I got a lot of feedback on my last post comparing Massachusetts with California in terms of Research, Innovation, and Commercialization of clean technologies. One respondent, my friend Jay Fiske of Wakonda Technologies, was so knowledgeable and thoughtful in his take that I asked him to write it up as a guest blog post. So… Enjoy!
———–
In his most recent post, Rob Day asks why the West Coast seems to be better at commercializing cleantech research than the East Coast.
It’s a great question.
As a former cleantech venture investor with the Massachusetts Green Energy Fund and as Vice President of Operations for Wakonda Technologies — a company developing high-efficiency, flexible, low-cost photovoltaics for the mobile power and building-integrated solar markets — I have been privileged to meet and work with a wide variety of scientists and engineers developing clean energy technologies.
Perhaps one of the biggest differences between the East Coast and West Coast is cultural. In my experience, there are many university professors who have no interest in commercializing their research. The knowledge gained from their research is the goal – they are pure intellectuals: “a person who places a high value on or pursues things of interest to the intellect or the more complex forms and fields of knowledge, as aesthetic or philosophical matters, esp. on an abstract and general level.” Thanks to dictionary.com for that one.
Academia — at least the East Coast version with which I have the greatest exposure — is a different place than business. Many academics seem to compete on who is smartest, who has the best paper, and who was published in which prestigious journal. Money rarely comes into the credibility equation for academics, unless you’re speaking with business school professors, and typically, one doesn’t find innovative energy technology in business schools.
Maybe the difference between the coasts stems from the fact that many universities in the East came into prominence before the industrial revolution when intellectualism was the goal, while many universities in the West came into prominence after the industrial revolution when commercialization was the goal.
Clearly, I’m stretching here.
Frankly, the “East Coast vs West Coast” debate is an interesting discussion, but the bigger concern I have is US vs India vs China.
Which regions will thrive because they are continuously developing innovative technologies and forming companies around them, and which regions will struggle to build or maintain a robust economy because innovative firms are formed elsewhere?
When I was recruiting for a senior scientist position at Wakonda, I reviewed about 130 resumes from PhD’s from various prestigious universities. An astounding 70% of the candidates I reviewed were born in India, China, or Russia. I guarantee you that not all of these highly-qualified individuals will find jobs in innovative materials science firms in the US such as Wakonda. Many will go home and start or join innovative firms there.
In addition to the incredible labor pool being developed in India and China (and to some degree, Russia), much of the manufacturing base has shifted to these regions, which greatly facilitates innovation. If a company’s manufacturing line is housed in the same facility that houses R&D, their “clockspeed” for implementing innovations will be much greater than firms where those capabilities are separated by 10,000 miles.
So, is it time for Rob Day to move to Shanghai?
Maybe not quite yet. I think there will still be opportunities to build great companies from East Coast research — the amount of scientific talent in the Northeast focused on energy is indeed incredible — and I am hopeful that we will see more efforts to fund the bridge from basic research to commercialization. However, I agree with Rob’s implied point that perhaps we in the East Coast shouldn’t be beating our chests too hard and should be a bit more paranoid about the competition. However, I would shift the focus of our paranoia to China and India and not worry so much about California.