The author's approach to IP development and protection
Driving Innovation Faster
August / September 2005
Volume 3 Number 4
As a scientist, I have a natural desire for creative solutions and concrete answers. As a businessman, I know that the marketplace is competitive, so time works against a sequential development process in the race for customers.
Consequently, it is understandable that most technology developers struggle to balance the dual demands for short product development times and innovation, particularly when the end-product requires a multidisciplinary development team. Concurrent development—€”working many parts in parallel so that the various parts converge simultaneously —€”has been widely used in product and system development in both government and industry.
At Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, we are applying concurrent development to early stage research and development activities and are combining it with multilevel protection for intellectual property. As a result, we are realizing shortened R&D timelines and stronger IP positions. The key to realizing these outcomes is a three-part approach: begin with a distinctive strategy or integrating framework; create innovations at the component level and integrate them into the framework early and often in mock applications that expose the researchers and technologies to end-use application environments; and then capture and protect IP at both the system (framework) and component levels throughout the process.
One example of how PNNL used this approach effectively involves an investment area that I lead for PNNL related to homeland security. The project is called SMART (short for Selective Mechanisms Analysis and Recognition Technologies).
The goal was to develop advanced systems for collecting and detecting chemical, biological or radiological threat materials.
After investigating and understanding the performance requirements for next-generation threat detection systems, we developed an integrated approach or framework for SMART. It consists of seven elements: signature identification, collection, pre-concentration, separation, detection, sensor analysis and network communications. For each of those critical elements, we developed innovations that would deliver the desired features and performance levels.
These included methods such as molecularly imprinted polymers, functionalized nanomaterials, immobilized enzymes, microcantilever sensors and many other topics. As a result, SMART became a multistage, multilevel program with many projects culminating to create an array of choices for achieving new levels of performance.
Essential to success is a disciplined process of documenting and protecting the IP at both the system or framework level and the individual component level and doing so early and often. To further accelerate development, we hold annual "integrated demonstrations" where the various technologies (and the associated lead investigators) are brought together in mock exercises where the technologies are integrated insofar as their state of maturity allows, and applied to realistic problems. The end result is that we provide a focus for the individual innovations, accelerate integration into solutions and protect inventions at both the component and the system levels.
SMART is an ongoing initiative at PNNL. The various technologies that have become part of that suite of solutions are undergoing continued refinement as they move towards implementation. But it has been a valuable lesson for us in how to create new tools for faster deployment. Looking back at what has been accomplished thus far, it became clear that a three-prong model for concurrent development evolved; one that incorporates strategic product planning, multi-level innovation and IP protection and integrated demonstrations all woven together in an ongoing, cyclic process.
This case study shows that this three-part approach for achieving shorter product development cycles and better IP protection is applicable to exploratory research and development.
It becomes even easier to see its benefits in development of tangible products. Imagine that your project is to develop a next-generation, high-performance race car. An overall strategy or framework is needed to integrate the key systems: the engine, the car's body, steering, suspension and so on. It is challenging, but the team invents some novel approaches at the system level. That type of high-value innovation is protected as IP, providing an umbrella or framework under which future component inventions can reside.
As progress is made, additional inventions emerge as individual components or functions—€”a better transmission or a stronger body material perhaps. When those component-level inventions are captured and protected, a stronger, two level IP position results. And let's not forget the third element of this development and protection strategy: frequent integration and demonstration.
As soon as the components are brought together, the improved engine and body are integrated and tested in the laboratory. Finally, the entire strategic approach is ready to be tested and the new race car is taken out for some laps around the track. It is a cyclic, but productive, process as each component is fine tuned and the power of the new product is fully realized.
Although rapid development cycles and invention seem to be competing goals in an R&D environment, both can be well-served by starting with an integrated strategic approach, pursuing concurrent development of innovations, driving integration through frequent exposure to end-user conditions and protecting the IP at both the system and component levels.
Dr. Douglas Lemon has led research and development and technology commercialization programs for more than 27 years. He currently directs PNNL's work for the Department of Homeland Security to develop next-generation sensors, measurement systems and information analysis tools for early detection and prevention of terrorist threats and actions.
Copyright © 2012 | Innovation America