In March, we spoke at SXSW 2018 about the kind of support and initiatives that could make it easier for scientists to build successful science-based startups outside of industry and academia. We brought together a panel that talked about the role of an engaged community, shared lab spaces and facilities, venture programmes, and funding.
🎙️ Listen to the audio recording of our SXSW panel here or carry on reading for the key points & updates since.
Kicking off our #sxsw panel with @gemmamilne @DominicFalcao @H_Destecroix & our very own @anaMflorescu: talking about building an ecosystem for science startups. pic.twitter.com/ovdG0oERsN
— Science Practice (@sciencepractice) March 14, 2018
Becoming an entrepreneur and starting your own digital company is now a common and accessible career option. That’s because, over the past decade, a lot of time and resources have gone into creating programmes, spaces, events and funding opportunities for people to come up with ideas, explore and grow them. The same is now happening for science-based startups.
We have been seeing this in the UK with the emergence of deep-tech focused accelerators and incubators, shared lab space and equipment, events and networking opportunities for scientists looking to start their own businesses, and funders turning to science innovation to increase their impact (and return). But most of these are nascent and often isolated from one another. We wanted to start a conversation to raise awareness of these different initiatives and to start thinking about them as part of a broader system — a system aimed to incentivise and empower scientists to build their own science ventures. Speaking at SXSW offered the perfect opportunity to do so.
South by Southwest (SXSW) is an exciting 10-day conference known for its fantastic diversity of cultural, political and technological events. This year, we added science to the mix. Our panel featured:
We discussed four ecosystem aspects — community, facilities, venture programmes, and funding. Below we provide a brief description of how these differ for science ventures and provide a couple of UK example initiatives.
If you’re an entrepreneur looking to start a digital company, there’s a wide range of events, communities and conferences you can join to help meet potential collaborators, investors, and test your ideas. If you’re a scientist looking to set up a science business outside of academia or industry, your options are limited (although the Hello Tomorrow conference deserves a worthy mention here).
It was this gap that Gemma Milne and Lawrence Yolland tried to fill when they created Science: Disrupt — an organisation connecting innovators, iconoclasts and entrepreneurs interested in creating change in science. They have an online slack community with around 800 members, they produce podcasts, write editorials, and run events, all intended on sharing existing initiatives in this space, raising awareness of opportunities available for scientists beyond academia and industry. As part of the panel, Gemma talked about the value of having spaces where entrepreneurs can meet like-minded people, exchange ideas, and learn from each other.
To create a digital startup you need a laptop and internet. To build a science startup you will most likely need a lab and equipment. Organisations like the London BioHackspace and Clustermarket are making it easier for science entrepreneurs to access the equipment and skills needed to test ideas.
As co-working spaces have demonstrated for digital startups, there is a significant added value in having different entrepreneurs working in the same space, sharing lessons, networks and expertise. These flexible shared work spaces and facilities are currently limited for science entrepreneurs.
Whilst founding Ziylo, a novel glucose monitoring tech, Harry Destecroix encountered the same problem in terms of lack of facilities for scientific spin-offs from local universities. So he set one up. Unit DX is the UK’s first independent science incubator, and now houses 18 early-stage science companies ranging from quantum to biotech startups. Harry talked about setting up Unit DX and empowering scientists to start their own companies.
Going through an accelerator or incubator programme has become part of the regular journey for a digital startup. But programmes designed to support science ventures are still nascent. Examples include RebelBio – the world’s first life sciences accelerator, the BioCity incubators, and Deep Science Ventures (DSV).
DSV is a hypothesis-led venture builder that aims to create science companies from scratch. Modelled on the Entrepreneur First approach, twice a year they select a multidisciplinary group of elite scientists and engineers and support them in starting high-impact science companies. Dominic Falcão, co-founder at DSV, talked about what a minimum viable product looks like for a science startup and how they’re trying to manage funder and VC expectations when it comes to investing in deep-tech companies (they’ve also written a great piece on this here).
Innovation funds tend to be skewed towards digital solutions. That means that funders can start seeing solutions quite soon after investing, but the downside is that these often have a limited impact. In an attempt to maximise this impact, funders are increasingly looking at more complex problems that would benefit from science innovation.
Our Good Problems team works with such science and innovation funders. We help them identify relevant challenges and design incentives that can both motivate and support scientists in developing solutions — whether by running prizes, funding calls or offering access to mentors, training or lab space. Ana Florescu, our team lead, talked about the value of good problems and how they can provide an opportunity for scientists to turn their ideas into impactful ventures.
We’re keen to keep the conversation going and see how we can contribute to building a supportive ecosystem for science entrepreneurs. Here’s what we’ve been up to since the panel:
🎙️ Reminder – You can listen to our full SXSW2018 panel discussion here. Enjoy!
Update 25/04/2018: Call now closed. Thank you to those who applied!
The Good Problems Team at Science Practice works with funders, investors, and philanthropists to design innovative challenges and funding schemes in science and technology. We have designed over 30 challenges and funding calls including the £10M Longitude Prize.
Our approach relies on finding interesting problems and proposing ways to encourage people to solve them such as challenge prizes, competitions, funding calls, and accelerator programmes. In the past, we’ve designed challenges and funding calls covering problems like antimicrobial resistance and water desalination for the Longitude Prize, sanitation in humanitarian settings for the Humanitarian Innovation Fund, and non-animal protein sources and opportunities for re-engineering soil for the Frontier Prize.
At the moment, we’re working on the Flying High Challenge – a project exploring how drones could be used in urban settings – and are designing challenges targeting international development opportunities in Indonesia and Egypt.
We’re also looking to design and run Good Problems workshops to share our tools and methodology with scientists so we can support them in identifying venture opportunities.
Science Practice is an equal opportunity employer and we value diversity and inclusion at our company. We welcome people of different nationalities, backgrounds, experiences, abilities, and perspectives.
As well as a competitive salary we are offering matched pension contributions and flexible, family-friendly working arrangements. Oh – and a cupboard full of fruit and snacks. 🍌
Please send an email with your CV and/or portfolio and a brief cover letter to Ana at af@science-practice.com. We look forward to hearing from you! 🙌
No agencies, please
Canadian born and bred, lover of the Oxford comma, and intimidatingly good proof-reader. Science Practice welcomes yet another new face to the team!
Andrea isn’t completely new — she’s been working remotely with us (from Vancouver) since November, but couldn’t resist the pull of London any longer and has finally joined us full-time in the studio!
With degrees in English and Information Design, Andrea fits right in with our design-led research approach. Her raft of experience ranging from the dramatic (licensing the Canadian security industry) to the downright unexpected (training as a ‘Master Compost Recycler’) means she joined ready to adapt to working in any sector and jumped straight into finding some good problems with us.
She’s already been working on the Flying High project as the designer behind those lovely summary documents we’ve been producing to bring cities up to speed with drone technology. Now she’s taking the lead on the research for the Egypt strand of our Global CoLab project with 100% Open, Nesta and the Newton Fund, and working on redesigning the good problems website — and of course, revamping this blog with a brand new design!
The good problems ‘A Team’ is now bigger and busier than ever, so keep an eye out on this blog and our twitter feed for future updates on our escapades as we take on the world’s problems together…
It’s been almost four months now, so an introduction to the newest member of the Science Practice team is well overdue!
Once upon a time, Aran was a scientist looking after stem cells and exercising his distinctly average pipetting skills on a daily basis. However, much like his new colleague Simon, he decided life in the lab wasn’t for him, and made a dramatic move into science communication instead. In his own words: “talking about science is a lot more fun than actually doing it!”
After finishing his MSc in Science Communication, he managed to talk his way into Science Practice on a short-term internship with the promise of some free grant money (which is yet to arrive, but we live in hope). A couple of months on, he decided to throw in the towel with big organisations and instead take up a desk as the fifth member of Science Practice.
As Ana’s right-hand-man on the Good Problems team he’s been busy researching drones for the Flying High Challenge and renewable energy in Indonesia for the Global CoLab; designing the first draft of the upcoming Good Problems workshops (stay tuned…) and helping out where he can with Ana’s relentlessly impressive drive to drum up more work. Crucially, he’s also taken over the role of Ana’s Lunch Enforcer, which has been vacant since Tempest sadly left the office.
For the last few months Aran has also been looking after our comms: coming up with a communications strategy to guide us for this quarter, reviving this blog and desperately trying to resist the urge to use #innovation in his tweets. If you drop us a line on Twitter, most likely it’ll be Aran getting back to you!
With his ever-present smile and a desire to get stuck in, Aran has slotted in well here at the office - although he’s still an outsider, as the only member of the team without a Mac.
Welcome to the team, Aran and we’ll make sure to keep that snacks cupboard well stocked!
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) - more commonly known as drones - have rapidly become the go-to gadget for hobbyists and professionals alike. They are regularly used for photography and filming applications, to deliver supplies to remote locations, and even by emergency services in search and rescue operations. But so far, they haven’t been welcome in cities.
The Flying High Challenge, a collaboration between innovation foundation Nesta and Innovate UK, aims to change that. The Good Problems team at Science Practice has been supporting the project by exploring problems that urban drones could solve and the barriers that need to be overcome before drones can be safely and usefully introduced to city skies.
To solve a problem, first you have to choose a problem. There are a wide range of barriers to introducing drones to cities, ranging from concerns around safety and functionality to restrictions imposed by the law. Through design-led research, we searched for and analysed these barriers to work out which problems the Flying High Challenge should focus on.
First up, there are clear technical difficulties in using drones to perform some tasks. For example, if police or fire departments need to use a drone in an emergency, it’s not very helpful if it can’t fly because of a little wind or rain. Some drones have sensors so advanced they can see through walls, yet they’re being held back by battery technology which limits the hardware they can carry and how long they can fly for. And Amazon wants to bring you your delivery in ten minutes flat? Great. Amazon drops your delivery from 400 feet onto the M25? Less great.
However, we can’t think about these drones in isolation: they’ll need a lot of new infrastructure, and if they’re going to be sharing the same airspace, they’ll have to learn to talk to each other. Cities will need to build recharging stations, maintenance hubs, and loading bays to help drones do their jobs. Drones criss-crossing the skies will need an air traffic control system to plan flight paths and stop them crashing into one another, as well as top-end security to prevent them being hacked or brought down.
There are legal barriers too: current regulations make it almost impossible for councils and businesses to operate drones in urban areas, since they can’t be flown near buildings or crowds (unless they have special permission, like when the London Fire Brigade used a drone to assess the damage following the Grenfell tower fire). In particular, drones can’t be flown autonomously, and have to fly within the visual line of sight of the pilot, which presents real issues for large-scale commercial applications.
To guide the decision-making of city authorities applying to the Flying High Challenge, we first produced an Introductory Pack which summarised our research in an accessible way. Its aim was to help bring cities up to speed with cutting-edge drone technology and help them decide which applications would be most appropriate and useful for their needs.
There turned out to be a lot of interest: whether they want to use them to deliver organs between hospitals, fight fires, or bring your packages to your door, cities across the UK want to be the first to bring drone technology into the urban environment.
Based on interest areas identified by cities and through our own research, we then shortlisted 13 priority use cases, each of which would offer significant economic and social benefits to citizens if implemented in UK cities. These use cases fall into five categories:
Monitoring environments, individuals and groups: Monitoring air pollution, mapping fires, overseeing construction sites and creating smart road networks.
Inspecting infrastructure and systems: Exploring hazardous environments, inspecting large infrastructure, and maintaining utilities.
Delivering goods: Delivering consumer goods and providing hospitals with medical supplies.
Transporting people: Providing airborne public transport or taxi services.
Supporting existing services: Responding to traffic accidents, managing marine ports, and boosting mobile networks.
We distilled our research on each of these drone applications into digestible one-page summaries. Their aim was to help cities get a clearer picture of which use cases they might be interested in and establish what needs to be done before those applications can become a reality.
Last week, the judging panel reviewed applications from cities across the UK and selected five cities to go forwards into the Flying High Challenge. Congratulations to Bradford, London, Preston, Southampton, and the West Midlands! Working together with Nesta, we will now explore each of the finalists’ visions in detail and help them identify specific use cases where drones could add value to their cities.
We are a close team of designers and researchers who are passionate about tackling ambitious and important problems. If you’re looking to grow your impact, we’d love to hear from you!