APPARENTLY the fate of Scotland’s economy lies in the hands of our scientists. We’ve all heard our enterprise minister say - and no doubt agree - that in order for Scotland to grow, we need to get our ideas "out of the labs and into businesses".

Scotland has an outstanding research base, but unfortunately there aren’t enough indigenous businesses to licence technologies to, and this means that we have to rely on academic spin-outs to commercialise this vast pool of knowledge. In other words, we’re expecting our scientists to come out of their labs, become entrepreneurs and save the economy. Call me a cynic, but I can’t help but feel there is something wrong with this picture.

The government should be applauded for the number of mechanisms it has set in place - such as SMART, Proof of Concept and the RSE/SE Fellowships - to support the universities, their staff and students in commercialising their ideas. This has led directly to some of the more enterprising individuals - supported by forward-looking universities - setting up an assortment of limited companies whose figurative bronze plaques adorn the technology transfer offices throughout the country.

There is a continued expectation that many of the remaining thousands of academics will follow suit. But they won’t. And why would they?

Our academics are academics because they love what they do and they’re good at it. This is the reason Scotland is one of the top three regions in the world for research, measured by peer-reviewed and cited, published research papers.

Although usually interested in seeing their research put to good use, and certainly interested in any potential financial upside, academics tend not to have the inclination nor the skills to set up and manage a start-up. With some notable exceptions, they do not usually make great CEOs and, for the greater good, we shouldn’t expect photonics experts to spend their time on financial spreadsheet models.

It is hard to blame academics for not necessarily jumping on the spin-out bandwagon: building businesses isn’t "their job". More importantly, they’ve watched the market tumble and some of their colleagues fail and the reality is that their chances of success are slim.

For every successful recent spin-out, there are many more that won’t make it. Armed with a £60,000 SMART award and a year’s secondment from their post, enterprising scientists are now realising that it takes substantial capital and a good management team to make a hi-tech start-up succeed - but that fundamentally you can’t get one without the other.

Reluctant to give up, drip-fed by government, angel or friends and family funding, these start-ups are finding themselves in "the land of the living dead". Despite - and partially caused by - spending 80 per cent of their time fundraising, they will fail because they are not able to make the satisfactory progress and/or hire a team to allow them to raise the type of money needed to become a valuable, sustainable business.

Traditionally, and understandably, venture capitalists want to be presented with the next "disruptive technology", a full and experienced management team and preferably a commercial contract or two before they part with their millions. Except for the technology, this is miles away from what universities can ever provide.

The universities also face another problem, which is that academic spin-outs are beneficial, but also potentially destructive to the institution. Successful technology transfer can benefit the university’s profile as well as its coffers and spin-outs are likely customers for future intellectual property and employers of graduates. There is also the satisfaction and gratitude associated with providing another valuable service to the economy.

On the other hand, spin-outs are likely to cause substantial HR headaches as a replacement needs to be found for the departing academic, who will likely have insisted on securing his or her position in the department as a backup. More importantly, how can we expect a university to encourage its star academics to leave to set up companies when they are bringing in millions of pounds of grant funding every year?

We must remember that commercialisation is really only a tertiary role for universities, next to research and teaching, and adjust our expectations .

What we need is for the private sector to be willing to provide not just the money but also the experienced management to build businesses around promising intellectual property. Only then can academics continue to support Scotland in the way they are best able to: in the labs, with the lights blazing.