--- CF4E28B18E26D0FAD967B3B8ECD07A5B

Annex 4: DESCRIPTION OF GOOD PRACTICE

The aim of annex 4 is to get detailed and structured information on good practices identified within INTERREG IVC projects. Since this information will directly feed into an on-line good practice database to be made available on the programme website, we would be grateful if you could ensure the good quality of the information provided. In particular, this information should be well written and easily understandable for external readers. One good practice can be described per form. There is no limit on the number of good practices that can be submitted, but a minimum of four good practice descriptions are required over the project's lifetime. Annex 4 is submitted together with the progress reports. N.B. See Programme Manual section 1.1 for the programme's definition of a good practice 1. PROJECT INFORMATION 1.1 INDEX 1.2 PROJECT ACRONYM 1.3 PRIORITY 1.4 PROGRAMME SUB-THEME 0787R2 DISTRICT+ 1: Innovation and the knowledge economy Innovation, research and technology development

2. GOOD PRACTICE INFORMATION 2.1 Title of the practice 2.2 Topic of the practice Please specify the precise topic of the practice in a few words (e.g. support to SMEs, demographic change, e-governement, risk management, water scarcity, renewable energy). 2.3 Location of the practice Introducing academics to roles and responsibilities of being a Director in a commercial enterprise through Mock Boards Creating an environment to nurture potential University spin-out activities and embed corporate practise with Postgraduate researchers and University academic staff.

Country NUTS 1 NUTS 2 City

UK WEST MIDLANDS Shropshire and Staffordshire Stafford 01/08/2010 End

2.4 Start date of the practice (and if applicable, end date)

Start

2.5 Detailed description of the practice Please provide a detailed description of the practice itself. The description should include information on the nature of the practice, its objective, the main stakeholders involved (including the beneficiaries) and the financial resources required for its implementation. If known, please also indicate key success factors and conditions for potential transfer. Academics by their very nature tend to have excellent skills in communication, research and problem solving, but in many cases lack experience in business. Whilst there are many theoretical guides for the development of business acumen, there is nothing quite like taking part and doing it. It is also important that management and administration staff are involved to ensure that they can help to incubate companies prior to official spin-out. The Mock Board approach is intended to involve academic inventors, University management and administration staff in a structured approach to developing potential IPR and commercial opportunities. The structure will simulate a board of Directors meeting in format, roles and responsibilities. This will introduce skills and procedures that project leads will require if the opportunity grows into a spin-out company. The meetings are held regularly (monthly) throughout the incubation period and roles will be appointed to each person on the mock board. Skills, experience and knowledge for these roles is drawn on from across the University. People are seconded from our meetings start department of Enterprise and Commercial Development and the management and quorum TheLaw school, ouroff reasonably informally, developing into more formal board meetings and minimum administration staff from and voting rights. A structured and standard agenda for the meetings is used and each member of the board reports on their activity. The main objectives of the mock boards are to develop academic inventors' skills and horizons to act in the interests of a potential spin-out company (this is a major step change for them), to monitor progress of potential developments, to fully develop a business plan for the potential spin-out company, to ensure that management and administration staff are supporting the needs of academics wishing to follow aspirations to form spin-out companies, to challenge academic inventors to develop and to challenge the spin-out concept and to examine University systems, structure and procedures in the pursuance of enterprise activities. The investment in this model is largely in staff time - mainly the academic, in buying out their time. The role of management and administration is to support this activity anyway, so this does not contribute a cost. 2.6 Evidence of success Please explain why this practice is considered as good. Objective result and/or impact indicators are welcome in this section to demonstrate the success of the practice (e.g. n jobs created or safeguarded, n of patents submitted, amount of tons/year of freight traffic withdrawn from road, % of greenhouse gas emission reduced). Since we started using Mock Boards at Staffordshire Univeristy we have used them for seven potential spin-out companies. This has been hugely succesful. We have managed to convert some of the potnetial spin-outs into new companies that are trading from the foundation that they had during the incubation period and the mock board. throguh this process we were also able to determine that one project should not become a spin-out and should trade from within the Unvieristy instead. We also determined that 2 projects should not be taken any further forward, thus reducing our risk and time. In terms of other outcomes, it is clear that University management and administration staff have learnt more about what is required to support internal and external enterprise.

2.7 Contact details to obtain further information on the practice Name Organisation E-mail Website 2.8 Annex completed on Dr Stuart Brown Staffordshire University stuart.brown@staffs.ac.uk www.staffs.ac.uk