ßÏßÏÊÓƵ

ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders: experience the stories behind the spinouts

Hear academic founders discuss challenges they've faced in their commercialisation journeys.

Episodes

In ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders,  speak to academic founders as they share their experiences of their own commercialisation journeys, diving deep to uncover the challenges and milestones faced, and how they have shaped the commercial impact of their work as they pave their path to market.

Episode four: Building your values into your commercialisation journey with Dr Charlotte Rae

Peter Lane speaks to Dr Charlotte Rae about the importance of building your own values into your commercialisation journey right from the very beginning.

Charlotte's research interests lie in the intersection of neuroscience and wellbeing at work, and the processes by which how we feel influences how we behave. In 2022, Charlotte began a major national study investigating how the working pattern of a four-day working week can positively influence both wellbeing and workplace performance. 

Increasing awareness of these benefits has continued to cpature more interested companies, and the knowledge Charlotte gained from the study exposed an opportunity to provide a service to organisations interested in trialling and transitioning to new working patterns.

Join us while we experience Charlotte's story.

• Podcast transcript

  Hello. Welcome to ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, a series where we experience the stories behind the spinouts created at the Sussex. Join us as we speak to academic founders as they share their own experience of the challenges and key milestones they faced in their commercialisation journeys.

  My name is Peter Lane, and I’m head of University Services at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation. Today, we’ll be talking about the importance of building your own values into your commercialisation journey, right from the very beginning.

  Our guest today is Doctor Charlotte Rae. Charlotte’s research interests lie at the intersection of neuroscience and wellbeing at work, and the processes by which how we feel influences how we behave. Charlotte’s work combines the use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, MRI, with physiology, behaviour tasks, and occupational psychology.

  In 2022, Charlotte began a major national study investigating how the working pattern of a four-day working week can positively influence both wellbeing and workplace performance. Increasing awareness of these benefits has continued to capture more interested companies, and the knowledge Charlotte gained from the study exposed an opportunity to provide a service to organisations interested in trialling and transitioning to the new working patterns. This activity also serves to further her research interest through the acquisition of ongoing real-world data.

  Hi Charlotte, thanks for joining us on this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders.

  It’s great to be here Pete, thanks for having me.

  Simon Sinek’s first and most popular book ‘Start with Why’ introduced the golden circles model, as well as the now well-known phrase “people don’t buy what you do, they buy why you do it”. Our team feel that starting by gaining a clearer understanding of a researcher’s Why is vital to discovering a future commercial model that will fit with the individual. By understanding this, the core principles of commercialisation – solving problems, evolving a value proposition, and creating impact – will drop into place and create something exciting and energising.

  So, Charlotte, my first question. Can I ask you to think back to when we first met to discuss your four-day working week research? Were you surprised when we kicked off the session asking about your personal values, and what motivates you every day in your work – or put another way, your own Why?

  Actually, I was delighted. Because that felt like a quite nice, gentle lead-in for me to discussions around commercialisation. Because for me that’s quite an easy question to answer – the Why and the values. Because, you know, the conversations that we’ve had – that I’ve had with businesses over the last couple of years – have really helped me realise what drives me is making a difference in the world. And I didn’t have a clue how to translate that into something commercial, and that’s where you came in to help me with that. But I was very happy to start off by talking about what drives me and motivates me as an academic.

  So, my background academically is I’m a psychologist and a neuroscientist, and I’ve always been interested in the biology of wellbeing. And I’ve previously done some academic studies on various patient groups, say, with neurodegenerative conditions. And I feel that it’s incredibly important work, but lots of other people are already doing it. And it was when I saw news in the media of the 4-day week trials, particularly the original one run by Andrew Barnes in his New Zealand business published by The Guardian, and I saw in the media that it was leading to both better wellbeing and better workplace performance; as an academic it ticked me. Because it got me thinking “What is it that’s going on up here inside the head that’s behind those media headlines?”. And at that point I was grabbed, and I couldn’t think about doing any other research. I thought “That’s what I want to find out, what’s the journey that staff are going on when they switch to reduced working hours”.

  So that was two or three years ago, and so that passion has really motivated setting up the research project, and we’ve been going for 18 months or so on the research. But after only a few months I realised that we were learning a huge amount, not just about the way the brain was working, but about the whole business transformation that was going on for these organisations. And a couple of academic colleagues suggested “Oh, I think there’s some potential here for commercialisation”. Because my motivation previously has been about answering interesting questions about the way the mind works, that had never occurred to me – that there might be commercial opportunity here.

  But in setting up those original conversations with Innovation Centre colleagues, I started to realise “Ah, okay, this is just another way – another vehicle – that I could express those values about being really curious about how the mind works, about what are the changes that are taking place within staff, and what does that mean for the organisation, and really just helping people to thrive.”.

  It’s almost like an alignment of values, isn’t it, between the research work that you were doing and have been experimenting with and, if you like, that shift driving a kind of increased awareness of “this has got to change”.

  Yeah, absolutely.

  I’m just interested in what really excites and motivates you in your work with businesses now? And has this changed since we started meeting and working together? And if so, how?

  Yes it has, though I wouldn’t say it’s changed so much as evolved and grown and really built even further.

  So originally, the motivation was “Oh I really want to see their data! I want to see the numbers, and the spreadsheets, and the graphs!”. And that hasn’t gone away, that’s absolutely still there, but what’s really grown and evolved for me is the personal human touch of meeting with the staff themselves, meeting with the business owner. And we have so many interactions at different points along the journey with them where you can feel the difference that you’re making – whether, you know, whether it’s that sort of reassurance early on that you can actually make it work, I’ve got the answers, we just need to sit down and I can make it happen. And you can see the metaphorical weight almost lifted off their shoulders.

  But then once people are actually in the trial, whether it’s through email exchanges that we have about the questionnaires they’re filling in, or when some of the staff come into us for some of the research procedures that we do. For example, staff can volunteer for MRI brain scans so that we can understand more about the neuroscience behind the 4-day week. And so when they come in to us for a scan there’s lots of chat and preamble, and we get to hear all these personal stories about the difference that it’s been making to their lives, both in work and outside of work.

  Really interesting. Earlier, we briefly touched on how the success of your research study led to companies contacting you to learn, seek expertise, and find support for trialling and then implementing the four day working week. Can I ask how this felt at the time, and if there were challenges this presented to your core research focus?

  So initially, in the first few months, I was quite focused in terms of what we were providing to the companies on data analytics – because that was a comfortable home territory for me as a professional scientist. And I think we genuinely did provide a useful service there giving some, you know, objective data from someone who was external to the organisation and could really but some hard numbers on “Well this is what we’ve seen with your productivity, this is what we’ve seen in your mental health” and so on through those first employers that we worked with. Actually, by osmosis almost, but also by having lots of personal conversations – because I love to go and visit the businesses, chat to the business owner, the HR manager, the staff themselves – we’ve learned a huge amount from those personal journeys.

  So over time we’ve transition the service to actually be a much more holistic package. From the early conversations with the business owner, who has this aspiration you know, this wonderful goal that they’d like to consider a four-day week but haven’t got a clue where to start; to thinking about the implementation; working with the staff themselves to identify what are the adaptions to your working routines and the working week to find those efficiencies; and then through to the trial phase, identifying additional Key Performance Indicators; and finally the end of the trial reporting back – this is what we’ve seen, where do we go from here, and how do I help you with the next steps.

  And in the evolution of that, you know, a challenge that came up – not so much in terms of conflicting with my values, but conflicting with my identity and status as an academic – was “this is working really well, and I’m getting a lot out of it and I’m hugely enjoying it. But I’m struggling, ironically, for time myself”. Because to provide all of that service over, you know, actually many months we hold company’s hands for through that time, I’m also trying to give lectures and do student supervisions and look after my pastoral care tutees.

  So it became clear to me if I was going to keep going with that level of ambition of helping people as much as I possibly could, I needed to look at my own working practices and my own working routines. So I applied for a research grant that would give me buy out of teaching – essentially, because it would pay my salary. And happily, I was successful in that. So as of today, of us recording this, my salary is now being paid by this research grant. That means I’m freed up from giving lectures, from all the student supervision, and therefore I can really you know focus the time that I want to give on supporting employees through that journey.

  So maybe we could talk a little bit further about your decision to apply for an academic grant from within the University, perhaps to relieve more time. Why did you feel that applying for a grant within the University was the right way forwards, as opposed to maybe taking this more independently forwards or whatever else? Could you talk us through that?

  Yes absolutely. Well we had some really useful conversations, Pete, as part of the mentoring and support that the Innovation Centre had given to me on sort of growth strategies. And one idea and suggestion for how I could do more of the work whilst still remaining an academic was essentially to employ other people, and to become you know a managing director. To have a team of people who would go out and, you know, run the workshops on efficiency. And at that point I though “Oh, I’m not quite ready to let go of holding the hand of the businesses all the way through the journey”. I love, love, love having that personal touch all the way through, so I don’t want to let go of that to someone else, because that’s the job I want to do. I’d miss it! It’s giving me a huge amount of joy and fulfilment. And I came to the realisation that, you know, as much as I love teaching and I’m good at it, I get good feedback from my students, and it’s rewarding in many aspects, I realised I was enjoying those personal journeys even more. And actually, that’s where I wanted to spend my time – in the four days that I’m now at work, because I’ve just started doing a four-day week myself.

  Brilliant. And one of the things, I guess the conversations that we regularly have with people that are starting on this journey, is they often feel that they need to jump into it 100% to start with and kind of put their academic work to one side. And sometimes the unique advantage, the unfair advantage, that working within a University can give you is that flexibility perhaps, to start to build that. And that grant sounds like the first step that’s really helped you kind of build that model.

  Absolutely, that’s another reason it’s been the ideal solution for me. Because when you and colleagues said you know “there’s this growth model whereby, you know, you’re the managing director and you have a team who actually deliver the service”. And I went “Whoa, I’m not quite ready psychologically for that”. As someone who’s only ever been an academic, and who also has the kind of career safety, you know, of not needed to worry about where my salary is coming from. I’m also still really enjoying the research.

  So this felt like a wonderful transition, where I can gradually bit by bit dip my toe more and more and more in the water of commercialisation. So I do envisage that over the next couple of years we will transition to charging, you know, a broader range of clients. But there’s another benefit to that research grant, which is that it means I retain my cachet as an academic expert. So I do think actually there’s an additional benefit for academic who have that, you know, academic status whereby we can communicate to a client “you’ve got access to a world expert in this”. So for all of those reasons, the research grant has been really beneficial as the kind of way to enable me to make that transition.

  What an amazing journey you’ve started. Hopefully, hearing about it will support our listeners and give them confidence that they can align and stay true to their own values throughout their own commercialisation experiences. But just one last quick question before we let you go today. What would be your one piece of advice to people starting their own journey on how to build their own values into their work?

  So I would say you’re not alone it in. You know what your values are, and you might have an idea about where you want to go with that. But certainly as an academic I didn’t really know where to start. And we’re so, so, so lucky to have here on campus ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation Centre. So if you’re not sure about how to express those values, the Innovation Centre can help. They can do mentoring, they’ve helped me with marketing. So find the people who can support you to express it.

  I guess what you’re saying is, life’s a team game. And there are people out there that can kind of help you build those skills and help you move forwards.

  That’s fantastic, thanks Charlotte. It’s been great to have you on the show. That brings us to the end of this episode on building values into your commercialisation journey. Many thanks to Charlotte for taking part.

  If you’ve enjoyed this episode, follow us on Sound Cloud and Spotify and join us for future episodes exploring a variety of other spinouts at Sussex.

  Thanks for listening to this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, where we experience the stories behind the spinouts. Our innovations, specialist consultancy services, technology, training, and know-how are transforming the world of businesses and the public sector. We hope you’ve enjoyed this episode. I’m Sue Baxter, Director of Innovation and Business Partnerships, and to find out more about how the Innovation and Business Partnerships Team at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ can support you on your own commercialisation journey, visit the Collaborate section on the University’s website or email collaborate@sussex.ac.uk.

Episode three: Finding Early Commercial Application Focus with Professor Gianluca Memoli

Peter Lane speaks to Professor Gianluca Memoli about finding an early commercial application focus as your technology readiness develops.

Gianluca’s research interest has been focused upon controlling sound, as we do with light. This has led to the development of some exciting acoustic metamaterials, now providing new solutions to how we are able to manipulate sound. In 2019 Gianluca and his co-founder Bruce Drinkwater led the formation of a spinout company, Metasonixx, founded to bring the unique benefits of this research and Intellectual Property to market across a wide range of markets and applications. 

Join us while we experience Gianluca’s story behind the spinout.

• Podcast transcript

  Peter Lane: Hello. Welcome to ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, a series where we experience the stories behind the spinouts created at the Sussex. Join us as we speak to academic founders as they share their own experience of the challenges and key milestones they faced in their commercialisation journeys.
  
  My name is Peter Lane, I’m Head of University Services at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation. Today, we’ll be talking about finding early commercial application focus as your technology readiness develops.
  
  Our guest today is Dr. Gianluca Memoli. Gianluca’s research interest has been focused upon controlling sound, as we do with light. This has led to the development of some exciting acoustic metamaterials, now providing new solutions to how we are able to manipulate sound. In 2019, Gianluca and his co-founder led the formation of a spin-out company, Metasonixx, to bring the unique benefits of this research and Intellectual Property to market.
  
  Gianluca, thank you very much for joining this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders.

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Thank you Peter for having me today, I’m really excited to share my, part of my journey with your listeners.

  Peter Lane: Brilliant, and it’s going to be fascinating, I think, to get your insight around this subject.

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Well, it’s a very hot subject for whoever wants to start a company.

  Peter Lane: Absolutely! I think it was Warren Buffet that’s quoted as saying “I don’t look to jump over 7-foot bars, I look for 1-foot bars that I can step over. Wise advice, eh? However, experience of the early stages of commercialising a novel technology, particularly a platform technology such as your own, can seem to pose a selection of 7-foot bars that can seem impossible to lower.
  So, my first question is about finding focus. How, when early in your journey there were clearly so many promising applications, did you approach the challenge of filtering – finding the most applicable applications on which to focus and build your initial strategy?

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Well that’s a very good question, because as an academic you normally want to say “oh I can do everything”. That is what the job of an academic is, while a start-up needs focus. Focus means that you really need… how you are saying, a one foot bar? Well even probably lower if you can, because you really have very little resources – it’s just you, your co-founder, and if you’re really lucky someone else who decided to share the journey with you.
  
  Okay, so we had the platform technology, we were dreaming of submarines; we were dreaming of having personalised sound for everyone in cars; we went to CES; we were so, so excited. But then we went to the nitty gritty bit, which is- we were, we needed to be honest with ourselves and realise what really could be done tomorrow. And like every time in these cases, you ask for help. And in our case we asked the University and the ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation Centre to help us focus. So what they did, is they did for us market research, which means they listen to us very patiently, taking out all the possible ideas, and then they filter them. And they said “okay, this will get you this size of market in this amount of time, we think”. And so it’s like, you know, a funnel. And you get smaller and smaller as you go along.
  
  That was not enough though, Peter. Because while the team here did a fantastic job, what we really needed to do was take the pulse of the people. Now, I really love to do outreach, so I do a lot of science fairs. And in particular, just after we incorporated the company, which was 2019, we had the New Scientist Live in London. And so we went there with our ideas, and we exposed them to people. And we asked them “What do you think of that? Do you think this could work? Do you think this is… will this change your life? Do you have a need for that?”. These are the three questions which eventually make your value proposition. So what they did is they gave us invaluable insight on what they saw. They dreamt with us, they shared our dream, and helped us to actually make sense with thinking into products. And everyone, everyone inevitably didn’t ask “oh I want to, I want sound perfect delivery in my car” – which was my problem. I had my kinds singing their nursery rhymes in the back, and I didn’t want to hear that. But what they asked us is “I have noise outside my windows, and I want to keep them open. Can you solve this?”. And that was the start of our journey.

  Peter Lane: That’s absolutely fantastic, and I love the way that you’re reaching out and engaging with people with real problems – helping them guide you towards those kind of killer early stage applications, where maybe you can kind of deliver a proof of product demonstrator.

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: The issue is, we normally talk about “oh my technology can do this, this and that, and I can solve the world’s problems in this way or the other way”. But actually, sometimes what you really need is people they say ‘with a pain’. So people who actually have a need, because these are the people who actually buy your product in the end. And that’s what makes the difference, I think, from a start up to an academic.

  Peter Lane: When you were looking at that, did you evaluate the challenges that you might face in some of these different application areas in addition to the scale of the opportunity, the market size if you like?

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: That is a very humble process. Because again, as visionaries and dreamers, we thought they were all one step away. But, like when you prepare a project for a proposal, that you do as an academic, you need to think about steps. So you got from the end, and you plan backwards to get to what you actually need. And frankly, sometimes you were- we reached so many… so much money that it was impossible for a start up without a lot of investment. Now, they all tell us “go out there, talk to investors, and you’ll find someone who will give you money”. But the reality is, that is not completely true. Because these people have their own money, and they want to make sure that they grow. And to grow, this means that you have to go by small steps. And so you might find someone – they call them ‘friends, family and fools’, which spend money on you just because it’s you. But from there, to a company which has a revenue which allows you to keep people, there are more smaller steps. And while you have to keep the vision, while you have to keep the long-term, you need to be aware of the small steps.

  Peter Lane: Absolutely, I think that’s great advice and great insight from yourself, is that you know you’ve got that runway kind of mapped out in your mind. And you’re kind of taking these bite-size chunks – it’s kind of how to eat an elephant, I guess isn’t it, is the old saying that they talk about.
  
  Let me sort of pivot that question slightly, because I’m really interested in how you identified and connected with really motivated early adopter customers or partners. And to what extent it was important to you that their, their own values and goals were a fit with your own in making those relationships – the right relationships that have become maybe deeper and more productive than others.

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Your question has two aspects. The first one is ‘how do you find people you want to work with?’. And in my case, I confess, I was extremely lucky. Because at the moment I still get emails, unsolicited, in my mailbox with crazy ideas – and this was from silencing outdoors to actually find a way to build a cushion that allows you not to hear your husband snoring. So crazy ideas, you could say, that probably have a market at some point.
  
  So what you realise is that when there is an application you can actually answer to, you find immediately the language working. So it clicks with what you’re saying. So you talk with someone and they… and you can build up. So in an improvisation game it would be “yes, and”. So I talk to you, Peter, and I give you a proposition and you say “yes, and we could do these other bits”. And these are the people you want to work with at the start, people that will believe in you but also see how this applies to them, and how they can actually monetise your idea.
  
  So I said at the start that I was, I had all types of ideas out on the plate so I could pick. And that is the second part of your question Peter, because what you are shapes your company. Now I was told “you know, you want to start a company, you go to a workshop and they tell you that you need to have a vision and a strategy”. And a vision means that if your company is a person, you want to describe it – that is my experience of it. And this means that also this new person has some ethical values that inevitably need to be yours, because you need to expose them.
  
  I came from having worked so many years with industry, and so I wanted to actually solve real problems. But also I was extremely passionate about environmental noise. Why that, Peter? Because when I arrived in London I was living – that was back in 2005, 2006 – I was living in a place which was absolutely noisy. That was near Shepherd’s Bush. And what I wanted to do is I wanted actually that people could sleep, because I couldn’t. And I wanted to silence tyres, and that was how we approached the tyre manufacturers, which eventually are one of the customers we are working with at the moment. And they came back with “yes, and” – remember? They came back saying “actually this is the way we can implement your technology in our products”. And then on that route, we went to the Italian motorways and again, there was a discussion like this. And we found a point which was together, and these discussions allowed us to identify what we want to be as a company – which is beyond consultancy but actually selling our products. And that’s how we identified our three key products, that now we’re trying to launch through investment.

  Peter Lane: Amazing. I mean, that’s a fantastic story. And I love this, kind of, correlation with noise, inner city noise. And actually I remember having a conversation with you at the time around my own issue with reversing bleepers and whether we could produce something if you like that localised the noise just to people that would be in harms way. But yeah, absolutely brilliant, I really love that. Now, did you ever sort of stumble upon or hit people that didn’t see the value in your research? And if you did, can you describe how that felt, and how you reacted to that? Did that change your behaviour, did it steel your behaviour to take that on board and carry on?

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: In the early days, I had the luck of talking with one of the local investors and he was a person I really wanted to work with. It was amazing, we were sharing the vision, we had the interest in environmental noise, we wanted to do something that changed the life of people. But then when it came to money, I felt that we were not valuing the research in the same way. And I was shocked – how can you distinguish, how can you not see how much value it’s doing? So is that a personal thing? It's not. It’s not a personal thing. It’s actually what I was saying before, these people were seeing where we were at that stage from the outside. And so they made an offer which was, how to say, from the business point of view, what we were at the time. So what I took on board, I took on board two things. One is, I think we value more and so we need to become that company which I think we value. And then the second bit is, unfortunately you will meet a lot of people that either will say no to you, or to whom you will have to say no. And that is, again, a strange learning outcome for an academic because normally you work with even your worst competitors. So it’s never personal, but there is different points of view to your company. If the outer world does not perceive where you think you are, then there is either a problem of communication, or you really have to struggle another bit to get there.

  Peter Lane: Gianluca, I could spend hours talking to you around this subject, and it’s such a pleasure and a fascinating journey – if listeners were making assumptions that finding early commercial application focus for their research, and engaging motivated early adopters was a straight line process. And I hope your practical insight will really help them on their own journey. But just one last quick question – what would be your one piece of advice to the people starting their own journey, to finding early commercial application focus for their own research?

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Don’t be scared. After all, as an academic you are not so far from the early stage selections. Because when you write a proposal, what you have to do is you have to find the novelty, you have to find the gap, and you have to find the resources to run into it to full steam. The big difference, the big difference is you also need a user. And so find the user, humbly accept that the user might be different from the one you imagined, and this will make your life much, much easier.

  Peter Lane: Thank you Gianluca. That’s great advice, and as always it’s been great to talk to you. That brings us to the end of this episode on finding commercial application focus. Thanks to Dr. Gianluca Memoli for taking part. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, follow us on SoundCloud and join us for future episodes exploring a variety of other spinouts at Sussex.

  Dr. Gianluca Memoli: Thanks, Peter.

  Sue Baxter: Thanks for listening to this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, where we experience the stories behind the spinouts. Our innovations, specialist consultancy services, technology, training, and know-how are transforming the world of businesses and the public sector. We hope you’ve enjoyed this episode. I’m Sue Baxter, Director of Innovation and Business Partnerships, and to find out more about how the Innovation and Business Partnerships Team at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ can support you on your own commercialisation journey, visit the Collaborate section on the University’s website or email collaborate@sussex.ac.uk.

Episode two: Finding funding and early commercial development with Professor Georgios Giamas

Peter Lane speaks to Professor Georgios Giamas about finding funding and the expertise needed to drive the early stages of commercial development. 

 For years Georgios’ research interest has been focused on the identification and clarification of the role of proteins implicated in the progression of cancer and the development of novel therapeutic targets. In March 2021 a spin-out company, Stingray Bio was formed to exploit years of leading academic research linking the LMTK3 kinase to essential disease biology in breast and other cancers.

Georgios now plays an essential role on the company Board in a Chief Scientific Officer role, guiding the development of exciting new cancer-treatment drugs aimed at delivering new treatments for breast cancer.

• Podcast transcript

  Peter Lane: Hello. Welcome to ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, where we experience the stories behind the spinouts created at the Sussex. Join us as we speak to academic founders as they share their experience of the challenges and key milestones they faced in their commercialisation journeys.

  My name is Peter Lane, and I’m Head of University Services at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation. Today, we’ll be talking about finding funding and expertise needed to drive the early stages of commercial development. Our guest today is Professor Georgios Giamas. For years, Georgios’ research interest has been focused on the identification and clarification of the role of proteins implicated in the progression of cancer, and the development of novel therapeutic targets.

  In March 2021 a spinout company, Stingray Bio, was formed to exploit years of leading academic research linking the LMTK3 Kinase to essential disease biology in breast and other cancers. Georgios now plays an essential role on the company board, in a Chief Scientific Officer role, guiding the development of exciting new cancer treatment drugs, aimed at delivering new treatments for breast cancer.

  Hi Georgios. Thank you for joining this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders.

  Professor Georgios Diamas: Hi Pete, thanks for the invitation. Nice to see you again, and thanks so much again for all the help that you have provided the last few years.

  Peter Lane: No problem at all, and thanks for sharing your time and your experience in this interview. It’s great to sort of learn more about your journey.

  So, Steve Jobs once said that the biggest innovations in the 21st Century would be at the intersection of biology and technology. However, biotech innovation is not for the faint hearted. Complex science, huge expense, long development lead times and ultimately an overwhelming likelihood of failure mean that finding and engaging interest, expertise, and particularly early stage funding is a huge challenge.

  So, can I ask you to turn the clock back to when you started this commercialisation journey. And my first question is about the initial viewpoint of the commercial drug development sector. How did you go about learning more about how pharma companies might view and engage with your research? And did their initial reaction surprise you?

  Professor Georgios Giamas: It all started back in 2010, when we first described this LMTK3 as a new Kinase implicated in breast cancer development, and since then other people worldwide started picking up on this target – which is something very important, because although we were the first ones to discover it, you know, you want other people to get involved and highlight its importance. And it’s actually literally about a week after this happened that some of the companies, the big companies – I can name a couple if you want – sent me a couple of emails letting me know that they would be interested in following up with this research and see the possibility of designing a drug against this target, this kinase, this protein.

  I didn’t expect that, to be honest – you know, especially so quickly and especially, you know, getting emails from these big companies. Obviously I wasn’t sure whether they were after supporting me in this journey to follow, or there was a bit of competition involved, you know if they were doing similar things and they wanted to see at which stage we are at the moment. As it turned out, you know, these companies obviously are interested in a more progress stage. Back in 2010 it was still early days, but again, it was very interesting discussion that we had. And I started, this was basically the first time that I started thinking about the possibility of taking this to the next step and developing hopefully a drug against this target.

  Following up, you know, the next years, there were some other companies or venture capital companies that were in touch with us asking again about the progress of our work and how things are going. In particular, there was one of them called O2H that were more interested than others, from the point of view that they were in touch every couple of years.

  Fast forwarding a few years later that we managed to publish more papers about this and strengthen the role of these proteins in cancer and in breast cancer as well in other types of cancers. There were some other companies which I haven't heard of, you know, smaller ones, and they were in touch with us again, asking us about the project, the progress of our work, at which stage we are, the possibility of investing in us. But again, these didn't move ahead because we were still quite early days.

  Fast forward again, to two or three years back now, 2019 or so – 2020 actually. We published a bigger paper that we have first described the first type of drug or inhibitor against this kinase and this is actually ringing bells for many companies, that we are actually now at a stage that we can take this forward. At this stage again, I got in touch and different companies got in touch with me and in particular, this O2H and we sat down around a table, and they were much more interested at this stage, you know, to take this forward.

  And it has been a very interesting period, you know, for a year of going back and forth and having discussions with your support as well and help - you were in most of these discussions if not all of them - and trying to understand, you know, how they are looking at the whole story, how we are looking – there are scientists on one side of the table, there are investors on the other side of the table, so, different points of view. But ultimately, you know, after about a year of negotiations, and a lot of back and forth, and disagreements and a lot of Greek drama involved, we managed to make a deal. And then this is how Stingray Bio was born.

  Peter Lane: That's fascinating, isn't it. So you brought together another team member into the group - in John's expertise that came in, and obviously the University team, who included people with sort of patenting and IP expertise. Did that kind of wider team and university viewpoints help in some way in terms of viewing how, you know, company formation might be seen? Or the kind of funding that you might need to move something forwards more on a commercial journey than perhaps furthering the research?

  Professor Georgios Giamas: Definitely, no question about it. So I was very ignorant about the whole process and what you need in order to set up a company. You know I'm a scientist, I work in the lab, you know, that’s my main interest. So we're not after this, you know, we're not doing this in order to get money or funding, eventually, you know, setting up a company. However, since this particular project actually was leaning towards this direction, we decided, you know, to try and take advantage of this possibility.

  And like you said, with the help of another professor, Professor John Spencer, who is a chemist, who is very important, you know, his contribution, because we're talking about drug development, your support, also the patent team, and everyone, I started, you know, to put the pieces together in the pattern and try to understand who is needed and who can add something to the table and, you know, bring to the table and help these negotiations move forward. So definitely, you need the whole team, because you cannot do obviously, everything. And as I said, after a long period, you know, about a year of negotiation, back and forth, we managed actually to take this forward.

  Peter Lane: These kinds of projects, you know, particularly when you look at funding, and whatever else, it's all about the team. It's all about the experience, but also different viewpoints and different personalities, and, you know, perhaps reacting to different disagreements, bumps in the road, as you kind of try and iron out the right, you know, agreement; the right amount of funding; the right journey moving forward. So it's fascinating that you managed to bring John into that equation as well.

  Professor Georgios Giamas: Yeah, John was excited from the beginning. And he was willing to help and like you said, it hasn't been an easy journey, I have to admit that. You know, there have been a lot of disagreements, a lot of bumps, but I think that's not a negative thing. It's important, you know, and to improve, you know, the whole process and take this to the stage that it's supposed to be taken. Ultimately, after, you know, as I said, many disagreements, and many feisty discussions between different parts of the team, you know, we managed to find a solution that was acceptable by everyone. And yeah, here we are now.

  Peter Lane: It is viewpoints, isn't it, and the disagreements, and you kind of have to stand up for your position that you want. But you know, O2H very much in those discussions had a view of where they needed to be, if you like, as investors, but also as the technical input, you know, the commercial input that went into it.

  Professor Georgios Giamas: Fair enough. 100%, I never blamed them or thought differently, but I had to stand my ground as well. You know, I’m a scientist, I wanted these things to be ticked in order to take this forward. They wanted some other things in order to be able to invest and progress with this work. You need both parts, you know - they couldn't have done without me, I couldn't have done it without them.

  Peter Lane: That's a brilliant insight. So moving on slightly, perhaps to a second question. Your passion for your research is obvious. We often quote here in the Innovation Centre, a chap called Simon Sinek. And his insight that people don't buy what you do, they buy why you do it. And it fits really well in here. However, when you need to funding and sector development expertise, your why can be a strong initial hook, but this is quickly followed by numbers. Was this a steep learning curve for you? And what key challenges did it present? Particularly perhaps in comparison to research funding and how you might go about securing that kind of funding in the past? Was it a competitive process?

  Professor Georgios Giamas: Just to highlight about the part that you said about the passion about this kinase. I have to say that I used to say, up to five years ago that LMTK3 is my baby. Five years ago, I had a real baby so now it has moved to second positions, to be honest!

  So in academia, you know, obtaining funding is very competitive, very difficult, and it's something like we work for many months and you get a decision after a year or so which is maybe positive if you are lucky but in most chances, you know, it's negative. So it's a long procedure that doesn't always have the… most of the time doesn't have the outcome that you were hoping for. You know, in the case of the spin out company I realised that things move much faster. So whether it's a positive or negative decision, but it's important that things move fast.

  I have an example that we have applied with Stingray Bio for a grant, for a startup grant from Innovate UK, which we got quite fast. You know, it took us about a couple of days to write the application. And we were told that we got the money, you know, just a couple of months later, which is very important because that means that two months later, we were able to carry on with our work. In the case of academia, it takes, as I said, at least a year from the point you consider a project up until you get the money.

  So from this point of view, it was very exciting. It was something interesting, and I realised that things don't always have to be so difficult funding wise. Obviously, I wouldn't say you know, that it's pretty straightforward, also obtaining money when it comes to, you know, setting up a spin out company, but definitely less competitive much faster than research funds.

  We are in the process of applying for other grants as well. But yeah, their input was great. Obviously, the scientific part of the project, you know, I had contributed a lot, but there were many, you know, business type of questions, types of parts in the application that you needed, you know, the expertise of these people. So again, having a strong team with a lot of experience in their respective fields is very important.

  Peter Lane: Fantastic thoughts. Did you expect larger pharma companies to be more interested perhaps from the beginning?

  Professor Georgios Giamas: So I was hoping you know, that larger pharma companies would be more interested at this stage. But at the same time, I was aware that these type of companies - they want an almost ready product, you know, when it's about to be commercialised. Which is, again, fair enough. However, it's different steps of the process. You know, that doesn't mean, the fact that we haven't managed to make a deal with this companies at the moment doesn't mean that it's not going to happen in the future. As a matter of fact, with the progress that we have done the last few years, there is a possibility of other bigger companies to invest, based on some discussion that we have had, at a later stage if we hit certain milestones. So this is something that can happen.

  Peter Lane: I think it’s interesting isn't it, how the pieces of the jigsaw start to fit together. So perhaps some of the earlier interest you had from large pharma, when you've de risked this within Stingray Bio, it will take it to if you like a development stage where they'll feel more confident and able to invest much more, you know, larger amounts of money that are going to be needed as this company progresses.

  An amazing story, Georgios, it might be easy to think that finding the skills, experience and funding you need to develop research to a commercially valuable level might be straightforward. I hope your own insight will help others in their own journey. And to help them avoid any cracks they find in the road. What would be your one piece of advice to people starting their own journey to find early stage funding and the expertise needed to empower their own spinouts?

  Professor Georgios Giamas: Go for it. Definitely, no discussion. Give it a try.

  I had a discussion with a fellow research scientist, five years ago, who had similar experience from Cambridge, and this is what he told me. He wasn't aware of the whole process, but he could see that my project was going to go in this direction. Actually, he was more optimistic that this would lead to a spin out company than me five years ago - it turned out to be true. So I would definitely go for it. It's a very interesting experience, nothing to lose more things to learn and gain, you know, seeing things from different aspects and see how scientists think, you see how companies think see how investors think so it's very important. And as I said, if you are lacking, you know, there are many boxes that need to be ticked and luck is also involved, you may be able to, you know, to take this to the final stage and have final product. Which without the help of such companies and the support that they provide would be not impossible, but definitely more difficult if you want to try this alone, from the scientists point of view alone.

  Peter Lane: Thank you, Georgios. It's been great to talk to you. And that brings us to the end of this episode. My thanks to Professor Georgios Giamas for taking part. And if you've enjoyed this episode, follow us on SoundCloud and join us for future episodes exploring a variety of other spinouts at Sussex.

  Sue Baxter: Thanks for listening to this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, where we experience the stories behind the spinouts. Our innovations, specialist consultancy services, technology, training, and know-how are transforming the world of businesses and the public sector. We hope you’ve enjoyed this episode. I’m Sue Baxter, Director of Innovation and Business Partnerships, and to find out more about how the Innovation and Business Partnerships Team at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ can support you on your own commercialisation journey, visit the Collaborate section on the University’s website or email collaborate@sussex.ac.uk.

Episode one: Building a team to succeed with Professor Tony Moore

Peter Lane speaks to Professor Tony Moore all about how to build a team to succeed. For many years Tony’s research interest has been focused upon the structure and function of the alternative oxidase in plants and parasites.

In 2020, a commercial team was formed, and a spinout bio-pharma company, AlternOx Scientific, was founded to bring the unique benefits of this research and Intellectual Property to market for agrochemical, as well as clinical, applications.

Now, Tony forms part of the company Board in a Chief Scientific Officer role, guiding this fascinating science to realising its game-changing value in these sectors.

• Podcast transcript

  Peter Lane: Hello. Welcome to ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, a series where we experience the stories behind the spinouts created at the Sussex. Join us as we speak to academic founders as they share their own experience of the challenges and key milestones they faced in their commercialisation journeys.

  My name is Peter Lane, and I’m head of University Services at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Innovation. Today, we’ll be talking about how to build a team to succeed.

  Our guest today is Professor Tony Moore. For many years, Tony’s research interest has been focused upon the structure and function of the alternative oxidase in plants and parasites. In 2020, a commercial team was formed and a spin-out bio-pharma company, AlternOx Scientific, was founded to bring the unique benefits of this research and Intellectual Property to market for agrochemical, as well as clinical, applications.

  Now, Tony forms part of the company board in a Chief Scientific Officer role, guiding this fascinating science to realise its game-changing value in these sectors.

  Hi Tony, thanks so much for joining this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders.

  Professor Tony Moore: Hi Peter, good to see you again. It seems quite a long time since you and I first got together to talk about my research and how potentially it could turn into maybe a company.

  Peter Lane: Yes it’s been a long time, and we’ve spent a lot of hours together in different meetings, and meeting different companies and stuff, so it’ll be fabulous to chat through the team that you’ve assembled to commercialise your research.

  Professor Tony Moore: Yes, I’m happy to do so.

  Peter Lane: I’ve heard it said that academic entrepreneurs are not created, they’re compelled to bring the benefits of their research work to society. However, their research is often extremely complicated; the information is usually written for other scientists and in the form of publications, perhaps patents. So my first question is about capturing the attention of a commercial audience outside of academia – how did you draw people into your passion, your story?

  Professor Tony Moore: To be absolutely honest, it started a long time ago.

  When I was an undergraduate student, I spent an industrial year with Shell research, and during that year I kind of learnt more about what the goals of industry were as opposed to what I was studying at University. And I met someone there who was my kind of mentor, and this is a guy called Professor Brian Beachy. Brian Beachy was kind of quite high up in Shell, but he took a great interest in the work that we were doing. And in effect, Brian has remained with me over these last 40-odd years. And he came from industry, although had very much an academic background.

  During this kind of period then, as I, you know, as my research started to develop, I always was very much aware of its potential for industrial application. And therefore, as such you know, I always kind of attempted to – sometimes with great success and other times not – but I tried to draw a, you know, kind of industry both, particularly on the agrochemical side, into my research. And so that was developing things like case awards and so forth, and trying to get, of course, companies to sponsor our research.

  Peter Lane: That’s really interesting. I’m interested in the pivot between what you were doing there in a research context perhaps, and then how you turned that around, if you like, it captured the attention of people that you wanted to help you sort of build a team and commercialise your research. So did they see things in a slightly different angle, and a different lens?

  Professor Tony Moore: Absolutely. Because I’ve worked closely with industry for all these number of years, in a lot of senses I kind of fooled myself that I was learning all of these kinds of expertise and really, I would know how to run a company because I’ve been interacting with industry leaders all the way along. And I kind of, you know, started to look at my own research and look at where it was going. And in some senses, trying to put it in context. The research that, you know, I started upon – namely on this one particular enzyme called the alternative oxidase – you know, for numerous years my peers always used to say to me “Tony, it’s an interesting protein, but it’s not going to lead you anywhere. Nobody’s particularly interested”. And so it became my goal that I had to engage people with my work, and part and parcel of it was I used to go down to the Eden Project.

  The reason I went down there was because they produced what was called a titun arum, which is the largest living plant in the world and it gives off a very stinky smell, and it attracts everybody to come and see it. And so I got to know people at the Eden Project, and they said “Okay, well, we have some flowering there – would you like to come down and talk about it to the public?” and what was initially meant to be the public would come around and I’d start a talk every half hour, what it turned out to be was I continuously spoke to the public for, you know, eight hours at a time. And that was really important for me, because the feedback from the general public was that “we wanted to know about your work”. And it wasn’t, you know, it wasn’t this particular plant but what applications it had.

  And as soon as we started to kind of discover that the alternative oxidase wasn’t restricted to plants, but in fact played a very key role in allowing parasites – particularly some human parasites – to exist in the body, then we started to realise ‘Ah ha!’, there are specific applications for the control of this particular protein. And so now it’s been my lifelong ambition to engage people in my work.

  Peter Lane: I think that’s a fascinating story and insight into, if you like, your development almost as a performer – as someone that can capture the attention of an audience. And I think the pivot was probably between the public and other researchers, perhaps research funders as well, into how do you actually attract the interest of a commercial team that looks at your research perhaps through an entirely different lens. A lens where they’re kind of saying “fantastic applications, how is it positioned in a market? How are we going to make money out of the research?”.

  In those conversations, did you have to change your approach? Did you have to seek support? Did the university help you in any way, to perhaps adjust the way that you talk to those people, that you pitched to those people?

  Professor Tony Moore: Yes indeed. So the, kind of, the university proved invaluable in a lot of senses because as I said, I thought I had the expertise but really I didn’t. I really didn’t know how to, kind of, look after the intellectual property that had been developed through our research. And so it was the university that kind of not only guided me through it, but equally also were incredibly supportive and provided funds to enable not only the protection of the IP but also to pursue different avenues that perhaps would have more interest as far as industry was concerned.

  I was, you know, I was very much intrigued by the Innovation Centre at that time when we first started, and so I’d like to come up here and then to, you know, chat along with the then chairman of it. And again, it was through his guidance and support that I met other people such as yourself at the Innovation Centre. And doing that, it was kind of like sets of building blocks – I’d got the foundation, but I just didn’t know how to get the rest of that building done. And so I needed people with other kind of sets of expertise to say “well okay, this is what you do next. We’re going to kind of, let’s talk to others to see what, particularly out in the industry, what they are after and what we can provide to enable the discussion to go ahead”. So you know, the university has kind of proved invaluable in that sense, because not only did it, as I say, did it give me support, but it made introductions and that was really important. And it kind of also helped me in those introductions by providing the backup, the necessary backup when I was talking to them so they could jump in and say “oh yes, this is how we’re doing the IP, etc etc”.

  Peter Lane: In many senses, that journey has had several teams along the journey, doesn’t it – along the pathway?

  Professor Tony Moore: Oh, yes, very much so. I mean initially there were, you know, it was building a research team. And you know, that was really important. We needed to ensure that we could continue to do research in that area and that research team was particularly important with respect to getting, you know, grant funding during that period. But after we, you know, then started to realise about the commercial potential, then we kind of had to build a team very much around the university about intellectual property. And that, of course, then meant that we interacted with the Innovation Centre and other members then joined the overall team. And that team then kind of, you know, morphed into a more longer term commercial team – because actually it was the innovation team that kind of provided me with lots of introductions to, you know, people that potentially could help us to move down that commercial pathway. And so now, of course, you know, we still have our research team, but in addition to that we very much have this company team.

  Peter Lane: And I’ve been privileged to be part of that, so that’s been fantastic, we’ve had many fascinating conversations. I’d like to sort of pivot slightly into saying a question around: in those conversations, and in seeking the right people to work with you to commercialise this research successfully, how important would you say an individual’s own commercial experience is compared to their fit with your own values in this journey? Did you have to kiss frogs, as it were, or experience false dawns with building this team that you have now?

  Professor Tony Moore: I mean yes indeed, there were moments when you felt as though you had to kind of sacrifice certain elements of your kind of overall ambition to meet, kind of, what the supposed goals of the potential investor wanted. And some of those didn’t work out at all. And it was obvious that certainly, you know, interacting with some of the big, kind of, players in the area that essential what they wanted to do was just download your brain into their setup, so they would be able to take over completely. And of course that proved, you know, it proved quite difficult, and you had to show a degree of resilience.

  But, you know, eventually, you know, through the number of invitations and discussions that we had with lots of people we eventually came across one person who was just an absolute delight to work with. And you kind of started to realise how much they could offer – me as an individual, and the company as a kind of, a real kind of linchpin to take it forward. And it was then trying to kind of see if we could, or if I could particularly encourage that person to kind of join us on this journey by really kind of getting them to engage with our own values.

  Peter Lane: And I think in building that team, in finding that figurehead, in finding that person that you fitted with for your own values, he brought as well a wider team of expertise – that we came to realis over a longer period of time was actually required in order to de-risk the technology in its first stage of commercialisation.

  Professor Tony Moore: Absolutely. And as you say, he brought in a team as well that kind of put very much an industry kind of knowledge base into it, and also what the values were, and what we needed to do in order to engage with other potential investors. And, you know, it’s been a tricky journey. And initially, you know, you kind of like, you know I said “Well wait a minute, you know, I’m the world leader in this area you know, I know all about this! And I know what to do!” But actually it wasn’t – it’s not the research, it’s what you know, we needed to do in order to engage with investors. And I really didn’t have that kind of expertise. And I remember saying to Ashley at one point I said “You know, I’m getting really annoyed, because there seem to be decisions being made that I’m not involved in” and Ashley said “Yeah I understand that Tony, but there are certain things that we can do that you can’t”.

  Peter Lane: And it’s that confidence, isn’t it, that different set of skills, that team base if you like, that is really important – not only in fitting with your values but actually fitting with you as you become a member of the team.

  Professor Tony Moore: Absolutely. Whereas you know, again, it was the aspect that you know, I’d been principal investigator on this and I built my own research team. And so I was the one saying, you know, “we should be doing this or that” etc. And now to be just kind of part of a team that seems to be doing stuff on my protein – what do they think they’re doing? And then you start to realise, actually they’re doing some really fabulous work answering fabulous questions that I kind of I hadn’t sort of realised were that important, with respect to what an investor would be looking for. And so it’s taught me a lot. And actually, it taught me about how, you know, as an industry, what you go… the kind of questions that you put forward with respect to kind of the utilisation of this protein in a particular application. And what you needed to prove to start with in order to get further investment to move along that kind of pathway.

  Peter Lane: Tony, you and I could talk about this for hours, couldn’t we? And it’s been a real fascinating journey that we’ve had together. And I guess the listeners may have made the assumption that building the right team might have been a straightforward process, and I hope this insight from yourself would help others on their own journey and their interest in Knowledge Exchange from their own research. What would be the one piece of advice to people starting their own journey that you would give to help them build a winning team to succeed?

  Professor Tony Moore: Oh gosh. Kind of in retrospect, it was… to me, probably it’s engaging with people. It’s trying to sell your story to them, but at the same time being prepared to understand that you may have to change the way in which you’re doing things. And you know, you’ve got to have lots of resilience, you know, and there are times when you think “is this really worth it, all this pain?” But you know, it’s kind of like walking a tightrope, but not doing it on your own, it’s having other people to hold your hand. And as you say, you know, those team members will change during that period but hopefully they will guide you to the other side. And currently, you know, Ashely is doing that with me – we can see the other side, it’s a matter of keeping our balance and keeping our enthusiasm to get us over there to that side.

  Peter Lane: That’s truly, truly wise advice, it’s been fantastic talking to you Tony. That brings us to the end of this episode on building a team to succeed. Thanks again to Professor Tony Moore for taking part. If you’ve enjoyed this episode, follow us on SoundCloud and join us for future episodes exploring a variety of other spinouts at Sussex.

  Professor Tony Moore: Bye-bye.

  Sue Baxter: Thanks for listening to this episode of ßÏßÏÊÓƵ Founders, where we experience the stories behind the spinouts. Our innovations, specialist consultancy services, technology, training, and know-how are transforming the world of businesses and the public sector. We hope you’ve enjoyed this episode. I’m Sue Baxter, Director of Innovation and Business Partnerships, and to find out more about how the Innovation and Business Partnerships Team at ßÏßÏÊÓƵ can support you on your own commercialisation journey, visit the Collaborate section on the University’s website or email collaborate@sussex.ac.uk.