ChiefNode

Texas votes to include patents & commercialization in tenure decisions

I have long advocated for the use of "outreach" "impact of research on the community" and/or "public good activities beyond publications" as being important to tenure & promotion decisions at major research institutions (and even non-research institutions). Service, scholarship & teaching are important, but so is showing impact to the community.

The University of Texas system just decided to add "patents" and "commercialization" to their tenure critieria. I applaud the concept, but I think it's unfortunate the focus is solely on patents (or, at least in this story about it). IP means copyright & trademark, which can be more important, in some cases, than patents. And the focus on "commercialization" rather than (?) public impact may be a problem. Faculty (and staff) across the university can make important contributions to the public, not just hard scientists and engineers.

But I may protest too much. I'd like to see: 1) researchers following how this policy impacts invention disclosures; tenure application packets; products released and companies started in Texas related to UT IP; newspaper stories about UT innovation, etc. AND 2) the policy. I'll need to seek out the second, but I hope researchers are paying attention to the first.

UPDATE: I've since learned that this is not the entire UT system, but only the A&M campus. 6/29/2006

posted by Dana Bostrom @ 21:25