Whether through the power to generate greater impacts at the level of the innovation chain or through the sharing of investments and risks, consortia are a trend, especially for research, development, and innovation activities.
In pursuit of increasing impact and maximizing open innovation efforts, partnerships are becoming increasingly broad, including a growing number of actors. This phenomenon also converges with the movement to form collaboration networks. The concepts of openness and cooperation in R&D, networking, and interaction indicate relationships capable of playing a more relevant and long-term role in generating innovation rather than collaborations characterized only by one-off partnership links, such as an isolated project, without the structuring of a more common research agenda among partners.
Perkemann and Walsh (1) conducted studies published in 2007 involving the relational dimension of interaction considering different segments of the industry and showed that there is a strengthening of the search for long-term relationships through innovation cycles instead of focusing on technologies, patents, and available one-off opportunities.
There are also some experiences that demonstrate the strengthening of innovation networks as generators of shared value. The use of more robust interaction models is considered a trend to integrate problem-solving solutions, highly skilled and creative people, based on interaction (2).
In this regard, consortia stand out as one of the interaction models for promoting R&D. A consortium involves a collaborative research arrangement among different organizations and innovation actors with a medium- to long-term perspective seeking to share risks and investments in research. The idea is that companies, research institutions, and other actors with complementary competencies—even competitors in some cases—develop new technologies, products, and services together, especially in the pre-competitive phase where research risks are higher. With the results, each company can continue to make specific applications in the subsequent stages of R&D. This allows for risk sharing, accelerates the development of more nascent technologies, and enables the generated intellectual property to be shared, as it involves broader protections.
One of the examples of excellence in the consortium model is seen in the case of the Media Lab. The Media Lab, an initiative linked to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, provides a unique environment to explore fundamental research and its applications at the intersection of computing and the arts (3). Within the Media Lab operates a consortium that is funded by companies and joint programs with other MIT departments. Currently, there are 80 members, mostly companies from around the world that are selected to participate. There is an annual fee paid to the Media Lab that translates into an opportunity for associates to access the people and technologies developed within the Lab, engaging scientists in their innovation challenges. The industrial property of the Media Lab can be used by all members simultaneously during the period they are associated and making the investments stipulated in the contract. The Lab's approximate budget is $45 million (4).
Currently, Natura has two direct participations in consortia. Since 2012, Natura has been a member of the Media Lab, and several projects have been discussed within the Lab's areas of operation. The main observed benefit is elevating the technological level of the company through its interaction with frontier science, allowing it to prospect technologies but also to discuss problems and structure projects jointly with researchers from the MIT Media Lab.
Another initiative with consortium characteristics that Natura is engaged in is a project led by the Technological Research Institute – IPT involving resources from the Brazilian Company of Industrial Innovation (Embrapii) and three other companies. The project focuses on the theme of nanotechnology, and the involved parties are sharing risks and results from the project. The strategy to reconcile industrial property and use by the parties was to divide the results into two main parts. One more general result in terms of nanotechnology platform that is owned by IPT and applied results with research objects of the participating companies, which will be specifically owned between the companies and IPT separately.
The future points to a need for evolution in the interaction models among the actors of the innovation system seeking to enable more investments and share risks while preserving the competitiveness of companies, the generation and protection of knowledge, and ultimately, the generation of shared value for society.
Do you know of other reports of consortia?
Share here on the Network Innovation Blog, and let's continue discussing and building these models of maximization and acceleration of the innovation process.
Leonardo Garnica holds a degree in Public Administration from São Paulo State University – UNESP and a master's degree in Production Engineering from the Federal University of São Carlos - UFSCar in the area of technology and innovation management.
He is currently the Scientific Manager for Innovation Systems at Natura, responsible for the Natura Campus Program, partnership projects with science and technology institutions, and funding agencies such as Embrapii, Science without Borders – CNPq, and FAPESP.
Contact: leonardogarnica@natura.net
References
(1) PERKMANN, M.; WALSH, K. (2007). University–industry relationships and open innovation: Towards a research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, Volume 9, Issue 4, pages 259–280.
(2) GASSMANN, O.; ENKEL, E.; CHESBOURG, H. (2010). The future of open innovation. R&D Management.V.40, Special Issue, 213-221p.
(3) Wikipedia (2013). Accessed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Media_Lab
(4) MIT – Media Lab. (2013) Accessed at http://www.media.mit.edu/about .
