Tech Transfer Talk

Tech Transfer Talk is a series of podcasts discussing aspects of the many facets of technology transfer.

Episode 63 – Notes on Innovation in Music with Peter Tregear 07/30/2026

Episode 63 – Notes on Innovation in Music with Peter Tregear This month it was a great pleasure to reconnect with , both school and college colleague, to explore the world of innovation and in turn technology transfer in music. This was a thoroughly engaging discussion for me, with my less than amateur music knowledge and skills being rekindled, and perhaps reimagined, as Peter took us from Sumer to synthesised music. It also took me back to some of our more profound discussions on and concepts of tech transfer with and respectively. Peter describes his journey into music as getting sucked into a whirlpool, having focused on science with some practical music studies at high school, he enrolled in an undergraduate science course at the University of Melbourne. However, he leapt across to the school of music and the rest, as they say, is history! Peter reflected on the impact of co-curricular activities at Melbourne High School and Ormond College and the innate curiosity that this drives to take on different experiences. I shared with Peter my fascination with and wanted to get his perspective on which of these – notation, pianoforte, opera, equal temperament, sound recording – was of greatest importance. Peter was firmly in the notation camp, and shared with us the story of notation, as a means to preserve, manipulate and standardise music through the ages – most surprisingly seeing notation as an early triumph of bureaucracy in the Catholic Church! Peter then went on a tour de force on western music, reflecting on how notation has driven many of the things we take for granted as an audience, and some of us as players and performers. Drawing on how writing things down enabled music to be connected through time between composers, performers and audiences, and contrasting western pitch centricity to other cultural systems. I was quite struck to discover the notion of microtonality, and how G# and Ab are not in fact the same note (except on a piano keyboard!) We then took the chance to reflect on the rise of digital music formats and how music has been at the forefront of digital commerce. We took a quick tour from Edison’s phonograph through radio, LPs, the rise and fall of HiFi culture to CDs and solid state recordings. Peter felt that the composer is being replaced by the role of a producer, able to sample and lean into the use of Large Language Models (LLMs), prompting the broader question as to whether notation is perhaps coming to the end of its reign as the great music enabler. We closed around the increasing use of AI and its impact on music, both in production and its cultural connection to human centred activities and consumption. In seeking authenticity, is there a need to know a human composed or produced what you hear? And the need for a tangible connection to the intangible, by way of CD or LP, akin to holding a book in a library or from one’s own shelf. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/42225830

Episode 62 - Building the Tech Transfer Club with Lisa Birrell and Greg Harper 06/25/2026

Episode 62 - Building the Tech Transfer Club with Lisa Birrell and Greg Harper I had the opportunity to unpack the NorVic Foods ecosystem with Lisa Birrell (who was CEO) and Greg Harper (who drove the genesis of the initiative). With the ongoing conversations in Australia around innovation ecosystems (which we have had with John Howard), the need for better industry engagement (which we have had most recently with Jane Fitzpatrick) and the challenges of building regional ag innovation systems (discussed sometime back with Elena Kelavra), this presented as a coming together of these threads. We set the scene as to the idea behind NorVic Foods (which is an abbreviation of Northern Victoria Foods) given its geographic centre was Shepparton in Victoria. At its heart, it was a different approach to building an ecosystem, putting established industry at the centre of the initiative to draw innovation in. This sits in contrast to ecosystems seeking to build new ventures driving to push innovation out. Given the partnership between (State) government, University of Melbourne and regional industries, we spent some time discussing the governance model and associated metrics with securing the funding. A Project Control Board was established as part of ensuring alignment between projects, capabilities and available resources. This underpinned the early efforts of Lisa (who was appointed CEO) to start building connections between the university (from which students would be placed) and industry (where their internships would take place). Greg and Lisa were able to share some examples of success, which were not only interesting in their own right but got me thinking about how to define and describe success. They shared that the work delivered by student had, in some cases, made its way into business case proposals to executive and board level in the private sector. It struck me this is a really great outcome, as the circumstances in which investment might be made are well outside the remit or even influence of those undertaking the technical program. While we do focus on economic outcomes, some recognition should be found for students and, perhaps, researchers whose work underpins investible propositions that don’t get invested in for a range of reasons? Particularly interesting were the insights gained from the four- year journey of NorVic Foods from each of Greg and Lisa. A key insight was around the ‘Nascent Value Chain Club’ that Greg described – bringing some economic theory into how an ecosystem can create value beyond the sum of its parts. With the program funding closing after four years, Lisa felt they had really only “just got started” with driving connections and impact through the region. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/41792050

Episode 61 - Tech Transfer, Innovation, and the Future of Chemicals with Victoria Meyer and The Chemical Show 05/26/2026

Episode 61 - Tech Transfer, Innovation, and the Future of Chemicals with Victoria Meyer and The Chemical Show In our first joint podcast, I joined Victoria Meyer and The Chemical Show to explore technology transfer and innovation in the chemical industry. The chemical industry is where I got my start, with Dow Chemical and subsequently Akzo Nobel (now Nouryon), and I have maintained my deep interest in and passion for the sector over the years. The opportunity to continue this through the biobased economy, industrial and agricultural biotech, made for a really contrasting foundation to Victoria’s journey in petrochemicals at Shell, Amoco, Lyondell Basell and Clariant. I got asked a really fundamental question being ‘what is tech transfer’ and from there, we started to explore productisation, the challenges of valuation and risk, and the need to demonstrate products and the ability to scale. Perhaps somewhat harshly, I pointed to a general ignorance of the complexity of tech transfer as being one of the limiting factors in bringing innovation to market. In reflecting further in our discussion, we explored the different skills needed in varying business phases and strategies. Victoria raised biosurfactants as a really interesting example of how innovation works with larger organisations and their partnerships with smaller, arguably nimbler, organisations. I noted the importance of both outsourcing of risk and the criticality of an internal champion. We also talked about the risk of internal disruption on operations as part of why larger organisations might struggle to develop and adopt innovations. Victoria noted that efficiency and effectiveness are being redesigned and that smaller scale, distributed assets may be more of the future as part of an increasing focus on resilience – which will require more innovation through supply chains. The search for greater supply chain and production resilience will call for changed approaches to innovation and culture which will, in turn, have an organisational fitness cost. Cost, not just in economic terms, but in behavioural and cultural dimensions. Victoria paused to reflect on how many things have to come together and we started to unpack that multidimensional problem by focusing on measuring value. We started on the dynamics of public and private ownership and finance and the leadership and executive incentives around performance. Ultimately, it’s about meeting customer needs and being relentlessly focused on these. In doing so, it may require a more porous or open innovation model compared to the days of doing it all in house. Victoria noted the ‘not invented here syndrome’ may run counter to that dynamic and then went on to note that merges and acquisitions are a path being pursued to access innovation and gave a great contemporary example of internal (human) dynamics which highlighted for me that humans to tech transfer and M&A, not organisations. Victoria asked the question of the role of the board and the executive team in technology transfer and innovation. I suggested it’s around articulation of risk appetite and tolerance. We compared agriculture and chemicals and found chronological similarities. Victoria suggested that the onus is more on the executive team rather than the board. With smaller boards, they have greater influence, but it’s more the executive team where there are independent boards. Victoria noted that filtering and biases may be impacting what the board hears and the C-suite interpretation from the board. Ultimately, it’s about risk tolerance and management to deliver profitable organisations. However, innovation can also be seen as a means to lower risk, in contrast to a direct improvement in profitability. Victoria introduced the question of measuring the value arising from innovation, contrasting investments in digital vs (operational) capital. I suggested that this is an eternal challenge in tech transfer and some soothsaying involved in an attempt to measure progress and set expectations. I highlighted the need to have clear assumptions and conditions for success in measuring progress. Digital is particularly interesting, and particularly AI, and looking back to internal investment in longer term R&D wondered whether the loss of internal risk appetite makes innovation investments harder to justify and/or measure. Victoria reflected on her experience with Shell’s re-entry into the polyethylene business. An observation drawn from her experience is that the more established one becomes, the riskier a misstep becomes. She also shared some of her experiences in building her current digitally enabled business. Victoria noted that there are no control group experiments with her digital innovation. We compared the need for control in some areas but not necessarily all and rely on human interpretation of results and using ai for augmentation of decisions. We talked around regulation and its impacts following Victoria’s discussion with Chris Jahn and how innovation and customer orientation can assist in dealing with differences between jurisdictions. Victoria highlighted that many leaders recognise the need for prudent regulation to ensure there are good operators in the industry. The challenge is that things aren’t adapting fast enough. Sustainable and safer products exist but these need to be approved and regulated. I asked about enforcement and consequence, as a lack of enforcement leads to cultural and behavioural change, reflecting on the Responsible Care program, and the risk of that weakening. Victoria suggested that, beyond punitive damages, the social, or brand damage incurred by poor or bad faith actors in the system had some deterrent effect. Victoria noted a shift from ‘big S’ sustainability to ‘small s’ sustainability in her ACI 2025 wrap and believes that this is driven by an industry pragmatism and shift from early 2020s to now. She drew on her personal experience with solar panel acquisition and the arising economic or commercial burden. We touched on a few examples which echo the challenge of the ‘perfect getting in the way of the good’. We closed with Victoria highlighting that the chemical industry does take a form of waste from petroleum and converts the carbon into an array of products, with BASF Ludwigshafen being the example offered and me reflecting on the agro-industrial complexes associated with the corn, sugar and pulp & paper industries. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/41415040

Episode 60 - An Analyst’s Perspective on Innovation Demand with Dennis Voznesenski 05/14/2026

Episode 60 - An Analyst’s Perspective on Innovation Demand with Dennis Voznesenski I had the chance to catch up with , who hosts a regular . Dennis is an Agricultural Economist and author of and is a frequent commentator on Australian agricultural markets and dynamics. With a general sense in Australia that we struggle for demand side innovation, I felt a conversation with Dennis who is focussed on industry would make for an interesting set of perspectives. Dennis shared insights on the current challenges facing Australian farmers, particularly regarding rising costs of fuel and fertiliser due to global events. It was interesting that he framed the innovation opportunity around cost of production as he described Australian farmers as price takers and as such, this is what they could control. We spent some time exploring the role of agtech with Dennis sharing some operational examples. More specifically, I was interested in blockchain or the broader concept of traceability. Dennis noted that the need for traceability could result in two parallel supply chains forming. In the absence of a premium to cover these additional costs, I wondered how value could then emerge. We touched on the notion of ‘mass balances’ and Closed Loop Identity Preserved (CLIP) approaches to traceability and value creation. Dennis highlighted that systems are being set up, for example around emissions, and some markets are calling for this but there is no immediate ROI. As an afterthought, as I reflect on our conversation, there could be additional costs borne by producers and the broader supply chain! We circled back to the price taker concept and shared a few personal examples of higher value ag products, such as Nufarm omega-3 canola and Arista high-amylose wheat and wondered if they were simply too small to be seen in the bigger picture? It was interesting how these examples of genetics lead us back to production costs and the importance of innovation and commercialisation of input traits to deliver scalable benefits. Given the contemporary challenges in Australian fuel security, we closed our conversation around the opportunities for agricultural feedstocks and their local conversion to low carbon liquid fuels. Dennis reflected on his book and noted that fuel, fertiliser and ships were critical factors to production and trading security. We briefly explored a few scenarios for biobased low carbon liquid fuels before Dennis concluded, noting the endless opportunities for innovation that addresses production costs. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/41238085

Episode 59 - The C is for more than Commercialisation with Jane Fitzpatrick 04/30/2026

Episode 59 - The C is for more than Commercialisation with Jane Fitzpatrick I had the chance to follow up with on her powerful closing remarks at a panel session at the last year. Jane is CEO of the , and her organisation sits at the intersection of science, innovation, translation and market pull. Given the challenges we’ve been highlighting on the podcast around the industry pull, and the recent Strategic Examination of R&D (SERD) report, , it seemed a great time to build on her comments last year. We opened a little unusually, in that we started where we left off from (2025 National Innovation Policy Forum Review: Coordination and Translation) with , revisiting Jane’s compelling observations around skills and experiences for tech transfer, and how these contrast with the training and, at times, interests of researchers. It was interesting to hear how ANFF had sought to build on the engagement with its client base and ecosystem, seeking to provide tech transfer support. The delivery of tech transfer support through ANFF-C was discussed and the ‘C’ stood for more than commercialisation, which I saw as really insightful and an important broadening of what happens in tech transfer beyond the focus on commercialisation. I reflected on the moving of a cohort of researchers from ‘unconscious incompetence’ to ‘conscious incompetence’ around tech transfer. Jane then drew a contrast between Research Infrastructure (of which ANFF is considered as part of the , and Technology Infrastructure, which she noted is an emerging concept in Europe as a step up in scale, where contract manufacturing and larger production runs are needed, but the business case for a full scale (owned and operated) manufacturing facility may not yet stack up. We explore how that might play out in Australia and the need to focus on areas of strategic importance – like the six pillars that the Ambitious Australia report has offered. We spent some time exploring the opportunity that quantum presents for Australia, as an example of strategic focus. Jane drew in a few ecosystem and sovereign examples of where strong strategic commitment has established long-term competitive advantage. In exploring the quantum opportunity, Jane shared the breadth of applications that exist now and emerging, comparing it to the journey ‘nanotech’ has been on where, now, it is mainly about applications and problem solving rather than fundamental science. We spent some time discussing the demand side challenges for innovation and tech transfer. Reflecting on the culture of SMEs in Australia, we explored how SMEs constantly innovate to solve challenges but just don’t necessarily call it innovation! Jane further contends that we have not done the demand side of innovation well, as problems don’t necessarily get brought to researchers or startups to find solutions—these cohorts don’t always, perhaps even rarely, position themselves as problem solvers, so how do they get found and connected? This brought to mind insights from where she asked, ‘Where is the front door?’ We closed our discussions around building networks and connections to help anticipate and address industry challenges. The networks in the NCRIS community are continuing to strengthen, and I reflected back on a question of (who joined us on ), ‘How can we help you be successful?’ /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/41058880

Episode 58 - Bringing Products to Market with Jarett Abramson 03/26/2026

Episode 58 - Bringing Products to Market with Jarett Abramson I had the great pleasure of catching up with , who was 'between gigs' since his departure from and his imminent (and arguably eminent) commencement at in Europe. The journey started for Jarett with writing patents on cranberry juice extract and we explored how that path to market unfolded. In his private practice, he found himself working across a number of industry sectors, but fate kept bringing him back to the ag industry. When moving from the private firm to private sector (being initially Dow Pharma then , the latter now part of ), he reflected on the change in culture. Even at this early stage of his journey, technology transfer and 'learning through the role' became apparent. We touched on the idea of a 'traditional path' in technology transfer, quickly noting that there isn’t really a definition and different experiences are key. Jarett then moved from Indianapolis to Mexico City in changing roles from private sector to NGO at . While the same underpinning objective is 'bringing products to the marketplace', Jarett noted that there are very few 'silver bullets' in agriculture. He shared some of his experiences in contrasting the private and public sector tech transfer environments and objectives. Jarett then shared his continuing journey in public sector ag & food tech transfer in his move to COO at . In reflecting on the change, it reinforced how important relationships are through the world of tech transfer and the need to 'understand the business in order to move forward'. We spent some time discussing risk from the perspective of an attorney within a business. While exploring his preferred risk framework, Jarett noted that the hardest thing is remembering what the risks are and in turn, the importance of active risk registers, concluding that in order to be successful you have to take risk. Jarett re-entered the private sector in moving back to Los Angeles with Provivi and became a 'jack of all trades' through his new venture journey. We spent a little time specifically discussing patents and patent strategy in a new venture setting. Specifically, we contrasted big corporates with new ventures. Another area of tech transfer we spent some time exploring was product translation, understanding cost of goods sold (COGS) and the scale up journey. In agriculture the importance of local demonstrations was highlighted as results don’t always translate between regions. We closed with Jarett reflecting on a few life lessons and setting the scene for his impending move to Europe. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/40615355

Episode 57 - Science Meets Parliament 2026 - Science Meets the Economy: Opportunity and Risk with Jasmine Chambers and Steve Rodda 03/19/2026

Episode 57 - Science Meets Parliament 2026 - Science Meets the Economy: Opportunity and Risk with Jasmine Chambers and Steve Rodda In our annual podcast leading into Science Meets Parliament, we had the opportunity to discuss innovation, tech transfer and research translation with , President and , Pro-Vice Chancellor (Industry & Innovation) at . With STA building on their bench to boardroom initiatives with their new 'Science Meets the Economy' Program, Jas and Stephen shared their experiences and reflections with the Australian innovation system, and their respective journeys through research and translation. It was interesting to have Jas note that her early forays into translation were catalysed by frustration! In contrast Stephen shared his observations and experiences from his time in Boston and London. A question we spent some time discussing was where is industry to capitalise on the domestic innovation ecosystem – a theme that we have touched on through the podcast regularly over past months. Stephen reflected on lessons from the invention and subsequent acceleration of solar technology and how Australia can ensure that it captures more of the industry and research opportunities and associated value with emerging technologies. We had a great conversation around the role of private sector culture, the role, or lack of role, for science and engineering in board and strategy decision making. This was contrasted with other countries, in particular Germany, where greater value is placed on these perspectives. It is the opportunity to build the presence of technology perspectives into strategy and decision-making that sits and the heart of improvements in productivity and economic complexity. These themes have been discussed with , and Catherine Livingstone amongst others. Jas identified language and communication as an important linker in building trust and value between different business communities – e.g. STEM, finance, marketing and perceptions how that lack of trust means risk and opportunity discussions become limited. Ultimately these connections are built through relationships and proximity. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/40522650

Episode 56 - Khaki is the New Green and Resilience is the New Carbon with Jim Lane 02/26/2026

Episode 56 - Khaki is the New Green and Resilience is the New Carbon with Jim Lane In our first recorded abroad episode for 2026, I had the opportunity earlier this month to catch up in person with in Digestville, located in Key Biscayne, Florida. I hope that many of you recall that we catch up with Jim intermittently and since our last chat with him in November 2024, much has changed in the world of the biobased economy, and yet many themes remain the same! We firstly reflected on some major trends that are emerging, echoed in the title of this podcast. Jim observed how important the biobased economy is becoming in the corporate and national conversations around resilience, and that security and defence interests are also rising in the new products and distributed manufacturing pathways that biotechnologies and biobased products could provide. Given the current discussions in Australia around First Of A Kind (FOAK) manufacturing facilities, I was very keen to explore Jim’s recent writings on this matter. We explored how government and industry play roles in the establishment of FOAK and Jim noted that how this is done is critical to ensuring that there aren’t complications arising with SOAK (which I shall leave you all to interpret – or listen to the podcast). Jim also reflected on another concept closely associated with FOAK which is the establishment of normalcy, or persistence of the arising products. This gave me cause to reflect on the recent, and some might say ongoing, alt-meat market which grew, peaked and troughed and now regaining its feet, and how normalcy may have played a role in this sectors trip through the . The conversation then moved to FOAK and fuels (while alert to being mispronounced) and the importance of feedstock, revisiting our ‘Sara Lee’ feedstocks acronym from . Sustainable, Affordable, Reliable, Available, Low carbon Extractable and Efficient feedstocks. We touched on the cost of feedstock as a percentage of variable cost and the need to demonstrate that it can be reliably accessed, and then Jim laid out quite a challenge from a SAF contracting perspective. In essence, the challenge is how to compete with the abundance of fossil feedstock and create renewable scale that meets market demand. To that end, Jim favours forestry as a preferred feedstock, with its well understood supply chains and production systems, but he also noted the need for oxygen removal from biocrude and price at the refinery gate to be near fossil prices. I suggested that in an ideal world, with unlimited fats, oils and greases, we would favour the HEFA pathway. We then reflected on the Alcohol-To-Jet (ATJ) pathway, touching back on the FOAK challenge. Discussing the importance of technology guarantees and how to manage this in the absence of a balance sheet, I raised the example of the DuPont 1,3 PDO Sorona technology, launched some 15 years back and a journey we discussed with . Jim noted that integration and dependencies need to last a long time, and industry stability as a factor, alongside policy stability. Turning back to chemicals, Jim shared the view that flatter supply chains are more likely to adopt biobased or novel chemistry. Jim very kindly reflected on the ‘complexity law’ that I have floated for the past few years and contended that these flatter supply chain successes bore this rule of thumb out. Reflecting on biopolymers, we observed that the sustainability benefits are typically much smaller than operational benefits—sustainability can be strong but hard to operationalise. We close out our conversation with a little soothsaying, and while uncertainty will likely dominate the coming year the biobased economy needs corporate strength, not technology strength while working on a stronger positioning that reframes price, value and consequence. Jim’s final metaphor of the leaf on the ocean seemed very apt given the focus on biobased economy. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/40212540

Episode 55 - 2025 National Innovation Policy Forum Review: Coordination and Translation with Jane O'Dwyer 01/29/2026

Episode 55 - 2025 National Innovation Policy Forum Review: Coordination and Translation with Jane O'Dwyer Following the (NIPF) in November 2025, I had the opportunity to reflect on the event with from (CRA) in mid-December. We started with the raison d’être of the NIPF to increase the linkages between industry, the innovation system and policymakers. To this end, as patrons of NIPF, and Catherine Livingstone have been catalysing the thinking over the past few years as the conversations and ambitions of NIPF evolved. The NIPF to date has moved from describing the problems to seeking how government and industry shape innovation policy and looking to ways to improve technology transfer, commercialisation and translation. When we recorded, there was great anticipation that would offer insights in to how the federal government will respond to these opportunities. set the scene chairing the first session, noting that a “list of priorities isn’t a market”. He, , and explored policy and industry perspectives in the 'Turning Missions to Markets' session. Jane and I spent some time reflecting on the 'First Of A Kind' (FOAK) challenges that Marcus introduced to the forum, discussing FOAK anywhere vs FOAK in Australia and the role of government as a first customer. Roy Green chaired a conversation with and on system coordination. We hear from both Linda and Jasmina on the podcast; Linda sharing the concept of an 'Innovation Accord' to try to resolve some of the innovation system complexities that have emerged at the government–industry–innovation system interface; Jasmina reflected on the need to declutter and move the focus to outcomes and impact. The third and final session discussed Innovation as a driver for productivity. Jane and I reflected on the Harrison.ai story and its journey from domestic incubation to offshore commercialisation. , and joined me on this panel touching on local manufacturing and the role of 'Original Equipment Manufacturers' in stimulating demand for innovation. Jane and I further reflected on the challenge of not wanting to constrain organisations growing, yet needing or wanting to find ways to keep these growing companies domiciled in Australia. This is part of the broader 'domestic demand side problem' for innovation and we talked of how 'moving the cheese' and focusing on major areas (or missions, flagships, BHAGs (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) or other suitable names) could act as a catalyst to aligning domestic demand with domestic innovation. We closed the podcast with Jane Fitzpatrick offering what I feel is a compelling summary of why tech transfer matters and the opportunities that investment and partnering with people with these skills present. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/39906585

Episode 54 - Innovation As Central to Sustainability, Not Just Productivity with Greg Harper 11/27/2025

Episode 54 - Innovation As Central to Sustainability, Not Just Productivity with Greg Harper In this episode, I had the opportunity to chat with , a longstanding colleague and friend, who has been on the tech transfer and commercialisation journey for many years. In this conversation Greg shares some of his experience and perspectives following his time at , as a board member at , senior leadership roles within the and, most recently, at . Greg shared some of his early journey into technology transfer from his post doc at the , and CSIRO, where he became involved in market orientated science, and the development and delivery of products to market, in a broad collaboration led by Professor John Hopwood, that created enzyme-replacement therapies for children suffering from mucopolysaccharidosis. We quickly turned our discussion to more contemporary issues in the Australian innovation system, reflecting on the recent economic roundtable and calls for improved productivity (which we have discussed on some of our other recent podcasts). We discussed the notion that there is an over representation of research but relative under representation on translation in the local innovation and productivity discourse. This line of thinking connects back to the discussion with in and the Prequel podcast with Catherine and in . We explored how tech transfer has “fallen through the gaps” in Australia, with the Productivity Commission setting it aside for to address, and the rise of a startup ecosystem that may be a proxy for externalising tech transfer from research institutions. Greg, with some insight from his daughter, then introduced the broader notion of innovation as central to sustainability—not just productivity. This invited some reflections on what sustainability means as a central tenent of innovation. I started reflecting on ’s that there is international demand for Australian innovation and asked Greg why that demand isn’t appearing locally. Greg thinks this is a networking and relationship challenge more than an alignment problem and that research and industry are not communicating in similar languages. We spent some time, given our shared interest and experience in the bioeconomy and agrifood, reflecting on the communication and alignment challenges around bringing digital and biophysical innovations to market. Patience was discussed as a missing ingredient in the domestic private sector (or innovation demand side), and contrasted this with the longer term, patient funding that can be found in other jurisdictions. We touched on venture in Ag, noting this was an in-depth with earlier this year. Greg and I then reflected on role of the board and strategy following the that we published through the last month, exploring the important role that the board should play in setting the culture and risk appetite. While we had this with for new ventures, we focussed this discussion on the role of established companies and their boards, and two lenses for boards to use—the growth and opportunity lens and its link to the governance, regulation and compliance lens. We explored the question of how a board gets a contemporaneous measure on risk appetite and profile. Greg then reflected on his experiences at MLA and the commercialisation of VIAscan, an automated carcase digitisation and assessment technology developed through MLA investments, and the board processes associated with taking risk for long-term industry benefit. We explored this as an example of the importance of complementary technology, disruptors, timing and patience in bringing a technology to market. I asked Greg about the role of boards and management teams in building absorptive capacity and how this ties back to the risk culture. Greg suggested that we are demographically challenged in that the younger we are, then higher risk appetite we might have. Greg brought this to life through an ag-production lens and the importance of regions and community in setting a culture of innovation and risk taking. We closed out our discussion around Greg’s sabbatical with at the , and reflecting on — the team led by , and how ecosystems form and are assessed. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/39178640

Episode 53 - The Prequel: National Innovation Policy Forum 2025: 'The economy is the whole innovation system' 10/30/2025

Episode 52 - Enzymes Have Changed the World with Alex Zanghellini 09/25/2025

Episode 52 - Enzymes Have Changed the World with Alex Zanghellini In this episode I had the opportunity to chat with , exploring his journey from AI/computer science to enzymes, and the co-founding of with Nobel Laureate . Alex chose to bypass finance and found proteins as wonderful machines and became motivated by solving problems and finding products for market applications. Alex reflected on how discovery shows that something is possible, but that it is a small part of the journey to a commercial product, and that journey is the fun! We immediately reflected on the role of hope and the roles of hopium and OPM (being other people’s money). The early steps at Arzeda were taken through a fee-for-service model, with no venture backing. Alex reflected on how this impacted profitability and the opportunity this created to experiment and ascertain how ready the technology was. Identifying gaps allowed Arzeda to build on the technology licensed from the University of Washington and identify unmet market needs. This early phase of project-based revenue allowed the team to learn what technologies were needed to complement the translation of leads to products. We reflected on the balancing between internal and external capabilities and the shift towards a partnering business model. The limitations of this model were discussed, including an inherent dependence on other parties for future license revenues, the lack of a clear valuation playbook for this sector, and no direct line of sight on manufacturing. We touched on some of the wisdom of from around the need to have products in-house to capture value alongside external partnering. Further to these insights emerged the challenge of incumbency. This brought me back to the discussion we had with in around the Sorona journey to market, and more recent discussions with in around the challenges of competing against fully depreciated assets. Alex then shared his thoughts on how to find pockets of opportunity, given the breadth of product choices that industrial biotechnology has as product targets. Alex noted that while there are advisors and the business team, at the end of the day business development needs effort (elbow grease) and time; ‘Never stop talking to industry and be ruthless in the assessment of opportunity.’ We then reflected on time, and how to stay patient in business and market development and that tech transfer cannot be sped up. We discussed translation and the challenge of time was discussed (way back) in with from and the realities of taking short cuts through this phase with in . The need to be transparent with investors around these factors and not getting ’over your skis’ is critical in managing cashflow risk. We spent a little time talking about ‘pivoting’ and discovered our mutual discomfort with the use of this phrase. We agreed that it means different things to different people, but Alex saw this as a need to add skills and competencies, not a change in business model. We touched on whether this might be an easy excuse for not learning from history? And on learning from history, we found ourselves discussing the broader challenges of due diligence. Alex noted that it’s difficult to do this in industrial biotech as it’s a multifaceted challenge and there is a need to find very experienced people to know what questions to ask – which may be challenging in such a young industry? Perhaps it is not appreciating the complexity of due diligence which makes so challenging? We closed out our wide-ranging discussion by circling back on the venture financing story, when and why venture investment was sought, and the benefits of having optionality on when they sought venture finance. Alex then remarked that enzymes and biocatalysts are a revolution in the way we make things. This conversation really covered some ground, and it was good for me to reflect on some of our very early and more recent conversations on the podcast and how things tied together through the experiences and journey of Arzeda. I was delighted to get a chance to unpack my issues with the term ‘pivoting’ but it also got me thinking more deeply around due diligence, why it may be harder that it looks, and some new ways to look at this important part of the new venture journey. I hope you all get something from this insightful discussion with the CEO of a world-leading innovator. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/38336965

Episode 51 - 65,000 Years of Tech Transfer with Chris Matthews 08/28/2025

Episode 51 - 65,000 Years of Tech Transfer with Chris Matthews In this episode, I had the chance to explore technology transfer through the lens of one of the world’s most enduring and continuous cultures, Australia’s indigenous peoples, with , Chair of (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Mathematics Alliance), and Associate Dean (Indigenous Leadership and Engagement) at . Chris set the scene by sharing his journey to mathematics, his embracing of programming and Commodore 64s as a means to getting through school and his childhood. This was a form of escape from the systemic racism that permeated his schooling and early career. While in retrospect, the journey was 'bittersweet', it led Chris to his interest in numerical techniques that formed the basis of his undergraduate and postgraduate studies. Chris found himself called back to his community, finding connection between culture and mathematics. This connection, in a sense, needed to be rediscovered as years of western philosophy and methodology was to be suspended in order to reconnect to country and people. This reconnection presented as a perspective on knowledge and in turn technology transfer. Aboriginal culture is dominated by relationships among people, tribes and the lands and ecosystems on which they live. That kinship with the ecosystem and each person’s place within it was rediscovered through Chris’s leadership at ATSIMA. Knowledge transfer is a strict system, based on these connections and the roles and responsibilities of people within those systems. Chris offered some perspectives on the balance that exists and is maintained and the role of story and songlines in carrying the knowledge system between generations. This was beautifully demonstrated by Chris as he reflected on songlines that go back to the last ice age and how those stories of survival endure. I then asked of Chris about any inherent ability to adapt and adopt technology through the ages. Chris spoke of how new things, and indeed new people, are positioned in the ecosystem and balance is maintained. He briefly touched on the impact of people being taken out of country. Chris then shared the story of bush mechanics, which had been made into a documentary many years ago and how aboriginal communities were early adopters of the automobile as a means to maintain connection. We finally contrasted western technology transfer systems and how indigenous culture could and should interact. In his closing thoughts, Chris reflected on the and the opportunity that the inclusion of indigenous culture and concepts could create new opportunities for both understanding and a better science and technology system. I found this a fascinating conversation, reminding me of the podcast where we discussed tech transfer and theology with and Spiegare’s work with many years ago when she was at . It offered some challenges to the way we see technology transfer and opportunities to be better at considering the broader ecosystems we are working in – a theme that we explored recently with in . Perhaps unsurprisingly, a central theme that emerged for me was relationships and how the are built and endure through culture and time. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/37976435

Episode 50 - Innovation, Productivity and Economic Reform Roundtable with Catherine Livingstone AC 08/14/2025

Episode 50 - Innovation, Productivity and Economic Reform Roundtable with Catherine Livingstone AC In our 50th episode, I had the great privilege of exploring innovation, productivity and the Australian Business Model with . Catherine is a distinguished and extraordinary contributor Australian public and business communities, having held a range of roles including CEO of , chair of , chair of , chair of and currently Chancellor of . In this extended conversation, we set the scene with some discussion around industry and neoliberal policy and explored the role government played in the formative stages of Cochlear. The Australian Business Model, an idea that has been in motion over the past few years, was discussed and the phase change that is underway, at both scale and speed. While the global market will sort things out, there are policy and government decisions to be made to either accept ‘what is left over’ in contrast to how can we take control of the future that Australia wants. Catherine noted that industry policy has been tarnished in recent years with a sense that this currently is seen as corporate welfare or grants. Australia needs to look at its comparative advantage and take this to globally competitive advantage. We discussed examples from Singapore and Taiwan, and reflected on the recent podcast with around the impact of issues of design and policy. We also explored the question of ‘what is productivity?’ and drew parallels with health, in that everyone really wants it but it’s rather tricky to define! We discussed productivity and introduced the ideas of capital and technology deepening as a means to this very broad end. Catherine noted that solutions are at disaggregated levels and different in market and non-market sectors, and reflected on a recently published . Catherine introduced the need for investible propositions and the role of government signalling through policy and its convening power. We agreed that thoughtful design of industry policy needs to be at the centre of government thinking around what Australia’s future business model could be. Catherine also contended that Australia has a challenge around research translation. We teased out what this means and connected the concept to investible propositions, reflecting back on the Cochlear experience. In identifying that Australia has a deep tradition in integrating technologies, we then explored why the capability to integrate hasn’t found its way into Australia’s ability to translate. We touch on factors such as management impatience, (sporadic) government funding and (changing) policy settings. The ‘Missing Middle’ was the centrepiece of the 2023 National Innovation Policy Forum. Catherine and I discussed whether there is, in fact, a missing middle and whether this nomenclature is helpful in improving Australia’s ‘innovation’ translation performance. A concept that we’ve had on the podcast for some time is that Australia has a ‘demand side problem with innovation’. Catherine suggested that we are not good at communicating our successes, with a lot of innovation adopted internally and not necessarily in the form of a new venture. We noted that if you don’t have sectors looking to solve problems, or don’t have the sectors, you don’t have the problems! We then reflected on the need for government to become a demanding customer and how they may not be geared that way. I reflected on our recent discussion with and her government procurement experience. Our conversation with Catherine reflected on a combination of risk aversion and brand familiarity driving current government procurement. Catherine noted that with things moving quickly, it’s harder for people, and specifically, bureaucrats, to be immersed in and informed as a purchaser. How do industry and government build better connection to be well informed buyers and sellers? We closed our conversation with Catherine outlining her hopes for the upcoming . Catherine shared an ambition for a whole-of-system review, where choices are made that are consistent in scale and impact – not laundry lists. Furthermore, activities should be implementable and their interdependence recognised, for which a systems view is required. This was an extraordinary conversation, exploring a range of perspectives around the intersections of the innovation system, and government and business needs. While we touched on this in our most recent discussion with Dr John Howard in Episode 49, the discussion with Catherine connected to so many themes that we have explored in the podcast from case studies connected to translation with , , and through to the reflection with . /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/37795085

Episode 49 - Innovation Ecosystems, Global Policy and Local Politics with Dr John Howard 07/31/2025

Episode 49 - Innovation Ecosystems, Global Policy and Local Politics with Dr John Howard This is a rather timely discussion, as I had the chance to discuss innovation policy, ecosystems and the domestic politics that have influenced the last three decades of innovation in Australia with , founder of the . The timeliness is due to his recent publication Thinking in Public: Australia’s Missing Innovation Policy - Will it Ever Be Found? that is now available at (Paperback) and for the version. We start our conversation around John’s entry into the innovation policy world, which started with an ARC project commissioned on university – business relationships from near the turn of the century. John then embarked on his PhD on the triple helix model which prompted in John’s mind the broader question of “how does it actually work?” A key report that emerged from our conversation with a report commissioned by (the then) Department of Industry, Science and Resources on the , which is an early artefact in the recognition of the role of Technology Transfer in the innovation system. We then explore theories of innovation and how the concept of linear flow where inputs are the focus rather than outcomes or impact has been the dominant paradigm. John reflects on how EU ecosystems have evolved but not translated to our local system concluding that while we like simple solutions, innovation is complex and exists in complex adaptive systems, however systems theory is bringing new insights. We then reflect on domestic industry policy settings, looking back to Senator John Button in the 1990’s and how industry policy did not appear to connect to or evolve with innovation policy. John then gave a working example of the Danish windfarm ecosystem and the policy and systems, where we explore the complementary concepts of value pools and supply chains and the need to coordinate 'across silos' to get outcomes, otherwise you get a lot of inputs. I suggested that the currency of announceables may in part be driving part of the malaise in innovation system coordination. John broadened that challenge across federal, state and local government administrations, approaching similar problems with different strategies with limited alignment around implementation – an area that he and have frequently commented upon. We briefly explored the concept of risk in the domestic innovation system. John pointed to the growth in integrity agencies over recent years in the public and private sectors. While we have previously touched in risk in the podcast, for example with , (and hopefully with in the coming months), John brought a broader lens to this issue as we concluded that the 'threat of consequence will naturally drive risk appetite down'. We close out the discussion discussing a range of examples that evidence that innovation ecosystems and technology transfer are working in Australia, despite some of the headlines that may be around. We reflect on the emergence of medical innovation ecosystem in Melbourne, the rural development corporations across Australian agroforestry industries and reflect on the benefits of stable policy, funding and bipartisan multi-government support. In reflecting on these successful examples, we touched on the importance of new methods and approaches and the importance of timing, and the challenges of being too early with innovations. This was a conversation reviewing the policy and political foundations of the innovation ecosystem and tied together a lot of themes that we have been exploring over the journey around risk, value pools and how to celebrate our successes. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/37605705

Episode 48 - 'Gaming the System' with Kerstin Oberprieler 06/26/2025

Episode 48 - 'Gaming the System' with Kerstin Oberprieler In this episode we had a chance to discuss the world of startups, gamification and behavioural change with . Kerstin successfully developed, launched and exited , a platform-based behavioural change product and continues to consult into the area of corporate culture, change and behaviour. I started by asking Kerstin about gamification and human-centred behavioural change. Kerstin’s journey into gamification was fascinating, discovering an interest in business and psychology. She came across gamification as an emerging research area as her undergraduate and doctoral studies unfolded. The journey started during her studies, finding market pull and interest in how gamification could be used to support organisational change. This started through the development of a 'classical' game, with pen and paper, but the challenge was to develop a game that would make a business. Kerstin shared the challenges of building a digital product, juggling access to coding skills, engaging with clients and obligations a supportive employer. This period allowed for the testing of a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) and identifying important aspects to enhance user and customer experience. Kerstin’s first client came through unexpected circumstances arising from a conference presentation and audience members seizing the concept and championing early experimentation within their organisation. This is a particularly interesting aspect of the journey in the context of current discussions around Australian industry demand for innovation and technology and the role procurement plays in nurturing new businesses – live conversations at the which has been facilitated by Kerstin the past couple of years. Encouragingly, the first customer became an advocate for the product creating opportunities in adjacent parts of their organisation. Kerstin shares her reflections on deciding to move full time into PentaQuest after years of testing and development. This involved building an organisation to meet the growing demand for products, the need to build a salesforce and greater flexibility into the product platform. Kerstin also shared the experience of the platform dropping out for a period, and the impacts on clients and reputation. We have reflected on , and Kerstin reflected on the impact that the COVID pandemic had on business growth. The inflection in sales growth lead to a decision to sell the business and Kerstin shared some of the process she went through to find a buyer with aligned interests. This was a great conversation about the journey from concept through commercialisation to conclusion for a founder. I also reflected on the importance of behavioural change in tech transfer and uptake of new products and concepts, making this a doubly interesting conversation for me! /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/37146005

Episode 47 - The Ten Carbon Chemistry Conundrum with Tony Peacock 05/29/2025

Episode 47 - The Ten Carbon Chemistry Conundrum with Tony Peacock In this episode we had a chance to discuss the pre-emptive wind up of with . Earlier this year, Tony candidly some of the story behind the journey and the recent decision to wind up the company, returning the IP to Wintermute Biomedical and I was very keen to explore the story behind this decision. Tony has been involved in tech transfer in many roles, most notably Managing Director of the Pig R&D Corporation (a forerunner of ), Chief Executive of , Chairman of , as well as a consultant to CRC bids and angel investor. We started by exploring our perspectives on what technology transfer is and discussed that perhaps the name suggests a simple handover where, in fact, tech transfer is a complex and ongoing set of interactions and iterations to enable success. We started exploring the rationale to the formation of this new venture. The venture was designed to enable Wintermute to continue its strong focus on biomedical applications while exploring opportunities in agricultural and industrial chemical markets. The formation of the new venture enabled market development and the positioning of the novel chemistry with different partners working who had different technical, market and regulatory needs. The timing of the venture was particularly interesting, (Launching in the time of COVID), which distorted demand for cleaning and hygiene solutions. We discussed how market structure and big brands can create opportunity and challenges in entering consumer facing market segments. The inherent risk to well known brands to adopt formulation change became a challenge. Regulations set around older chemistries presented challenges with a new mode of action. Agriculture applications emerged where the technology received interest as a fungicide resistance solution. Tony introduced the 2:2:1/2 rule – that biotech takes twice as long as expected, with twice the resources envisaged and half the revenue generated! We particularly focussed on the timing issue, with various delays in trials and paths to market impeding the return on investment. The importance of market pull, or the as Paul Bryan mentioned in an earlier podcast, was also explored where Tony described the initial enthusiasm amongst glass recyclers for the product and getting and holding the attention from (potential) customers. We then explored the governance and management that oversaw the decision to wind up the company. Tony reflected on the importance of governance and the need to think beyond risk management, an area we discussed with in an earlier . We discussed the importance of clear financials, the role of the founder and having a focused management team to bring the venture into maturity. In reflecting on the journey, Tony reinforced the need for due diligence and wearing a black hat in assessing opportunities and recognise that new ventures take time and energy. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/36745470

Episode 46 - My Favourite Martin: Wright's Law, scaling up and why hydrogen won't decarbonise energy products with Paul Martin 04/24/2025

Episode 46 - My Favourite Martin: Wright's Law, scaling up and why hydrogen won't decarbonise energy products with Paul Martin In this extended episode we had our first three-peat, with from rejoining the podcast. When he first joined us in February and April of 2023, we had a terrific discussion on the diseconomies of scale, hydrogen and hopium, and it seemed timely to revisit the outlook for scale and technology transfer in the hydrogen market. It was great to explore why funding has continued to flow towards hydrogen in the face of the techno-economic and thermodynamic challenges that these investments are seeking to overcome. We discussed the notion of predatory delay and the emerging infrastructure challenges of connecting renewables to the transmission infrastructure. Paul also debunked the underlying assumption that is broadly applicable to reducing capital costs whereas the cost improvements are largely restricted to hydrogen electrolysers and note the balance of plant. We also explore the importance of reserves and resources. Paul then offered a reprise of why the techno-economics simply don’t work for green hydrogen with current black hydrogen prices at around USD 1.00 – 1.50 / kg EXW. We contrast two (polar) scenarios where we assume free capital or free electrons to try to make the numbers work. We conclude that a carbon pricing mechanism is needed to get green hydrogen competitive with current production routes. Paul referred to his discussions with and the recent as moved into discussions around e-fuels. We briefly explored the outlook for renewable fuels and reflected on policy history, our podcasts with Paul Bryan in and and the differences between price of sale (to market) and cost of production (at refinery). We discussed why harder to abate sectors (such as aviation) are getting their efforts underway while easier to abate sectors (such as land transport) appear less systematic in the uptake of low-carbon energy alternatives. Paul introduced the concept of the time value of CO2 in the atmosphere and the need to make quicker inroads into atmospheric reduction. Is there a place for industrial green hydrogen? Paul brings us to cost per ton of abatement rankings and reflected on some of the confusion that has arisen around using hydrogen as a decarbonisation strategy rather than decarbonising hydrogen (in its current industrial applications – which for the avoidance of doubt rarely if ever is an energy carrier). In the absence of policy, super additive benefits are needed (beyond carbon reduction) to drive consumer and industrial product uptake. We then explore some policy interventions and Paul contends that subsidises make sense where Wright’s Law is likely to apply, and in turn support technology scaling. We discussed the development of battery technology reflecting on LFP market trajectory and the scale-up challenges for sodium ion technology. We reflected different approaches to capital for technology scale up, and the importance of patience. We specifically touched on the Biden Administration Loans Office and a recent podcast with on , as an example of targeted policy support. Paul and I conclude our conversation with Paul reframing the question we are trying to answer. We should not be thinking 'what we burn?', but 'how we provide energy services?'. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/36275675

Episode 45 - Wyse Counsel: Reflections on venture and biobased economy with Roger Wyse 03/27/2025

Episode 45 - Wyse Counsel: Reflections on venture and biobased economy with Roger Wyse In this episode, I had the great pleasure of catching up with , Founder and Managing Partner at . I have had the pleasure of collaborating with Roger over the past decade (or more) and have always found his insights of great value and was delighted to have the chance to discuss his experiences and learnings. Roger reflected on his early experiences at Burrill and the opportunities and challenges of being the first biobased economy venture fund. He then looked back on the early syndication efforts in building the fund and the journey to establishing Spruce Capital Partners in 2013. Spruce was seeking true disruptors, yet in bioeconomy, disruption is an oxymoron! Producers are conservative as they notionally have '40 shots on goal' (i.e. 40 growing seasons) and industrial biotech is conservative as consumer facing companies have brands to protect. We also reflected on the motivations and time horizons associated with different limited partners. We discussed time associated with the market forming actions from regulators, such as sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) and market constraining actions from (same) regulators in securing approvals to construct processing plants or introducing technologies to market. Roger noted that in terms of time, society now has a 100-year environmental debt that we need to start to pay off! It came to light that the technology transfer process from research institution to commercial partner in the US and Australian systems have eerie similarities! IP valuation disparities and divergent incentives amongst the parties can make alignment and deal finalisation time consuming. We speculated that this may in fact be the first of the 'valleys of death' that a licensee or venture might face! Roger co-authored a discussion paper in October 2023, which explores the convergence of enabling technologies to accelerate the concept to commercialisation process. Reducing the time to market requires market, product and development processes to be undertaken in parallel, rather than the near linear fashion they are today. This requires patient capital alongside a systematic engagement across the stakeholders (or value pool participants). Roger also noted that there are process engineering expertise and infrastructure challenges to support scaleup and bridging product to market challenges. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/35880645

Episode 44 - Science Meets Parliament 2025 02/08/2025

Episode 44 - Science Meets Parliament 2025 In this episode I had the opportunity to discuss the genesis and history of Science Meets Parliament (SMP) with running of the 25th SMP in February 2025. Drs , and joined me to explore the origins of the event, how the event has evolved and why it remains a centrepiece to informing parliamentarians of the central role STEM plays in society and the economy. Ken reflected on the need to focus on science for one or two days, to “flood the parliament with scientists” with a mandate to inform parliamentarians – it wasn’t about lobbying. As it happened, the idea was “pushing on an open door” with early bipartisan support. It was noted that it was in fact STA’s predecessor, the Forum of Australian Science and technoIlogical Societies that initiated the SMP concept and talked of the challenges of coordination in bringing a new event onto the calendar. Cathy noted that scientists have unique knowledge, and the event offered members and scientists a forum through which to learn more how they think and the issues they are seeking to address. Cathy reflected on her own experiences at SMP and the life changing exposure that it creates for scientists creating a new dialogue as equals with parliamentarians, offering information on what science can offer. In turn, this brings science to front of mind for politicians, akin to the idea of bringing innovation to the centre of policy making explored at the most recent . Jeremy noted that science and government are both complex systems and that the issues of the day change, highlighting the need for broad science engagement to reflect the breadth of challenges and opportunities being met by parliament. This forum allowed for new ideas to be shared where there is a receptivity to new concepts that could be shared thoughtfully. He noted that parliamentarians are tuned to authenticity, which is an enduring strength of SMP. We wrapped our conversation reflecting on the challenges that modern media has brought on communicating science and the importance of direct conversations, trust and rigorous science being the cornerstones of social license between the science community and parliament. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/35200750

Episode 43 - 'What got us here, won't get us there!': Reflections on NIPF24 with Jane O'Dwyer 01/30/2025

Episode 43 - 'What got us here, won't get us there!': Reflections on NIPF24 with Jane O'Dwyer In this episode, I had the opportunity to reflect on the with , CEO of . Firstly, we reflect on the opportunity before the Australian innovation community to influence policy and bring innovation to the centre of economic policy, and not merely as an afterthought. We then hear some highlights from the remarks of and at NIPF24. These are important scene setters as they bring out issues of local innovation culture, the need for customers and investors, and to find the unique Australian business model that allows innovation to drive economic growth and productivity. We took the opportunity to reflect on each of the three discussion sessions from NIPF24. Each of the sessions had recurring themes touching on culture, customers, investment and risk. In discussing risk, raised the challenges that boards face with director liabilities, pushing risk taking to the background and, in turn, missing opportunities for new ways to create value while serving customers. challenged the participants around leadership behaviours, consequences and the need for a national conversation around how we talk about risk. further reflected on risk, introducing the ! In the next session (2), the missing middle was discussed – a topic that emerged from NIPF23 – and explored the idea of government procurement as a market maker. exemplified the impact of procurement policy with examples from the health care sector. brought forward the notion that the economy should serve people, not people serving the economy, and highlighted the need for Humanities and Social Sciences (HASS) to have its place alongside STEM in innovation and technology transfer. shared his recent experiences of reviewing federal government procurement policies and the misaligned incentives that exist favouring procurement from abroad, rather than domestic service providers. The third and final session focused on the notion of a New Australian Business Model. described government procurement as bridging market uncertainty, addressing social challenges and stimulating demand. explained the canyon of death that faces organisations delivering profitability and emissions reduction through scaling production. reflected on the 'burning platform' we are on nationally, highlighting that innovation drives productivity but the private sector needs the capabilities and capacity, commonly called absorptive capacity, to take up and scale innovation into profitable products. Jane and I conclude our reflections on the need for elaborately transformed manufacturing to reassert itself, aligning with sovereign interests and contemporary geopolitical risks. Tying in the prequel remarks from Catherine Livingstone and (from ), and, on the day, from , Jane poignantly points out that the current cost of living crisis and the long-term living standards of Australians cannot be resolved without innovation at the core of economic policy. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/35060650

Episode 42 - Going with the Flow: How electrical engineering impacted irrigation management with Matt Ryan 12/19/2024

Episode 42 - Going with the Flow: How electrical engineering impacted irrigation management with Matt Ryan In this episode, I had the opportunity to chat with of Rubicon Water on a tech transfer success story that is rippling through irrigation markets around the world. is an ASX listed company that started in 1995 following the consolidation of a number of Victorian rural water boards. Members of the departing staff identified inefficiencies in the movement of water from dam to crop and started to develop products and solutions to meet market needs for efficient water management. Early trial work led by Matt in the Burdekin River Irrigation Area around Ayr in Far North Queensland gave confirmation of the market need and the testing of early product solutions. Rubicon’s market hypothesis in the late 1990s was that better scheduling and delivery of water from dam to farm would complement (then) application technologies. The value was apparent from the regular drought cycles that affect Australian agriculture. The product required to create value needed to better measure and manage the flows through irrigation channels to match supply with demand. Matt explained that the Rubicon team didn’t have the internal capacity to undertake the product development R&D. He also shared that Rubicon had a hunch that the challenge could be solved with an electrical engineering, rather than (a more conventional) civil, agriculture or hydraulic engineering approach. This disruptive thinking led to a partnership with (then) at the before his current roles as Non-Executive Director at Rubicon and Pro-Vice Chancellor at . Matt also shares a little of the funding history that sat alongside the research collaborations. The product, now referred to in the Industry as Total Channel Control (TCC) arising from the hunch was trialled in Far North Queensland and Matt shares with us some of the technical elements needed to bring the product together. This journey included new gate designs (inspired from the aviation sector), telemetry, scheduling software and distributed network control loops (noting that we are still in the late 90s). What was equally fascinating was the industry culture and the challenges in marketing, selling and implementing such a different product offering to market. Matt noted that “the hardest thing is the people”. We conclude our discussion around the current opportunities for Rubicon, particularly as USA water markets are changing in Arizona and California. We also reflect on the broader set of stakeholders that are part of bringing the technology to market, not just in the USA, including urban and environmental water requirements and recognising the rights and needs of indigenous communities. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/34484185

Episode 41 - The State of the Bioeconomy with Jim Lane and Sara Lee 11/28/2024

Episode 41 - The State of the Bioeconomy with Jim Lane and Sara Lee In this episode I had the great pleasure of catching up on the global bioeconomy with , a global champion of the biobased economy with his daily publication and semi-annual events. Over the past 12 months, a lot has been happening in the bioeconomy, and we had the chance to catch up on Bold Goals, renewable fuels and feedstocks, among other things. Our discussions opened around one of Jim’s keynote messages – it’s all about the feedstocks! While the energy transition is underway, we discuss the importance of molecules as part of the future energy mix. Jim reckons that accessibility to feedstocks, and not the conversion costs associated with process technologies, is the emerging bottleneck in scaling and acceleration the transition away from fossil resources. We touch on a range of current and emerging solutions including residues (which he sees as a significant pathway), cover crops and tree crops! Jim introduced the 'zoning problem'. He makes the observation that feedstocks are getting punished rather than producers acting in bad faith, and this is distorting the availability and social license of some options. He sees the greatest challenge in logistics, delivering densified, uniform, standardised raw materials to refinery operations and we explored whether biomass gasification should / could be a pathway solving these challenges. While Sustainable Aviation Fuel has drawn a lot of the headlines over the past few years, we explored the rising demand from the marine sector – from Jet Zero to Wet Zero. We touch on the greater optionality that the marine sector has for liquid fuel solutions. And with Jet and Wet discussed, we move onto Debt Zero and the need for financing to get the first of kind and next of kind plants up to scale to drive returns and lower risk for the industry. Jim and I then explore some of the broader challenges in the bioeconomy, specifically the marketing challenge that the industry has around positioning with consumers to drive uptake of products. We have a little reflection, around changing the conversation and Jim makes the excellent observation that shaming customers really doesn’t work! Marketing also gets some further discussion as we reflect on alternative protein and cellular agriculture. We close out our conversation reflecting on the Bold Goals initiative (which started 12 months ago) and talk of the 10-billion-ton study. Jim closes out with the acronym of the year – as nobody does it like Sara Lee! /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/34178425

Episode 40 - The Prequel: National Innovation Policy Forum 2024 with David Thodey AO and Catherine Livingstone AC 11/21/2024

Episode 39 - Trust, Talent and Technology Transfer with Mark Hutchinson 09/26/2024

Episode 39 - Trust, Talent and Technology Transfer with Mark Hutchinson In this episode, I had the great pleasure of having a wide-ranging discussion with . He is currently a member of Australia’s , Advisory Board Member to Program, recent past president of and has been a successful research leader and tech transfer advocate for over 15 years at the , largely centred on the and . We quickly uncover one of Mark’s modus operandi which is to seek forgiveness and not permission. This approach allowed him to get on with addressing roadblocks and challenges in developing and delivering solutions to willing and engaged partners. Given Mark’s early experiences in academia in Australia and at , we touch on Australian cultural challenges of researchers moving between private, government and research sectors, and differences in partner scale between his USA and Australian activities. Mark reflects on his 2024 experiences at in San Diego and notes the open engagement culture, the lack of non-disclosure agreements, and the focus on relationships. We contrast this with our observations around Australian tech transfer and Mark raises the notion that we could be suffering from a culture of locked in scarcity where the glass is always half empty. We then discuss some of the arising challenges of tech transfer with a scarcity mentality. We then explore Mark’s successful tech transfer experiences and reflect on the experience of a doctoral student, the cadence of engagement, and the need to change direction to reflect changing circumstances. We also touch on the need to get comfortable with uncertainty and contrast organisational and experimental (or bench) uncertainty. The domestic employment arrangements and consequences are also explored, touching on the that discussed in Episode 11. We discuss and the innovation and tech transfer opportunities, touching on co-creation as a driver of economic growth through dual use technologies and the opportunities for SMEs. Mark reflectsd on the need to 'get sticky; with our deals and partnerships (which is a variation on the concept discussed with in Episode 38) and look to a 'hook and loop' component to government transactions, somewhat inspired by the thinking of . We discuss the cultural challenge of risk aversion to sharing ideas in this brave new world, and the need to make change through talent heading abroad for experiences and have them returning into a welcoming and engaged innovation system and share stories of success. Mark shares his paper transportation challenge', noting that not all innovation comes through PhDs! We reflect on the importance of Minimum Viable Products and the importance of engineering alongside research to get products to market. This introduces the notion of scale, which we started discussing on the podcast; firstly with ) at the start of 2023 and highlighted further at the in November 2023. We also touch on this getting discussed by with in an episode of . Mark notes that there is a perception that fundamental science is worth more than the translation bridge, however they need to exist in a dynamic equilibrium. We wrap up our discussion with an impassioned close from Mark around believing in your product, solutions arising from teams, and being prepared to listen to the market and adapt while pressing forward. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/33199832

Episode 38 - Tech Transfer with Sticky Customers with Dr Angeline Achariya 08/29/2024

Episode 38 - Tech Transfer with Sticky Customers with Dr Angeline Achariya In this episode I had the chance to catch up with Dr Angeline Achariya, who has had a successful technology transfer journey moving across industry and the innovation sector throughout her career. With her formative years spent on the land in Fiji and in Queensland, she moved into agribusiness starting at Mrs Crockett’s then moving through and to where her executive career took route with and subsequently . Ange then moved to to lead what she started at Mondelez, before moving back to the private sector with and now in her portfolio career journey. We explore what innovation looks like in different organisations and brand environments. We touch on the world of Quick Service Restaurants and the challenge of tech transfer with a younger workforce. We explore in some detail innovation at Mondelez and the establishment of the Monash Food Innovation Centre. This was established in 2013 and was an early Australian forerunner in developing industry, research, government agrifood clusters. Ange took me through some of the approaches taken and the importance of listening to what industry wanted from the emerging entity – an “outside in” rather than “inside out” approach. In establishing the Centre, Ange describes some of the concerns and cultural challenges that emerged. We touch on SME concerns around partnering and sharing IP, why Monash University and differing perspectives around risk between the founding parties, including the Victorian Government. We discuss the importance of securing a mandate to get on with things and some of the associated governance dynamics. Here risk management and perception were managed through a “no surprises” approach and developing an understanding of the boundaries of involved parties. The rate of change of partner ecosystems also offered some interesting connections back to our recent discussions with David Thodey (in Episode 34) and Andy Shafer (in Episode 36) around culture and clock speeds. We wrap our discussion with the introduction of the “of getting sticky with customers” and the importance of building relationships through which partners engage over the longer term. Ange also notes that innovation isn’t formulaic and that the same approach cannot be applied in all circumstances. Purpose, Strategy, Culture, Risk Appetite and Capability among the partners and within the broader ecosystem also shape approaches to innovation and tech transfer. We finish our discussion talking about the need for resilient sustainability and solving the right problems for the right customer to create new value. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/32785097

Episode 37 - Making a Meal of Market Intelligence:- Relationships, Rolodexes and Returns with Rohan Rainbow 07/25/2024

Episode 37 - Making a Meal of Market Intelligence:- Relationships, Rolodexes and Returns with Rohan Rainbow In this episode, I had the opportunity to catch up with my colleague, business partner and good friend, Dr Rohan Rainbow, who has been a leading voice in the implementation of agricultural technologies in Australia for over 30 years. His early childhood journey moved him from suburban Melbourne to farming in rural Victoria, followed by South East South Australia and then settling in the Clare Valley in South Australia. He completed his PhD with The University of Adelaide while working on his agricultural research at followed by work as an independent consultant, plus executive officer to both the and establishing the , then research investment with the . In 2014, he established his consultancy and in 2018, with myself and Leecia Angus, established . Our discussion started with his formative years on farm and how his PhD in soil physics and mechanics set the scene for how engineering parameters can improve crop establishment. In moving into research management, we noted that adoption and extension are easily overlooked in tech transfer circles and yet, are critical to the success of any new technology or practice. Rohan talked of the importance of field days, and the themes that came through were the need for clear value propositions for new technologies, particularly in the context of significant capital expenditure and/or practice changes needed for technology adoption. Rohan reinforced an observation Spiegare blogged about around venture investment in agtech in 2020; that not everywhere is the same – soils, equipment, people –for starters! We then talked about early adopters and the merits of ‘first vs fast followers’ in agriculture. We noted that someone has to go first in order for there to be a fast follower! We then explored Rohan’s motivations to establish himself as an independent consultant. Recognising the need for technical advice into regulatory and policy discussions, he has worked closely with and, more recently, on a range of issues. We also discussed the Precision to Decision Report that Rohan led in 2018 – a report that contributed to the foundations of agtech adoption and investment in Australia. We discussed the AUD 20.3 billion potential value identified that agtech could release, progress toward realising that ambition and some of the dynamics in agtech solutions, data stewardship. and satellite markets that have unfolded since the publication. We also touch on the tech transfer challenge around the need for all the components to come together to deliver value. We conclude our conversation with a discussion around pesticide access in Australia, and the market and regulatory dynamics that are arguably setting Australia at a disadvantage in accessing cutting edge approaches to crop protection and weed management. Rohan’s final thought is quite poignant from an Australia agriculture perspective, in that, Australian growers are quick to adopt technologies that work for them, because they have to! /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/32287392

Episode 36 - Building Businesses: Roadmaps, risks and rates of change with Andy Shafer 06/27/2024

Episode 36 - Building Businesses: Roadmaps, risks and rates of change with Andy Shafer In this episode, I had the opportunity to catch up with who’s been a leader in building businesses in the 21st century biobased economy. A alumnus, he started his 'bio-journey' with , a Joint Venture between Dow Chemical and , where he had a leadership role in bringing PLA to market. He then moved to for 9 years, establishing their market facing partnerships including sales and marketing, corporate brand and communications. He then spent 7 years in private consulting, including the authoring of a book on strategy and development, before joining in late 2023 as their Chief Marketing, Customer and Brand Officer. In our discussions, Andy reflects on his journey into the biobased economy and early involvement in the market development of PLA. It was striking that a reframing of the questions and potential benefits lead to a dramatic shift in strategy, leading to a focus of performance in use and less on the fact that it was a 'bio' product. His shares some observations on bringing a new joint venture together, with a team of different industrial backgrounds (and allegiances), and the process of bringing that team together around the JV’s mission. He also reflects on the resources and reputation that comes with a new JV entity in contrast to its (larger) parents. One of the challenges we discuss is developing 'proof of concept' to customers with constrained resources and the need to look toward creative collaborations. Andy sees segmentation as critical to tech transfer as this involves identifying who is going to help you be successful. He also notes that this isn’t necessarily the obvious, discussing fast followers rather than incumbents as they may not have the reputational risk associated with trying new approaches. We touch on the role of laggards or, as per Episode 7 with Paul Bryan, the role of the desperate customer. Andy also reflects on the rate of change and introduces the notion of 'stopwatches vs calendars'. We touched on the importance of timing in Episodes 10 and 13 and how these impact tech transfer outcomes. Here, Andy notes that clients can move at different rates to new ventures. He also notes that capital intensity and downstream supply chain partners, all need time to adjust and adopt new approaches. We touch on how ownership and the introduction of new investors through fundraising rounds can also be subject to asynchronous timing outcomes. The need for synchronicity between investors throughout the life of a venture is critical to sustainable success. Andy discusses how investor misalignment can drive different operational behaviours and outcomes. We close by discussing his new role at Gevo, and team members and acting as a gravitational force to bring Andy back into corporate life from his consulting activities. Andy sees Gevo as an opportunity to “help transform another industry on a mission that matters”. In taking on the challenge of bringing Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) to market, we again reflect on rates of change and risk. /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/31896672

Episode 35 - Science Meets Parliament 2024 05/30/2024

Episode 34 - Innovation and the board: Reflections on ambition, culture, and the opportunity for Australia with David Thodey 05/16/2024

Episode 34 - Innovation and the board: Reflections on ambition, culture, and the opportunity for Australia with David Thodey In this special episode, I had the privilege of talking with , whose experiences and roles have included board and chair roles in organisations such as , , , , and Chancellor Elect at the . David is also a figurehead and thought leader within , particularly around innovation and the role that it can play in Australian business and society. In our conversation, David shares some of his journey into innovation, having started at , and he shares his passion and ongoing fascination with how science and technology can shape society and business for good. We reflect on the importance of communication in technology transfer, both in terms of inspiring the public and private sectors, but also in articulating the problems that it can address, and the opportunities that can arise through the embracing of innovation and well-managed risk. We touch on some of the broad enablers for business, such as finance and process, however, culture becomes the dominant theme through our discussion, and the challenge of disrupting the status quo alongside the need for competitive energy, both within organisations and in the markets that they serve. We then touch on the recent Australian tour by , and the notion of grand challenges for Australia to set and rise to. through better deployment of innovation and technology into the local ecosystem. David notes the need for defining organisational aspirations, purpose and through that, setting the culture for an organisation. Some time was spent reflecting on Australian business outlooks, including a recent survey which suggests that 85% of Australian CEOs believe their business would still be economically viable a decade from now, if it remained on its current path without major changes. This catalyses some discussion around the current malaise in private sector investment in innovation, competition, and the arising risk appetite from corporate Australia. David notes that every board should be looking for means to prosperity, and that innovation reflects the desire to improve. We reflect on how there are great sectoral examples of innovation, where organisations compete on the global stage for talent, resources and commercial success. We also explore some of the cultural conundrums inherent in innovation, related to people (who ultimately are driving innovation), and the corporate governance settings around reporting, control, trust, and accountability. There is an equilibrium between these and also between the board and management that needs to be thoughtfully calibrated. We also reflect on local attitudes to risk management and the challenges associated with recognising and managing well-intended but erroneous outcomes arising from the pursuit of innovation. Accountability and consequence need to be built into a system that results in (failing and) learning fast, not failing fast (and not learning). /episode/index/show/techtransfertalk/id/31172292

Tech Transfer Talk

TOPICS