El Dr. Alan S. Paau, Vice-Rector de Desarrollo Económico y Transferencia de Tecnologías de la Universidad Cornell (Estados Unidos), hace una presentación sobre Propiedad Intelectual y Gestión de Conflictos en Instituciones Académicas.

1. Consejo de Innovacion
June 2, 2009, Santiago, Chile
Intellectual Property & Conflict
Management in Academic
Institutions
Alan Paau, MBA, PhD, CLP
Vice Provost
Technology Transfer and Economic Development

2. Topics
Evolution of Academic
Activities and Institutions
Roles of Government in
the Development of
Academic Culture
Infrastructural Support
from a Policy Perspective
Key elements of IP and
Conflict Management
Policies

3. Evolution of Academic Activities
And Sponsorships
Pure curiosity pursuit wealthy individuals
Increasing Utilitarian in Character
churches/monasteries
Pursuit to “impress” + nobles and kings
Pursuit for use + ambitious
monarchies
+ industry
Pursuit to serve + government

4. Diversity of Academics
Platonic academics : devoted to knowledge and art for their own sake
(Socrates philosopher) – not devoted to finding uses of them; not
utilitarian and rare in institutional form today
Sophist academics : aims to impart knowledge and skills useful for
worldly action for a price, make businesses out of wisdom
(“knowledge/skill hired guns”)
Baconian academics : state sponsorship devoted to knowledge that
would extend man’s influence over nature (and others) and augment
the power of the state for the benefit of its constituents
(Sir Francis Bacon, later Lord Verulam and the Viscount St. Albans,
set the foundation for the triumph of technology and for the modern
world as we currently know it.)
Modern day academic institutions that receive government
funds are Baconian Institutions

5. US Government’s Support of Academic
Institutions – A Historical Perspective
Morrill Acts – Land Grant College Acts of 1862, 1890
WWII
penicillin – moldy cantaloupe and fermentation
research in Peoria, IL in 1944
synthetic rubber – Akron, CalTech in 1942
mechanical computing – Colossus in UK, Z4 in
Germany, ENIAC in USA
atomic weaponry – Manhattan Project in USA
multiple projects in Germany
Cold War (1940s early 1990s)
space race
arm race (conventional and nuclear)

6. Take-Home Lessons from
The USA Experience
Act of government extends education and imparts knowledge and
skills to the general public for society good
Academic research can serve the national interest well
Strategic vision that cut across politics from the leadership is
important
Support from the leadership is important on 3 fronts -
cultural (mind-set) influence of leadership
infrastructural – policies and organizational
resources – financial and human capital
Takes time and patience

7. Multiple Stakeholders with Intersecting
and Potentially Conflicting Interests
Institution
- reputation
- proper academic missions
- financial return on use of resources
- leadership vision
- other gains (professional, power)
Heads of academic units of the researchers (mostly
same as above but at a more “territorial” level)
Individual researchers-extremely varied
• efinitely
D not homogeneous
• ay be congruent or conflicting
M

8. Policies of Academic Institutions
Serve to
define rules and expectations
guide decisions and activities/actions
spell out in a transparent manner the proper
administrative mechanisms and processes
In order to achieve the desirable and rational outcome
The targeted readers are not lawyers. Important to not
use legalese

9. Intellectual Property Policies
Usually, two key IP policies for academic institutions:
Invention/Patent Policy
patentable v patented or not
physical embodiment of an invention
tangible properties (biologicals)
Work of Authorship/Copyrights Policy
Other policies: Trademark or Use of Institution Name

10. Key Elements of
Intellectual Property Policies
Statement of scope, goals, applicability to stakeholders and
signing of Acknowledgement Form
Ownership – based on relationship and use of resources
Reporting requirements and standard
Responsible administrative unit – roles/responsibilities and
authorities
Management philosophy and process
Benefit-sharing scheme (rights of the stakeholders)
Dispute resolution or grievance process
Final disposition or adjudication by institution
Invention Policy dominates Work-of-Authorship Policy

11. Conflict Management
Potential for conflict exists when stakeholders have
multiple relationships
Conflict arises when a stakeholder advances the interest
of one relationship at the expense of the other relationship
We all have multiple relationships (not avoidable) – but most
do not have intersecting interests that may give rise to conflict
(not all intersecting interests will give rise to conflict)
When an academic institution encourages its employees
to be innovative and entrepreneurial, it encourages
additional relationships with interests that may intersect
Important to have a policy in place to spell out . . .

12. Key Elements of
Conflict Management Policy
The key interests of the institution and why they are
considered so
Statement of scope, goals and applicability to
stakeholders
Disclosure requirement and standard
Responsible administrative units – compositions, roles
and responsibilities, and authorities
Management philosophy and process
Dispute resolution or grievance process
Final disposition or adjudication by institution

13. Conflict Management Infrastructure
Conflict Management Office – staff, accept relationship
disclosures, preliminary review, gather background
information, make referrals and provide administrative
support to . . .
Conflict Advisory Panel/Committee – faculty, review
referrals to determine whether potential of conflict is
“manageable”. Devise “Conflict Management Plan” and
recommend to the responsible academic leadership
(dean, provost, vice rector, rector)
Conflict Oversight Committee/Subcommittee – monitor
compliance with “Conflict Management Plan” once
approved by the academic leadership
3 units + 1 instrument = “3 + 1 Architecture”

14. Key Institutional Interests
The important interests of the institution – normally can
be summed up as 4 key issues
Proper use of Institutional Resources for proper academic
activities (that advances the missions of the institution)
No misappropriation of intellectual property and inventions
(that should be owned and controlled by the institution)
Maintenance of good reputation without bias interpretation
of research results (research integrity)
Fulfillment of institutional responsibilities and duties
A good Conflict Management Plan addresses all of them with
effective mitigation approaches.

15. Mitigation Approaches
Use of institutional resources – funds, facilities and personnel
Oversight Committee to monitor compliance with the
Conflict Management Plan
- eriodically and independently interview subordinates
P
(students, staff, post-doctoral researchers)
-review and, if necessary copy, notebooks
-review publications and the overall program output and nature
of activities
To ensure activities are not improper in an academic program
and indeed advance the institutional missions
Report non-compliance and concern to Conflict Advisory Panel

16. Mitigation Approaches
Intellectual Property – ownership and use without permission
Oversight Committee to monitor compliance with the Conflict
Management Plan
- andatory disclosure of all inventions and copyrights
m
-periodic search of patent databases
-follow through with “whistle-blower” and investigate
-review and determine compliance
To ensure no misappropriation of institutional IP
Report non-compliance to Conflict Advisory Panel

17. Mitigation Approaches
Reputation/Research Integrity – most difficult to judge and
philosophical since even disinterested researchers may
interpret research results differently
Oversight Committee to monitor compliance with Conflict
Management Plan
- andatory disclosure in all publications and presentations
m
of research result of the researcher’s
relationship with one or more third parties in
which the researcher has significant financial
interests (or clinicians, disclosure to patients)
to “let the readers beware”
To ensure proper disclosure is made
Report non-compliance to Conflict Advisory Panel

18. Mitigation Approaches
Institutional Responsibilities and Duties – most straight
forward
Oversight Committee to monitor compliance with Plan
- ttendance guidelines (1 day/week away allowed in the US)
a
-review record of publications and other scholarly writings
-funding level
-teaching activities
To ensure contributions to institution are comparable to
peers in similar positions
Report non-compliance or concerns to Conflict Advisory
Panel

19. Ramifications
Conflict Advisory Panel – review reports of non-compliance
and concerns of the Oversight Committee
-discussion with the interested researcher
-discussion with the interested researcher’s superior
-determine proper remedial or punitive action(s) required
Recommend corrective action(s) to the relevant academic
leadership for final implementation

20. Policies and Processes
Transparent and straight forward with as little
ambiguity as possible while with enough flexibility to
accommodate disciplinary differences
Well distributed and publicized for good awareness
Continuing awareness program (not “one and done”)
Diligently monitored for compliance with the will to
enforce
Periodic review for policy and process update
Competent implementation (human resource)