On December 13, 2016 the Association of clusters and technology parks has published II National ranking of Russian technoparks. Its main task – to enable technology entrepreneurs and investors choose the optimal platform for the realization of the project, to show to the management companies of technology parks the direction for the development of its activities, and to the authorities – to identify and replicate best practices of technology parks.
The pilot ranking was released in mid-February 2016. That time it was attended by 14 technology parks in different regions of the country, and the leaders of the ranking became technology park “Zhigulevskaya Valley” (Samara region), “Ulyanovsk Centre of Technology Transfer” and “Technology park of Aviation Technologies” (Ufa) . That rating has allowed for the Association of clusters and technology parks to develop an approach to the analysis of technology parks’ activity and became the initial basis for a more detailed study, which is presented review today.
At this time, the rating has become more widescale – an application for participation in it have filed 103 technology park from 85 Russian regions. The final version included 25 technology parks from 15 regions of the country that provided the most complete data which are sufficient for settlement. All the technology parks were evaluated on 10 indicators grouped into 4 groups: innovation activity of residents, economic activity, the effectiveness of the management company and the existence of favorable conditions for residents. As a result, the top five included 4 representatives of Moscow and leaders became Nanotechnology Center “Tehnospark” (Moscow), Moscow State University Science Park (Moscow) and the Science and Technology Park of the Novosibirsk Akademgorodok (Academpark). It is noteworthy that none of the leaders has won first place in the individual categories. So, the best in the nomination “The effectiveness of the management company” was the Technopark in the sphere of high technologies “IT-park” (Kazan), and the winner in the categories “Innovation and economic activity of residents” – Technopark “Strogino” (Moscow) who took 5th place of ranking.
According to the rating the main components traced of functioning technology parks’ efficiency in Russia: proximity to major research centers and the academic environment, the presence of private investors and the high interest of the regional government in the diversification of the economy.
In this ranking Science Park of Moscow State University is especially allocated – the oldest technology park of the country, founded in 1992. In spite of its small area of 1 hectare, the technology park was able to take the second place in overall ranking.
The secrets of this success has shared the general director of the Science Park of Moscow State University Oleg Vladimirovich Movsesyan.
Movsesyan O.V.: Our park is really small. However, despite this, we have taken the second place in the ranking presented. First and foremost, this result has been achieved through efficiency and innovation activity of our residents. And it is easy to explain: we set up at the Moscow University and work with leading universities in Moscow. Young people come to us with the desire to create a start-up, and we help them in this. For talented young people we have developed a special acceleration educational program “Formula of Success”. Each year, about 500 young people are recorded on it – well-trained, active, inclined to entrepreneurial activity, as a rule, with an engineering or science education.
E-Vesti: Thus, we can say that this acceleration educational program is one of the success factors of your Science Park? After all these young people, the future residents of the park, begin to create their own company and launch start-ups, already well prepared. And, accordingly, have a better chance of success.
Movsesyan O.V.: The key to success – is reliance on our leading research and education centers and focusing on working with young people, which are able to create something necessary and useful to people. And, most importantly, they want to do it quickly, as soon as possible to bring their product to market, and achieve success.
E-Vesti: Tell me, what are the reasons low position of the Scientific Center of Moscow State University in the ranking in terms of “Economic activity of residents”?
Movsesyan O.V.: I think the fact is that most of our companies – start-ups that are just entering the market, or even develop its first product. Accordingly, revenue from them is virtually nonexistent. In general, the volume of production by our companies is annually about 5 billion rubles. But when you divide economic indicators by the number of resident workers, including the company’s early stage without revenue, is not very relevant picture, especially when those of us over 60%. There is something to discuss with the operators of ranking, but I want to say that on the whole it looks professional.
Our focus – the generation of new companies and facilitate their development. After some time, our residents grow up and go out of the park in the larger, industrial technology parks. For example, in Strogino, Glory of or IQ-Park. Several companies that have emerged from the Moscow State University Science Park, has built plants in the Moscow, Kaluga and Tver regions and other regions of Russia.
E-Vesti: So, even though your focus on young companies, you were able to achieve such a good result in the ranking. This is doubly valuable.
Movsesyan O.V.: We are successful at the expense of efficiency. Our park is not big but if you count the amount of revenue per square meter, then I think we will have the highest index. The second key to success – it is a landmark on the market, the demand of our customers. Nearly 25 years ago we started out, they say, from scratch. The funds invested in the development of the park, there were only 25% from the budget. But even this money we have received on a returnable basis, and eventually returned them to State Fund of promoting innovations, which have supported us more than fifteen years ago. From that moment other budget funds we have not received for the development. The rest of the financing went through profits from our residents, who also invested in the development of infrastructure. So we have developed. Market orientation and focus on the demand force to be effective.