An enquiry was spread among the members of the Club of Interest (representatives out of Industry), to investigate industrial needs. The results of the enquiry are summarised in a report and already have been a great help in the first steps of the really ongoing Technology Transfer in the EADGENE project.

The questions are presented below (click on the link to view the results):

1. Number of employees
2. Is this company directly connected with a research institute or university (e.g. as spin off)?
3. Is this company owned by a parent company?
4. Size of parent company, if any
5. In which sector is your company active?
6. If your company works with animals, please tick all boxes which apply
7. Company operates mainly in
8. What kind of research and development does your company practice?
9. Do you work together with research groups?
10. How is the research funded?
11. Are you a member, or connected with any European groups e.g.:
12. If already associated (in any way) with any EU projects, please list
    1. Part 1
    2. Part 2
    3. Part 3
13. In what ways do you currently protect company-sensitive intellectual property
14. Do you actively contribute in time, staff and/or financial recources to public research?
15. Have you ever received, or are you currently receiving, public fund for research?
16. In what ways do you expect to benefit from the public research sector?
17. How much direct benefit has your company derived from public research?
18. Would you welcome an increased opportunity to become involved in public funded research and at what level?
19. Would your company welcome it if the outcome of public funded research at different levels, was more readily transfered to industry?
20. If your company were to become more involved in either research or technology transfer, which instrument would you consider?
21. What resources do you currently use to keep the company up to date with developments?
22. Do you feel the resources you use, meet your needs adequately?
23. What obstacles do, in your discourage greater participation of companies in public funded research?
24. Would you welcome the opportunity to increase your knowledge by participating in (one of) the events listed below, to be or organised within the EADGENE - Technology Transfer Project?
25. The EADGENE - Technology Transfer Project is planning a course on genomics. Would you be interested, and at which level?
26. If you are interested in one of the suggested genomics courses, would you appreciate further information regarding this course?
27. One method to facilitate interaction and cooperation between European research groups and companies, is a database with relevant information. What information would be relevant in your opinion?

1. Number of employees  

In total 49 representatives of Institutes answered this question. Most of the companies employed 11 to 50 people (15 institutes), after this >100 (14) and 1-10 (12). The institutes with 51-100 and over 250 companies were least represented (4, 3).


2. Is this company directly connected with a research institute or university (e.g. as spin off)?

In total 48 representatives of Institutes answered this question. 79 % of the Institutes were indicated as linked to a research institute or university and 21 % indicated not.



3. Is this company owned by a parent company?
 

34 % out of the 48 institutes were not owned by a parent company, 63 % are.
 

4. Size of parent company, if any

Institutes owned by a parent company were mainly owned by companies with over 250 employees.


5. In which sector is your company active?

Most of the Institutes that participated are active in animal breeding, 59 % of which 38 % in genetic improvement and 21 % in animal production. The other sectors; genomics, pharmaceuticals, veterinary services and 'others' were each represented by ca. 10 % of the respondents.


6. If your company works with animals, please tick all boxes which apply

In this question more answers were of course possible. The cattle sector was best represented with 35 institutes, of which 19 beef and 16 dairy. Followed by the poultry sector with 32 institutes, of which 11 eggs and 21 meat (several species). The pig sector was represented by 23 institutes, the fish sector with 22 and sheep & goats were represented by 17 institutes. The laboratory animals, companion animals and 'other' were less represented, with respectively 2, 6 and 4 institutes.

7. Company operates mainly in

Also for this question, more answers were possible. Nine of the respondents indicated that the company they represented operated world wide. Furthermore, most company's operated national. In Western Europe and South Europe followed by Eastern Europe most companies indicated to operate.


8. What kind or research and develoment does your company practice?

Fundamental research was least represented (9/47), with 19 % of the total amount of represented companies which answered this question. Applied research was represented most with 83 %, followed by new product development with 64 %. New technology development and direct technology transfer activity were represented with 49 %, respectively 36 %.


9. Do you work together with research groups?

Most institutes collaborate with university departments (40 out of 48 answers). Followed by research institutes (32) and private and service company's (22). Entirely in house research was done by 2 institutes, in house research as spin-off from a research institute or university at 7 companies.


10. How is the research funded?

Most of the companies fund research out of company profits (35) and national funds (34).

11. Are you a member, or connected with any European groups?

The main part of the institute representatives were connected with EFFAB: 28 out of 47. Twelve representatives were connected with Genesis Faraday, the other European groups were represented by less then 4 companies.


12. If already associated (in any way) with any EU projects, please list.

Most companies indicated to be associated with the SEFABAR and/or CODE-EFABAR projects, with 22 respectively 23 companies out of 48 answers. The other projects were indicated by 3 or less companies.

13. In what way do you currently protect company-sensitive intellectual property? 

Answer 13e indicates how many patents are hold by the several institutes holding any patents. Question 13a to 13d indicate if the companies protects their intellectual property with secrecy, contracts, licensing and/or patents. Most companies use secrecy and contracts (32, 29 out of 45). Patents are use by 22 companies, licensing by only 11.


14.  Do you actively contribute in time, staff and/or financial resources to public research?

Thirty-five out of 48 representatives indicated to be active at national level, and 25 at EU and 14 at non EU level.


15. Have you ever received, or are you currently receiving, public funds for research?

Only 14 out of the 48 were funded by non-EU money, 25 with EU money and up to 35 institutes were partially financed with national funding.


16. In what way do you expect to benefit from the public research sector? 

'Direct profit improvement', 'expansion of markets' and 'increased market penetration' were the least seen as ways to benefit from public research (9, 9, 10 – 48). 'Cost reduction' and 'Current product development' were by 15, respectively 18 respondents marked as possible ways to benefit. A reasonable amount of respondents indicated 'access to research funding' and 'New product development' as potential ways to benefit. Most of the respondents (40) indicated that they saw an increase in company know-how as a way to benefit from the public research sector.

17. How much direct benefit has your company derived from public research?

One respondent indicated their company does not benefit at all and 5 indicated that public research was very beneficial for their company. Furthermore, 16 times the benefit from public research was scaled with a two, 15 times with a three and 8 times with a four, this on a scale from one (no benefit at all) to five (very beneficial).

18. Would you welcome an increased opportunity to become involved in public funded research and at what level?
 
An increased opportunity at EU level would be appreciated by the majority of the institutes (40 out of 46). More involvement at the national level would be welcomed by a large part of the respondents (36), more involvement at non-EU level was indicated by 22 companies.

19. Would your company welcome the outcome of public funded research at different levels, was more readily transferred to industry?

More readily transferred outcomes of public funded research to industry was most appreciated at National (39) and EU level (38), followed by non-EU level with 27 out of 47 institutes.

20. If your company were to become more involved in either research or technology transfer, which instrument would you consider?

Provision of animal resources, e.g. DNA samples, was consider by most respondents (27). Provision of technology least with 12 company's. The other instrument were all indicated as considerable by circa the same amount of institutes (16-20).

21. What resources do you currently use to keep the company up to date with developments?

'Industrial literature and sources' and 'courses' were both indicated by even 20 companies, but still the least indicated resources. Indicated by 25 to 40 respondents were the following resources, appointments of technical staff (28), personal visits (31), membership of common interest groups (37), workshops (30) and internet sources (34). 'Scientific literature' was indicated by 41 respondents as used and 'conferences and seminars' even by 44.

22. Do you feel the resources your use, meet your needs adequately?

Fourty-four respondents answered this question. 80 % of them indicated 'yes', 16 % indicated 'no' and 5 % indicated 'not applicable' as an answer to this question.

23. What obstacles do, in your discourage greater participation of companies in public funded research?

'Barriers of language' and 'barriers of technical training / understanding' were by 5 or less respondents seen as obstacles, 'scientific results not transferable to commercial applications' by 8, 'too many hurdles to overcome' by 11, 'low priority of research for technology transfer 'by 14, as well 'loss of Intellectual Property (IP) control, as 'unawareness of opportunities' by 19. Over 20 institutes indicated 'scientific results not transferable to commercial applications' (22) and 'high costs'(23) as obstacles. 'Time consuming' was indicated by most of the respondents, in total 33.

24. Would you welcome the opportunity to increase your knowledge by participating in (one of) the events listed below, to be organised within the EADGENE Technology Transfer project?

In-between 10 and 20 respondents indicated to welcome the opportunities of 'web newsletters'(15); a 'project website'(12), 'courses'(15), 'visits to group research institutes/members'(19), 'scientific literature'(20), and industry literature, sources'(12), and 5 institutes also indicated to use other opportunities as mentioned. More than 25 respondents indicated to welcome 'workshops'(29) and 'conferences and seminars'(34), the winning opportunity were 'e-mail newsletters' with 39 times indicated.

25. The EADGENE Technology Transfer project is planning a course on genomics. Would you be interested, and

Thirteen respondents indicated that their company was not interested in a course on genomics. The other companies indicated to be interested, they indicated in which courses they would be interested. The following results were found: course for absolute beginners: 6; course basic principles and possible use: 19 and 22 companies were interested in a up date course in new techniques and applications for 'users'.

26. If you are interested in one of the suggested genomic courses, would you appreciated further information regarding this course?

Seventy-three percent of the answers was positive.

27. One method to facilitate interaction and cooperation between European research groups and companies, is a database with relevant information. What information would be relevant in your opinion?

All suggestions were indicated by a reasonable amount of respondents. In particular 'name and e-mail addresses of contact persons per topic' was indicated as relevant information (33 out of 46). Also 'available tools and technologies at research groups' was indicated regularly (29). Furthermore, in order of amount of indications, 'names and addresses of research groups, and all their research topics present'(23); 'names and addresses of research groups, and the main research topic at present'(22); 'previous research topics of the groups'(18); 'available bio-resources at research groups'(18), other resources were indicated by 5 respondents.