The Commercialization Gap Inside Today’s Innovation Ecosystem

If you work with startups, researchers, inventors, or emerging technologies, you probably already have many of the right pieces in place. You may provide mentoring, customer discovery, business planning, access to funding, intellectual property support, technical resources, investor introductions, or connections throughout your innovation ecosystem. Universities, government agencies, incubators, accelerators, economic development organizations, and entrepreneurship centers have invested heavily in building these resources, and they play an important role in helping innovations move beyond the laboratory or drawing board.

But there is a question I think more innovation organizations should be asking: What happens after we determine that an innovation has commercial potential?

That may sound like a simple question, but in my experience it is where a surprisingly difficult gap begins to appear. An innovator can complete customer discovery, secure a patent, build a prototype, receive grant funding, develop a business plan, and participate in an accelerator—and still not have a clear process for getting the technology in front of companies capable of commercializing it.

That is what I call the commercialization gap. Filling it doesn't require replacing the programs that already exist. It requires connecting those resources more effectively to the marketplace.

The Innovation Infrastructure Is Already Strong

There is a tremendous amount of serious work being done around innovation.

NSF's I-Corps program is a good example. It helps scientists and engineers move their thinking beyond the laboratory through customer discovery and evaluation of commercial opportunities. Participants engage with potential customers, partners, and other industry stakeholders rather than simply assuming a market exists.  NSF I-Corps⁠

The U.S. Economic Development Administration takes another approach through programs supporting organizations and regional ecosystems that help innovators and technology-driven companies move emerging technologies toward commercialization and growth.  U.S. Economic Development Administration⁠ Universities have also developed extensive technology-transfer capabilities for protecting, managing, and commercializing research-derived intellectual property.

These aren't weak programs looking for somebody to fix them. They are valuable pieces of an increasingly sophisticated innovation ecosystem. The issue is that commercialization requires several different capabilities, and no single program was designed to provide all of them.

Customer discovery helps you understand the market. Intellectual property management helps protect the innovation. Incubators help develop companies. Grant programs help finance research and development. Technology-transfer offices manage university intellectual property and licensing activities. Accelerators help startups develop faster.

Eventually, however, somebody has to convert all of that work into a specific commercial opportunity and begin engaging the marketplace. That's where another set of capabilities becomes important.

Where the Commercialization Gap Appears

I have seen this repeatedly over many years of working with intellectual property.

An inventor can explain exactly how the technology works but struggle to explain why a company should care about it. A researcher may have strong technical validation but no clearly defined commercial application. A startup may know its initial customers but have never considered whether licensing the technology into another market could create an additional commercialization pathway.

Even when licensing has been identified as a possible strategy, another set of questions immediately appears. Which market should we pursue first? What type of company has the strongest reason to license this technology? Who inside those companies evaluates outside innovation? What information will they need before they take the opportunity seriously? How should the technology be positioned? What commercialization materials need to be prepared? How do we approach potential partners? And what do we do with what they tell us?

Those aren't research questions, and they aren't really business-plan questions either. They are commercialization execution questions.

One simple way to see whether this gap exists in your own organization is to take two or three technologies or startups currently moving through your program and follow what actually happens after market validation. If licensing or an industry partnership becomes a viable pathway, who owns the next step? Who identifies potential partners? Who translates the technology into a commercial proposition? Who initiates outreach? Who manages the responses? And who brings what companies are saying back into the commercialization strategy?

You don't need to create another program to answer those questions. Simply mapping those handoffs may identify a point where an otherwise promising opportunity is slowing down.

A University Technology Example

A university-developed food technology I worked with illustrates the difference.

Researchers at the University of Arkansas developed a food preparation technology designed to give baked foods characteristics normally associated with fried foods while significantly reducing fat. Technically, there was quite a bit to explain. The process used enzyme-modified starch as an oil delivery system within the coating, and the underlying work included peer-reviewed research comparing sensory characteristics of baked and fried samples.  

All of that was important. But imagine approaching a food company by beginning with enzyme-modified starch chemistry. That isn't necessarily what gets the commercial conversation started.

The opportunity had to be translated into something an industry executive could evaluate quickly: a healthier baked-food process capable of producing the taste, texture, and appearance consumers associate with fried products, potentially using existing coating lines and commercially available ingredients. Those were business implications a food manufacturer could understand.  

Nothing about that diminished the underlying research. In fact, the research made the commercial proposition credible. But research information and commercialization information perform different jobs.

That distinction is at the heart of the commercialization gap.

Commercialization Is Also a Learning Process

There is another part of commercialization that is easy to overlook. You don't learn everything you need to know before you approach the market. You learn by engaging with it.

You may enter the market believing the most important commercial application for your IP is X. Then a company looks at it and asks, “Could this do Y?”

Maybe it can. Maybe it can't. Maybe it would require additional development or adaptation. But that question is valuable because a potential licensee has just told you something about the market you didn't know before. It may open a discussion about an application, customer need, or market opportunity the IP owner had never considered.

If several companies begin asking similar questions, that feedback becomes even more valuable. Perhaps the original market isn't responding as expected while another application generates interest. Perhaps companies consistently identify a feature they would need before moving forward. Or perhaps their questions reveal an entirely different market where the technology could have commercial potential.

Here is another practice you can put to work immediately in your organization. When participants speak with companies, don't just record interested or not interested. Capture the questions companies ask, the alternative applications they suggest, the objections they raise, and the capabilities they say they need. Then periodically review that feedback and look for patterns.

That is commercialization intelligence.

A licensing campaign shouldn't be a package of materials you create once and send repeatedly until somebody says yes. A good campaign should learn from the market. Market responses become data that can be used to refine positioning, target companies, applications, messaging, and sometimes even the development direction of the IP.

Choosing the Right Commercialization Path

Looking at an innovation through the eyes of a potential commercial partner can also change the commercialization strategy itself.

A company evaluating outside innovation isn't simply asking, “Is this interesting?” It is asking much more practical questions. Does this solve a problem we care about? Does it fit a market we already serve or want to enter? Can we manufacture, integrate, distribute, or sell it? Does it give us an advantage? What additional development will be required? What is protected? What are the risks? Could it be adapted to another application? And ultimately, can we build a business around it?

Sometimes forming a startup makes perfect sense. Sometimes the opportunity may be better suited to licensing into an established company with manufacturing, regulatory, distribution, sales, or market capabilities already in place. In other situations, a strategic partnership, co-development arrangement, OEM relationship, distribution agreement, or another structure may make more sense.

Commercialization should come before licensing because licensing is one commercialization strategy, not the definition of commercialization itself. The important thing is making that decision deliberately—and remaining willing to adjust it as the market provides new information.

The Opportunity for Innovation Organizations

This creates an opportunity for universities, government programs, accelerators, incubators, economic development organizations, and other startup-support organizations.

You don't necessarily need another large program. You can strengthen what you already provide by giving innovators a more structured bridge from validation into commercialization execution.

Think about the progression. A researcher develops the innovation. Customer discovery helps determine whether the market problem is real. Intellectual property work establishes what can be protected. Technical development reduces uncertainty. Startup and business-development programs help determine whether a company can be built around the opportunity.

Then comes another important decision: How are we actually going to move this opportunity into the marketplace?

For some participants, the answer will remain startup development. For others, licensing or another partnership strategy may offer a more practical route. Some technologies may need additional validation before any commercialization campaign makes sense. Knowing that early is valuable too.

A good commercialization system shouldn't push every innovation toward the same outcome. It should help determine what the opportunity is ready for, what still needs to be done, and then continue learning as the opportunity encounters the marketplace.

Why I Developed the IP Licensing Coach Academy and Licensing Launchpad™

This commercialization gap is one of the reasons I developed the IP Licensing Coach Academy and the Licensing Launchpad™.

The objective wasn't to create another accelerator, incubator, technology-transfer program, or entrepreneurship curriculum. Those resources already perform important functions. The objective was to create a commercialization and licensing implementation system that could complement them and give innovators a structured way to move from commercialization readiness into licensing campaign execution when licensing is the appropriate strategy.

The Licensing Launchpad™ is structured around two connected levels.

Launchpad Lite helps build the foundation. It gives an innovator a structured way to assess the IP, organize the commercial opportunity, evaluate market viability, identify gaps, and determine what needs to happen before serious licensing activity begins.

Launchpad Elite moves from foundation into implementation. It provides the system for developing commercialization and licensing strategies, identifying potential partners, building presentation and marketing assets, preparing for negotiations, launching outreach, and managing the licensing campaign.

Together, Lite and Elite create a continuous path from commercialization readiness through licensing campaign execution. But importantly, the campaign doesn't become static once those assets are built.

The IP may change. The technology may improve. New applications may emerge. Markets change. Companies respond in ways you didn't anticipate. Potential licensees begin giving you information that can change how you think about the opportunity.

The Licensing Launchpad™ is designed to support that continuing process. Market feedback can be brought back into the campaign, analyzed, and used to revise the strategy, positioning, target applications, partner profile, messaging, and campaign assets. As the IP and market evolve, the commercialization asset evolves with them.

The Licensing Launchpad™ isn't something an innovator completes and puts on a shelf. It is a dynamic commercialization and licensing asset designed to grow, change, and support the opportunity as the campaign progresses.

Strengthening What You've Already Built

Most innovation organizations don't need someone telling them to start over. You have already invested considerable time, expertise, and resources in helping innovators conduct research, validate markets, protect intellectual property, obtain funding, build companies, and develop technologies.

The opportunity is to make that infrastructure more complete.

The IP Licensing Coach Academy and Licensing Launchpad™ are designed to complement those existing resources. Launchpad Lite helps innovators establish the commercialization and licensing foundation. Launchpad Elite provides the implementation system for building, launching, managing, learning from, and evolving a licensing campaign.

And because commercialization doesn't stop when a campaign launches, neither should the system supporting it.

Let's Stay Connected

If this article gave you a new way to look at commercialization within your organization, put one of the ideas to work. Map a commercialization handoff with your team, start capturing the questions companies ask your participants, or take another look at what happens when licensing emerges as a potential pathway.

If you'd like to learn more about what we're doing at the IP Licensing Coach Academy, let's have a short introductory conversation. You don't have to be considering a new program or partnership, and we're not looking to sell you something. Tell us a little about what your organization is already doing, and we'll share some observations and ideas that may help strengthen your commercialization efforts. At the very least, you'll come away with a better understanding of the Licensing Launchpad™ and another resource you can draw on when the right opportunity comes along.

If a broader discussion would be useful, we're also happy to arrange a one-on-one or group presentation for your team and explore where the Academy and Licensing Launchpad™ could complement what you've already built.

Not ready for a conversation? That's fine too. We'll be happy to send you information about the Academy and Licensing Launchpad™ that you can review, share with your colleagues, or simply keep for future reference.

And even if this isn't the right time for a conversation, take a moment to join the Licensing Launchpad™ Newsletter. Each week we'll share practical commercialization ideas, licensing strategies, case studies, and approaches you can put to work within your organization and with the innovators you support. It's an easy way to stay connected while continuing to get new ideas you can use right now.