Reminder of the key principles of the M2M courses

I have chatted with staff running M2M modules at both Universities and the UTC and there is a recurring question. How do the "teams" move on to develop their Business Plan in the "real world"? This is not the intention at all, although if it can be arranged, this could be a desirable end-point, maybe for the best idea(s)? The concept of M2M was primarily in order to develop a greater awareness of enterprise and in the case of the courses in the Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Sheffield (and to a large extent at the Life Sciences UTC, Liverpool), in the area of Biotechnology. It isn't intended that the students validate a piece of Chemistry or Molecular Biology, since at both Institutions, this is covered in laboratory sessions. No, the aim is to dig deeper into aspects of business such as fund raising, employment, location and logistics, sales and marketing, competitor analysis etc. 

For example, we have a nice idea around home screening for infections. This involves the harnessing of monoclonal antibody technology and microfluidics. It isn't intended for a proof of concept pilot project in the lab, but rather an investigation of existing technologies and the cost of producing a more competitive (price or simplicity) product. This can be combined with exploring the cost of business set up, fund raising, structuring the business over 1, 3, 5 years etc. This will then lead to a more robust iteration of a business plan. I hope this helps clarify things! I have often thought though, that assessment of competing ideas could be rewarded by provision of resources to "give it a go"!

Company profiles and case studies

One of the tasks I regularly set for my Molecules to Market courses is for students at all levels to perform a short analysis of a company that has either failed or succeeded. This helps them gain an understanding of the forces that are at play in the commercial world. Some choices are predictable: Starbucks, Marks and Spencers, Amazon, Virgin etc. Some are more parochial, Pete's Pet Foods and Geoff's Surf Supplies. There is value in the analysis of all companies. I often think of a discussion I had with a group of PhD students about one of the lowest entry barrier startups: hand car washing. with a few pound coins to invest in a sponge, a bucket and some detergent, an afternoon of door-stepping (in the right area of town!), generally sees a return on investment and a move to profitability by the end of the first day.

It was during a discussion with (mainly) Masters Level Molecular Scientists recently, that we discussed the business model underlying Higher Education. Notwithstanding regulatory issues (accreditation and the investment in infrastructure etc.), the current funding model in the UK, where students can borrow £9 000 pa for course fees, together with a small annual maintenance loan, all repayable at an "affordable" rate post graduation. As a business model, the not-for-profit Universities must "earn" sufficient income from research, teaching and related activities to pay staff salaries, maintain buildings and provide appropriate levels of support (ICT etc). The net profits (minus a small allowable surplus) are re-invested in staff, buildings etc as approved by a board of governors or council. 

So far, an interesting subject, fairly simple revenue streams: undergraduate and postgraduate teaching etc., research council iand charitable income (less salaries and costs for supplies, services and instrumentation) and then less restricted income streams for consultancy work, services and professional training and conferences (not forgetting hospitality and accommodation for students on site). I then asked how many students enrolled into HE courses last year (2013): we agreed that the figure is around 500 000, across just over 100 institutions. Now think about the income from undergraduate teaching provision alone £(500, 000 x 10, 000)! I cant wait to see if anyone chooses to analyse the successes an failures! When they do, I'll report back!

Can co-ops still survive in the current socio-political climate?

One headline from the BBC today reads: 

"Co-op Group members approve sweeping reforms to board"

What is the background to this change to an organisation that has its foundations in working class, Victorian Rochdale over 130 years ago? And why is it important? The principle of shared ownership didn't feature highly outside of the retail sector in the UK, as Britain emerged from the challenges of World War II. However some organisations (John Lewis for example in the UK and New England Biolabs) have employee ownership or shared bonus schemes hard wired into their operations. In addition, many venture capital funded businesses use stock options as an incentive to senior employees and early stage recruits. The concept is very simple: if you own a stake in the company that employs you, you are more likely to contribute to its success. You should take a look at examples of companies and how they manage their employee remuneration and rewards. You might be interested in the history of Unilever (originally Lever Brothers) in this respect.

The Rochdale Pioneers

The Co-operative movement in the UK (and similar overseas organisations exist) is run through a large number of members (8 million in the UK alone), who take decisions ranging from the distribution of local funds to good causes, to management of the funeral service fleet for example. It is this structure that is perceived to have led to the current financial crisis at the Co-op. I wonder whether this model, which in my view combines elements of socialism, philanthropy and fair trade ideologies, is viable in today's world? Is it something that could work best in developing countries? Or is it a threat to those global corporates that operate on stretch sales targets for maximising economic growth, often at the expense of employee satisfaction. Read about the many ways that businesses can operate and decide what mode of governance you feel most comfortable with and how you feel it might impact on financial viability in the short and long term of your virtual business. 

What price a new cure?

The recent announcement by NICE, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence to deny NHS patients access to the anticancer drug trastuzumab emtansine (called Kadcyla by the manufacturers, Roche) is a result of their cost benefit analysis. It is useful to consider not only the cost of drug discovery, development and clinical trials, but also the price a particular market (or health economy) will stand. The NHS in the UK is facing increasingly tough decisions on how to allocate its annual budget (of just under £100bn), especially when a single drug for a single patient, for one year is just under £100 000: clearly this is why prevention is their byword!  At the same time $800m (approx £480m) is the generally agreed cost of anti-cancer drug development. It is inevitable that some will feel that the NICE decision is harsh, but it has to be seen in the context of other priorities. It also has raises important issues for drug discovery management by the Pharmaceutical sector.

In an earlier Blog I discussed the challenge of making a profit from the sale of

paracetamol, this is the other end of the spectrum. The challenge here is to meet the demands of the UK population whose average lifespan is significantly higher than say that in a developing country (typically by 30 years!) and around 10-15 years more than in the UK when the NHS was established. How might you therefore persuade an investor to back your business plan to develop a new anticancer treatment given the economic climate in the UK and the even greater pressures on healthcare budgets in the majority of the developing countries? It is worth thinking about the cost of typical treatments and the difficulties faced by NICE alongside those facing the drug companies.

For example, a kidney transplant which lasts for about 10 years saves the NHS £24, 000 pa against the comparative cost of renal dialysis. The upfront transplant surgery costs and the post operative care are significantly lower than the annual costs (around £30 000) of renal dialysis. Importantly, this needs to be considered in the context of the 40 000 cases of renal failure diagnosed per year. And that's just one example. The amount spent per capita per year in the UK on health care works out at around £300. Clearly, the system we operate of redistributing tax revenues and National Insurance contributions is under extreme stress, both as a consequence of increasing life expectancy and probably also a result of a long period without a major conflict involving citizens! You will of course be aware of the influence of the last century's two World Wars, which were only separated by 21 years.

On the topic of conflict driven innovation, I am reminded that it is the centenary of the discovery of citrate as an anti clotting agent. A most timely intervention for the start of WWI and the important discoveries made on the biochemistry and physiology of haemoglobin, driven in part by the need to manage the high casualty levels resulting from trench warfare: in particular the valuable practice of blood transfusion. WWII by comparison, presented a major stimulus for antibiotic development on an affordable, large scale in order to combat field infections. Finally, having spent some time working at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, I am still taken aback by the age of some of the drugs used to treat TB and malaria: TB combination therapies were developed 50 years ago and in the case of malaria, quinine based drugs remain in widespread use after nearly 100 years. However, the need for drugs to treat tropical diseases has probably been influenced significantly by our involvement in conflicts in the East illustrating once again that the drivers behind drug development are complex and often surprising! Hopefully, the intensive research efforts to produce artemesin at an affordable price will be successful and the influence of the Bill and Melinda Gates organisation will catalyse further developments.

I wanted to make you think about the economics of drug discovery when you are discussing your business plans. I firmly  believe that taking stock of historical influences and events can be informative. Now you have a think and discussion amongst yourselves about the government's decision to stockpile Tamiflu from around 2006-2010! 

From the hook-and-eye to velcro: does a new invention always displace the previous one?

I was listening to the Book of the Week on Radio 4, B is for Bauhaus, and I was taken with the history of the invention and patenting of the zip or zipper. It reminded me of how human invention and design is reflected in Nature. The hook-and-eye was major step forward in the clothing business, since it allowed a whole range of items to "stay up!". As clothing became increasingly sophisticated and those with sufficient money would buy and wear more and more individual items, the demand for secure fasteners also increased. However, which came first the hook-and-eye or the button. It is clear that ornamental buttons have been around for a couple of thousand years, but buttons and importantly, button holes developed before the hook-and-eye, which surprised me. 


The question I asked myself as the author began discussing the impact of the arrival of the zip fastener in its current form: did it ring the death knell for the button? (Moreover, did velcro seal the fate of the zipper?) Well yes the zipper did for trousers, but not for suit jackets (well not all). But more importantly, this is a story of niche businesses and the adjustments and the accommodations made by society (globally) to make way for a new invention that improves upon one idea in many ways.....but not all. What is the lesson from this story? Well as an undergraduate it was made very clear that all enzymes are proteins. However, in the mid 1980s, it emerged that certain RNA molecules possessed catalytic activity. Did this turn the world of Biochemistry upside down? No, it just made everyone rethink their fundamental assumptions and it became clear that catalytic RNA was not as effective in general terms as protein catalysts, but rather there are some aspects of bio-transformation that are best achieved by RNA enzymes. Moreover, maybe catalytic RNA preceded protein-based enzymes....

Today, you can by a box of hooks and eyes on E Bay just as easily as a box of buttons or zips. You can also expect to find a hook-and-eye in one or two places where you will never find a button or a zip. The point is you may have to adjust your business plan/model in order to survive, but this is where long term business planning and foresight management is important. Other examples would transport: ships, trains, planes....bicycles. They all co-exist and different opportunities exist in different markets. So include some thoughts on long term sustainability and think of examples of coexisting products and examples were an invention has been completely replaced (I immediately think of a product that goes together with a TV). 




And then of course there is velcro, and its biological mimic! 

Poster Preparation Tips

The poster is a tried and tested format for the presentation of scientific data at conferences. It is probably quite a recent development (it has been suggested it was first introduced at European scientific symposia as a means of dealing with language barriers). The earliest references to posters I have come across in the USA go back to the early 1970s. However, today, no scientific meeting would be the same without the animated poster sessions. A poster is often a useful vehicle for PhD students to "exhibit" their work to an audience of scientists, young and old, providing essential experience in communication skills and as a means of simply meeting the community of scientists in your chosen field of research. In recent years, the poster has become a means of enabling students to deliver all kinds of verbal "pitches" and as a focus for discussion as part of the assessment of a module or course.


When planning the design of your own poster, the rules are pretty simple; indeed the conference or class organiser often lays down the size of paper and font etc, in order to manage the display space and poster numbers. Your poster should be readable (from a reasonable standing distance), it should follow a systematic "path" (each text block and image should be in a clear order: use numbers if necessary). It should be appealing, use colour and striking images: I like the use of infographics as pioneered by the newspapers in weather forecasting: see the Economist and newspapers such as the Financial Times for examples. Here, you combine data with explanations in a way that makes the poster person-independent. In other words, when you walk away from your poster, anyone interested can get the"message" without you being there.

The poster session will provide you with the opportunity to "pitch" your ideas to members of staff as well as experienced entrepreneurs, who will be taking part in the evaluation. For the Molecules to Market Poster session, you should think about including the following sections:

1. Company name and names of members (Title)
2. Introduction/Company Mission
3. Description of your product or idea
4. Market and competition
5. Financial model
6. Milestones: from incorporation to exit
7. Why should we invest in you?

The poster size information is made available at the FCP201 Edmodo site (entitled Poster Template). The date and time for the poster session, which will be held in the Council Room on D floor of Firth Court is Wednesday afternoon, 7th May, 2014. There will be prizes for the best posters on display and the best presentation skills.

Faculty Level Molecules to Market Presentations

As promised, some general comments on yesterday's marathon presentation session, in preparation for the M2M "Oscars" next! I think Emma's idea to use a single powerpoint slide format worked incredibly well, allowing time for you to get your ideas across while fostering discussion. We are using the term committees, for the first time, in the  Faculty wide M2M module (FCP201) to identify groups (or teams) prior to settling on a virtual company name. Each committee can access the specific comments on your presentation, by creating an account with Edmodo (which is free) and entering the code that you will shortly receive by email. The group that you will join is called FCP201. I shall give some general comments on the styles, the content and the commercial viabilities, as well as some guidance in respect of the next assessment, namely the poster day.


Company names and logos. I think you will all agree that there were some great names and some that were a little less memorable, but always functional! I would recommend brainstorming the name and make sure its not taken (carry out a domain search). The name usually, but not always reflects the nature of the business: It should roll off the tongue and look good in the logo or on the web site. The logo itself should combine simplicity of design, with impact: it should again be memorable (see right). If someone in your committee has a flair for design, let them create a set of draft ideas and then vote for the one(s) you all like best. I was very impressed with your first attempts and don't think there were too many turkeys!

The Science. First of all, I have to say that you drew on your core knowledge (mostly some aspect of Biology) really well and some committees had developed it much further than I expected. The majority of talks involved the development of new medicines, or had a nutritional theme. I would like you to firm up the Science for your posters. If you are focusing on a molecule, or class of molecule, you must be able to discuss it in detail and you should know the chemistry/biochemistry relating to it/them. I also want you to produce a schematic diagram that connects the science with the application in a clear manner. You should expect to be "grilled" on the science during the poster session. Given the devolution of roles within the committee, it may be useful for one member to take the lead on the Science and feedback to the rest of the team for shaping the communication of the Science to potential investors and customers.

The competition and your USP. We need you to explain the market in which you will operate. Who are your major competitors? Why is your product better than those currently available? What is your unique selling point (or proposition)? I wanted to see more evidence of the market size, the likely selling price and the margins that you are able to forecast. I am aware that the cost of manufacturing is often difficult to estimate and the margins made for example, by Land Rover on the sale of a Range Rover, or Heinz on the sale of a can of baked beans, are closely guarded secrets, but try to de-convolute the cost of production and look at the margins and forecasted sales, in comparison with your own operating costs: not forgetting re-investment in order to make the company sustainable in the long term.

Communicating with investors and clients/customers is a fundamental part of any business. I think the teams were generally inclusive, with a number of the group directly contributing to the presentation, while some of you hung back. As long as everyone contributes to the assessed material this is OK, but we will expect all company members to make some contribution to the post-presentation and general discussions. It is through our assessment of these sessions that we can begin to determine how much you connect with different strands of material and concepts which are covered in independent modules. 

Posters. The final session is scheduled for 7th May where you will use the scientific poster as a vehicle for pitching your business. Several assessors will spend the session quizzing you as a company and a winner will be selected before the end of the day and awarded an appropriate prize. The template to use for the poster will be available via MOLE and the Edmodo site shortly, together with some tips and advice that you may choose to ignore or incorporate into your poster design. However, your poster must conform to the general layout (size and key elements), but you are responsible for ensuring it creates the impact necessary to secure the prize!

Update Feedback is now posted on Edmodo

First presentation session for level 2 undergrads

This is a short post to say two things. Yesterday afternoon was a great event: 13 new business ideas and some very nice Science. But the most rewarding thing from the perspective of the module coordinators was the astonishing level of engagement, considering the large group size. I shall follow up by tomorrow with some comments on all presentations and a general overview, but wanted to congratulated all committees on a resounding success!

Print and be damned!

The column that sits on a spot near St George's Hall and the Walker Gallery/World Museum in Liverpool supports the Duke of Wellington (well a statue of him!). It was nearly 200 years ago when he delivered his now famous challenge to a notorious publisher and blackmailer: "Publish and be damned!" So when I was working through ideas to talk over with George Rule (our resident 3D printer expert) about how we will be introducing 3D printing into the Liverpool Life Sciences UTC laboratory programme, I came across the US Biotech company Organovo. I had been thinking about printing molecular models of proteins, alpha helices, DNA duplexes and even printing lab equipment to facilitate and customize our experimental work. But I hadn't appreciated just how far patents in this area had come on over the last 5 years.   

I have been delivering talks on Biotechnology and Synthetic Biology to a range of groups from schools to University of the third age groups and I have been using the concept of 3D printing to explain the principles of protein synthesis and protein folding in cells (on the ribosome, shown right). The nice thing about biological 3D printing of proteins, is that often (but importantly not always), the sequence of amino acids, self-determines the final 3D structure of the protein; and in less than a second. So as biological 3D printers, ribosomes are pretty smart. However, I am not sure that the term "printing" is a quite right? Printing is defined by the OED as "marking a surface with text, a pattern, a design, or an image". In 3D printing, we are creating an object that is not attached to a surface. I wonder whether 3D publishing might be better, or perhaps molecular sculpting. Then I remembered my conversation with Professor Keith Ridgway at Sheffield's Advanced Manufacturing Centre, where he showed me how he "sprayed" powdered metals and bonded them in a furnace in order to construct 3D objects for jet engines: quite the opposite of traditional sculpting! So for now, printing it is!

Back to Organovo, who are pioneering the use of Bio-printing for the production of tissues for pre-clinical drug screening and ultimately for tissue implantation. So what do they mean by this term? They are taking cells and using their 3D printing technologies to generate an architecture, that mimics that found in tissues. This provides (in their view) a more relevant assay system for drug screening, and also provides a more sophisticated approach to tissue implanting during corrective surgery. Take a look at the videos on their web site and the Economist view (RHS). When I started thinking about the potential not only to make molecular models of bacteriophage, but also the possible printing of virions, I never imagined the technology was so advanced. 

Getting off the starting blocks

I looked through all of the online discussion notes today for the Faculty Module, and two things struck me. The first was that only 50% of the group have used the online chat room resource on MOLE and the other was the level of engagement that those who have participated have shown. I will of course respect the confidentiality of your ideas until they are fully formed, but there are a few things that you may wish to consider. The first relates to the value of your idea and whether it is best to consider patenting.

To file, or not to file? Coca cola kept their recipe secret (well as best they could!) and since the business started more than 20 years ago, in 1886 to be precise, this was clearly a good decision, since their market lead and subsequent revenues, have ensured that they have been able to compete with any alternative providers: last time I looked Coke was selling 10 bottles of coke for every bottle of Pepsi. The same is true of Jelly Babies: a closely guarded secret recipe that has taken many years to copy, but Bassetts of Sheffield company maintained a long enough market lead (founded in 1842!) to become an attractive acquisition by Cadbury-Schweppes in 1989.

Thomas Edison, a prolific filer
of patents, who was
only recently overtaken!

The use of patents to create value in a company is also a successful business option: in 2012 IBM held over 6,000 patents, with the top ten companies being exclusively electronic or ICT related. In 1997, IBM were still top, but with around 1700 patents. The countries filing most patents last year were Japan, China and the USA, with South Korea emerging as a major player. Clearly as the BRIC countries become more mainstream economically and the emerging MINT countries following suit, patenting will become a strong indicator of economic performance. So it is clear that examples exist where secrets (or know how) can be a successful strategy, but so too can patent protection. You will have to decide which route you think will be the best for your business. 

Next I will look at location, which is something one or two committees have discussed in the chat rooms.

An afternoon with Sir Ken and Lady Murray

I often use Biogen as an important early example of a Biotech Business, but it is pretty unusual in some respects; in particular in respect of their strategy at the outset for choosing, harnessing and then translating emerging knowledge in Molecular Biology in the 1970s. I then immediately think of the enormously inspiring afternoon I spent with Ken Murray and his wife Noreen. Ken was one of the scientific founders of Biogen and Noreen was a pioneer in the development of early methods for cloning genes using bacteriophage vectors. (They spent the majority of their careers and lives at the University of Edinburgh: you can find them on Google, ). Noreen died in May 20011 and Ken died a couple of years later: they had both technically retired many years earlier! I was fortunate enough to know them both and spent a memorable afternoon with them both at their home in Edinburgh just before Noreen died. At this time Noreen was unable to speak, but had no problem communicating, as Ken was the perfect host, attending to both our needs while attending to our needs and filling in any gaps in the conversation. We talked about their lives in Science, the people they knew and had known and the circumstances surrounding the early days of Biogen.

Ken left school at the age of 16 to become a lab technician at Boots in Nottingham. From there he studies for his degree part time and finally obtained a PhD in microbiology from the University of Birmingham. After around 10 years at the University of Edinburgh, Ken and the other founders of Biogen met in Geneva in 1978, and included in addition to Ken, Walter Gilbert and Phillip Sharp(who would both later receive Nobel Prizes). The idea was to create a company that fostered the development of a number of ideas that were emerging from the research labs of the founders. Charles Weissmann, the Hungarian born Swiss scientist, probably had the discovery that was forecast by many to bring fortune to Biogen: he had cloned the wonder molecule interferon. However, it was Ken's work on developing the first genetically engineered vaccine against Hepatitis B, that proved their biggest initial success. So much so that on his death last year, Ken's estate amounted to over £12m, the bulk of which was left to the Darwin Trust for the promotion of research, in particular postgraduate scholarships, the remainder being distributed around the scientific communities in the UK.

Ken and Noreen were in many ways traditional scientists who many would say were working on esoteric subjects: the fundamental principles of genes and proteins in bacteria and bacteriophage. However, it was their personal experimental skills, their love and respect for their chosen fields, that led to their influential work both in understanding fundamental aspects of Molecular Biology, but in making the world a better place to live. Both Ken and Noreen had an incredible grasp of the literature and any important discovery was read in detail: their own published work was always a tour de force. Ken carried out the key Hep B experiments under containment level facilities at the MOD, while Noreen was still plating bacteria and phage in a quiet corner of a lab until the very end! Their selfless pursuit of scientific truth led them to considerable wealth, which they then gave back to the organisations that they cherished in order to continue the pursuit of knowledge: a rare example of the powerful combination of Pure and Applied Science and humanity.

Zero energy buildings and recycling

Over the weekend, I enjoyed listening to Forum on Radio 4 in which Bridget Kendall interviewed experts in recycling. I also noticed the announcement that Craig Venter's new Institute (left) has come to fruition in San Diego near UCSD, The Salk Institute and The Scripps Institute, as the draw of Southern California continues. I wonder if you have looked seriously into the sustainability of your business ideas?

The Journalist Adam Minter, who has recently published the book entitled Junkyard Planet, described the recycling route of mobile phones. First they are shipped to China (low labour costs) and they then go direct to Africa where there is a buoyant market pre-owned (we used to call them second hand or used, but this is less market friendly!) phones. If not fit for sale, they are refurbished first and then shipped, or alternatively stripped for parts and finally pulverized for possible recovery of precious metals. The glass is a problem, since it can rarely be recycled successfully. It reminded me of the scene in Blade Runner, where Philip K Dick conjures up images of scavenging and recycling in a sophisticated, but seedy downtown California of the future!

Think about your business ideas in the long term and you may improve the chances of success and investment!

Making money out of paracetomol and aspirin

The cost of a pack of 32 paracetamols over the counter can be as little as 25p. That works out at less than 1p per tablet, and that includes a box, a leaflet and the plastic and foil packaging. Not much of a margin in this! So what's the catch? I also looked at the cost of a white sliced loaf: 47p in a well known supermarket! Think about the costs in producing a loaf at home, using your own ingredients, oven and time! Finally, what about baked beans, the staple of students (in my day at least): 24p a can. What's going on! There's the cost of the can, the beans, their preparation, energy costs and the canning process itself, not forgetting the advertising costs. Well of course it comes down to where you buy them from, where they are manufactured and how many you can sell and a few other factors. 

Compare this with Chanel number 5, retailing at about £200 for a 30ml bottle! Or a a 3 year old Ferrari for about £200 000. Clearly pricing is a complex issue. What isn't complex is to work out the cost of manufacturing of a particular item. Then you factor in the savings associated with scaling up production (typically ingredients cost less per unit when you buy in bulk). However, this isn't the only explanation, since even allowing for the savings on costs of manufacture by outsourcing production to countries with low labour costs, for example, sometimes the sale price represents a loss. This is only possible for a limited period, where you are trying to get customers hooked on your product so that they remain loyal when you increase the price. Alternatively, a large supermarket chain may draw in customers to buy baked beans or bread at loss leading prices, knowing that they will spend more than they bargained for on items they don't really need. Stores that sell multiple items can spread their profit margins in very creative ways. 

Think about the psychology of marketing when planning your business. Why do supermarkets surround the check outs with sweets? That's the place where you linger, where your children start getting restless. Need I say more! The other issue is how do you position your product which you know is high quality when your competitors are cutting corners to reduce the selling price? This is when you need to think about marketing and branding. Again think of how Ferrari can sell a vehicle to get you back and to from work with a fuel consumption that is probably (I don't speak from experience here) 10 times worse than a Ford Focus! Then there are the tyres to replace.....

Let me have some feedback on your ideas and how you are getting on. Why not look at some businesses and see how they market via the internet. Next I shall say a few things about the different ways in which start up companies raise funding to get started. 

I'm not triskaidekaphobic!

Today's session was a lively one with thirteen new committees working towards the development of ideas that could form the basis of a set of new enterprises. This is the first time that M2M has been tried out at Level 2 and I was delighted with the bustling atmosphere and the engagement shown by everyone I spoke with. There were a number of ideas proposed, ranging from Phage Therapy to Synthetic Burgers, which made it immediately apparent that you were beginning to draw on the diversity of subject matter  from your varous degree courses, together with an awareness of what's in the News. This all goes to reinforce my view that by setting you the challenge of developing a business application of an area of Life Science, you not only improve your understanding of that Science, but you also acquire a wide range of transferable skills.

Here are some of the questions and issues that came up today. 

 "Do we need to invent something completely new?" Of course not, the aim is to explore an area of Science that interests you and then to explore its potential for making money, or for developing a social enterprise. Someone asked if student IP was the property of the University. I am delighted to say no. Any IP you develop alone (apart from any formulated in conjunction with a University member of staff) is yours. The ideas I discussed with you all were, without exception, appropriate for starting a business. The challenge your committees face, is to offer something new, something competitive and something either sustainable, or a business with a clear and attractive exit strategy.

What about the differences in Business planning in respect of a high quality, low volume product, versus a low cost-high volume product? Again, you have to work through the likely pricing structure that would be attractive to your customer base. In fact think about your complete offering and then begin to consider your customer base and refine your Business strategy accordingly. Think about the following types of product and how you might structure the business to deliver them. Aspirin or paracetamol, both as off patent drugs (think how much a pack of 32 costs in a supermarket). Anti-breast cancer drugs such as tamoxifen, or the challenges associated with the successful re-branding of thalidomide for anti-cancer therapy, after its disastrous launch for the relief of morning sickness in pregnant mothers in the late '50s and early '60s. Or maybe you could think of the marketing of Coca Cola, where no patents exist, or the business models of RedX Pharma and Concertpharma.

Most of you had settled on a single idea, but some of you were still toying with more than one idea. Since I didn't get round to everyone, I thought I would reiterate that each committee, with more than one idea, should draw up a list of about 5 criteria that you all agree would be required to make a successful business idea that interests you. Each member should then consider and rate each of these ideas. Then, re-group and try and see whether the best idea emerges. You should do this as soon as you can between now and the next session, in order to firm up your Business and present your preliminary business pitch at the next session.

In this respect, for the next session, you should give a 2 minute pitch of your business idea, using a single power point or prezi slide. Emma will provide more details on the MOLE site. I am looking forward to seeing how you get on with the planning and committee meetings: good luck and let me know if you have any questions. Finally, look at the M2M Google Site and if you find some useful internet resources, please share them!

Planning a new enterprise

The first session of the second year Faculty "Molecules to Market" Module at Sheffield begins tomorrow. The aim is for me and Emma to facilitate a session in which you develop the ideas for setting up your virtual company. Typically, this involves a number of steps.

Think of an area of Science that you wish to exploit commercially. I always think that the word exploit sounds negative and slightly sinister, however by definition, it simply means "to make full use of and derive benefit from something (in this case a piece of knowledge)". You may wish to exploit the recombinant DNA technology surrounding the green fluorescent protein to make plants or fish that glow in the dark? You may consider developing a hand held, solar powered device for diagnosing infectious diseases in sub-Saharan Africa. Or you may want to develop a novel form of Bioenergy based on the unusual metabolic characteristics of halophilic blue-green algae. Whatever you choose to develop as the core of your business, you should construct a concise Mission and Vision statement that captures its essence.

Having decided on an idea, the next stage might be to stratify your team 
and to identify roles within the company. Who will be the CEO? What characteristics do you as a committee value in a leader and what will the

outside world; including potential investors, customers, collaborators and suppliers want to see as the "phenotype" for the CEO of your business. You may choose to develop your company as a not-for-profit organisation, you may require someone who is highly competitive in order to attract venture capital funding, or you may be looking for someone with sophisticated communication skills and a strong grasp of some complex Science. Make sure you identify and prioritize these qualities when you select your CEO. The same goes for your sales team, your chief scientific officer, your PR and HR representatives.

Then there is the matter of your image, your logo, your company name and your website and or social media presence. These are all issues that can make a huge difference to the success, the acceptance and the positioning of a business. We want you to consider this as holistically as possible,  by combining Science and Business with sales and marketing. Finally think about money. Will you require a significant investment of cash? 


Will you build your business organically? Who are likely to be your main competitors? How much money do you want to make in the first year, five years, or ten years and how realistic is this compared with your competitors? How much will you pay each other and how will you recruit your first employee? And where will your head office be? These are a few of the issues we hope you will consider tomorrow. Looking forward to it!