spillovers, she said, while acknowledging the imperfection of patents as a proxy for spillovers.
Dr. Flamm cautioned that one might find the same number of patents pre-and post-ATP in a company or companies, and draw the inference that the ATP had had no effect. It is possible, however, that the ATP encouraged companies to generate patents with greater spillovers than before, meaning that the program made a difference. Dr. Zucker responded by saying that she and Dr. Darby were developing a way to address the quality of patents among ATP recipients.
Alan Lauder of DuPont asked Dr. Ruegg about the 12 project terminations in the ATP and stated that often we can learn more from failures than from success. What, Mr. Lauder asked, has been learned from these failures?
Dr. Ruegg said that the 12 projects were terminated in the time horizon of Dr. Long's study and, since then, 12 more have been terminated. This amounts to 6 percent of all ATP projects. About 20 percent of the terminated projects are joint ventures that did not get off the ground. Another 20 percent have been small companies that have gone bankrupt. One-third of the terminations is due to a change in company management or strategy; something internal changed that caused the company to no longer pursue the project. A final class of projects was terminated for technical reasons; the R&D team believed that technical challenges were too great to be overcome in the context of the project.