Welcome to Innovation Talk #4! In this edition, we dive deep into the world of biomedical research and innovation with Alexandre de la Fuente González, Research Manager at INIBIC and SERGAS. From the challenges of transforming scientific discoveries into market-ready spin-offs to the future of healthcare innovation in Galicia and beyond, Alex shares invaluable insights on bridging the gap between research and real-world impact.
Discover how public health institutions are driving entrepreneurial culture, fostering collaboration, and leveraging cutting-edge technology to revolutionize patient care. Whether you’re a researcher, entrepreneur, or innovation enthusiast, this interview sheds light on what it takes to turn ideas into solutions that truly matter.
For a global outlook on technology transfer and the top innovative spin-offs to follow this year, don’t miss our free report “Top Spin-Offs to Watch in 2025”.
Linknovate: Thanks for joining us, Alexandre. To start, could you briefly tell us about your role as a research manager at INIBIC and SERGAS, and how it relates to innovation?
Alexandre: As a research manager at INIBIC and SERGAS, my main role is to facilitate and coordinate projects in biomedical research, from the initial conception to the transfer of results. This includes supporting researchers in the administrative and financial management of their projects, securing competitive funding, and, importantly, identifying results with innovative potential. Innovation happens when we’re able to connect scientific knowledge with the real needs of the healthcare system and the market. Our goal is to explore pathways for practical application—whether through patent protection, licensing, or the creation of spin-offs that can further develop and commercialize the solutions we generate.
The Role of Spin-Offs in Public Healthcare Innovation
L.: In the context of a public sector entity like SERGAS, what role do spin-offs play in the transfer of knowledge generated in biomedical research?
A.: Spin-offs are a strategic tool for translating research results into clinical practice or market-ready solutions. In a public environment like SERGAS, these companies help channel the knowledge generated in hospitals and research centers into innovative products and services that can directly benefit the healthcare system and improve patient quality of life. Moreover, spin-offs foster collaboration between the public and private sectors, creating opportunities for co-development, investment, and the scaling of innovations that might otherwise remain within the academic or clinical setting.
What It Takes to Build a Strong Spin-Off Team
L.: How do you recommend structuring a spin-off team?
A.: A spin-off is, above all, a vehicle for knowledge transfer. And one of the first major challenges is finding people willing to make the leap into the business world. Often, the individuals involved aren’t entirely sure what roles they should take on within the company. It’s common to see researchers with a promising idea, but without a clear understanding that a business must generate revenue. A good idea isn’t enough—you need to know how to bring it to market and sell it.
It’s also frequent to encounter administrative profiles who are well-versed in formal and regulatory procedures, but who lack the organizational or communication skills needed to effectively interact with the broader team.
That’s why it’s essential to bring in intermediate profiles—professionals who understand both the R&D and the business sides, and who have prior experience in company creation and management. These individuals act as a bridge between the scientific and commercial worlds, helping facilitate communication and alignment among researchers, managers, and potential business partners. In spin-offs, where many participants are unfamiliar with the business environment, this type of profile is especially valuable.
L.: What conditions or factors must be met for a research idea to become a viable spin-off?
A.: First and foremost, there must be a clear clinical or social need that the proposed technology or solution addresses. From there, the idea should be grounded in robust scientific evidence and supported by a team that combines technical expertise with business acumen. Intellectual property protection, a preliminary business plan, and strong institutional backing are also essential. In many cases, a proof of concept or initial validation is necessary to reduce perceived risk for potential investors.
Many projects fail because researchers underestimate the journey from invention to first sale. There are multiple stages between early development and market entry. That’s why it’s critical to involve profiles with experience in that journey—rather than assigning key responsibilities to scientists who may not be prepared to take on roles like CEO or business development lead.
In general, researchers do not have an entrepreneurial mindset. They often believe they need to offer complex, technically impressive solutions, when in fact, the market tends to reward simplicity. In science, complexity has value; in business, it’s usually the simplest, most accessible ideas that succeed.
Finally, many researchers aren’t aware that similar ideas may already exist. For technology transfer to be truly effective, you must start by looking at the market—not the other way around, which is often the approach taken in academic research.
From Research Idea to Market-Ready Innovation
L.: How do you evaluate whether a technology is mature enough to build a spin-off around it?
A.: We evaluate different criteria, such as technological maturity level (TRL), the degree of preclinical or clinical validation, the existence of protected intellectual property, and the interest of the market or potential industrial partners. We also analyze product scalability, market entry barriers, and whether there is a team committed to development.
It’s also true that the TRL required to launch a spin-off or a company, while an objective assessment, depends greatly on the field. In Galicia, for example, programs like Ignicia typically require a TRL between 4 and 7. But it all depends on the type of development the company wants to pursue: in the case of a drug, for example, a TRL of 5 is light years away from the market, while a medical device with the same TRL of 5 could be marketed in much less time.
And finally, we must also take into account the final goal of the development of a spin-off. When creating companies, there are two main models: one oriented directly to sales and the market, and another focused on attracting investment to continue increasing the TRL. This second model is designed with the prospect of the company being acquired by a larger company.
The two spin-offs we are currently promoting at SERGAS follow this second approach: they are pharmaceutical projects whose objective is to continue developing products and attracting capital before reaching the market, a very common strategy in the sector.
L.: What conditions must be met for a scientific innovation to truly reach the market and have an impact?
A.: In addition to technical maturity, it is necessary to have a clear transfer strategy, adequate financial resources, and close collaboration between researchers, managers, clinicians, and companies. It’s key to translate scientific language into one geared toward the end user, comply with regulatory standards, and ensure that the innovation responds to a real need.
Institutional support and a favorable environment are also essential. And, once again, the team makes the difference: people with the ability to bring a scientific idea to market are needed. The idea must respond, simply and effectively, to an existing demand. Therefore, it is essential to thoroughly study the market to identify a strategic niche that will allow the innovation to be successfully positioned. In hospitals, this alignment with the market is often more natural, as much research stems from specific clinical needs, which facilitates its future transfer.
Overcoming Barriers to Innovation in the Public Sector
L.: What are the biggest challenges you face when promoting the creation of spin-offs from the public sector?
A.: One of the main challenges is balancing the public mission with market logic. We also face administrative barriers, a lack of entrepreneurial culture in some scientific environments, and difficulties accessing financing in the early stages. Another critical challenge is finding entrepreneurial profiles who can lead these initiatives beyond scientific knowledge.
I could give a politically correct answer to this question, but I prefer to tell the truth: until recently, health systems were not mature enough to be agile, as there were no precedents allowing for swift action in business creation and management. The first project paves the way, but the road is arduous. Fortunately, we are now beginning to have a clear vision in our healthcare system of the need to promote business creation, with clear and defined steps on how to do so. In this sense, SERGAS is being a pioneer.
To attract private investment, it is important that the public institution not be the one directly leading the project, since investment funds tend to be reluctant to engage with models that are excessively controlled by the public sector. Spin-offs allow for greater flexibility in investment.
Success Stories: Turning Innovation Into Impact
L: Could you share with us any recent success stories at SERGAS related to the creation of a spin-off or a notable innovation?
A.: We are currently supporting the creation of two spin-offs focused on medical technology, based on validated clinical results. These projects not only have patent protection but have also secured initial funding and are in the validation phase within the hospital setting. They are clear examples of how SERGAS and INIBIC can support innovation from idea to market.
A well-established example is Nasasbiotech, the first spin-off in Spain to emerge from a public health service. It recently signed a joint venture with AMSLabs to create Nexo Tech. In addition, it has formed a new company, Batea Oncology, with the goal of transferring a proof of concept and clinical trial initiated at Nasas to patients with glioblastoma. In this case, the model has fully succeeded: there has been really a “spin” and an “off”, with the technology taking on new life within its own business structure.
L.: Are there specific support mechanisms or programs from the Xunta de Galicia or the SERGAS to facilitate these types of initiatives?
A.: Yes, there are several support instruments. From the Xunta, the calls for proposals from GAIN (Galician Innovation Agency) and, in particular, the program Ignicia, aimed at valorizing research results. On the part of SERGAS, healthcare innovation plans also provide a structured support framework. In addition, we have internal structures, such as those of INIBIC and other institutes, that facilitate the identification of opportunities, the protection of intellectual property, business consulting, and partner searches.
Ignicia is a pioneering program, and a very necessary one. The problem is that there are numerous mechanisms to support R&D, but very few to take the next steps (to bring an idea/innovation to market). At some point, research must transform into business development, which involves creating companies, generating employment, and providing economic and social value. Ignicia fills precisely that gap.
L.: In a world where collaboration is key and open innovation is the trend, how are partnerships with universities, companies, or technology centers articulated to accelerate these processes?
A.: Open innovation is a fundamental pillar of our strategy. We actively participate in consortia with universities and technology centers, both nationally and in Europe, and we promote co-creation spaces with companies. Alliances allow for resource sharing, reduced development times, and improved success rates in transferring results. They are also essential for accessing international networks and attracting investment.
There are specific aids that promote these collaborations, such as the calls from Carlos III Health Institute, which finance both companies and public entities, and which require public-private partnerships. In Galicia, the program Connects Peme also promotes this type of collaboration, requiring the joint participation of at least three Galician companies and research centers.
What’s Next: The Future of Healthcare Innovation
L.: How do you envision the future of healthcare innovation in Galicia and around the world? What trends do you think will shape the future in the coming years?
A.: I imagine a future in which health will be increasingly personalized, digital, and data-driven. Galicia, with its scientific and healthcare ecosystem, has great potential and, with the right support, can become a benchmark in areas such as biotechnology, digital health, and precision medicine.
At a global level, trends such as artificial intelligence, advanced therapies, and the integration of connected devices will lead the way. Sustainability and a focus on health outcomes will also be essential. We live in a digital age driven by AI, although we still lack a clear regulatory framework to govern these changes.
One of the main challenges of AI projects is data management. Large volumes of data are needed—impossible for a single institution to obtain—and patient clinical data require extremely high levels of security. At SERGAS, we are especially rigorous in their use. Therefore, we have created a “high-impact committee” that evaluates any project involving AI, ensuring proper management and avoiding non-clinical or improper uses.
The future of healthcare lies in digital development and AI, which can free doctors and researchers from repetitive tasks. Always under human supervision, AI can help, for example, in the interpretation of medical images—a process that currently consumes a large part of professionals’ time. In ten years, I imagine hospitals transformed by effective predictive tools, allowing for more precise anticipation of pathologies and substantially improving patient care.
