Patrick puts forward the argument that technological and economic powerhouses’ development leaves behind the less development entities, and that rift will continue to grow over time.

There are interesting counterarguments brought out by the participants.

Emma Persky pointed out that development can reduce the cost and barrier to entry for less developed entities.

The idea that interactions in exchange rates and other forces can complicate the question of cost.

Tim Duckett thinks that development is not necessarily linear – less developed entities may bypass steps that more developed entities have worked through over time.

Ian Forrester says that it’s more patents and brand recognition that are a barrier and an opportunity. A less mature entity may ‘clone’ existing concepts and products to gain market share locally.

He mentioned HTC, now a well known name in mobile devices, but unknown a couple of years ago.

Patrick then mentioned the apparently hypocritical attitude of some developed entities towards other entities that are only now becoming capable of some actions – missile testing, for example.

The discussion then moved to Digital Britain. Joanne Jacobs spoke of the lack of recognition in the report of creativity and innovation in the report and Tim Duckett added that the report recognises innovation in maintaining the status quo.

Dougald Hine mentioned his audience with David Milliband discussing the role of tech in UK industry.

Richard King pointed out the tendency of government bodies to overlook innovation in small companies, and only consider the big players like Google and the BBC.

Dougald proposed ways of making innovation more appealing to government bodies – making innovation defensible. Joanne suggested that the wrong approach to encourage innovation is not to provide money in return, but to provide real recognition. Money will then follow naturally, but the innovators will not learn to, say, write applications for cash.

Traditionally, commercial organisations drive innovation, not the government.

Business incubators – provide a roof for the period between the idea and the commercial viability. A model for this kind of incubation could be the publicly funded art schools that produced some of the most successful musicians of recent times. The enormous debt incurred by today’s graduates when they leave University is an example of how this concept isn’t being applied today. Joanne, having had experience in academia, mentioned her view that academia has a skewed perspective of the need for applied skills versus research. Emma thinks that postgraduate studies build skills that are too abstract to be useful outside of academia, and wonders if the University of Sheffield Enterprise’s kind sponsorship of the event is related to a recognition of the need to spin-out businesses rather than produce academics. Tim Duckett notes that the funding model today tends to require marketable ideas, in contrast to that of the past.

Postgraduates able to create startups need support to bridge the gap between leaving academia and becoming commercially viable.

Time was then called on the discussion, but it’s clear that this is an emotive subject.

No related posts.

Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.