Talking Innovation with Dr Kate Cornick, CEO of LaunchVic

As a nice segue to last week’s blog on Techstars, I was fortunate to hear Dr Kate Cornick speak, just before the latest LaunchVic grants were announced. Organised by Innovation Bay, hosted by Deloitte, and facilitated by Ian Gardiner, the fireside chat plus Q&A was a useful insight on a key part of the Victorian Government’s innovation strategy.

launchviclogo innovationbay-feat-800x500At the outset, Dr Cornick stressed that LaunchVic is not an investment vehicle, and it doesn’t fund individual startups. Rather it seeks to support initiatives that help grow the local startup eco-system. (See also my blog on the consultation process that informed LaunchVic’s formation.)

Commenting on why Victoria (and Australia) has the potential to become a world-class centre for innovation, Dr Cornick pointed to a number of factors:

  • A collaborative culture
  • Positive economic conditions (comparatively speaking)
  • Governments (mostly) open to innovation
  • Strong research base

However, a few of the obstacles in our way include:

  • The notorious tall poppy syndrome, whereby Australians are suspicious, sceptical and even scathing of local success – except when it comes to sport and entertainment!
  • An inability to scale or capitalise on academic research
  • Insufficient entrepreneurial skills and experience to “get scrappy”
  • Lack of exposure for highly successful startups (c.$20m market cap) that can help attract more investment

From a startup perspective, Australia also has the wrong type of risk capital: institutional investors are more attuned to placing large bets on speculative mining assets, typically funded through public listings, and with very different financial profiles. (Or they prefer to invest in things they can see and touch – property, utilities, infrastructure, banks.)

So there is still a huge gap in investor education on startups and their requirements for early-stage funding. Part of LaunchVic’s remit is to market the local startup community, promote the success stories, and foster the right conditions to connect capital with ideas and innovation. After all, Australia does have one of the largest pool of pension fund assets in the world, and that money has to be put to work in creating economic growth opportunities.

As I have blogged before, we still see the “expensive boomerang”: Australian asset managers investing in Silicon Valley VCs, who then invest in Australian startups. Although when I raised a question about the investment preferences of our fund managers, Ian Gardiner did point out that a few enlightened institutions have invested in Australian VC funds such as SquarePeg Capital, H2 Ventures and Reinventure.

Dr Cornick also provided a reality check on startups, and added a note of caution to would-be founders:

First, it tends to be an over-glamourised sector. For one thing, founders under-estimate the relentless grind in making their business a success. And while eating pizza and pot noodles might sound like a lifestyle choice, it’s more of an economic necessity. Thus, it’s not for everyone (and not everyone should or needs to build a startup…), so aspiring entrepreneurs would be well-advised to do their homework.

Second, the success of any startup community will be reflected by industry demand. “Build it and they will come” is not a viable strategy. And I know from talking to those within the Victorian Government that unlike their inter-state counterparts, they are not willing (or able) to fund or invest in specific startups, nor in specific ventures such as a FinTech hub. Their position is that industry needs to put its money where its mouth is, and as and when that happens, the Government will look to see what support it can provide to foster and nurture such initiatives – particularly when it comes to facilitating between parties or filling in any gaps.

Third, don’t expect too many more unicorns, and don’t bank on coming up with simple but unique ideas that will conquer the world – meaning, new businesses like Facebook, Uber and Pinterest will be few and far between. Instead, drawing on her earlier comments about research, Dr Cornick predicts that it will be “back to the 90’s”, where innovation will come from “research-based, deep-tech solutions”.

If that’s the case, then the LaunchVic agenda (for the remaining 3 years of its current 4 year lifespan) will include:

  • Getting Victoria on the map, and positioning it as a global innovation hub
  • Raising the bar by educating startups and investors
  • Bringing more diversity to the startup sector, by providing greater access, striking better gender balance, and building a stronger entrepreneurial culture
  • Introducing a more transparent and interactive consultation process
  • Continuing to support the best accelerator programs that focus on startups
  • Making more frequent and smaller funding rounds, each with a specific focus

Asked what areas of innovation Victoria will be famous for, Dr Cornick’s number one pick was Healthcare, pointing to the strong research base coming out of both the Monash and Melbourne University medical precincts. Also in the running were Agriculture, and possibly Cyber-security. (Separately, there is a list of priority industries where the Government sees growth, employment and investment opportunities.)

If one of the biggest hurdles is commercializing research, Dr Cornick suggested that Universities have to re-think current IP practices, including ownership and licensing models, developing better career options in research, and doing more to re-calibrate the effort/reward equation in building research assets compared to building companies and commercial assets.

Finally, Dr Cornick offered an interesting metaphor to describe the current state of Victoria’s innovation potential:

“We have everything we need for baking a cake, but the missing ingredient is the baking powder to make it rise.”

Next week: Gigster is coming to town….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What might we expect in 2017?

On a number of measures, 2016 was a watershed year. Unexpected election results, fractious geopolitics, numerous celebrity deaths, too many lacklustre blockbuster films, spectacular sporting upsets (and regular doping scandals), and sales of vinyl records are outpacing revenue from digital downloads and streaming services. What might we expect from 2017?

Detail from "The Passing Winter" by Yayoi Kusama (Photo by Rory Manchee)

Detail from “The Passing Winter” by Yayoi Kusama [Photo by Rory Manchee]

Rather than using a crystal ball to make specific predictions or forecasts, here are some of the key themes that I think will feature in 2017:

First, the nature of public discourse will come under increased scrutiny. In the era of “post-truth”, fake news and searing/scathing social commentary, the need for an objective, fact-based and balanced media will be paramount. In addition, the role of op-ed pieces to reflect our enlightened liberal traditions and the need for public forums to represent our pluralist society will be critical to maintaining a sense of fairness, openness, and just plain decency in public dialogue.

Second, a recurring topic of public conversation among economists, politicians, sociologists, HR managers, career advisors, bureaucrats, union leaders, technologists, educators and social commentators will be the future of work. From the impact of automation on jobs, to the notion of a universal basic income; from the growth of the gig economy, to finding purpose through the work we do. How we find, engage with and navigate lifelong employment is now as important as, say, choosing high school electives, making specific career choices or updating professional qualifications.

Third, the ongoing focus on digital technology will revolve around the following:

  • The Internet of Things – based on a current exhibit at London’s Design Museum, the main use cases for IoT will continue to be wearable devices (especially for personal health monitoring), agriculture, transport and household connectivity
  • Fintech – if a primary role of the internet has been for content dissemination, search and discovery, then the deployment of Blockchain solutions, the growth in crypto-currencies, the use of P2P platforms and the evolution of robo-advice are giving rise to the Internet of Money
  • Artificial Intelligence – we are seeing a broader range of AI applications, particularly around robotics, predictive analytics and sensory/environmental monitoring. The next phase of AI will learn to anticipate (and in some cases moderate) human behaviour, and provide more efficacious decision-making and support mechanisms for resource planning and management.
  • Virtual Reality/Augmented Reality – despite being increasingly visible in industries like gaming, industrial design, architecture and even tourism, it can feel like VR/AR is still looking for some dedicated use cases. One sector that is expected to benefit from these emerging technologies is education, so I would expect to see some interesting solutions for interactive learning, curriculum delivery and student assessment.

Fourth, and somewhat at odds with the above, the current enthusiasm for the maker culture is also leading to a growing interest in products that represent craft, artisan and hand-made fabrication techniques and traditions. Custom-made, bespoke, personalized and unique goods are in vogue – perhaps as a reaction to the “perfection” of digital replication and mass-production?

Fifth, with the importance of startups in driving innovation and providing sources of new economic growth, equity crowdfunding will certainly need to come of age. Thus far, this method of fund-raising has been more suited (and in many cases, is legally restricted) to physical products, entertainment assets, and creative projects. The delicate balance between retail investor protection and entrepreneurial access to funding means that this method of startup funding is constrained (by volume, amounts and investor participation), and contrary to stated intentions, can involve disproportionate set up costs and administration. But its time will come.

Finally, as shareholder activism and triple bottom line reporting become more prevalent (combined with greater regulatory and compliance obligations), I can see that corporate governance principles are increasingly placing company directors in the role of quasi-custodians of a company’s assets and quasi-trustees of stakeholder interests. It feels like boards are now expected to be the conscience of the company – something that will require directors to have greater regard to the impact of their decisions, not just whether those decisions are permitted, correct or good.

One thing I can predict for 2017, is that Content in Context will continue to comment on these topics, and explore their implications, especially as I encounter them through the projects I work on and the clients I consult to.

Next week: The FF17 Semi Finals in Melbourne

Final StartupVic Pitch Night of 2016

There was something of a festive mood in the room for StartupVic‘s final pitch night of 2016, hosted at inspire9. It certainly had an end of term feel, as a number of the long-term Startup Vic team members said their farewells before moving on to new ventures. So it will be interesting to see how these monthly events continue to evolve in 2017.

screen-shot-2016-12-10-at-4-01-47-pmContinuing the theme of recent pitch nights, diversity was the key – this month’s startup hopefuls came from the energy, AI, environmental and consumer sectors. As usual, I will comment on each pitch in the order that they presented:

BioFuel Innovations

With the simple aim of turning waste into fuel, BioFuel Innovations uses an enzyme, as opposed to a more caustic chemical catalyst, to convert used cooking oil from restaurant kitchens into biodiesel. Given this greener and more sustainable process, the company can use lower quality feedstock, consume less energy and reduce the amount of waste water.

Having built a pilot plant in Dandenong, the founders are currently developing a containerised “turnkey solution” comprising a pilot micro-refinery, which can be financed by 3rd party lenders (a bit like some solar energy schemes). However, they are seeking funding to gain access to a startup accelerator program.

With a number of existing service providers that collect used cooking oil from restaurants and food processing plants, BioFuel Innovations only plan to produce their own fuel on a small scale. Rather, their business model is to sell micro-refineries for biodiesel production.

Asked by the judges why they are focusing on biodiesel rather than other higher-yield fuels, the team pointed out that some of those products require high temperature processing, and therefore consume more energy. Also, in concentrating on this type of biodiesel production, the founders believe they are helping to solve the problem of disposing of waste oils. However, longer term, they may explore even more sustainable energy derivatives and regeneratives. And in Asia Pacific, for example, there is a need to re-process palm oil residues.

Finally, a key to their success will be streamlined manufacturing processes and logistics, such as building supply chain partnerships for the shipping containers that hold the micro-refineries.

Breathable

This is an environmental design concept that aims to use plants to replace air ventilation systems in offices and homes. Based on research from Maastricht University in the Netherlands, Breathable uses an algorithm based design solution. Taking into account the building dimensions, natural light, air flow, number of people, amount of mechanical and electrical equipment, etc., the team can design the right combination and layout of plants for each given location.

Established as a bootstrapped social enterprise, whose profits go to helping asthma sufferers and patients with respiratory complaints, Breathable is hoping to make a large and sustainable impact.

The first question from the judges was, why set up in Australia? The team explained that given certain plants are not allowed here, the underlying algorithm has to be reconfigured for native plants, by a local team.

This was a very timely comment, given the recent episode of “thunderstorm asthma” in Melbourne. However, the judges were a little concerned that while there was a clear connection between purpose and passion, they wondered whether it is more of a lifestyle business for the founders, especially as thus far, no IP has been registered or protected. (On this specific point, the team simply said, “we challenge people to do it better”.)

There is an expansion plan, to develop fully self-sustaining eco-systems – such as using plants to power lights that help generate photosynthesis. But big goals need big marketing budgets, and with an active waiting list of 20 corporate clients, the challenge for the business is in how to scale.

MagicPi

I should say upfront that based on what I had read in advance on their website, this pitch was not what I had expected. Instead of a presentation on artificial intelligence, we got a pitch about Australia’s Chinese tourism “problem”. Namely that, based on a 2016 report from Bloomberg, by 2020 Australia will host 5 million Chinese visitors a year, representing a $13bn market. (And as I know from having worked with the founders at China Digital, many tourist destinations in Australia are far from China ready.)

Using natural language AI (cognitive, cloud, machine learning – “Siri with a human touch”) MagicPi is targeting Destination Marketing Organisations (conventions, conferences, local tourism boards). They plan to create content and solutions for client websites, and then take a commission on bookings. With a presence on both WeChat (including a voice recognition bot) and AliPay, MagicPi has a long-term vision of being the “intelligent interface for everything”.

However, the judges questioned whether the solution works or even exists. They felt that there was currently no visibility for investors or consumers. Claiming to have built a demo app, the team stated that there is a lack of quality information for Chinese tourists, and people are willing to pay for premium content – and to distinguish mere “recommendations” from the visitor “reality”.

Despite adopting a deliberate enterprise solution, the judges felt that the pitch needed to stress the “why”, rather than focusing on the problem.

The Cider Link

I should mention that I first met the team from The Cider Link about a year ago, and was intrigued by their mission to build an online craft cider market that connects makers with customers. (So much so, that I connected them to local wine producer, Richard Stockman, who invited them to appear as guests on his weekly food and drink radio program.)

The Cider Link is challenging both the market duopoly for cider retailing, and the ubiquity of “commercial” cider, much of which is produced from bulk juice mixed with alcohol – rather than being fomented from freshly pressed fruit, as is the case with craft ciders.

Cider is currently enjoying 10% annual growth by volume (based on bottle shop sales alone). So, online, cider and craft are all “on trend”. The founders have built a commission-based market place, and with connections to producers who are members of industry body Cider Australia, The Cider Link is also appearing at festivals and related events.

In the Q&A with judges, the team explained that success for them would be sales of 1000 cases a month, making it a $1m business. They also plan to take the model to the UK, which has the largest cider market in the world.

In addition to attracting more customers, the founders are seeking investment to improve sales conversions and support some advertising.

Given the mix of pitches, and the range of business models and sectors, based on judging criteria and audience votes, the winner was Breathable.

Next week: End of Year Reflection

 

The Startup of You v2.0

Through my blogs on startups, meetups and portfolio careers, I was recently interviewed by Peter Judd from News Corp., who is trying to bring the discussion on entrepreneurship, startups and innovation to a wider audience, particularly people who may be looking at a career change. (We both agree that the National Innovation and Science Agenda is not cutting through to the general public.)  Apart from being an advocate for portfolio careers, I also pointed out that entrepreneurship or working with startups is not for everyone. Instead, it may be possible to change your current role to the one you want. Alternatively, taking a new look at your current circumstances can provide some fresh perspective on finding your dream career.

Francis Kenna: The Unbearable Lightness of Seeing (2016) [Photo by Rory Manchee]

Francis Kenna: The Unbearable Lightness of Seeing (2016) [Photo by Rory Manchee]

The impetus following the 2012 publication of “The Startup of You” has done much to fuel the current entrepreneurial phenomenon, combined with lean startup business models and agile product development processes. The drive for innovation in response to digital disruption and lowering technology costs also means that launching your own venture can be increasingly de-risked.

For example, I recently saw some data by Ian Gardner from Amazon Web Services, that showed the “cost of failure” has come down from $5m to $5k, in just 15 years. This is based on a comparison between what it typically cost to launch a new business at the height of the dot.com boom/bust in 2000, and what it costs today. With a mix of open source tools, cloud computing, APIs, SDKs and social media platforms, launching a new business has never been cheaper or easier.

Of course, there is a paradox here: if an increasing number of people, especially younger graduates and new entrants to the workforce, are more interested in doing their own thing and less interested in joining large or established organisations, it’s going to get harder for employers to attract and retain the best talent; on the other hand, without appropriate experience, on-the-job training and personal development, how do these aspiring entrepreneurs acquire the necessary business, technical and leadership skills to succeed in their own ventures?

For some people, it may be appropriate to take their entrepreneurial spirit of adventure into a “traditional” role to test some of their ideas, as well as build networks and get some practical experience. Equally, I can see a huge opportunity for companies to create the right opportunities to engage employees for flexible roles aligned with specific projects or objectives (rather than plugging them into org charts). Companies are also finding new ways of tapping into their existing workforce to identify hitherto hidden and unknown skills and knowledge. Many employers also recognise that leadership roles will increasingly be filled by people who are comfortable with rapid change, increasing complexity and heightened uncertainty, as well as having enhanced soft skills. (There’s even some current thinking that utilising “rebel talent” is a good thing.)

Whether you are starting out on your entrepreneurial journey, looking to reboot your career, or searching for meaningful work that aligns with your values and purpose, there are numerous opportunities (via meetups, hackathons, pitch nights and networking forums) to explore your options before you make a decision. And for companies looking to re-invigorate your workforce and unleash hidden talent, there are many ways to experiment through taking informed risks, by building in-house innovation hubs, running consultative and collaborative workshops, and inviting ideas and inspiration from your existing people, who are familiar with the challenges you face.

Next week: Banksy – an artist for our times?