Technology Assessment
Client Problem
The client for this engagement was a nonprofit research laboratory owned and operated by a private university. The laboratory had developed a new ultrasound-based technology for the nondestructive evaluation of the tenderness of meat. Further development and commercialization of this technology would require the expenditure of additional funds of at least several hundred thousand dollars. Hence, the laboratory, its board of advisors, and the university wanted to know where this new technology stood with respect to the state of the art and what the prospects were for its successful commercialization. The matter was further complicated, and an answer made more urgent, by the fact that rights to the intellectual property were the subject of a costly litigation between the university and a foreign-owned industrial concern.
What We Did
To properly advise the university and recommend a course of action, we initiated a technology and market assessment of the new technology. Assessing the market for this new technology was made more difficult by the fact that the technology represented a new capability with unproven demand. Thus, we began the study with an investigation into the overall size of the industry thereby enabling us to estimate an upper bound for the potential deployment of the technology. We then interviewed representatives from industry, academia, and the government to gather as much expert opinion as possible concerning the potential demand for the capability introduced by the technology.
An additional issue weighing on the minds of the laboratory’s board was just how good was this new technology? To address this issue we began a search of university, government, and industrial research facilities to learn who else was working on a similar capability. This portion of the investigation yielded several past and present research and development initiatives aimed at providing a similar capability. With this information, we were able to accurately position the new technology with respect to the state of the art and the range of competing technologies that purported to provide a similar capability.
Results
Our market assessment revealed that the industry was immense (greater than $50 billion or 0.7 percent of U.S. GDP in 1996) and that there was likely a substantial, albeit largely anecdotal, demand for the capability proffered by the university’s new technology. Knowledgeable sources all recognized a need for this capability to help stimulate sales, but there was a dearth of factual data concerning how much consumers would pay for meat that could be accurately graded and guaranteed to be tender. We also learned that power in the industry was heavily concentrated in the hands of a few processing firms who would strongly resist the deployment of an innovation that might brand a significant portion of their product as unacceptable. Finally, our investigation into the state of the art revealed several competing technologies, some of which were both nearer to commercialization and promoted by universities and research institutions with stronger ties to the industry. With our findings, the university obtained a sober and factual view of the prospects for commercializing its new technology and the potential economic benefit to be derived therefrom. This information was ultimately used to guide settlement negotiations in the intellectual property litigation and to help guide the future course of the university’s investment in additional research and development to advance the technology.
The client for this engagement was a nonprofit research laboratory owned and operated by a private university. The laboratory had developed a new ultrasound-based technology for the nondestructive evaluation of the tenderness of meat. Further development and commercialization of this technology would require the expenditure of additional funds of at least several hundred thousand dollars. Hence, the laboratory, its board of advisors, and the university wanted to know where this new technology stood with respect to the state of the art and what the prospects were for its successful commercialization. The matter was further complicated, and an answer made more urgent, by the fact that rights to the intellectual property were the subject of a costly litigation between the university and a foreign-owned industrial concern.
What We Did
To properly advise the university and recommend a course of action, we initiated a technology and market assessment of the new technology. Assessing the market for this new technology was made more difficult by the fact that the technology represented a new capability with unproven demand. Thus, we began the study with an investigation into the overall size of the industry thereby enabling us to estimate an upper bound for the potential deployment of the technology. We then interviewed representatives from industry, academia, and the government to gather as much expert opinion as possible concerning the potential demand for the capability introduced by the technology.
An additional issue weighing on the minds of the laboratory’s board was just how good was this new technology? To address this issue we began a search of university, government, and industrial research facilities to learn who else was working on a similar capability. This portion of the investigation yielded several past and present research and development initiatives aimed at providing a similar capability. With this information, we were able to accurately position the new technology with respect to the state of the art and the range of competing technologies that purported to provide a similar capability.
Results
Our market assessment revealed that the industry was immense (greater than $50 billion or 0.7 percent of U.S. GDP in 1996) and that there was likely a substantial, albeit largely anecdotal, demand for the capability proffered by the university’s new technology. Knowledgeable sources all recognized a need for this capability to help stimulate sales, but there was a dearth of factual data concerning how much consumers would pay for meat that could be accurately graded and guaranteed to be tender. We also learned that power in the industry was heavily concentrated in the hands of a few processing firms who would strongly resist the deployment of an innovation that might brand a significant portion of their product as unacceptable. Finally, our investigation into the state of the art revealed several competing technologies, some of which were both nearer to commercialization and promoted by universities and research institutions with stronger ties to the industry. With our findings, the university obtained a sober and factual view of the prospects for commercializing its new technology and the potential economic benefit to be derived therefrom. This information was ultimately used to guide settlement negotiations in the intellectual property litigation and to help guide the future course of the university’s investment in additional research and development to advance the technology.