Dr. Cal Stiller poses in his offices in a converted historic home in London, Ontario, Thursday, April 1, 2010.Dave Chidley
Dr. Cal Stiller, who was recently named a recipient of a prestigious Canada Gairdner Award, fielded questions from readers in an online discussion on April 16.
When the hour was up, several questions remained about the need to fix the imbalance of research and commercial development in the country's life sciences.
Mr. Stiller took some extra time to answer them.
He says he has always had an entrepreneurial spirit, which inspired him to work with colleagues to create centres such as the Toronto-based MaRS Discovery District, which brings researchers and budding entrepreneurs together.
From R. Hall: Has MaRS been able to effectively mine discoveries by researchers in regional universities?
Cal Stiller: The simple answer is yes. But much more use can be made of the incredible people and research program there online. In London and in Guelph (Ontario), for example there are "MaRS Landings" and the Stiller Centre in London is connected to MaRS Toronto Discovery District. My experience is that the best ideas quickly rise to the top irrespective of where they come from.
From Susan T: As an entrepreneur, what are the ways to reach the new ideas and research being undertaken in Ontario?
Cal Stiller: Frankly, the best way is through the Tech Transfer offices at each of the universities. You need to talk to them, tell them of your experience and desire and convince them of your ENTHUSIASM. They'll see you're engaged and call you when they have an idea/disclosure. But then call them back as well.
From Paul: How do budding entrepreneurs with business backgrounds find worthwhile life science projects in need of commercialization?
Cal Stiller: Paul, I have answered this with Susan's question in part. But you can also visit the Angel Days that each centre puts on – and the Centres of Excellence are putting on and Discovery Day at the Toronto Convention Centre on May 17 and 18 – but not limited to life sciences.
From Roger: Why would we want off-shore funding? Would we not then lose control/leverage of the IP? My opinion is that we give away too much as it is in Canada.
Cal Stiller: You are right in part Roger. We have too many discoveries going south. But a lot of money is needed to get a successful project over the goal line and we simply don't have enough money in Canada to accomplish what is necessary. But if we have an "anchor" lead investor here in Canada and the management is good then it'll stay here. But you are right to have your concerns. I certainly do.
From Keith: Do we risk contaminating the discussion on entrepreneurship by focusing on VCs? VCs are (by their choosing) late stage players, generally disinterested in anything prior to Phase II (for a drug) or marketing approval (for devices). How to finance the shots on goal which entrepreneurs generate? Finding the "3 Fs" has become increasingly difficult.
Cal Stiller: Thank Keith. You are right, of course. VCs invest downstream when the product is in the clinic. So the early stage funds (valley of death funds) are critical to have a successful industry, just as a vibrant public capital market is critical for the life cycle of investment. The provinces have some funds for this (Ontario has the Strategic Initiatives Fund) and the IRAP program is a really good one. But there isn't enough. What there is is too risk intolerant. And there are not adequate incentives for the private investors to get involved. Hope may be on the horizon from some institutional funds however.
From Guest: Thank you for your time today Dr. Stiller. I am a second year medical student interested in the innovation side of medicine. I would like your advice on some good ways to get involved as well as to 'socialize' my peers to the importance of this topic - it gets absolutely no emphasis at all in my medical school whereas basic research and clinical research are well supported.
Cal Stiller: What a delight to hear from a second year medical student. There is hope for Canada! I would go to your dean and propose a visiting professor series of seminars that was voluntary and had entrepreneurs invited to tell their stories and give advice. Your dean will jump at the opportunity. The other thing to do is have the Entrepreneurship 101 lectures piped in from MaRS to your school. They are just fantastic!
From Guest: I'm a student at the University of Alberta, and in taking a law course I was struck with the distinction between American and Canadian strategies for R&D funding. It's my understanding that in the Canadian system research capital must be independently acquired upfront, and government assistance comes afterwards. Whereas in America researchers can apply for grants and receive funds upfront. Please correct me if I'm wrong. My question is, do you think that one system is superior to the other? Or would it be best form some sort of hybrid between the two?
Cal Stiller: I'm not sure that I understand the question as it relates to the statement 'research capital must be independently acquired upfront in Canada.' The systems are much the same now. Seed or establishment grants are given to newly recruited staff along with capital grants for equipment. This is usually good for two years and then the scientist must compete for funds from the councils or NIH. The only real difference is the size of the grants.
From Ann Kirsasis: Hello, is there any chance a similar type of MaRs concept will be coming to the north of Toronto - perhaps Yonge/Sheppard area? I find it very hard to commute to downtown and a satellite office would be a magnet for the 905 area. (Really enjoy this discussion!) Thx.
Cal Stiller: Dear Ann. Thank you for this question. There should be a good connection between MaRS and York so that you can participate in all the lectures. But I'll find out. I agree with you.
From Roger: Thank you for your very generous offer. My next question is: How do we keep the brain trust we have, and are developing, here in Canada? All too often we lose highly talented individuals to foreign markets, and not simply just the U.S. To your point, our private and government funding is sadly lacking, and therefore not creating the high-tech institutions that would employ them and keep them here. I have found that, from time to time, a U.S. project proposal is accepted and moved on more easily than here. In your opinion, why is the Canadian model not as adventurous?
Cal Stiller: Oh, Roger, if I only knew! It certainly isn't because there are less entrepreneurs in Canada – just less experienced ones. We are certainly more risk adverse. That is my experience and I don't have any social studies to back that up. But on the other hand I have found my most bold ideas have had private sector and government support. One of the great deficits here is that we don't have the receptors in Canada that they have in the States in many areas – defence, health, etc. We can discuss at length why that is.
From Tim: Assume that you have a technological idea or some extremely early stage prototype. How do protect your idea/prototype when you are meeting with potential partners who are otherwise strangers? Is it a leap of faith in some respect?
Cal Stiller: No – no – Tim. This is not the area to take "leaps of faith." Apply for a patent and always sign a confidentiality agreement. I mean always.
From AJH: What would you say is the role of communication and knowledge brokering in making the right connections between those with the research and technology results and investors? What isn't happening that should?
Cal Stiller: I could write a book on this! You have to have, within 15 minutes of starting a discussion, a comfortable level of shared knowledge and understanding. You have to take your science to a level of Scientific American . With good uses of metaphors and cartoon diagrams so that the investors see with clarity what the invention is and how it meets a human need. That level of communication is critical and it is the primary reason buy-in doesn't occur. Start with the human problem that needs to be solved, and then – and only then - describe in laymen terms how this unique and protected invention solves it.
From Yameen: As someone working in the field, I get the feeling there is this attempt in Canada to have the innovation happen at the university level and then commercialize it via small startups. Does this not overlook the skills large companies bring to the table? How do you propose to get young people in the field when they have no industrial mentors?
Cal Stiller: Ah Yameen – another book! The skills of the large companies in innovation (that is adaptation) is paramount. However we don't have a plethora of those in Canada and it's pretty hard to get in to see the key people. That's why large corporate people migrate out to small companies and do this in the form of start-ups – and then when they have a convincing story, sell it to the large corporation. And that is exactly what MaRS is all about – putting you in touch with mentors from small and large. Ilse Treunicht, the CEO of MaRS, is a wizard at conceiving of ways to "make it work."