Innovative business: three sides of the coin

Science is waiting for "business angels"
Kira Obukhova, Fontanka.roo

The course of modernization announced in the country "from above" involves simple actions – business should invest in scientific research or, to put it fashionably, "innovation". There are enough objects for investment – not all bright heads have gone to the West, oddly enough, there are enough businessmen who are interested in this particular field of activity. But, as it turned out at a conference in the St. Petersburg Union of Scientists, "this medal has three sides."

(The scientific and practical conference "Scientific, Technological and Business expertise of projects: three sides of the same coin", organized by RVC and the Partner Expert and Analytical Scientific Center of the Engineering Section of the St. Petersburg Union of Scientists, was held at the St. Petersburg Scientific Center of the Russian Academy of Sciences on April 25, 2011 - VM.)

The problem was discussed enthusiastically. Although there were snide statements on the sidelines that "thin technologies" (recently called "nano") have been known since the seventies, and "innovative business" appeared in Russia in the early nineties – simultaneously with the collapse of the defense complex, the discussion was serious.

The first problem was quickly identified: any project must pass an examination – both scientific and commercial. To assess the novelty (and sanity of the project), a special "Corps of Experts" was created back in 2007. "This project began as a social and initiative one," said Galina Cirlina, professor of the Department of Electrochemistry of the Chemical Faculty of Moscow State University, who represents it. "We tried to develop criteria for the selection of experts in various fields, mainly in the field of natural sciences."

The selection system was based, as explained by Cirlina, on a formalized principle – the citation index of scientific publications. However, this approach is not applicable for IT technologies and a number of technical sciences, she stressed. All the experts involved should be trustworthy and have a certain weight in the scientific world. "Only then will peer-reviewed projects be able to resist bureaucratic mafia decisions that are often made at the level of ministries with funding for science. We hope that this will help those research teams that will soon begin to be evaluated on purely formal indicators to survive, without a corps of experts, we will not be able to resist this pressure. But we managed to conclude an agreement with Thomson Reuters, the holder of all citation indexes. And now we can resist all attempts of the ministry to publish some of its ratings," she said to the unanimous approval of the audience.

At the same time, experts should not only evaluate developments, but also find new projects. "I have enough acquaintances in various technoparks who complain that there are simply no sensible developments – they bring only garbage to them," said Cirlina. "Therefore, we have an intention to create a map of the development of science in Russia so that we can predict the processes a little bit."

"The search is the work of experts," Nikolai Adamov, Director of SIA Virtual CEO (Riga), supported Cirlina. – A huge number of developments just lie on the shelves. There are no those who make projects "with legs and a head". I came across this – I decided to invest my funds in development, I wanted to become a "business angel", but among those who come, I see either "crazy Kulibins" or good entrepreneurs who simply do not have any new ideas. Investors do not have enough projects, they need to be looked for."

Gennady Borisenko, representing the Department of Scientific and Technical Expertise of Rosnanotech Group, agreed with the reservations in his speech. "It's a good idea to forecast the development of science, but the culture of drawing up road maps is still at a very low level," he said. In addition, there is a clear shortage of competent good experts, but not only them, there are simply no many basic industries in the country. "It turns out that in Russia, with all its great history, some industries either did not exist, or they died in the turbulent nineties," Borisenko spread his hands. "Many developments are also being slowed down for this reason."

The topic was picked up by Arseniy Berezin, chief consultant of Typhoon Software Barbara. "We have no more capacity or people left. For example, we cannot develop hi-tech electronics – we simply have no one to do it. We cannot produce accurate antennas – there are no turners in Russia. But there are no tool workers, no milling workers. We can do almost nothing and are forced to turn to the West." Therefore, expertise only on the novelty and significance of the idea, in his opinion, is not enough – the one who evaluates the project must also intuitively assess the prospects for development, as well as think through all the issues of the placement of future production.

With the business expertise of scientific developments, the issue is solved a little easier. "We have assembled a pool of 900 experts," said Leonid Levkovich–Maslyuk, head of the Expert support Department of the Russian Venture Company (RVC). – We attract successful investors and entrepreneurs of high-tech companies, less often we call consultants in the field of business. The largest part consists of scientists and engineers who understand the market value of their activities and are able to communicate with both business representatives and representatives of science."

But RVC also has its own difficulties. Firstly, different branches of the expert community have very little contact with each other. "The paradox is that biotechnological innovative developments are very closely connected with computer technologies, and expert groups almost interact, and it's very important that some see what others are doing," Levkovich–Maslyuk complained.

Secondly, the RVC expert community covers branches of science unevenly. Experts are being sought in five areas – space technologies, nuclear, information, medical and biotechnology. But today 40% of the pool members are able to evaluate information technologies, 16% – biotechnologies, projects in the field of chemistry – 10%, and energy and electronics – 6% each. "It is not surprising that experts and projects in the field of IT prevail," Galina Cirlina commented on this bias. – It is easier to finance computer development than a technological project for which a plant will be needed – that is, it will be necessary to solve the problems of raw materials, logistics, personnel and much more. Therefore, we have a lot of IT specialists and practically no electronics engineers. Although one cannot exist without the other." However, RVC hopes to expand the pool of experts and correct the distortions.

Fundamental science remained "overboard". "It is difficult to quickly promote scientific projects to a commercial level," said Cirlina. – It's time for us to learn how to evaluate the knowledge intensity and prospects of long-term projects. But I have never seen business structures that are ready to support anything for at least 5-7 years. And you won't get results quickly in the case of fundamental science." On the part of Rusnano, they immediately objected that the business's business is to make a profit, and the task of the state is to build restrictions and set priorities.

"Listen, what are you going to finance? – Vladislav Bolshevanov, Associate Professor of the Faculty of Physics of St. Petersburg State University, became interested. – Are the projects ascending, which will be tomorrow, or the projects descending, which by the time of their implementation will already begin to become obsolete? If they are ascending, then your business experts simply will not be able to evaluate them, and if they are descending, then we will build a second Detroit near St. Petersburg. That's all innovation."

Benjamin Ferrari, representing Imprimatur Capital, undertook to answer the question that confused both RVC and Rusnano. "You need to determine what Russia needs," he said. – Do you want to build capitalism? Or venture capitalism? The Russian innovation system or the international one? We need to make a decision." "I don't want to criticize Russia, the picture is the same everywhere," he added. – But you need to prioritize. To take some concrete steps. You have a very strong entrepreneurship, but it functions in the field of production of goods. At the same time, there is a very strong imbalance between key industries in Russia – technologies for creating new types of energy and environmental ones are almost not developing, but the oil and gas sector is very well developed. We have no doubt that there are technologies in Russia that can be presented on international markets, but something needs to be solved."

Those to whom these words could be addressed were absent in the hall. Therefore, the question "whether to build a second Detroit or think about a new generation of cars" remained open. As well as the work of patent specialists – according to Alexander Filippov, CEO of Plasmas LLC, it takes at least five years to patent a development in our country. "During this time, the States and China manage to issue three patents on similar topics," he was indignant. But there were no patent law specialists at the conference either.

However, one issue was resolved to everyone's satisfaction. The proposed way to get rid of the inventors of "perpetual motion machines" was liked by both scientists and businessmen. Evgeny Eidelman, a senior researcher at the Ioffe Institute of Physics and Technology, even developed a special questionnaire (provided to the Fontanka editorial office and can be made available to everyone), which he recommended "to distribute in ministries so that officials do not rush to finance crooks, as it happens all the time now." In short, the essence of the methodology boils down to the fact that "if a certain figure promises an immediate revolution in the world that will occur after the introduction of his invention, or if he insists on the secrecy of the research conducted, or if he is unable to state the essence of the discovery in generally accepted terms, but uses his own (for example, "torsion field", "biofield"or "energy-informational interaction"), then before you is a typical rogue from science." The opinion of the officials could not be found out.

Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru26.04.2011