Jorge Cabero Zumalacárregui is Director of Innovation at the General Foundation CSIC (FGCSIC), a Spanish non-profit organization that acts as a bridge between the national science ecosystem and the CSIC (the Spanish National Research Council) and society. From this position, the FGCSIC leads initiatives aimed at facilitating the valorization of technologies and scientific knowledge and their transfer to the productive sector, promoting science-based innovation. They focus on forging alliances between researchers, companies, and public administrations to transform inventions into real solutions with social and economic impact.
The Fundación General CSIC promotes strategic programs, connection tools such as Nexofy, and valorization models such as COMTE Innovation the VBB (Venture Business Builder) that support researchers on their journey to market. Their work is especially relevant in a context where investment in R&D is growing, but real innovation still faces significant structural challenges.
Before reading the interview, you can get a global outlook on technology transfer and the top innovative spin-offs to follow this year downloading our free report “Top Spin-Offs to Watch in 2025”.
Disconnect between R&D investment and real innovation
Linknovate: At a time when Spain is reaching record levels of investment in R&D, why do we still have so many inventions that never reach the market?
Jorge C.B.: Indeed, 2023 was a historic year, with more than €22 billion invested in R&D, largely thanks to European funds. However, this investment has not translated into a greater conversion of science into innovation. Why? Because there is a lack of robust intermediary structures, such as the Fundación general CSIC, that support inventions from the early stages. Furthermore, there remains a disconnect between the scientific and business worlds: different timescales, different languages, different priorities. And added to this is an institutional culture that still views transfer as secondary.
Keys to generating impact from science
L.: What characteristics must a scientific or technological invention have to scale and generate real impact?
J.C.: There are three essential elements. First, a solid scientific foundation. Second, early market validation, which allows the invention to be tailored to real needs. And third, complementary teams, where science and business are integrated from the outset. But structures are also needed to cover the entire process: from intellectual property protection to connecting with investors.
L.: How does the role of research centers change with the emergence of artificial intelligence?
J.C.: AI accelerates the generation of knowledge, yes, but it also forces centers to orient part of their activity toward the challenges and demands of society and the market. Publishing is no longer enough: we must facilitate the delivery of this knowledge to society in the form of solutions. Organizations like the FGCSIC play a key role here as a bridge between science and the market.
Good practices for connecting science and business
L: What good practices would you highlight that connect the academic and business worlds?
J.C.: The Fraunhofer or Max Planck models in Germany, Oxentia in Oxford, and the MIT TLOs are benchmarks. In Spain, at FGCSIC, we are committed to providing professional support to researchers without forcing them to become entrepreneurs. We protect their rights and create vehicles like COMTE Innovación or VBB to facilitate their leap to market. Furthermore, platforms like Nexofy, or networking events like the ones we periodically hold by opening CSIC technology centers to companies, make it possible to connect the real needs of the productive sector with scientific capabilities.
I would like to highlight our COMTE Innovation program, with five calls and more than 30 beneficiary projects. Its objective is to leverage the technological projects and knowledge of CSIC research staff based on the protected results of their research projects, which can correspond to any scientific or technical area. To this end, the program offers intensive mentoring, led by expert mentors in entrepreneurship and business development, and a comprehensive, extensive, and personalized program of support, acceleration, legal advice, and the search for both public and private funding for projects, so that they can develop their value proposition and ideal business strategy, as well as the necessary milestones to increase their maturity levels and reach society and/or the market.
L: What needs to change in the education system so that more researchers see innovation and entrepreneurship as a natural path?
J.C.: Cross-curricular training from the early stages, without a doubt. But, above all, a cultural shift. We must stop presenting innovation as a “plan B” and start seeing it as a legitimate and powerful option for generating impact through science.
Effective collaboration in open innovation
L.: How can companies and knowledge centers collaborate effectively on open innovation projects?
J.C.: With a shared vision, trust, and clear frameworks for collaboration. One-off agreements aren’t enough. We’ve seen that when companies clearly express their needs and researchers receive that input with professional support, viable projects are generated.
L.: What barriers need to be overcome to make open innovation work better?
J.C.: Institutional mistrust, rigid legal frameworks, and a lack of intermediary structures. Open innovation requires more than just willpower: it requires real platforms, mixed teams, and professional management.
The role of different actors in the innovation ecosystem
L.: What role should the various actors—large companies, startups, funds, governments—play in this process?
J.C.: Each has a role: large companies provide scale; startups, agility; funding, scalability; and governments must create the conditions. At FGCSIC, we work to ensure that these actors do not act in parallel, but in partnership.
Key measures to improve knowledge transfer
L.: If you could implement four concrete measures tomorrow to improve knowledge transfer, what would they be?
J.C.: One, reduce regulatory barriers for public centers to participate in companies. Two, professionalize valuation with mixed teams. Three, scale programs like Nexofy.
And finally, four, make operating models more flexible to facilitate investment without compromising growth.
L.: Can Spain become a global hub for technology transfer? What’s missing?
J.C.: It has the ingredients: excellent science, active universities, strong companies, and committed administrations. But it lacks two things: a shared long-term strategy and an enabling regulatory environment. We also need a change of narrative: innovation should not be an exception, but rather the natural outcome of well-managed science. If we achieve that, our country should be able to position itself as an international benchmark.
