That is a very good point you mentioned, because it's another way of looking at both our research and our educational system. If you have a bad mark in your transcript, it will stay with you forever, whereas if we create these parallel environments that if you fail your first start-up or your first ideation, it's actually a good thing, because now you know how to do it better next time.
It needs some programs in our institutions to be able to value those failures, but also build models that the entrepreneur can learn from.
The other thing I noticed is that we have fantastic research, as Xavier mentioned, in our research labs. The challenge is that we cannot translate them into economic growth metrics and commercialization. One of the key things we observed is that there are no metrics to value our professors to become entrepreneurial. It would be great if a university could say it values you if you publish a paper in a high impact journal but it also values you a lot if you can commercialize your research and turn it into a start-up. That way you could attract professors who are motivated to turn their disruptive research into a commercialized aspect.
The other thing we observed is that France has a great program that incentivizes large companies to partner with start-ups. If we could have that in Canada, because the biggest challenge that start-ups have.... With my own start-up and things we have seen in the DMZ is that big enterprises in Canada are not willing to take the risk, because they want to see that three other people have used your technology before they will use your technology. If we could incentivize them to partner with these start-ups and be the first adopter of that technology in Canada, I think it would significantly expedite the time from the lab to the market.