussion of free money, Democrats and Republicans who actually agree with each other, and flying cows! (No, I’m not kidding on any of the above!)


This is Part 6 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

The Life Sciences in North Carolina

When I left you last week, I asked for your opinions about the top 5 “leading life science states.” I asked because I was interested in this demographic’s opinion of strong life science states. Let me introduce you to our three case study states, and reveal a leading life science state from last week’s pop quiz . . .

North Carolina—The Tar Heel State. And also a leading life science state!

Minnesota—The North Star State. A state with an established medical device industry with some growth in other sectors. (And also my home state!)

Kansas—The Sunflower State. Not for long—Kansas aims to be an up and coming life science leader.

Each of these states has implemented policies to facilitate the growth of their life science industry. Over the next few days, I’ll give you the 50,000 foot view of each state’s strategies.

This week: North Carolina—The Tar Heel State

North Carolina began its quest to become a leading state for technology in the 1950’s when state and local government leaders came together to form the Research Triangle Park (RTP). RTP is the largest research park in the United States whose tenants employed over 44,000 people in 2008. Many of those employees work at life sciences companies located in RTP.

By the 1980’s states leaders recognized the promise that the life science industry held, and decided that the state needed plan to promote growth in the future. In 1984, state leaders created the North Carolina created the North Carolina Biotechnology Center (NCBiotech). NCBiotech was given a mission to develop and expand the life science industry in North Carolina, and the center has been quite successful at fulfilling that mission. NCBiotech offers a slew of programs to promote industry development, including:

• Educational programs to retrain workers from low-tech industry to work in the high-tech life science industry
• Financing programs to provide the ever-critical money required to start a new business. To date, the state has invested over $200 million in life science companies!
• Consulting services and access to business knowledge

NCBiotech isn’t short on resources to complete its mission. In fact, NCBiotech received $15.6 million from the state legislature in 2007-08 to carry out its programs.

The investment has paid off. According to the North Carolina Chamber of Commerce:

“North Carolina has the third largest biotechnology industry in the nation with more than 520 bioscience companies, contract research organizations and device and life science-related companies. More than 56,000 workers, with skill sets ranging from bioprocess technicians to Ph.Ds are employed by this sector. Among the state’s largest biotech and pharmaceutical firms are GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Bayer, Biogen IDEC, Diosynth, Novo Nordisk, Wyeth and Baxter.”

Next Week: the 50,000 foot overview of the life sciences industry in Minnesota.

This is Part 5 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

Quick Poll: Leading Life Science States

Last Monday, I asked for your opinion of “leading life science states.” Before I reveal the three states that I used as a case study next week, which, if any, of these states do you think is a leading life science state?

KansasNorth CarolinaMinnesotaLouisianaNorth Dakota

Is any of these states a "life science leader?"

Leave your vote in the comments section below.

This is Part 4 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

Financing A New Business in the Life Sciences

Welcome back to our entrepreneurship series. In last week’s post, I discussed the importance of research funding to the business development (and economic development) pipeline. As promised, I’ll provide more information today about the critical step of acquiring financing—or money to run the business.

It’s nearly impossible to do anything these days without it costing money. The same holds true for starting a life sciences business. In fact, life sciences business takes a long time and a lot of money before they become successful. Unlike starting a pizza restaurant, for example, a life science entrepreneur may need to spend several years conducting additional research and testing their product before they can turn a profit (unless you’re conducting lots of chemistry research at your pizza parlor to create the perfect sauce).

For this reason, state governments have realized that they need to implement strategies to help life science entrepreneurs get access to the money they need to start their businesses. In fact, 35 states plus Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia have implemented strategies to facilitate growth in the life sciences. Some local governments have also implemented strategies, but usually to a lesser extent.

Table 1 (below) shows some of the main sources of financing available to entrepreneurs.
Let’s go through a few of these.

If you are sitting on a huge pile of cash, great! You can probably self-finance your new business. But if you’re not, you’ll likely need to rely on one or more of these other sources of financing.

Private sources are heavily relied on by new life sciences businesses. For example, when my fellow blogger Ilse becomes a multi-millionaire, she could chose to invest her money in new life sciences businesses; she would be an angel investor. When my fellow bloggers Ilse, Heather, Emily and I all become multi-millionaires, we could pool our money together to invest in multiple businesses. We would create a venture capital fund (also referred to as VC), and would expect a higher return in a shorter time frame. Basically, you (scientists with venture capital funding) need to pay up a lot, and pay it sooner than later!

One of the most interesting sources of public financing is silent-equity partnerships. A silent-equity partnership is when a state or local government takes a silent role in supporting a new business by investing public funds in the business. For example, Minnesota recently tried to use a state pension fund to support new life science businesses. Some state leaders wanted to take $200 million from the state pension fund to invest in life science businesses. If the businesses made money, so would the state pension fund. But the converse is also true; if the businesses lost money, so would the state. Using pension funds is risky gamble, but can be an effective way to help new life science business get access to the money they need.

A great resource to learn about the financing options for life science businesses in your states is the State Biosciences Initiatives report by Battelle Memorial Institute and BIO. This report provides detailed information about new state initiatives aimed to help life science entrepreneurs.

Next week, we’ll look at how three states implemented policies to help life science entrepreneurs gain access to financing. In the mean time, I’m curious to gauge your opinion about states that are “life science industry leaders.”

In your opinion, what are the top 5 “leading life science states?”

This is Part 3 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

It's All About the Ideas (and the Money)

Last week, I showed the steps to starting a spin-off company. Remember, ‘spin-off’ is the term used to describe a new company that is created based upon research from a university, hospital, or research center. (Think of the CSI and CSI: Miami analogy.) I will refer to all of the steps together, from start to finish, as the business development pipeline or Pipeline. Here is the Pipeline again as a refresher:
Someone once told me, you always have to start from the beginning. So, that's where we'll start. The beginning of the the Pipeline is to identify new opportunities from research. But as you know if you're a researcher, this research has to be funded somehow, usually by governments, universities and/or non-profit organizations.

I need to squeeze in my academic quote for this blog. Bear with me for three truly academic--but important--sentences (from my forthcoming thesis):

Studies have shown that research funding directly affects the Pipeline by increasing the number of spin-offs created at the end. Adams & Griliches (1996) and Siegel et al (1999) found a positive relationship between research funding and the number of university spin-offs created. DeGregorio & Shane (2005) found a direct, empirical relationship between research funding and the number of spin-offs created.

(Whew . . . that wasn't too bad, was it?)

In other words, as research funding increases, so does the number of spin-offs that can be created. This is good news for research funding advocates—not only does research funding lead to better health, it also leads to new businesses. Creating those new businesses can be referred to as ‘economic development’—two buzz words that any elected official loves to hear.
The next step in the Pipeline is to secure intellectually property (IP) rights, usually in the form of patents or licenses. Many research institutions have specialists who will help researchers secure IP rights. These IP specialists usually work in Technology Transfer Offices within the research institutions. IP is a relatively complex topic, and an entire series could be devoted to IP alone. At this point, all you need to know if that IP rights are important to start a spin-off, so visit your institution’s Technology Transfer Office soon if you have questions.

After securing IP rights, it’s time to secure funding to start the new business. Surprise, surprise--you need more money to make your idea work. The next post in this series will focus solely on possible sources of financing through the different stages of business development.

With the right people, policies and resources in place, an entrepreneur will be able to develop his or her technology into a successful market product. There are a lot of resources that state and local governments can provide to help entrepreneurs. Future posts in this series will discuss those resources as well.


This is Part 2 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall

Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction

Which of these statements is true?

Science = Mmm . . . this frozen pizza sure tastes good. *Sigh.* Wish I could afford something else for dinner.
Science = I'm glad I spent a gagillion hours on that research project, just to put someone else's name on it. *Sigh.* I wish I were my own boss.
Science = A business opportunity to create high paying jobs, keep what you earn, and be your own boss.

The answer: All of the above. I reluctantly admit the first two are true, but let's focus on the last one. . .

Science = A business opportunity to create high paying jobs, keep what you earn, and be your own boss.

In other words,

Science = Entrepreneurship

By now, it’s clear that science has had some significant benefits on human health and well being. But have you thought about science as the starting point for new businesses? Because of my background in business and entrepreneurship, I decided to research the process of starting a science-related business. Over the course of a few posts, I’ll share some of my research findings with you. Consider this the first in our series on entrepreneurship. If you’ve ever thought about starting your own science-related business, listen up!

Over the next few posts, I’ll explain what exactly it is that an entrepreneur—someone that starts a new business—needs to start a new life sciences company. When you think of entrepreneur, think of William H. Gates III, the man we know as Bill Gates. (For those of us living on intern/student salary--or the comparable--this may not be something you want to hear: Mr. Gates is estimated to be worth $57 billion. And his net worth went down last year.)

Do you want to be in the same position as Mr. Gates? If so, you'll need to know what entrepreneurs and new businesses need to be successful. You'd probably also like to know what state and local governments can do to help new businesses get started.

Note: My project focuses specifically on life sciences businesses, but much of this will be relevant to any scientist who has discovered a great idea that they want to turn into a business. (‘Life sciences’ is the umbrella term for the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, medical devices and the agricultural/industrial biology industries.)

But first things first—what are the different ways you can start a life sciences business? Here are two common options.

• First, you could create a new company. A good example of creating a new business is Medtronic. Sixty years ago, two relatives who were operating a medical device repair service realized that they could make improvements to the devices they were repairing. The relatives recognized an opportunity, and created a new company to fulfill a need.


• Second, you could create a company out of research from a university or research center. ‘Spin-off’ is the term used to describe a new company that is created based upon research from a university, hospital, or research center. Think of this like a TV spin-off, for example. Create a hit TV show, like CSI, and then create a spin-off, CSI: Miami, for example.

Same applies to research (with some obvious technical differences, of course.) A researcher who discovers a brilliant idea literally takes that research and, with help, spins it off in to a business. Once the research becomes a business, the researcher becomes an entrepreneur.

To whet your appetite, here is a grossly oversimplified diagram that shows the steps to starting a spin-off.

Savor on this for a bit. In future posts in this series, I’ll explain more about the steps in this diagram, focusing on the steps that I think are most important—identifying new ideas from research and acquiring funding. Check back for the rest of this series!


This is Part 1 of 8 in our Entrepreneurship series.
Part 1 - Science and Entrepreneurship: An Introduction
Part 2 - It's All About the Ideas (and Money)
Part 3 - Financing a New Business in the Life Sciences
Part 4 - Leading Life Science States
Part 5 - Life Sciences in North Carolina
Part 6 - Life Sciences in Minnesota
Part 7 - Life Sciences in Kansas
Part 8 - Life Science Industry Overall