PROMOTION OF INVENTION AND INNOVATION
IN INDUSTRY AND RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS
by Dr. Farag Moussa
President of International Federation of Inventors' Associations (IFIA)
WORKSHOP ON
THE PROMOTION OF INVENTION AND INNOVATION
Organized by the Sri Lanka Inventors Commission
Colombo, Sri Lanka (August 5, 1992)
INTRODUCTION
Let's face it. The subject of
Promotion of invention and innovation is political. Political in the border sense of the
word. In any country, whatever the country, the promotion of creativity and inventiveness
within the population depends on politics. On that huge puzzle full of complexities, made
of political and economical interests, in which psychological barriers, often been born
out of tradition, not to mention the burden of history, also play their role.
Yes, it may seem evident - but
evidences must sometimes be reminded - that a man, or a woman, before working in a
specific field or sector of the economy, is first of all the citizen of country, of a
nation. Hence the importance of the environment. The environment which should prevail in
any country should allow ideas to generate, to run, to flow, to fly, to live, to grow. And
to survive! For our slogan should be: Never let an idea wither!
But let us now limit ourselves
to the problem within two specific environments: industry and research organization.
I. PROMOTION OF
INVENTION AND INNOVATION IN INDUSTRY
An industrial enterprise can
have among its employees different kind of inventors. It can be an engineer - as in most
cases. It can be someone working in the factory, also a graduate but from a non-technical
university (law, economics, business, etc.). And of course it can be a worker.
And they can be either a man or
a woman!
Now how can creation, invention,
imagination flourish in the enterprise?
The management must be convinced
that inventions, innovations within the firm bare one of the elements of its success, that
without ideas emerging from the brains of its employees the enterprise could not stand
against local and world competition.
On the other hand the employee
who invents must feel that his invention, his achievement is recognized by the management.
It will stimulate him, and encourage other employees to invent Unfortunately, most
managers, most entrepreneurs have a short-term view. They want to make quick money, and
with no risk. And this takes place in both developed and developing countries. While
introducing an invention in the firm is a costly long-tem policy.
For the entrepreneurs to regain
some sense of adventure two main incentives have been thought of.
One is of course the legal
protection of the invention by a patent. The other is the financial incentives introduced
in many countries.
The trouble is: do entrepreneurs
know all this? Do they know that tax incentives and financial assistance schemes,
specifically designed to encourage their own local activities, exist? In their own
country?
Governments - and I don't say
that only for the sake of inventors, but for Inventions in general, for the sake of
enterprises, for the sake of development - , governments should give more publicity to all
such protection systems and incentives.
Another trouble is : does the
employee who invents within the firm know that he is inventing? Often he is not aware of
it. He just does it, and that's it. Here we are facing again an information problem.
There, it's up to the management to find a way to inform - and to motive - its employees,
either through lectures, books, films
I know, for that the employees will have to
abandon their work place for a few minutes - and I know, I know that time is money. Some
might not agree with me, and yet I am convinced of the importance of spreading such news!
Now let's come to the employee
within the firm who invents and knows he is inventing!
These can be divided in two
groups.
The first ones know that they
are inventing
because they are there for that and are paid for it. These are the
employees of the Research and Development (R&D) department of the firm: The others are
just like you and me, people with all kinds of jobs within the firm. Who knows, even the
man in courtyard might invent a new broom?!
Now is there a system to reward
these employee inventors, be they in the R&D department or not?
Very few countries, like Germany
for example, have issued a specific law for the benefit of employee inventors. Elsewhere,
each firm has, or has not
alas, its own award regulations.
Here are some general ideas on
the system applied by enterprises towards their employee inventors - as much as these
information are made available outside the firms. Some of them, to say the truth, are very
discreet on the subject. In short, the invention developed in relation with the production
of the firm belongs to the firm. It is stipulated in the employee's contract. This does
not exclude awards.
Certainly a plate with your name
engraved on it is a nice feeling. Certainly to have your picture in the newsletter of the
firm is thrilling. Certainly to be the star of a banquet is an honor. Certainly to be
promoted is even better. But the best of the best for most inventors - word of IFIA
President - would be cash awards, and high cash awards!
Lets now recall the importance -
though not always evident - of a small invention. Small inventions can be numerous in an
enterprises. A simple modification in a tool for example. One should even encourage the
innovation in the working methods. A new movement gaining time, in its small way, is a
innovation too.
It is precisely for this kind of
things, for this kind of proposals, which often come from the workers themselves, that
some enterprises have adopted what they call "suggestion boxes". These boxes can
be found here and there in the factory, like mail boxes, and you just slip your paper in
it. It might even be better investment than a love letter, for if your suggestion is real
good, if it's considered useful to the firm you might get more than a kiss, an award, a
cash award
II. PROMOTION OF
INVENTION AND INNOVATION IN RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS
We come now to the second part
of our lecture. I imagine that the organizers meant research organizations outside
industry which has just been our previous subject. We shall then speak of research
organizations and centers located at universities and other academic institutions.
The first thing that strikes you
in developing countries is the importance of science and technology institutions, and
other university research centers, compared to local industries. The number of university
graduates, the level of knowledge among academics is often very high.
Their primary function, I know,
is to educate. And at a higher level, to publish the results of their research - usually
basic research. All this is good and important. And yet, one can regret that in our
changing world of today, where everything is entwined, academics keep living, as they did
for centuries, in an "ivory tower" - with no link, or very little, with the
outside world, with the real beat of the world.
I am myself an academic, with a
Ph.D. I am myself from a developing country, Egypt, therefore I can afford to say it: Our
universities and scientific institutions are full with talents. And yet this potential is
not properly exploited for the promotion of invention and innovation, which are the
pillars of any modern - and powerful - society.
The trouble is that academics
live in their "ivory tower"
while local industries live in their
compound! With no link between them. Don't feel ashamed! This situation is not a Third
World specialty! It has been on the menu of all developed countries for decades. It took
time, a long time when at last the developed countries started to bridge the gap between
the scientific and industrial worlds. In fact it started only 10 to 15 years ago.
Developing countries should
follow their example. Of course like in any couple, both have to make an effort to go to
the other, to discover the other. But believe me, this two-way relationship between
scientists and industrialists can be very fruitful indeed.
What are the benefits on each
side, not to speak of the benefit to the country which could be huge, economically?
Industry can find in research
centers the technical expertise. Academics are people who usually keep themselves well
informed of the latest world-wide research and developments in their specialized fields of
study. Why not sign a consultancy agreement between a local industry and a national
research institutions? Let's say for example you have a food industry on one hand, and a
nutrition research center on the other. Shouldn't they work together? Institutional
barriers should definitely be broken.
And this should not be limited
to purely scientific and technology institutes. I remember some one from Singapore
suggesting that tourism industry could easily benefit from research conducted in the
Department of Geography and Archeology to set up new tours for the visitors, to provide
unknown pictures for advertisements, etc.
To go back to the research
organizations in the academic sector, what would be their benefit out of their
collaboration with industries?
First of all it must be said
that - just like employee inventors in industry - scientists often invent without being
aware of it. They don't realize that their work can be patented. The world of patents is
either unknown to them, or simply rejected by them. Why rejected? Because traditionally
scientists, for ethical reasons, think that their discoveries should be made free to the
human community. But to say the truth, these idealists are slowly diminishing, like a rare
species. Nowadays, research centers and scientific institutions have understood that
through patenting their scientists' inventions, they could bring money in. Mainly to
finance further research.
A survey conducted in Denmark
very recently, confirms this trend; only 12% of the scientists recognized
ethical-humanistic considerations to be an important reason for not filing patents. In
fact, the survey shows clearly that the most important reasons for not filing patents are
practical reasons. They are the following in the order of declining importance:
| First of all comes the lack of
knowledge. The lack of knowledge of what can be patented or not. The lack of knowledge in
which cases a patent might be useful.
|
| The lack of time comes second
in the list. Any one who tried one day to file a patent will agree that it is time
consuming. And time is money!
|
| Talking about money, the cost
of patenting comes next on the list. Filing fees, as we know, are terribly high when you
want to protect your invention worldwide.
|
| Last but not least, the Danish
survey shows that among the reasons for scientists not to file a patent, is the delay in
the publication of the patent. In most cases, the granting of a patent takes at least a
couple of years, while scientists are used to have their articles published - in
scientific journal or symposium proceedings - within a few months.
|
Here is the heart of the
problem. A scientific career is built on publications. Yet in many countries, and in
almost all third world countries, patents live their own life - and/or death -, unknown to
the academic world. Under those conditions, how can a patent be considered an asset, in
the career of a scientist? Unless things will change. And things are changing at last!
More and more universities and research centers in the US, in Europe and Japan, recognize
nowadays patents as equivalent to published papers. I mean equivalent to articles written
for scientific journals, and/or lectures given at symposiums.
To conclude, I
should stress that to promote Invention and Innovation is a "joint venture". And
an adventure ! In this adventure, partners are engaged. All of them different. All of them
indispensable. As President of IFIA, I feel it is my duty to recall here that the most
indispensable of all these partners, the one without whom NOTHING would exist, is the
INVENTOR.
Back to HOME
page |