Burning Down the House

 

fires

 

 

 

 

 

 

The 2023 election was supposed to be a climate election. Our last chance to set in place a paradigmatic shift in policies governing the way we treat our planet and thereby setting an example to other nations. Instead, the topic of environment has been almost entirely absent from debate. That says as much about voters as it does about the candidates vying for our attention of course. But we need to lift our heads and focus on the real opportunities, generating better outcomes for everyone, whilst avoiding setting fire to our own home.

Scrolling back through social media activity from the various political parties in the lead up to the election, it is clear that climate change and the environment are not at the forefront of political discourse. That is unsurprising given that polling has “cost of living” as the number one concern for voters. The difficulty is that inflationary cost pressures on households are largely outside of the control of any government whereas parliamentarians can influence how we treat the environment. Moreover, arguably less progressive nations are now surging ahead of us. It is not sufficient simply to state there is a “climate emergency”. Action is also required.

Most disappointing this election is that the New Zealand “Green” Party have ironically chosen to focus on almost everything EXCEPT the environment. Envy taxes, rent controls, income support. So having achieved very little for the environment alongside Labour, the current strategy now seems squarely aimed at eating Labour’s base. At the same time, Green policy is underwritten by divisive identity politics and other failed ideologies from the 20th Century aimed at producing dull, classless societies where thought and discourse is dictated by the State and elites in government control and distribute wealth, rather than individuals. They are completely missing the point.

In fact, what politicians across the spectrum all seem to be missing is our profound failure to meaningfully participate in the emerging global transition economy, a project worth more than US $100 Trilion over the next 25 years. It’s very simple. If we want to address social equity and care for an ageing population, we must generate greater economic wealth. Carbon transition alongside biodiversity regeneration will be one of the largest economic opportunities of our lifetime and good for the planet. Peering at our navels and invoking a victim mentality is not the kind of leadership needed right now.

A supporter of The Opportunities Party this election, Paul Spence is a commentator, researcher and serial entrepreneur, a previous co-founder of a successful New Zealand based global technology venture, co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research & SondXF and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events co-curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Bringing Change To The Top Table

Lyttleton Harbour, Christchurch

Lyttleton Harbour, Christchurch

Recently I attended a public discussion delving into “Otautahi Christchurch as an Innovation Hub”. It’s no secret that the city has confronted numerous challenges over the last decade or so. From devastating earthquakes to wildfires and a mass shooting. One could be forgiven for thinking that the place was on its knees. But it’s not. As the central city was being rebuilt, a core group of activators played a pivotal role through charting a course with innovation and collaboration at its core. Now the city is thriving. What if we germinated that approach into central government?

A number of the aforementioned group were present at the recent discussion event. Not the least of these was Raj Manji, who convened the session. As a former Christchurch City Councillor and tireless advocate for the city, Manji is no stranger to the challenges of navigating government processes in difficult times. He’s also a global thinker who takes action and attracts smart people with fresh ideas into his sphere of influence.

These are attributes that seem sadly lacking in many of our current politicians, including those who are likely to be in charge once the face of government changes in October. As The Opportunities Party (TOP) leader, Manji has a real shot at securing the Ilam seat at the general election. This would be a game changer because, under MMP, successful electorate winners get to “tag and drag” along some of their party list candidates. Potentially this means TOP could play a huge part in shaping the next government.

Why is this significant? It’s pretty clear that our current government has run its course and the wheels are falling off the proverbial wagon. Not a week passes where there isn’t either a dramatic exit or a revelation of bad behaviour by Ministers or coalition partner MPs. The present incumbents performed admirably during the pandemic, but the world has now moved on. History has also shown that governing parties very rarely secure three consecutive terms in New Zealand. For its part, the Opposition, whilst more disciplined than before, seem unable to generate intelligent policy or outline a coherent plan. Political change of some form is undoubtedly on the way. The question is – how do we optimise that change?

By standing up and supporting TOP I’m putting a stake in the ground in an effort to facilitate an optimal outcome. We desperately need fresh thinking and evidence based policy driven by responsible adults. If TOP fails to win a place at the table, we face the possibility of an unstable coalition underwritten by dogma and driven by the smug, sneering faces of the more extremist minor parties. Parties that do not necessarily have the interests of ALL New Zealanders at heart. This would be disastrous at this pivotal moment in history when society must act collectively to confront significant global issues.

Paul Spence is a commentator, researcher and serial entrepreneur, a previous co-founder of a successful New Zealand based global technology venture, co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research & SondXF and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events co-curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Our Tech Entrepreneurs Need A Breakthrough

btvic_logo The state government of Victoria has announced the first investments from a $2 billion fund for the commercialisation of research, science and technology. Breakthrough Victoria will focus on life sciences, agri-food, cleantech and digital technologies in a push to reboot the state’s post-Covid economy. The package includes $100 million for co-funding platform services such as research facilities and commercialisation advisory.

It was with this in mind that I attended the Startup Council roadshow event in Christchurch recently with fire in my belly. For context, the New Zealand government invests a grand total of $2.5 million per annum to support incubation and acceleration across the entire country. In June 2022 the existing successful “founder incubators” were all de-funded by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and the funding was handed over to an elite collection of service providers outside of the universities. In 2020 funding for “deep tech incubation” was allocated to a group of foreign controlled entities. There is currently no central government funding for incubation within a New Zealand university.

The newly formed Startup Council sprung out of some policy initiatives developed collaboratively during the first lock-down through Global Entrepreneurship Network New Zealand, to which I actively contributed. The self-selected Council is comprised mostly of representatives from the investment community, but also includes a serial technology entrepreneur and an accelerator operator. The Council has direct communication with government Ministers.

That last point is important because for a long time our startup ecosystem did not have a voice in government. Over the years we have been reliant on pleading a case to gatekeepers at MBIE who seem to have little or no global context for decision making. Up until recently, the government focus has been upon kick-starting the venture investment sector. This ignores the issue of curating a pipeline of deal flow however. Translational research does not magically become investment ready without a lot of background support.

Not investing in our startup ecosystem is not just an existential problem for those of us that work with founders. It is also an impediment to progress in meeting our carbon zero commitments. In 2021 around US $1 Trillion in capital poured into funds targeting investment into environment, social and governance (ESG) focused projects and ventures, including cleantech, sustainable food and renewable energy. Areas in which we already have capability. Investment is expected to grow to $4 Trillion per annum, as the global economy decouples from carbon. If New Zealand is to have a chance to participate, we need to be building sound innovation infrastructure right now, especially within universities!

The cold, hard reality is that (up until now at least) the government has not seen the value in supporting a vibrant startup ecosystem. This is despite the fact that our neighbours across Asia-Pacific have literally invested hundreds of millions over decades. If nothing changes and with the world open for business again, it will be no surprise if some of our scientist entrepreneurs and tech startup founders start looking towards the West Island. Or perhaps even further afield.

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a previous co-founder of a successful New Zealand based global technology venture, co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research & SondXF and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events co-curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

The Art Of The Sale

niro1This week I conducted a small experiment. I really want to play my part to reduce emissions, so I’m in the market for a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). I’ve also been doing a couple of papers at our local university for interest recently and have just completed a marketing course at Masters level. So I’m up to speed with marketing tactics and sneaky selling strategies. This is where the fun begins.

I headed into town to work my way around a few car sales yards – just to see how I would be treated as a potential customer. Here’s what I found.

1. KIA – The receptionist introduced me to a very young salesman who looked like he had better things to do. I asked if he could take me out for a short drive and introduce me to the vehicle I was interested in. No, that was not possible. But please sign this $5,000 waiver and feel free to take her out for a spin yourself. I asked a basic question about whether the vehicle had anti-skid. He said he needed to go check on this. Really? Aren’t you selling these vehicles? I was also informed there was a 6 month waiting list. Slightly bemused, I signed my life away. After a 2 minute familiarisation, he left me to it. 5/10

2. Subaru – Bubbly young lady waltzed up to me. Very positive attitude, but admits that Subaru do not offer what I seek and not likely to in the future (they do in the U.S.). Things got better though. She asked if I’d considered a Peugeot. I had not. Her colleague under the same roof looked after the franchise, so she kindly took me over and introduced me to him. 7/10

3. Peugeot – We had a good discussion about European vehicles and the sales chap mentioned that he would have a demonstrator vehicle arriving next month that would fit my needs. He gave me a business card and showed me where to find useful info on their website. At all times he showed an interest in the customer needs and was looking to find a solution for me. Not bad. 8/10

4. Hyundai – I currently drive a Hyundai. It has been a wonderful vehicle with minimal running costs. I also love that Hyundai is sponsoring the Pinnacle Programme that offers scholarship opportunities to high achieving students. The current television campaign is the best ad on tv in my humble opinion. I dearly want to love Hyundai – but they keep disappointing. At last year’s service, the car groomer conspired with a rude receptionist to turn the stereo volume to maximum, resulting in an ear blasting when I turned the key. Funny joke. So it was with some trepidation that I set foot on their car yard. I need not have worried. The salesman completely ignored me whilst having an animated discussion on his mobile phone. 1/10

My point is this. There was a time when sales people knew their products and they knew the art of converting leads into actual sales. As a customer, I want to feel valued and respected, no matter where I am in the pipeline. From walk-in to first sale to post-sale service. Sales people used to build lifelong relationships with customers who would often return for their next purchase. What went wrong? Attention deficit?

I’m not sure if this is a localised cultural problem, but service ethic no longer seems to be part of our business DNA here in New Zealand. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve walked into a shop or cafe this year where the young staff were either chatting amongst themselves or texting their friends on phones whilst completely ignoring customers. Since when has this ever been acceptable? It reflects badly on business owners who are failing to train teams in customer service and also failing to monitor performance. At a time when businesses are desperately trying to recover from sales lost during the pandemic – why are sellers failing at that most fundamental task called customer service?

Oh… and I still haven’t found my PHEV. Any suggestions?

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a recently exited co-founder of a New Zealand based technology venture, a co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Free the 99

akaroa3 They called it the slap that reverberated around the world. A wealthy and privileged, angry man arrogantly displaying his lack of respect for a long established institution and the faithful community that had blindly supported him. No, I’m not referring to the infamous Oscars night incident, I’m talking about Grant Dalton’s acceptance of an offer from the city of Barcelona to host and fund the 2024 Americas Cup yacht race.

In 2017 a glowingly optimistic report from the Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) estimated that delivery of the Americas Cup event would bring in $600 million to $1 billion in benefits to the New Zealand economy. A more recent post-event report estimated that less than half of the $348 million public investment was returned in economic benefits during the 2021 event. The New Zealand government share of the funding was $133 million.

In fairness nobody forecast that the event would fall amidst a global disease pandemic. It is a testament to local organisers (and the success of the government’s pandemic response) that the event ran at all in fact. It is claimed that 68 million global viewers watched the televised component of the event and almost 39,000 (mostly domestic) visitors provided a much needed boost to the Auckland regional economy. But the taxpayer investment in the event came with no guarantees that Team New Zealand would opt for the 2024 challenge to be held in New Zealand and despite a further $99 million offered by the New Zealand government, hard man Dalton predictably followed the big money elsewhere.

That’s a shame for Auckland. But in light of some commentators complaining about the elitist nature of the sport, perhaps it is not worth throwing more good money after bad. In the meantime, about the same time the report on outcomes of their $133 million stake was being released by MBIE, the Ministry was also taking a decision to actually reduce their $3 million annual investment in the local innovation ecosystem. Founder incubators will be disestablished from June this year and it is already known that some will receive no further government funding.

Founder incubators were once at the heart of the innovation ecosystem, providing a basis for entrepreneur capability building, a channel for investment flows and a pipeline of high tech startups that added long term, high value jobs to our economy. Not as glamorous as yacht races or movies, but creating sustainable value that persisted long after the initial public investment. Last month I explained how our neighbours and competitors across Asia-Pacific have begun to reap the rewards of long term ecosystem investment amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Which brings me back to the $99 million already budgeted for the 2024 Americas Cup investment. Would it not be more valuable to now allocate those funds towards developing our local innovation ecosystem? New Zealand is finally beginning to gain some traction in attracting foreign startup investors and we have a wealth of homegrown entrepreneurial talent ready to take on meaty global problems in areas such as climate, food and health. We need to capitalise on this opportunity as quickly as possible. Surely it is now time to invest in creating sustainable economic opportunities, rather than one off vanity events?

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a recently exited co-founder of a New Zealand based technology venture, a co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Coster and Foster Failed Us All

ronnies I will defend to my last breathe the right for New Zealanders to peacefully protest about issues they feel strongly about. But the mob camped on the lawn in Wellington have now gone too far. It’s bad enough that they have obstructed a public road, shut down a bus station and university campus and harassed innocent passers-by. Now the Police have allowed a vigilante “security” force to impede access of citizens to Parliament grounds, a public venue that belongs to all of us. It’s no joke that the Police, Wellington City Council and the two Andy’s have failed the people of New Zealand.

For a protest group ostensibly “protecting our freedoms”, this is beyond rational. But then there’s nothing rational at all about the melange of bizarre causes being promoted by these sheeple and their conspiracist puppet-masters. Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with vaccine mandates and lockdowns, this is not the way to win hearts and minds. In fact it must only be a matter of time before an organised counter-protest arises, at which point we will indeed see the kind of direct conflict that was hoped to be avoided. No doubt the counter-protestors will be quickly arrested or dispersed, for their own safety of course.

If the disaffected filthy few wish to live like Orwellian farm animals together on the Parliament lawn to promote their cause, let them do so. However the moment that occupation spreads onto the surrounding streets and into peoples’ lives, it becomes domestic terrorism. The “freedom protesters” have ironically made it clear that they actually have no regard for the freedom of those outside of their own circle. Once the initial threat of a Capitol style storming receded, the Police strategy seems to have been to withdraw and allow the lunatics to take over the asylum. An entrenched mob will be very hard to remove at this point.

Police Commissioner Andrew Coster and Mayor Andy Foster are complicit in this mess. Suspending the rule of law in the Molesworth Street precinct was an enormously foolish capitulation that has set back civic society immeasurably. Foster will be gone at this year’s local body election for sure, but Coster continues to enjoy the tacit support of the government, who wish not to be seen being involved in directing the response. But operational mismanagement of the situation has now led to a petition for Andrew Coster’s removal.

Appointed in March 2020, about the same time the pandemic began sweeping across the globe, it was clear from the outset that Coster’s tenure would be challenging. But his arrival signaled quite a shift in strategic direction for the New Zealand Police, with the much lauded “policing by consent” methodology being invoked. Armed patrol units were withdrawn from the streets of Auckland. Within months a young police officer and several civilians had been shot dead as Police lost control of the city to armed gangs. Softly, softly may have once been the motto of a fictional police television series, but that approach is clearly not working.

But the most concerning aspect of Coster’s appointment is that he represents the gentle, smiling face of a new generation of Cabinet appointed leadership within the public service. A leadership group that has become infiltrated by politically correct sycophants quietly “reforming” institutions, infrastructure and instruments of government without the permission of the electorate. Calls for his removal simply echo an increasing level of discomfort over the current direction of our public institutions. “Policing by consent” may be the flavour of the moment, but there’s nothing consensual about the direction our public service is heading in right now.

2021 – A Political Retrospective

watersThis year has been remarkable if for no other reason than the pandemic has resurfaced some ugly divisions that continue to bubble away behind the easy-going facade of New Zealand society. We are doubtless challenged now more than ever on numerous complex topics, including environment, poverty, crime, health, immigration and race. So the need for change is absolutely genuine. But the manner in which change is now being enacted is both contemptuous and potentially self-defeating.

2021 firmly reminded us of the fragility of the social contract. In an otherwise generally compliant nation, a vocal minority held out against vaccinations and wise public health measures on the basis that their “freedoms” were being threatened. There was of course little discussion by these lost souls about the freedoms of thousands of elderly or unwell who would have very likely lost their lives, had we caved in to the views of the misinformed. I had several respectful but somewhat disturbing conversations with individuals this year invoking thinking from my recent article on why science is more trustworthy than their deranged social media feeds.

At the other end of the political spectrum, hand-wringing social purists doggedly continued to promote the longstanding policy of shutting down any debate that appeared to challenge their well meaning, but at times misguided ideologies. Consequently institutions that had been previously hotbeds of intellectual debate and where ideas were once challenged and tested in open fora, have latterly become hotbeds of conformity and intolerance instead. Nowhere was this more apparent than the embarrassing public skewering of celebrated evolutionary biologist Professor Richard Dawkins, for daring to question why a group of science academics were being villified in a Galilean inquisition by the very body responsible for promoting science discourse in New Zealand.

Of course the danger in shutting down the intellectual debate of good ideas is that bad ideas from across the political spectrum similarly do not receive proper analysis or exposure to the sunlight. This appears to be part of the strategy currently being invoked by the government as it pursues a programme of social reform aimed at centralising control of some of the most important assets and resources in the country. With convenient distractions provided by the public health crisis, our servants in the Capital have quietly set about executing a quite radical socio-political agenda that the majority of voters actually did not yet sign up for.

History has shown however that rapid, ideologically driven reforms are quite often not very successful and ironically may even disenfranchise the intended beneficiaries long term. Unfortunately, many of the idealistic and bright-eyed policy wonks busily designing the new order from Wellington were not even born when we last fundamentally overhauled our economic order and thus have little lived experience to draw upon. Worryingly, much of the reform model is based on a flawed legal premise around the nature of our important responsibilities under the Treaty of Waitangi. The interpretation of this precedent perversely constrains governments to take a narrow, binary and transactional approach in an obviously highly diverse and increasingly complex world.

The other difficulty here is that this reform programme received little exposure at the last election and therefore suffers from what some have termed “democratic deficit”. Worse still, in the absence of a properly informed and curated public debate, the attitude of some of the critics has turned from fearful to venomous with some unpleasant personal attacks containing racial overtones. That is unfortunate and sad. But it also illustrates that sidelining large sections of society is not the way to pursue important social reforms. Instead of stifling open public debate around big ideas, we must encourage it.

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a recently exited co-founder of a New Zealand based technology venture, a co-founder and director of Creative Forest, principal at GeniusNet Research and an advisor at ThincLab. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Entrepreneur Ecosystem Resource Rethink Requested

Square EManifestoNZ PostDuring the last few months a number of us from the entrepreneur enabler community have been working on a manifesto document aimed at making the case for a more coordinated and vastly better resourced entrepreneurial ecosystem. The initiative sprung from a weekly discussion session that began during the pandemic lock-down and was hosted by the Global Entrepreneurship Network in New Zealand.

As entrepreneurs we are accustomed to dealing with uncertainty and frequently making do with limited funding. But as the economic and health crises evolved, it has become clear that as a nation we will need to do a great deal more together to support entrepreneurship. This is more important than ever now because encouraging early stage new venture development will be fundamental to both the economic recovery and preserving our living environment. In fact we need to be embedding transition thinking into every economic policy decision.

Despite claims by officials to the contrary, government support for early stage entrepreneurship is negligible by comparison to our neighbours across the region. New Zealand is light years behind and it’s time we had an honest conversation about it. Singapore and Australia have already injected hundreds of millions of dollars into developing their ecosystems over the last few years, with demonstrable success – particularly in software and deep tech. There are currently over 4,000 technology based startups operating in Singapore and there was around US $10 billion in venture investments made during 2019 alone. Australia’s “deep tech” incubation program turns 20 years old this year and continues to churn out high tech success stories with publicly funded support through the universities.

But how do we make a case for scarce public funds at a time when there are so many other competing needs? The reality is that we cannot afford to delay any longer. Our innovation infrastructure has been left to languish for far too long thanks to gate-keeping and a lack of a compelling vision. This long-standing under-investment now looks like a threat given the challenges we currently face. So it is our role to inform and educate through the Manifesto document.

Fortunately we could make a huge difference with even a modest increase to resourcing. Through the manifesto we’ve suggested five areas [PDF] that could deliver early wins and for which there are already a number of initiatives in play that could very easily be leveraged and scaled up. Building upon our existing innovation infrastructure is the smartest way to grow economic activity and employment.

For example, there are several excellent educational programmes operating within New Zealand that aim to build entrepreneurial and innovative capability, specialising in various demographics from primary school through to postgraduate research level. All of these programmes bring value to the ecosystem and help to create a pipeline of talent. But there is little in the way of coordination between these initiatives. This is a lost opportunity at a time when there has never been a greater need for high value, new venture innovation across society.

One approach would be to provide an overlay to better align our efforts in educating, encouraging and empowering entrepreneurs from an early age. Furthermore, creating an “innovation nation” is the key to solving the most intractable environmental problems that confront us, whilst also generating positive economic and environmental outcomes across society. New Zealand has a unique window of opportunity to show global leadership in this space right now, in order to attract the capital and talent we will need to rebuild better.

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a recently exited co-founder of a New Zealand based technology venture, a co-founder and director of Creative Forest and principal at GeniusNet Research. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest. Paul is a co-author of the Entrepreneurship Manifesto 2020.

The Unjust Transition

Environmentalists, social entrepreneurs and green politicians have been warning of the need for a “just transition” to a low carbon, less damaging and more socially inclusive economy for as long as I can remember. Unsurprisingly those who advocate for radical change in how we do business, have been quick to point the finger of blame and to frame this unique moment in history as an opportunity for re-imagining society. In fact change was already underway before the pandemic arose. But it takes a long time to turn a large ship around. Redistribution of wealth cannot be at the expense of wealth creation. Blowing the ship out of the water is not the answer.

The dark stain of social inequity has often formed the basis for arguments against our prevailing economic system. Yet even the most ardent critics of capitalism agree that proportionally less of the global population live in (extreme) poverty than a century ago. The looming spectre of climate change has increasingly emboldened demands to discard capitalism and move beyond GDP as a measure of progress. Yet the already emergent transfer of capital away from polluting industries into regenerative, more socially responsible activities possibly offers the greatest hope of a cleaner, more equitable economy. Innovators and entrepreneurs are an important part of the solution. But this will not be enough on its own.

Today’s global public health crisis is symptomatic on every level of how political structures have failed to distribute the benefits and reduce the risks of a globalised economy. The highly corrupt and distorting nature of political systems in China, Iran, Italy and the United States created the breeding ground for this disease and allowed it to take hold worldwide. But plagues and looming environmental disasters are agnostic when it comes to politics. It is how we respond that is most important. Unfortunately failed governments, autocratic leadership and internal competition for resources do not allow for an informed and timely response.

Instead of tearing down the existing economic model, we first need to adapt political systems to a new way of working. There is no place for confrontational and divisive politicking during a global crisis. The lack of a coordinated response to the pandemic has been most notable in federations such as the United States and the European Union. It also illustrates the reasons why we are failing to address the problem of climate change. Self interest and exceptionalism by the militarily most powerful are materially inconsistent with wise stewardship of a globalised, highly interconnected economy.

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a recently exited co-founder of New Zealand based technology venture iwantmyname,  a co-founder and director of Creative Forest and principal at GeniusNet Research. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.

Optimising Our Knowledge Networks

Instructing the Super Fund to channel $300 million of investment into emerging tech firms, as well as a recent call for delivery of a “deep tech” incubator to assist commercialisation of public funded research in New Zealand, illustrates that the government has been listening to the concerns of the high tech business community around the need for greater support in the commercialisation of knowledge. Health, environment, food production, robotics and AI – there are many problem areas in which we can excel.  But whilst a broadening of activity in the innovation ecosystem must be seen in a positive light, new entrants may face an uphill battle.

Some say that government involvement in the sector is long overdue. Not a month goes by without the media reporting the departure of a promising high growth, high tech firm such as Rocket Lab, for example. The paucity of follow on capital and expertise available locally is often quoted as the culprit. Successive previous governments failed to address the problem due to being ideologically opposed to what has sometimes been unfairly branded as corporate welfare. But interestingly the most vocal critics of incubation and government directed investment funding tend to be wealthy and well-connected individuals who have no problem sourcing capital for their own ventures.

Since the public purse is already funding universities and research organisations in one form or another anyway, is it really such a stretch for government to facilitate obtaining an economic return on those investments? Those who mutter in their beards about “level playing fields” should take a look around. We are losing the battle with our neighbours in the Asia-Pacific region with whom we compete for capital and talent. Australia, Singapore and Korea all provide substantial support for startups and the commercialisation of publicly funded research.

So where does that leave New Zealand with its newly rediscovered enthusiasm for investing in science and technology commercialisation? Well there was an additional most welcome announcement this week of new funding for an existing body that has already made considerable inroads into surfacing promising research and turning it into businesses. That seems to foreshadow where government thinking might be heading in terms of who is now best equipped to develop a formal incubation programme.

But research commercialisation is actually a network optimisation problem involving many and diverse stakeholders. A post graduate study that I conducted on this topic a few years ago is still relevant. The most creative ideas and opportunities are found at the boundaries where disparate networks overlap. Hence the direction we are heading with, GeniusNet. It is therefore absolutely essential that we have an open innovation based ecosystem and a diversity of players in the incubation and commercialisation marketplace, if we are to lift our economy up the value chain.

Paul Spence is a commentator and serial entrepreneur, a co-founder of New Zealand based technology ventures iwantmyname and Creative Forest and principal at GeniusNet Research. You can follow Paul on Twitter @GeniusNet or sign up for a free weekly digest of startup, tech and innovation related events curated by him through New Zealand Startup Digest.