Search results

The paper aims to understand the process of transfer of agricultural technology, which comprises incubation of the technology business, valuation, evaluation, licensing and commercialization, to examine various dimensions of the process of technology transfer and the effectiveness of transfer object use criteria, to explore ways of sustaining incubation and commercialization through an autonomous unit responsible for technology transfer, to peruse the role of agribusiness incubators in creating an effective agri-entrepreneurship eco-system and to study the factors that promote or inhibit the sustainability of business incubators in an academic or research institution setting.

An innovative technology for production of liquid bio-fertilizers was developed and nurtured to market levels by Anand Agricultural University (AAU), a State Agricultural University in Gujarat. The technology for production of liquid bio-fertilizers, developed during 2009-2010 to 2013-2014 was licensed to some of the state public and private sector undertakings under the World Bank-financed National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP) implemented through Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). For commercializing the technologies from the University, a Business Planning and Development (BPD) Unit was set up at AAU along the lines of a technology transfer office, under the aegis of NAIP during later part of 2009. The NAIP funding from World Bank for BPD Units ceased in June 2014 with closure of the project. With funding no more available, Rajababu V. Vyas, a research scientist at the Microbiology and Bio-fertilizer Department of the University and Head of the BPD Unit, had serious concerns about the BPD unit’s sustainability, as well as sustaining the process of technology transfer from the University.

Anand Agricultural University (AAU), a state-run university in Gujarat, developed and incubated a technology to produce liquid biofertilizer, licensed the technology and marketed its product through a few state-run and private fertilizer firms. The technology was developed between 2009/2010 and 2013/2014 as part of the National Agricultural Innovation Project of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research with funds from the World Bank. A unit to incubate agri-businesses, referred to as Business Planning and Development Unit (BPDU), was set up in late 2009 to expedite the process of technology transfer from AAU to agribusiness firms. Rajababu V. Vyas, a research scientist at the Microbiology and Bio-fertilizer Department of the university, was concerned about the unit’s sustainability, because funding from the World Bank had ceased from June 2014, and wondered how to sustain the transfer of technology from the laboratory to the field in the light of the data available to him.

Teaching Notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

Entrepreneurship

The ‘CSIR-Tech: Facilitating lab to market journeys’ case is designed to teach students the strategic intricacies of an organizational network. The case also throws light on the formation and design of a collaborative inter-organizational network. CSIR, a premier R&D organization in India, was plagued with challenges in the commercialization of technologies developed in its constituent laboratories. CSIR-Tech was established as a private-limited company to catalyse the technology development and commercialization process. The case analyses formation of CSIR-CSIR-Tech alliance and discusses how the alliance can help in overcoming challenges associated with commercialization of technologies being developed at CSIR.

Innovation Strategy/Entrepreneurship.

The case can be used in an MBA/postgraduate management program for a course on Innovations Strategy with a focus on disruptive innovation, specifically in relation to disruption in the value chain with the adoption of new technologies or for a course on Entrepreneurship focusing on the opportunities created by the Internet-based technologies for start-up businesses. Alternatively, it can be used in a course on e-commerce strategies, particularly to demonstrate the efficiency of online distribution vis-à-vis physical channels.

The case illustrates how Medknow Publications created a profitable e-commerce model out of a struggling conventional business, namely, the learned society journal publishing. It also provides a useful ground to discuss the challenges faced by the conventional scholarly journal publishing models, the current crisis in scholarly journal publishing and how Medknow, a disruptive business model innovation, would address these issues. Besides, the case illustrates how Medknow created a sustainable “for-profit” alternative to the prevailing not-for-profit models of open access publishing.

After the analysis and discussion of this case, students will be able to: appreciate how technological innovation can disrupt existing business models; understand how digitization helps improve the efficiency of value chain in the content industry, particularly the scholarly journal publishing industry; and appreciate that the flexibility of digitized content and the global reach of the Internet have the potential to transform the scholarly journal publishing industry for good.

Teaching notes are available for educators only. Please contact your library to gain login details or email support@emeraldinsight.com to request teaching notes.

This is a field-researched case about a nonprofit organization, the Accelerated Cure Project (ACP), dedicated to accelerating advances toward a cure for multiple sclerosis (MS). Inspired by the successful open source software development platform, ACP brings the strengths of that platform into the medical research and development environment. At the opening of the case, Robert McBurney, an Australian scientist with extensive experience in the biotech world, has been named CEO. McBurney and his team want to use ACP's bio-sample and data Repository to drive innovation in the search for the cure for MS by fostering collaborative research and development across research institutions, pharmaceutical and bio-tech companies. To encourage such collaboration ACP waives its rights to potentially lucrative Intellectual Property. This decision to foster collaboration at the expense of revenue sources appears problematic, since ACP does not have the staff or resources to undertake fundraising at the scale needed to fund current projects. ACP chooses to serve instead as an open access research accelerator making an impact on the field by functioning as an innovation driver rather than a profit maker. Is this an innovative recipe for success in finding a cure for MS or a recipe for financial disaster for ACP?

Interviews provided the primary source of data for this case. Four semi-structured interviews were conducted with the CEO of ACP, the Vice President of Scientific Operations, and a member of the organization's Board of Trustees, a collaborating university researcher, and the President of a bio-tech company working with ACP. Interview data was supplemented with additional information from ACP's web site, news reports, McBurney's comments at Suffolk University's Global Leadership in Innovation and Collaboration Award event, and follow-up conversations.

This case is intended for use in an undergraduate course examining strategic management issues midway through the term. The case discussion can center on issues relating to: first, the development of the business model; second, revenue resources and fundraising. Students are expected to spend two to three hours of outside preparation reviewing concepts of change leadership and the collaborative enterprise business model. They should read the case materials and brainstorm options for improved change leadership. The case can be taught in one two-hour class period.

The purpose of this case is to introduce students to the strategic management and funding challenges faced by an organization that is using a non-traditional business model in an increasingly complex environment. As a result of discussing this case, students should be able to: first, examine strategic organizational strengths, analyze opportunities created by business, market and environmental factors, and strategize to minimize weaknesses and to address threats identify an organization's strategic focus; recognize and recommend options at crucial decision making junctures in a business situation; second, assess an organization's revenue model; analyze how this model can be improved; third, analyze the functionality and sustainability of an organization's business model.

Dr. Narendran, Director, Indian Medicine (Siddha) College, has been requested by the Head of the College's Pharmacology Department to ensure intellectual protection for, and commercialisation of, a formulation that he had developed for coronary atherosclerosis. Such a request has been made for the first time in the College, and the Director has to decide how it fits into the educational and research mandate of the College. He also has with him a brief market study of the formulation's potential.

The Director, Jaipuria Institute of Management, Lucknow is preparing to face two challenges: maintaining the educational purpose of transforming students into down-to-earth managers and lifelong champions of the institute, and attracting and retaining good faculty. The case illustrates the institutional processes that a school which is part of a chain needs to consider. The tension between autonomy and conformity, and the concept of a corporate office, which is new to educational settings, are illustrated.

In mid-2013 Deepak Kumar, Chairman and Group CEO of MakeMyTrip (MMT), was headed to the Hindustan conference room of the company's head office in Gurgaon, India, for deciding the new homepage design. A day earlier, Ajay, Product Head, had shared the consolidated results of the trials of different options (see Exhibit 1 for the results of testing the options) with the homepage website redesign team, responsible for the entire project. The team consisted of the head of business (CBO), the Analytics Head, the user experience (UX)head, the Product Head and the Tech Head (CTO).

Looking at the results, Deepak Kumar reflected that there were a lot of surprises in how the different options had performed. While the tracking tools in online businesses had a huge advantage over traditional businesses in that almost every customer interaction could be measured, there was still a lot of reading between the numbers that had to be done. Deepak was looking forward to a fruitful discussion to evaluate the options and finalise the new homepage design to be rolled out. As he opened the door to the conference room, he heard an excited chatter.

This case, “One Mission, Multiple Roads: Aravind Eyecare System in 2009” is a sequel to the earlier case, “Aravind Eyecare System: Giving Them the Most Precious Gift” (BP 0299). It describes the new challenges facing AECS in 2009. It presents the strategic choices facing a mission driven organization like AECS. For its future growth it had the option of several paths. Following any of these paths would not dilute its mission and yet it could not pursue all of them at the same time. It would have to prioritize them. The case encourages participants to develop criteria for this prioritization.

This case aims to enhance students’ scholarship and understanding of performance management systems with respect to the formulation of key performance indicators (KPIs). Specifically, working through this case and the assignment questions, students will be able to:▪ critically analyse process-based and outcome-based performance indicators;▪ recommend the right mix of process- and the outcome-based KPIs;▪ apply the specific, measurable, aligned, realistic and time-bound (SMART) framework to the KPIs;▪ create SMART KPIs; and▪ propose when to involve team members in decision-making.

The Director of the Centre for Learning and Innovative Pedagogies (CLIP), Dr Tanushree Sharma, was in for a surprise when the Dean and the Advisor to the school expressed their dissatisfaction with her approach to framing performance indicators for the management of the Centre.

They categorically advised her to change her process-based orientation to an outcome-based one and create tangible ground-level outcomes. Their feedback made her realize why, in spite of having rolled out several initiatives, the Centre was struggling to demonstrate its impact on student learning and faculty development. It dawned on her that the Centre’s inability to showcase a tangible impact on the school could mar the collective hard toil of the team.

Accepting the feedback and recognizing the merit of designing outcome-based SMART performance indicators, she started working towards them. Although she was able to conceptualize a broad framework, she was uncertain about whether to include only outcome-based KPIs. She was also unsure whether to unilaterally create and assign the key responsibility areas (KRAs) and KPIs or co-create them with her team members. A confluence of factors weighed heavily on her mind – the pressure of limited time, remote working because of the pandemic, moderately experienced team members, voluntary team membership, lack of positional power and her limited organizational influence. With less than a month to the proposal submission, she had no time to waste.

The case is suitable for courses on performance management systems, human resources and leadership; however, it is particularly relevant to framing KRAs and KPIs, developing outcome-based KPIs and applying the SMART framework to developing KPIs. It can be used in both postgraduate and undergraduate programmes at business schools.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 6: Human Resource Management.