An official website of the United States government
Nanocomposites provide outstanding benefits and possibilities compared to traditional composites but struggle to make it into the market due to the complexity and large number of associated challenges involved in, as well as lack of standards for, nanocomposite commercialization. This article proposes a commercialization framework utilizing market analysis and systems engineering to support the commercialization process of such high technologies. The article demonstrates the importance and usefulness of utilizing Model-Based Systems Engineering throughout the commercialization process of nanocomposite technologies when combining it with the Lean LaunchPad approach and an engineering analysis. The framework was validated using a qualitative research method with a case study approach. Applying this framework to a nanocomposite, called ZT-CFRP technology, showed tremendous impacts on the commercialization process, such as reduced market and technological uncertainties, which limits the commercialization risk and increases the chance for capital funding. Furthermore, utilizing the framework helped to decrease the commercialization time and cost due to the use of a lean engineering analysis. This framework is intended to assist advanced material-based companies, material scientists, researchers and entrepreneurs in academia and the industry during the commercialization process by minimizing uncertainties and risks, while focusing resources to reduce time-to-market and development costs.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on February 6, 2026
Lessons Learned and Challenges Ahead in the Translation of Implantable Microscale Sensors and Actuators
Microscale sensors and actuators have been widely explored by the scientific community to augment the functionality of conventional medical implants. However, despite the many innovative concepts proposed, a negligible fraction has successfully made the leap from concept to clinical translation. This shortfall is primarily due to the considerable disparity between academic research prototypes and market-ready products. As such, it is critically important to examine the lessons learned in successful commercialization efforts to inform early-stage translational research efforts. Here, we review the regulatory prerequisites for market approval and provide a comprehensive analysis of commercially available microimplants from a device design perspective. Our objective is to illuminate both the technological advances underlying successfully commercialized devices and the key takeaways from the commercialization process, thereby facilitating a smoother pathway from academic research to clinical impact.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10581743
- Publisher / Repository:
- Annual Reviews
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering
- ISSN:
- 1523-9829
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Early-stage science-based ventures (SBVs) require a wide range of intellectual resources and practical know-how to successfully commercialize their technologies. Often SBV founders actively gain this knowledge through advisory relationships providing business and technology guidance. We explore the effects of both business and technology advisors in combination with the founder’s entrepreneurial and technology experience. We measure early-stage success in an SBV using application readiness, a novel concept that encompasses progress in both technology discovery and validation as well as market identification and application. Using hand-collected longitudinal data from 112 emerging science-based ventures associated with American universities, we find that business advisors have a positive impact on application readiness, while technology advisors delay it; and these effects are moderated by the founder’s experience. Remarkably, a small number of advisors can have the same impact as decades of experience. Our article unpacks underexplored mechanisms through which advisors—an often-used policy tool supporting entrepreneurship—are implemented in emerging science-based ventures and makes academic contributions to the literatures on technology commercialization, advisors and human capital.more » « less
-
Evaluating the impact of entrepreneurship education is difficult given the heterogeneity of programming which presents challenges related to the generalizability of findings. The National Science Foundation’s Innovation-Corps (I-Corps) program, which incentivizes academic researchers to explore the commercialization potential of their research, offers a unique opportunity to examine the outcomes of entrepreneurship and technology commercialization training from an educational perspective given its standardization across populations and settings. We used the four-level Kirkpatrick Model for evaluating the impact of training and education programs to examine faculty experiences with I-Corps in depth. Using a qualitative inquiry methodology, we conducted 26 interviews with faculty innovators across three large public research institutions. Findings revealed that faculty had positive impressions of the program overall and attributed specific knowledge gains to participation. They also described behavioral changes impacting both their research and teaching. However, participants also identified challenges with I-Corps pedagogy and identified opportunities to improve training. This program evaluation and description of specific learning outcomes (skills, knowledge, attitude, and behaviors) contributes to best practices associated with delivering technology commercialization and entrepreneurship training to academic researchers.more » « less
-
The emergence of electrowetting-on-dielectric (EWOD) in the early 2000s made the once-obscure electrowetting phenomenon practical and led to numerous activities over the last two decades. As an eloquent microscale liquid handling technology that gave birth to digital microfluidics, EWOD has served as the basis for many commercial products over two major application areas: optical, such as liquid lenses and reflective displays, and biomedical, such as DNA library preparation and molecular diagnostics. A number of research or start-up companies ( e.g. , Phillips Research, Varioptic, Liquavista, and Advanced Liquid Logic) led the early commercialization efforts and eventually attracted major companies from various industry sectors ( e.g. , Corning, Amazon, and Illumina). Although not all of the pioneering products became an instant success, the persistent growth of liquid lenses and the recent FDA approvals of biomedical analyzers proved that EWOD is a powerful tool that deserves a wider recognition and more aggressive exploration. This review presents the history around major EWOD products that hit the market to show their winding paths to commercialization and summarizes the current state of product development to peek into the future. In providing the readers with a big picture of commercializing EWOD and digital microfluidics technology, our goal is to inspire further research exploration and new entrepreneurial adventures.more » « less
-
Abstract How to study inequality in innovation? Often, the focus has been gender gaps in patenting. Yet much is missing from our understanding of gendered inequality in innovation with this focus. This review discusses how gender and innovation are intertwined in durable academic inequalities and have implications for who is served by innovation. It summarizes research on gender and race gaps in academic entrepreneurship (including patenting), reasons for those longstanding inequities, and concludes with discussing why innovation gaps matter, including the need to think critically about academic commercialization. And while literature exists on gender gaps in academic entrepreneurship and race gaps in patenting, intersectional analyses of innovation are missing. Black feminist theorists have taught us that gender and race are overlapping and inseparable systems of oppression. We cannot accurately understand inequality in innovation without intersectionality, so this is a serious gap in current research. Intersectional research on gender and innovation is needed across epistemic approaches and methods. From understanding discrimination in academic entrepreneurship to bringing together critical analyses of racial capitalism and academic capitalism, there is much work to do.more » « less
