global Benchmark 14/15 report Top University Business Incubators UBI GLOBAL

Transcription

1 global Benchmark 14/15 report Top University Business Incubators UBI GLOBAL

2 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As an emerging phenomenon, university business incubators have an important place in the innovation ecosystems globally. They enjoy tremendous institutional backing and receive financial support from the public exchequer. As a key component of entrepreneurial activity around the world, it s normal that their performance becomes subject of scrutiny. A key topic that warrants attention is improving the current incubators by making them more efficient and competitive. In this regard UBI Index is a pioneer in measuring the performance of university business incubators in 67 countries to recognize the top performing incubators of the world. In this latest edition UBI Index has analyzed 300 incubators and identified top 25 university business incubators globally. Doing so and highlighting some of their best practices will help universities, governments, incubation agencies, corporations, and incubators to improve the incubators they support.! UBI Index Stockholm, Sweden August 15, 2014 * * * Some of the key insights discovered this year: The majority of top incubators are based in urban areas, while less than 5% are based in rural areas. Europe leads the pack with 9 incubators in the top 25 rank, followed by North America having 8 and Asia with 4. ICT remains a popular sector and nearly half of the top incubators belong to it. The second biggest sector is that of non-specialized incubators. In regards to incubation performance, top 25 ranked incubators generate a significantly higher economic impact for their region when compared to the global average. Incubators with better resources, a positive peer effect and bigger network perform better than other incubators. This clear tendency is reflected in the top 25 ranking. The stage of client startups have little effect on the incubator performance as evident from the top 25 ranked incubators, where 36% of the clients are in early phase (some proof of idea viability) while 28% are in the growth phase (established proof of concept). According to the top 25 ranked incubators, the ability to attract high potential startups and to create a supportive entrepreneurial environment among the startups and qualified, involved coaches and mentors that provide individual support are the most important success traits. Another important aspect is that the top 25 ranked normally provide more services than the other incubators. The biggest differences are in the provision of coaching and mentoring services, access to funds, access to market through partnership and networking services and Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property (patent, etc.) services. The top 25 ranked incubators place high importance on coaching and mentoring services for their clients. They have significantly higher number of coaches and mentors. Additionally they rope much higher number of serial entrepreneurs than the global average. Therefore, we can infer that serial entrepreneurs are more important than professionals with academic background in developing startups. There are important differences in how the top incubators find and provide funding to their clients. 40% of the top 25 ranked incubators have available seed funding with an average size of $1,56M compared to 31% of the total sample, which has only $319k available on average. Top 25 incubators have better and wider network than the global average. This is especially true for number of contacts in large corporations, business providers and venture capital firms. * * * 3 - Executive Summary

3 EXPERTS BIO KJELL HÅKAN NÄRFELT Kjell-Håkan Närfelt has been working with technology-driven business development and R&D for more than 20 years in different management positions. He has advised numerous government agencies on incubation policy. Additionally, Kjell Håkan has served as a board member and advisor to several R&D based start-ups during his time as an investment director of a corporate venture and as a partner at a seed investment company. JONATHAN BRADFORD Jon is the Managing Director of Techstars in London, cofounder of f6s and tech.eu. Previously, Jon was the co-founder and CEO of Springboard. Jon loves to help startups and their founders achieve their true potential. Over the last four years, Jon acted as an advisor to many other multi-company accelerators from Montreal to Moscow. PAOLO BORELLA Paolo is director of AppCampus, where he drives operations and development efforts. He also advises a few startups across Europe and mentors at Startup Sauna and Startup Bootcamp. His previous work includes running an online community as Vice President at Fox Mobile Distribution in Germany, acting as a Director at Nokia, where he spent more than 13 years bringing services and software to markets and driving Business Development for the Smartphone Unit. DR. JELENA ANGELIS Dr. Jelena Angelis is an experienced innovation policy consultant who has been working with innovation and entrepreneurship, technology transfer and incubation since 2002 first with SQW Consulting, then with Oxford Innovation and currently with Technopolis Group. She has a particular interest in new technologies in the healthcare and life sciences sector. Jelena has published a number of publications and articles, including Innovation into Business, a book chapter in The Innovation Handbook: How to Develop, Manage and Protect Your Most Profitable Ideas. ORIOL PASCUAL Oriol Pascual is a business developer with a focus on innovation and sustainability. He has over 15 years of experience in these fields, during which he worked at Philips Corporate Sustainability Office (Netherlands), ERM (Spain), and Delft Technical University (Netherlands). He has been responsible for the development and management of a of cleantech business incubator Dnamo. For more information about Oriol, visit his website at Oriolpascual.com. 5

4 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFINITIONS AND METHODOLOGY DEFINITION RANKING METHODOLOGY TWO RANKING CATEGORIES OF UNIVERSITY BUSINESS INCUBATOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RANKING AND BENCHMARKING SAMPLE AND LANDSCAPE REGIONS SECTORS PHASES RANKING UBI GLOBAL TOP MOST PROMISING TOP CHALLENGER UABI GLOBAL TOP MOST PROMISING UBI EUROPE TOP UBI NORTH AMERICA TOP UBI SOUTH AMERICA TOP Table of contents

5 UBI ASIA AND OCEANIA TOP UBI MOST PROMISING AFRICA BENCHMARK GLOBAL SCORE APPLICATIONS VC OR ANGEL FUNDING SURVIVING AND GROWING COST PER JOB BACKGROUND OF COACHES BACKGROUND OF MENTORS INSIGHTS & BEST PRACTICES YOUR METRICS WHAT WILL YOU USE THE SCORECARD FOR? CASE: RICE ALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP UPCOMING PUBLICATIONS PARTICIPANT DIRECTORY NORTH AMERICA SOUTH AMERICA AFRICA ASIA + OCEANIA EUROPE Table of contents

6 3 DEFINITIONS & METHODOLOGY 01 DEFINITION THREE TYPES OF BUSINESS INCUBATORS BUSINESS INCUBATOR MANAGED BY OR AFFILIATED TO UNIVERSITY (-IES) Primary objective: To facilitate entrepreneurship and support early stage (new) ventures through a systematic (mid-long term) and extensive incubation process that includes services and infrastructure Quality-controlled intake of clients (startups) and regular time-bound exits in form of graduate startup clients BUSINESS ACCELERATOR Provides support and service to catalyze growth of (commercialization stage) ventures Through a short-term and intense incubation process that focuses on competence development services (not focused on infrastructure) BUSINESS INNOVATION CENTER Dedicates its efforts and resources to help entrepreneurs with innovative ideas and turn those ideas into viable, successful and sustainable businesses Core mission is to accelerate innovative entrepreneurship at the local level, through the customized delivery of a comprehensive range of professional support and incubation services (pre-incubation, incubation, postincubation) targeted at innovative startups, spin-offs, entrepreneurs and SMEs 02 RANKING METHODOLOGY RANKINGS PROCESS: 3 KEY STEPS 1. APPROPRIATE RESEARCH DESIGN A framework to ensure that the relevant metrics are considered for the ranking 2. APPROPRIATE DATA COLLECTION AND TREATMENT The survey and preparation of the data for analysis are carefully screened to ensure non erroneous data collection and treatment 3. DATA ANALYSIS & RANKING INDEX To ensure reliable data analysis, fair comparisons and nonbiased ranking 1. RESEARCH DESIGN The UBI Index ranking is built using the Bhatli & Eriksson framework, a comprehensible and exhaustive structure, which is made up by clusters of indicators that form the basis of a standardized framework for comparison. The same has been perfected through in-depth desk research and extensive consultations with over 30 incubation experts around the world. It measures each participating incubator on three broad categories. These three categories are further divided into 7 sub categories and constitute of over 60 key performance indicators. DESK RESEARCH INCUBATION EXPERTS 6 - Definitions & Methodology

7 03 TWO RANKING CATEGORIES OF UNIVERSITY BUSINESS INCUBATOR BASED ON THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNIVERSITY (-IES) UBI INDEX University Business Incubator of 2014 GLOBAL TOP 25 UNIVERSITY BUSINESS INCUBATOR RANKING UBI INDEX University Associated Business Incubator of 2014 GLOBAL TOP 10 UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS INCUBATOR RANKING Includes Business Incubators that fall into: Includes Business Incubators that fall into: UNIVERSITY MANAGED Majorly operated by the university UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED Not managed by the university but has a formal affiliation with the university UNIVERSITY NON AFFILIATION Works closely with the university but has no formal affiliation with any university 04 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RANKING AND BENCHMARKING RANKING IS NOT THE SAME AS BENCHMARKING RANKING BENCHMARKING Developing a framework and methodology that measures the performance of university business incubators allows both for ranking and benchmarking. At UBI Index we have two types of ranking cateogories (see above) depending on the relationship with the university. An incubator is ranked depending of belonging to these category groups, but benchmarked against all. The difference between ranking and benchmarking is that ranking implies the ordering of the incubators according to their performance, while benchmarking means the comparison of one particular incubator taken out of the sample against a point of reference which in this case are top performing incubators. In other words, if we were to think of this difference in terms of numbers - ranking process would attribute an absolute number to each of them (the position in the series). Whereas benchmarking would be the ratio of incubator performance and that of the reference line (top global average, top regional average etc.) At UBI Index we follow a two pronged approach to rank and benchmark university business incubators. First, a thorough ranking process identifies the top performing incubators (which become the reference line), second a benchmark process that stacks incubators against the reference line to identify the strengths, weaknesses and best practices associated with improving the performance of benchmarked incubators. 9 - Definitions & Methodology

8 4 SAMPLE AND LANDSCAPE SECTORS MAJORITY SECTOR AT THE INCUBATORS INCUBATORS ASSESSED INCUBATORS ACCEPTED INCUBATORS BENCHMARKED 55% 01 REGIONS A GOOD DISTRIBUTION FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD AFRICA 5% 6% ICT BIOTECH 13% ASIA + OCEANIA EUROPE 37% 7% LIFE SCIENCES NORTH AMERICA 23% 4% SOUTH AMERICA 22% CLEANTECH 67 COUNTRIES 5 GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS 28% NON-SPECIALIZED 03 PHASES STAGE OF CURRENTLY ENROLLED STARTUP CLIENTS WHEN ACCEPTED 32% 31% 23% 14% IDEA PHASE EARLY PHASE GROWTH PHASE ACCELERATION PHASE 10 - Sample and Landscape

9 06 BACKGROUND OF COACHES PERCENTAGE OF CURRENTLY ACTIVE COACHES AT THE INCUBATORS ACADEMIC 7.6% 17.2% BUSINESS 30.1% 32.6% ENTREPRENEURIAL (SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR) 25.9% 42.4% SECTOR/TECHNOLOGY 18.1% 16.1% OTHER 1.8% 8.1% GLOBAL TOP AVG GLOBAL AVG 07 BACKGROUND OF MENTORS PERCENTAGE OF CURRENTLY ACTIVE MENTORS AT THE INCUBATORS ACADEMIC 7.9% 13.4% BUSINESS 29.2% 32.4% ENTREPRENEURIAL (SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR) 29.6% 45.6% SECTOR/TECHNOLOGY 14.8% 15.4% OTHER 2.4% 9.2% GLOBAL TOP AVG GLOBAL AVG 21 - Benchmark

10 5 RANKING UBI INDEX University Business Incubator of 2014 UBI GLOBAL TOP 25 TOP UNIVERSITY BUSINESS INCUBATOR RANKING 2014 # INCUBATOR UNIVERSITY COUNTRY 1 Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship Rice University United States 2 SETsquared University of Bath, Bristol, Exeter, Southampton, Surrey United Kingdom 3 SCUT National University Science Park South China University of Technology China 4 ATP Innovations University of Sydney; University of Technology, Sydney; Australian National University; University Australia of New South Wales 5 Digital Media Zone Ryerson University Canada 6 IncubaUC Pontifical Catholic University of Chile Chile 7 Center of Industry Accelerator and Patent Strategy National Chiao Tung University Taiwan 8 Encubator Chalmers University of Technology Sweden 9 Instituto Genesis PUC-Rio Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro Brazil 10 TEC Edmonton University of Alberta Canada 11 INiTS Universitäres Gründerservice Wien Vienna University of Technology, Vienna University Alma Mater Rudolphina Austria 12 DTU Symbion Innovation Technical University of Denmark Denmark 13 Melbourne Accelerator Program University of Melbourne Australia 14 Hust Science Park Development Corporation Huazhong University of Science and Technology China 15 Incubatore di Imprese Innovative del Politecnico di Torino (I3P) Politecnico di Torino Italy 16 Hefei University /National University Science Park Anhui University; Hefei University of Technology; University of Science and Technology of China 17 VentureLab Georgia Institute of Technology United States 18 Uppsala Innovation Centre Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; Uppsala University Sweden 19 NDRC Dublin City University; Dún Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology; National College of Art and Design; Trinity College Dublin; University Ireland College Dublin 20 PSU Business Accelerator Portland State University United States 21 Dean L. Hubbard Center for /Innovation and Entrepreneurship Northwest Missouri State University United States 22 Western Research Parks Western University Canada 23 Chrysalis Pontifical Catholic University of Valparaíso Chile 24 National Chiao Tung University /Business Incubation Center National Chiao Tung University Taiwan 25 iminds University of Antwerp; University of Leuven; Ghent University; Vrije Universiteit Brussel Belgium China 11 - Ranking

11 UBI INDEX University Associated Business Incubator of 2014 UABI GLOBAL TOP 10 TOP UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS INCUBATOR RANKING 2014 # INCUBATOR UNIVERSITY COUNTRY 1 Youngstown Business Incubator Kent State University; University of Akron; Hiram College; Youngstown State University; Case United States Western Reserve University 2 H-Farm Ventures Università Ca Foscari Venezia Italy 3 TechColumbus Ohio State University; Columbus State Community College; Otterbein University; Denison University United States 4 Montpellier Agglomération BIC Université de Montpellier France 5 Hub China Beijing Technology and Business University, Capital Normal University China 6 Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator University of Southern California; University of California, Los Angeles; California Institute of United States Technology; California State University, Northridge 7 Stiftelsen Chalmers Innovation Chalmers University of Technology Sweden 8 Incubadora de Nanotecnología Instituto de Innovación y Transferencia de Tecnología de Nuevo León Mexico Northwestern University; University of Chicago; Illinois Institute of Technology, University of Illinois; United States DePaul University 10 Nuvolab Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore; Scuola Superiore Sant anna Italy TOP UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATED BUSINESS INCUBATORS Ranking

12 2 TOP INCUBATOR CASE STUDIES OVERVIEW The benchmark presented above has clearly established the value of being a top incubator. With this in mind, every incubator may aim to achieve such success. However, as incubators are inherently diverse, what is the best method to achieve that? And, what kind of practical know-how should an incubator acquire in order to do so? This section would answer some of these queries using case studies of top incubators. In these features, managers of top incubator programs reveal their best practices and strategies. Some of the insights you ll find in the featured case studies include: Best practices to ensure excellent value for incubator client startups Best practices to ensure a successful business model for an incubator Best practices to optimize an incubator s operational budget Best practices to attract deal flow and talent to an incubator Best practices to provide relevant customer problems for incubator client startups to solve FEATURED CASES RYERSON DMZ UPPSALA INNOVATION CENTRE RICE ALLIANCE YOUNGSTOWN EDISON INCUBATOR CORPORATION BUSINESS INNOVATION CENTRE DE MONTPELLIER AGGLOMÉRATION INCUBAUC 8

13 RICE ALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY AND ENT. INCUBATOR BRIEF LOCATION: Houston, USA FOUNDED: 2000 UNIVERSITY AFFILIATION: Rice University WEBSITE: DIRECTOR: Brad Burke MISSION: To provide devoted support to technology commercialization, mentoring, networking and the launch of high growth technology companies BENCHMARK SCORECARD AVAILABLE IN APPENDIX PERFORMANCE PROFILE GLOBAL RANK 1 UBI INDEX University Business Incubator of 2015 Sector focus: Cleantech $2m Yearly operational budget 7 Number of employees GLOBAL BENCHMARK 2014 VALUE FOR ECOSYSTEM 720 Average submissions received per year 28% Average accepted submissions per year 3 mo Duration of incubation program VALUE FOR CLIENTS N/A Aggregate of funds attracted by client startups 300 Size of investor network No Incubator has a seed fund ATTRACTIVENESS 20 Number of events organized, or co-organized per year 207 Number of regional and international partners 220 Number of corporate sponsors mo=months, m=million, b=billion SUMMARY In the Global Benchmark 2014, Rice Alliance was attributed a 3.5 star performance rating on value for ecosystem indicators driven by robust job creation figures and exceptional performance on economy enhancement indicators. On value for client indicators Rice Alliance was attributed a 5 star rating due to outstanding performance on competence development and network enhancement indicators. On the attractiveness indicators Rice Alliance was attributed a 4 star rating based on exceptional post-incubation performance and incubator offer. 9

14 BEST PRACTICES AND INSIGHTS Brad Burke An exclusive interview with Brad Burke, Managing Director, Rice Alliance for Technology and Entrepreneurship What is your incubator s value proposition to your client startups? What would be 3 tips (best practices) to ensure excellent value for client startups? The reasons that startups come to participate in our program are to look for funding and to connect with investors, second, to seek advisors and mentors to help them, third, to find other competent people to fill out their management team and fourth, to look for strategic partners, both corporations and others, that can help startups with their development needs. Essentially we provide all the aspects that an early-stage startup may require for successful commercialization. If I used the UBI framework, I d say our value proposition includes three types of assistance: access to capital, access to relevant training, and access to a strategic network. My advice to incubators is first to understand the importance of the ecosystem. We have hundreds, if not thousands, of individuals (including investors, mentors, advisors, corporations, etc.) in our ecosystem that cover all aspects of our client startups needs. I d suggest that all incubator managers should spend time on building relationships with their ecosystems. Second, focus on the value you provide to your clients. We need to think of incubators as entrepreneurial businesses and consider startups as our customers. If we are not providing value-added services to our customers, we ll go out of business. Hence, my suggestion is to continually get feedback from our customers, i.e. client startups, and continually evolve your value by offering better service to your client startups. What is the business model of Rice Alliance? What are the main sources of revenue for your incubator? What would be 3 best practices to ensure a sustainable and successful business model? Our business model is probably different from other incubators as we do not take equity nor charge our clients or have an endowment. Ninety percent of our funds come from corporate sponsorship, strategic investors and grants, while 10% come from Rice University. We have built an ecosystem of corporations and individuals around our incubator and entrepreneurs who are willing to fund our programs and engage with us on many levels. What is great about corporate involvement is that these corporations are very open to new ideas and have a deep sense of commitment for the startups to succeed and for Houston to be a top entrepreneurial city. In addition to financing, they can help our clients in many other ways, such as by making connections and mentoring them. Additionally, they are open to our endeavors and methods and have practical expectations with goals focused on business and job creation. As for leveraging public funds from the government, we do very little of that. The U.S. was built on the entrepreneurial spirit and that principle infuses new business creation efforts, both from the standpoint of the startup and supporters. This is a very positive and extremely beneficial method for all involved. Americans want to grow our and the world s economy and perpetuate a history of innovation. This is built on personal convictions of those who have gone before and want to give back and continue to develop not only the U.S. but world economy. This is a successful model here in the U.S., in part because there aren t many sustainable models based on public subsidy here. Entrepreneurial education is becoming more prevalent and some foundations and government organizations are supporting that more and more, but the majority of funding is still through corporations and individual investors. Another business model that is often pursued by incubators is 10

15 having a physical facility and renting space to cover operating costs. We have deliberately chosen to stay away from that model because we don t want to become a real estate company making our sole preoccupation maximizing the occupancy of our space. We would rather focus on mentoring, education and customer development that benefits our entrepreneurs. Another accelerator model is charging for services, and my sense is that it s very hard to ask entrepreneurs, who are short on cash, to pay for services. If we enter into this transactional relationship it changes the dynamics of that relationship. We are here to educate and help launch companies. Our purpose is to aid startups, not reap from them before they are even launched. For us, that is counterintuitive. Part of our secret sauce, which may not be so secret, is that incubators need to build an ecosystem based on great relationships with corporations and entrepreneurial individuals who can support their start up businesses. However, this relationship has to be a two way street, so on our end we make sure that we give back to those corporations supporting us. We keep them involved and engaged. Whatever they are looking for, partnerships, talent, we are there to help them out. We and these new businesses will hopefully be a part of our community for years to come and we want to start these relations off right, with mutual benefits and accomplishments. We want our success to be everyone s success - the supporters and the startups. Another tip is to operate the incubator like a startup. A startup that received an initial funding of $10m will not be as lean and hungry as one that had to earn its money dollar-by-dollar. Incubator managers need to have that mindset and try not to live off subsidies and endowments. They need to be efficient, be able to provide value, focus on outcomes and feel comfortable to go ask corporations and individuals for money. Incubation managers need to demonstrate the value that can be gained by everyone involved. One of the biggest roadblocks for incubator managers is that they haven t sold anything in their life and that is the missing piece. On that note, another tip would be to engage the alumni of the university where your incubator is based, to give back. They are often willing to do so and could be a great support base. Fifty percent of our budget goes towards staffing and HR costs. The key is hiring great people. Something we tell startups is that the first five people you hire can make or break the company. So a big part of our budget goes to getting hugely talented people who are aligned to our goals. Our budget breakdown is 30% global intercollegiate business plan competition, 10% on events, 5% on marketing, 5% on administration costs. How can incubators attract deal flow and talent? What are some of the best practices at Rice Alliance? We have built a number of sizable databases that we leverage to attract deal flow. First, we have an newsletter that goes out to over 27,000 subscribers, second, we have a university database with about 9,000 international university contacts, third,we have a venture capital database for each industry that we focus on, and fourth, we have a database of startups that we have worked with over the years. So, a tip on creating deal flow is to do the research and spend time in creating relevant databases. Second, if you want to attract talent and deal flow you need active involvement of the investment community. For the startups to participate you need to engage the investors at different levels, from angel investors to venture capitalists, private equity and corporate technology development investors, Another important thing is the entrepreneur education and skill development. Not only do you need to have great people delivering those skills but also you need to keep it relevant. So we need to constantly ask entrepreneurs, what they need. and to be able to make connections. It acts as a great hook and is a vital element to attract talented entrepreneurs. The same holds true in reverse. You need to search and find those viable and investable startups for investors to attend your events and become vested in a sustainable and long-term endeavor. How do you use your operational budget? What would be 3 tips (best practices) to get maximum value from your operational budget? Third, organize relevant events around the incubator. At Rice we organize the Rice Business Plan Competition and give away over a million dollars in prizes every year. It s one of the biggest drivers of our deal flow. 11

16 How do you assist your client startups with accessing (relevant) customers and marketplace? What would be 3 tips (best practices) for providing client startups with relevant customer problems? Many of our client startups are selling business to business. So one way we provide them access to the marketplace is by connecting them to all the major corporations in our region. We organize special theme-based connection events, such as speed dating, where we encourage our entrepreneurs to spend short amounts of time with important corporations. My suggestion to all other incubators would be to identify key strategic partners in your ecosystems and start building a relationship with them. Organize specific events of interest for those strategic partners. That is the window for your entrepreneurs to connect with the marketplace and relevant customers. How do you monitor your incubator performance? What are the 3 KPIs (key performance indicators) that you monitor regularly? For us there are three metrics that are very important to measure our success as an incubator. First, we look at the number of graduated companies that have come through, survived, thrived or exited. Second, we look at the amount of follow up funding our companies have attracted. Third, the number of people who participate in our programs. It s all about building the ecosystem, so the number of people involved and benefiting from our programs is crucial for us. SUCCESS STORIES Auditude Auditude is a leading video management and monetization technology company that helps content owners and aggregators grow their video revenues. The company s proprietary technology, Auditude Connect, is an innovative ad management system that allows premium video websites and content owners to manage their business requirements and ad serving needs using professional videos. Auditude is based in Palo Alto with offices in Los Angeles and New York City. It was acquired by Adobe in 2011 for $120m. Rebellion Photonics Rebellion Photonics has built the first real-time chemical imaging video camera based on their unique snap-shot hyper spectral imaging technology. Their main product is the Gas Cloud Imaging camera for oil and gas safety. The company was founded in 2009, is headquartered in Houston, Texas and has attracted over $10 million in follow on investment. KEY TAKEAWAYS SUSTAIN ABLE BUSINESS MODEL Build a micro-ecosystem of corporations and individuals who can support your incubator financially. Run the incubator like a startup and try not to live off subsidies or endowments OPTIMIZE OPERATIONAL BUDGET Hire great people EFFECTIVE INCUBATOR MANAGEMENT Build a large ecosystem and constantly engage with it Keep entrepreneurs at the center when designing entrepreneurship education ATTRACT DEAL FLOW AND TALENT Get the investment community actively involved Spend time researching and creating databases 12

17 8 PARTICIPANT DIRECTORY 01 UNIVERSITY BUSINESS INCUBATORS FROM 67 COUNTRIES 5 GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS NB! Only a few select organizations are enclosed per region Would you like to gain full access to the participant directory with all 300 incubators? Contact us today at for more information 19 - Participant directory