11
Guide to the SES Qualifications September 2012
counterparts was an anathema. Common wisdom dictated that technology transfer was doomed to
fail, even if legislation was enacted to encourage such interaction. (Context) A handful saw it
differently. I was among them.
I shared this vision with the top administrators of two research campuses. I met weekly with these
officials and successfully argued that a Center for Technology and Development (CTD) should be
created and given responsibility for all patenting and licensing activities. (Challenge) My vision for
the CTD, including its mission, policies, and administrative structure, was adopted on both
campuses. I proposed, lobbied for, and succeeded in including the phrase “transfer of knowledge
and technology” as part of the new mission statement for the campuses, making technology transfer
a sanctioned university activity. (Action)
My ability to communicate my expectations of the CTD as an economic engine for the State
allowed me to garner the support of the local business community. The community rallied and
provided the CTD with counsel on legal, technical, market, and economic development issues pro
bono. Their backing was key in obtaining support from the State Legislature. (Context) Within 6
months, I had established the CTD as an important member of the technology transfer community
and assembled strong networks with national and international biotechnology and pharmaceutical
companies, venture firms, investors, and service providers. These networks have proven vital to
this day. (Result)
Later in my career, I moved from the academic world to the Federal Government as head of the
Office of Technology (OT). This office was created to implement the requirements of the Federal
Technology Transfer Act. The OT is charged with the successful and appropriate
commercialization of technology developed in Federal Laboratories. With an annual operating
budget of $5 million, patent prosecution expenditures of over $7.5 million and a royalty revenue
stream of $30 million, the OT is, arguably, the largest and most influential not-for-profit
technology transfer operation in the world. (Context)
When I was recruited to head the Office of Technology (OT) it was fighting for survival, plagued
with tremendous unrest as to the direction and future of technology transfer. There was widespread
discontent with the performance of the OT, giving rise to numerous investigations and the need to
address 75 Corrective Actions. (Challenge) The OT was viewed with suspicion and concern by
insiders and outsiders. It was clear something had to change. (Context)
In my first staff meeting, I set forth my vision for the OT. I embarked on a process of evaluation
and strategic planning for every unit, gathering advice from staff at all levels within the
organization. Working together, we wrote a new mission statement, established policies and
procedures, reorganized the Office, appointed key personnel, reassigned some staff members, and
opened an important dialogue with our customers to assess their needs and requirements. (Action)
Under my leadership the OT’s performance has improved dramatically. Productivity has increased
by 40 percent and is at an all-time high. In the last fiscal year, we have signed a record number of
license agreements, reached a record level of royalty income, patented important new technologies,
and systematically reviewed our portfolio to eliminate obsolete cases. From a management
perspective, the OT has accomplished a remarkable turnaround. We have attracted and hired