Technologytransferandthecreationof companies: the CSIRO experience Garrett Upstill 1 and David Symington 2 1 University of New South Wales (ADFA) Canberra, ACT, Australia 2600. g.upstill@adfa.edu.au 2 Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia 3025. There is increasing interest worldwide in stimulating the emergence and growth of new technology-based companies, and in the role of public-funded research agencies in this process. This paper examines the experience of CSIRO, Australia’s largest R&D organisation, in creating new companies, as part of its technology transfer activities. Three modes of technology transfer are described, namely Non-Commercial Transfer, Commercial Transfer and New Company Generation. The technology transfer ‘mix’, that is the relative weight given to the different modes, has changed in CSIRO and in other public funded agencies in recent years. The increased importance being given to New Company Generation in CSIRO is attributed to the development of in-house commercial expertise, changing public expectations and the increased availability of venture capital. CSIRO’s experience with spin-offs and other new companies is analysed, and the challenges related to effective use of this mode of technology transfer are discussed. 1. Introduction A cademic institutions and public research agencies have long been associated with the growth of high technology companies and industries. In some cases this has been the outcome of a deliberate process, with a new company created and nurtured by a publicly funded agency. More often, though, the relationship has been less structured with the agencies an inter- mittent source of people and ideas. In recent years, spurred by well-publicised examples of fast growing technology companies, notably in the IT and biotechnology industries, there have been moves, worldwide, to promote a more active role for public funded research agencies in the generation and growth of new technology-based companies. These agencies are rethinking their approaches to technology transfer in response to these new challenges and opportunities. In Australia this issue has been a feature of three recent reports. The taskforce of the National Innovation Summit (Innovation Summit Implementation Group, 2000) identified new competitive firms as a key policy focus, and made recommendations on pre-seed funding for universities and other research organisations, on the development of a national incubator programme, and on funding relevant business expertise for the commer- cialisation of emerging technologies. It also addressed remuneration arrangements in public research agencies to maximise incentives for effective commercialisation. A report by Australia’s Chief Scientist (Batterham, 2000) looked at spin-off and start-up companies and focused on pre-seed capital funding and incentives for researchers. An earlier report (Department of Industry, Science and Tourism, 1997) called on CSIRO and Australian universities to double the level of budgetary support for the creation of spin-off companies. The encouragement of entrepreneurial activity by the higher education sector has been the subject of two recent reports to the Australian Government (Johnston, Matthews and Dodgson, 2000; CCST, 1999). R&D Management 32, 3, 2002. # Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2002. Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 233 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.