In March 2011, the United Innovation Association UK (UIAUK) was invited by the United Inventors Association of America (UIAUSA) to work collaboratively under a Memorandum of Agreement(MOA).
We accepted, in the belief that such a partnership would benefit the members of both organisations. We agreed to use similar logos & names and to share resources whilst in all other respects to remain independent of one another.
We entered into the relationship with UIAUSA in good faith. However recent issues arising necessitated that we reconsider our position.
After careful consideration we have taken the decision to withdraw from the MOA with immediate effect and to have no further dealings with the UIAUSA.
As such this decision requires that we change our name and branding and all associated collateral such as URL and email addresses.
These changes will be completed within two weeks.
All services provided to all members and our support of them will remain unaffected.
If you have any questions please feel free to email me direct: simon.brown@uiauk.org
It is said that only 1 in 1000 inventions make it to market and provide a return on investment[1].
However even a basic internet search pulls up a myriad of conflicting statistics to necessitate a complete review – here are just a few of them
99.9% fail – 1 out of 5000 inventions have successful product launches[2]
99.9% fail. Only 2 products are launched out of every 3,000 ideas[3]
99.8% fail. Only 3,000 patents out of 1.5 million patents are commercially viable[4]
99% fail. Only 1 out of 100 patented products make money[5]
99% fail. 1 out of 100 ideas make it[6]
98% fail. Only 2% earn significant dollars[7]
95% to 97% fail – Only 3 to 5 out of 100 inventions succeed[8]
Most of the information emanates from the USA, very little from the UK, and the majority of stats appear to be based on, ‘percentage of patents granted[9] that go on to become successful products’.
However many inventions are never patented yet go on to become successful inventions. So how can anyone be sure that the question of funding of innovation is being assessed and addressed correctly?
If government support and funding agencies are relying upon patent-based, conflicting statistics to determine what level of support is provided to innovators, inventors and start-ups then it is little wonder that their risk assessment is out of sync with 2011 reality.
The UK Government provides scant support or accessible funding for innovators, inventors or start-ups which is not a surprise when the risks appear to be far too high. But if the risk assessment itself is outmoded then significant opportunity to UKPLC could be the highest risk.
If you view the dates of the ‘evidence’ you’ll note they predominantly stem from the 1990’s with the original 1 in 1000 stat predating all of them. Therefore if robust, considered & up to date evaluation of the cost and time involved from ‘beermat to marketplace’ were to be instigated the risk assessment might look a whole lot better.
Factor into that the availability of the internet, rapid prototyping, 3D CAD, new materials and most recently 3D printing which in 2011 all provide a faster ‘route to commercialisation’ not available two decades ago when those statistics were borne. In 2011 it is significantly easier and faster to achieve a ‘ready for manufacture’ prototype. Hewlett Packard is currently providing free 3D printing[10].
Innovation is flourishing in Britain, and it starts with individual innovators and inventors.
As an inventor myself and Founder of United Innovators Association UK (UIAUK), I would confidently hedge a bet on the 1 in 1000 figure transpiring today to be 5% to 10% of innovative concepts, (patented or otherwise) making it to market with a healthy return on investment. That’s a figure likely to be far more acceptable to UKPLC upon which they might base funding support for inventors, innovators and entrepreneurial start-ups.
To further evidence this, the UIAUK can report a rapidly growing membership base of innovators & inventors who share their concepts and inventions with us for evaluation and validation purposes.
Our own figures show that 6% have ‘inventions’ with significant market potential in the UK, and a further 2% with international potential. The quality of thinking behind most of those concepts is extraordinarily high, concurring with British Ingenuity and inventiveness being very much alive and well.
We frequently hear that Britain can only create lasting jobs through continuous innovation and increased productivity. And those jobs are best created at the infancy of commerce i.e. the new business start-up.
That being the case, any inventor with a validated concept (UIA validation stamp) who is prepared to put 100% energy and commitment into forming a new business, should deserve support mechanisms and a level of accessible funding that is, after all, available to Universities and established SME’s up to major corporate firms, who arguably need it less.
It might also be noted that a new product created by an individual inventor; requires the input of designers, IP specialists, manufacturers, marketing, web developers and many others. Thereby up and downstream innovators and inventors generate revenues and sustain jobs.
In summary I am calling for a debate and re-think on how support mechanisms including funding are assessed in context of inventors; innovators; entrepreneurs and start-up businesses. Right now, it appears that the PR machines achieving column inches on ‘Start-Up Britain’, Innovative Britain and so forth are so woefully out of sync with the crucial support mechanisms and funding access needed to make that a reality for Britain and for the inventive, innovative and creative communities.
I sat watching the BBC Breakfast News the other morning to be confronted by a story about a person who set up a website; I believe called ‘rent my items’.
Now as founder of the United Innovation Association, I for one am all for entrepreneurship and innovative new business ideas and congratulate the gentleman for his initiative, however I must ask the question;
Why are the BBC focused on promoting a commercial business, when there are many non-profit organisations such as the UIAUK, struggling to be recognised for the good work and support they are providing, and getting no coverage?
Surely, it would be of more interest to the public to know about organisations, which are of direct help and benefit to them, particularly as government has made it very plain that it wants to support innovation and entrepreneurship.
I quote from David Cameron on March 28th this year when he stated,
“If you’ve been turning over a good idea for years – now is the time to make something of it. If you’re working for a big firm but you know you could do a better job on your own – now is the time to make that leap. If you’ve been dreaming about starting up the next great British brand – now is the time to make it happen”.
So come on BBC, ITV, Sky etc. give the same time and coverage to the innovation support providers, who are not commercially orientated, and who have taken up the challenge government has set us.
It has come to my attention that the excellent NESTA/Arts Council digital fund launched in early August 2011 to enable arts organisations to partner digital firms and innovate within their sector was over-subscribed by a staggering £28 million.
495 applications were received by the Friday 2nd September 2011 submission deadline to the tune of £28.5 million for a fund worth just £500,000 which therefore could only support between maybe 5 to 10 applications.
Unsuccessful applicants were advised on 16th September just 10 working days after the 2nd Sept submission deadline. By anybody’s standards that’s no mean feat to read, review, compare and rate 495 applications & announce the short-list in just 10 days.
Incidentally NESTA have stated that;
No feedback will be provided to unsuccessful applicants due to the sheer volume received
It would also be interesting to know how many applicants were deemed ‘unsuccessful’ by the 16th and how many actually went through to the following week when 18 applications (approx. 3.5%) were then short-listed for interview for 21 & 22 Sept, the final winners being announced on Monday 26th September.
It raises some eyebrows and some questions in regard to the amount of creative industry organisations seeking support for innovation versus the low level of funding actually available.
That in comparison to the £multi-million Technology Strategy Board funding pot available to more established companies & Universities (albeit it with a match-funding requirement), would appear to suggest, again, that the smaller and arguably faster moving companies or individuals are left to fend for themselves. Clearly they do not struggle to innovate or invent but they struggle to implement without the funding support enjoyed by more established and financially secure organisations.
And whilst the time and money invested into the handful of lucky winners might pay off, over 485 companies will come away empty handed.
Will those circa 485 innovation proposals, which I imagine would have taken an average 15 man days each to produce, now bite the dust?
Or will more funds be found to allow the more promising ones to be progressed?
I can’t say enough about how well I think you have done to position UIAUK at a higher level. The web site is leaps and bounds ahead of the first version – it’s tone of voice, look and feel, and not least of all its clear home page engagement with a community is self-evident.
The service provider tab, where we feature, as well as the scrolling home page appearance, in order, of Diamond members is great.
I wish you and UIAUK every success – and thank you for all your hard work and commitment towards not only the ‘little guy’ needing help but also for those of us that equally have ethical products and services to provide to them and back you up.
You deserve every success for your commitment and passion supporting a vital UK PLC set of people much needing support, that others including intermediary government organisations with the benefit of significant tax payer funds, have not succeeded in engaging with in quite the same way.
Hat’s off to you
All the best, Maxine
Maxine Horn, CEO
Creative Barcode
“It is clear that the service the United Innovation Association UK offers, bringing one source of support, information and matching services to inventors and companies will make a difference to innovative companies and start-ups, particularly those who may not otherwise know how to access help. We recognise the importance of such organisations to the UK economy and we welcome this type of service.”
I cannot describe how much of a benefit it’s been joining UIAUK. As a novice inventor of very limited knowledge (and funds!!) I cannot speak highly enough of Simon and the UIAUK team. To be able to talk to someone in confidence about an idea that you hold close to your heart and receive so much constructive advice, is like a breath of fresh air. Simon’s guidance in particular renews your faith in the good people.
James Drake, Inventor
“Simon is an inspiring leader who gets results, whether managing a team or working independently.”
Dixit Baiju on Sep 1, 2011
“Simon blends creativity and innovation with organization and strategy.”
Petisamaria G Hall on Jun 12, 2011
D2M has been involved with the UIAUK since its initial launch.
Due to being members of the UIAUK, we have found partner companies for both Far East manufacturing and standards testing among other areas. These relationships were unlikely to be formed outside of the UIAUK and are going to result in a better overall service for our customers.
Having the reassurance that they are fellow members of the UIAUK means that we are happy to use their services ourselves and recommend them to our clients where appropriate.
Our membership to the UIAUK has also meant that we have gained commissions, one of which is substantial, that we would not have otherwise have received.
In short, the UIAUK membership cost has been far outweighed by the benefit in terms of partner companies and also new commissions. I would not hesitate to recommend the UIAUK to other businesses in this industry or to our clients to join as individual members. We feel that this is a fantastic organisation that is filling a gap for inventors who are starting out on a complex journey and D2M is keen to support the UIAUK in whatever way it can.
In forming the United Innovation Association UK I found myself spending a great deal of time assessing the words coming from government. I paid particular attention to those politicians who constantly tell us that we, the ordinary public, hare responsibility for supporting growth in the UK.
Frequently we’re told that enterprise, innovation and yes, invention, are the key factors in providing a sustainable future for the growth of UK business. Remember George Osborne’s Budget speech this year?
We want the words made in Britain, created in Britain, designed in Britain, invented in Britain to drive our nation forward. A Britain carried aloft by the march of the makers. That is how we will create jobs and support families.
A stated priority of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS) is to ‘Boost enterprise and make this the decade of the entrepreneur’. BIS wants to ‘Help small and medium-sized businesses start and thrive through better business support, improved access to finance and stronger competition, with fewer market barriers to entry, creating a more entrepreneurial culture.’
And two statements on the BIS website:
We want to make sure that Britain is the best place in the world to run an innovative business or service – this is critical to the UK’s future prosperity, our quality of life and future job prospects.
And:
The Government’s vision is for many more people in the UK to have the opportunity, aspiration and motivation to use their talent and initiative to be enterprising and have an increased proportion of people starting a business.
So all the right noises are being made and government is supportive of new enterprise at individual and business levels. Government wants the ordinary person to be more innovative and enterprising, and is eager to provide the support structure needed to make this happen.
Or so it would seem.
Over the past couple of months I have made direct contact with all the relevant government departments and agencies involved in innovation, enterprise and entrepreneurship. With the honourable exception of one agency, I have concluded that what is really meant by all the rhetoric is this:
The only ones who will benefit from the new enterprise and innovation culture are those who can afford to benefit.
By this I mean that if you already have the financial resources to take your innovation to market, you will get more financial assistance and support. Otherwise, you won’t.
There is no government support for organisations that can help SMEs or lone inventors to exploit ideas or innovations in the absence of finance, business acumen or innovation development knowhow. That’s many thousands of individuals and SMEs being ignored.
The priority is on supporting fast, high growth new technology. This kind of support, in my opinion, won’t significantly benefit smaller UK manufacturers as it mainly favours collaboration between universities and specialist manufacturing processes.
There is little or nothing for ‘ordinary’ SMEs who also want opportunities to grow, find new products and expand into new markets.
Invention and innovation is not just about high tech. It’s about all new ideas and all new products. It might be a new variation on a potato peeler or a light fitting. Not ‘sexy’ perhaps, but with commercial potential comparable to, if not greater than, many advanced technology innovations.
They all need designing, prototyping, testing, developing, manufacturing, marketing and retailing. Cumulatively, that’s a lot of work for a lot of people.
And all those ‘second class’ inventions and innovations generate welcome jobs and welcome tax revenues. Potentially that’s a lot of jobs, a lot of wealth and a lot of spending power. Lower tech innovation is also faster, often lower risk and more cost efficient to commercialise than advanced technology.
Where is the balance between longer term advanced technology and it finding market applications and the faster turnaround product and service ideas that generate service and manufacturing jobs?
There appears to be a shortage or even an absence of government support for ‘bread and butter’ innovation by individuals or SMEs!
I’ve spoken to many manufacturers who are looking for new products to develop. Most are willing to consider equity, royalty, licensing or similar deals to assist the originator with the costs of development. But without the support of intermediary filtering systems and help for support organisations providing back-office and filtering services, the cost of supporting grass-roots innovation become prohibitive.
I’m told that on average it costs corporates around £100 every time they get an unsolicited request to support a new invention. And they can receive up to 30 such requests a day from around the world. How many SMEs could entertain even one a day at £100?
All that cost, just to say ‘no’ to people!
The biggest issue in reality is that there is no shortage of inventive individuals, but very few are taught anything about enterprise and commercialisation at school. Even at university it isn’t a priority on most courses.
So we have a puzzling situation: our government wants more innovation but doesn’t actually encourage anyone (other than well-heeled businesses) to do it, either through the education system or through the business support system.
There may also be a cultural misfit between innovators (inventors, creatives, academics) and commercialisation. These people are not seeking to build and run businesses, in a high percentage of cases they are seeking to license and sell-off ideas to industry to commercialise. ‘It is not enough to simply berate innovators for not possessing the commercialisation interests or skill set and write them off.’
After all, do we expect accountants, investors and business managers to be inventors, designers and ideation specialists? No.
Therefore a division of labour model that respects the skill sets rather than forces square pegs into round holes might be more successful. The development of new business models that enable the generation of ideas to be licensed and sold off to industry for commercialisation could be more beneficial for all parties concerned.
Simon Brown
Founder
United Innovation Association UK
Join Viadeo, the professional social network chosen by Simon Brown and more than 35 million professionals
“It is clear that the service the United Innovation
Association UK offers, bringing one source of support, information and matching
services to inventors and companies will make a difference to innovative
companies and start-ups, particularly those who may not otherwise know how to
access help. We recognise the importance of such organisations to the UK economy
and we welcome this type of service”.
Innovation Policy | Department for Business, Innovation and Skills | Wed 22/06/2011
Posted by UIAUK 
