Anyone who has ever started a company in Spain will know that is it not a simple process.  Through all the bureaucracy and steps one has to follow, there is a central preoccupation - finance.  In the case of technology companies it has traditionally been even more difficult.  However in recent years numerous biotech companies have been created in Spain, giving rise to an increase in this sector that is now beginning to be recognised, not only in Spain, but also at a European level.

One of the main reasons for this growth in the number of businesses has been a fundamental change in scientific administration and in research centres.  In Spain, with the previously much-heard phrase "Let them investigate it" now overcome, there exists a well-knit scientific network around the Universities (both public and private including, for example, the Universidad de Navarra), the CSIC (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas/Spanish Institute for Scientific Research) and all the other bodies dependent on, or under the ultimate supervision of the CSIC (Centro Nacional de Biotecnología, Centro de Biología Molecular Severo Ochoa, Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas, etc.…). According to figures, Spain represented 16% of all European literature published in 2003, whilst only representing 2% of patents issued in Europe.  This means that there is a significant gap in the transfer of technology to the business sector.

One reason for this is the way that scientists used to be encouraged and rewarded for publishing the results of their work, rather than for patenting them: the more they published, the better the evaluations and budgets they received.  Recently there has been a significant change in policy with the creation of technology transfer offices with this aim:

…to ensure that the maximum number of scientific-technical skills and accomplishments of the CSIC are transformed into social, economic, and cultural benefits.  To do this we will::

1. Disseminate and promote the image and skills of the CSIC in its socioeconomic framework.

2. Foster and encourage the relationship between our researchers and different sectors of production.

3. Drive the creation of technology-based businesses emerging from the CSIC framework.

(Taken from the declararion of objectives of the Technology Transfer Office of the CSIC)

Scientists are now encouraged and rewarded for the production of patents that may become developed by business.  The technology transfer and extension bodies communicate with businesses and investors, attend congresses and events to make their patents and scientific achievements known, and encourage the creation of businesses based on the technology from these scientists and research centres, which give up or license their patents in exchange for payment and/or future royalties from the sale of products derived from their inventions.

In many cases scientists or researchers become promoters for the companies and reach agreements with the research centres to develop their companies within the centres, which give their facilities, laboratories, employee time, and resources in exchange for rent, royalties, or shareholdings in the companies. This stage is critical as not all inventions, patents or technologies can be developed into products or applications that will one day reach the market.

At this stage a moral dilemma arises, which must be resolved by the researchers and administrators with much common sense and business acumen.  The conflict arises from the fact that research work is funded by public money and is then transferred to private profit-making businesses.  The technology transfer offices have applied the rule of the greatest common good and have developed agreement models in which technology is given in exchange for royalties from future sales, that will be reinvested in future research projects, which means that research centres benefit from their success economically, and not only in terms of prestige and recognition.

The ability to ”recognise an opportunity” is crucial in the process of creating a new business, in this case to relate a patent or invention with a gap in the market and transform it into a “product” that fills that gap completely or partially.  Defining a business model that determines how the business will make money and offer profitability to its investments also takes considerable skill.

Not all scientists have these skills and it is sometimes an external entrepreneur who will promote the business, with or without the scientists.  These external promotors or entrepreneurs see innovation as an opportunity to meet previously identified gaps in the market and may include:

• executives of pharmaceutical companies who want to start their own business and know how to develop and take their idea to the market
• consultants or executives of investment banks who the keys of financing and developing a business
• clinical doctors who understand the treatment and diagnostic needs of their patients and feel frustrated by the lack of solutions
• business-minded MBA students interested in science
• business investors attracted to technology and innovation.

Experience shows that a business may be successful or unsuccessful independent of whether it is formed by a scientific or external entrepreneur, as both have their strong and weak points. While scientists know technology from the inside and can push the development, they do not always feel sufficiently committed to leave their academic life and lack the knowledge needed to develop a business project.  On the other hand external entrepreneurs pull the scientific group and are attracted to the business challenges, while underestimating the difficulties or overestimating the technology.  Both profiles bring necessary qualities to the biotechnolgy project, and sooner or later they combine for the benefit and development of the business.