![\"\"](\"\/Themes\/Release\/images\/responsive\/ettelecom-default.jpg\")
The country should also enable policies that encourage venture capital investments in high technology areas, Paulraj told ET’s Raghu Krishnan on the sidelines of the Synergia Conclave recently. A former Indian Navy officer, he is also actively involved with policy makers to strengthen the country’s technology base.
Paulraj, who established three research labs in India before moving to Stanford, has so far built and sold three technology companies and advises both the US and Chinese governments on technology policies. Edited excerpts:
What are our capabilities in emerging technologies such as 5G<\/a>?<\/strong>
India has a vast technology workforce working for multinationals such as Qualcomm and Huawei. There is fantastic amount of talent. I built and sold three companies, all of them had backend centres in India. The best wireless chips are built out of India, because there is incredible amount of math that go in there.
You can build anything in the world, but if the company is not headquartered here, then you have zero control. Any country gets influence, presence and strength if the company is headquartered there. On that count, in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) area, India virtually has zero market share.
Is it capital or government policy that is not helping India?<\/strong>
Clearly, the technology talent is here. The one thing that is missing in Bengaluru and Hyderabad is that it also needs skills such as marketing and product management. Those kind of skills, technically, are sitting in the headquarters (of global companies) and India units are only the tech shop.
Why are we at near-zero? There is no effective government policy. Technology is here, not because of IITs. In fact, most of the talented engineers come from often unknown engineering colleges.
One thing missing in India is venture capital. In this high risk business, 80% of companies fail, whether it is in China or in the United States. Technology companies fail because the market is so competitive. One out of ten companies succeeds and makes a whole lot of money; that is how the VC sustains. Making VC money available has not happened and the government has failed with its policies.
What else has India missed in shaping policy?<\/strong>
China never bought technology in general without demanding transfer of technology. It would say — I will buy this jet engine from you Mr Rolls Royce, the next generation of jet engine should have 5% of Chinese headquartered IP. You can start the company, fund it completely, but it is in our jurisdiction. That IP is part of the system, if not I will buy engines from GE. And, they would play one company against the other. All these companies, in order to get market share, would be ready.
We have created no (such) mechanism in India. In the last 25 years, we would have bought maybe close to $800 billion worth of high technology stuff, but we have got no transfer of technology. We need to do this properly and we need to hire the best talent to do it for us. We have technology knowledge, but lack marketing knowledge. China today invites people…to work in the country. We should also do that. We should create a city like Shenzhen where hi-tech companies can thrive and learn from an ecosystem.
What about the large Indian IT companies?
<\/strong>
Indian IT firms have made enormous money through services. The hi-tech road is very risky. It will hurt their business model as they have to compete with their clients. It is not advisable for them to build products.
How about industry-university collaboration in India? Do you see that happening?<\/strong>
I worked with Professor Anurag Kumar, Director of Indian Institute of Science on the 5G<\/a> committee for India. Kumar was talking to IIT directors on how to move the needle, as not one idea (in 5G) technology has come from India. The professors told him that what is missing is entrepreneurial zeal.
Starting a company is very hard. These people are very comfortable, the government gives the money. In Stanford, I have to fight for every dollar to fund my students. Writing papers is easy, building prototypes and working with hardware is messy and difficult work. Frankly, not much is expected. Ultimately, if the systems are working, people are making money; they (Indian professors) would take risks. Today, the barriers are too high for them to take risks.
<\/body>","next_sibling":[{"msid":71964718,"title":"'Quantum supremacy' and the threat it poses to data storage, digital economy","entity_type":"ARTICLE","link":"\/news\/quantum-supremacy-and-the-threat-it-poses-to-data-storage-digital-economy\/71964718","category_name":null,"category_name_seo":"telecomnews"}],"related_content":[],"msid":71964808,"entity_type":"ARTICLE","title":"India should emulate China in tech transfer, IP: 5G Forum head Arogyaswami Paulraj","synopsis":"India should also enable policies that encourage venture capital investments in high technology areas, said Paulraj","titleseo":"telecomnews\/india-should-emulate-china-in-tech-transfer-ip-5g-forum-head-arogyaswami-paulraj","status":"ACTIVE","authors":[{"author_name":"Raghu Krishnan","author_link":"\/author\/6201\/raghu-krishnan","author_image":"https:\/\/etimg.etb2bimg.com\/authorthumb\/6201.cms?width=100&height=100","author_additional":{"thumbsize":false,"msid":6201,"author_name":"Raghu Krishnan","author_seo_name":"raghu-krishnan","designation":"Editor","agency":false}}],"analytics":{"comments":0,"views":151,"shares":0,"engagementtimems":658000,"url":"https:\/\/ettelecom.indiatimes.com\/telecomnews\/india-should-emulate-china-in-tech-transfer-ip-5g-forum-head-arogyaswami-paulraj\/articleshow\/71964808.cms"},"Alttitle":{"minfo":""},"artag":"ETTelecom","artdate":"2019-11-08 08:47:02","lastupd":"2019-11-08 08:49:53","breadcrumbTags":["Arogyaswami Paulraj","technology transfer","Mimo","5G","5GInfra","Stanford University","Industry","Interviews"],"secinfo":{"seolocation":"telecomnews\/india-should-emulate-china-in-tech-transfer-ip-5g-forum-head-arogyaswami-paulraj"}}" data-authors="[" raghu krishnan"]" data-category-name="" data-category_id="" data-date="2019-11-08" data-index="article_1">
读到
国家也应该支持政策,鼓励风险投资在高新技术领域,Paulraj告诉ET的间隙拉Krishnan增效最近秘密会议。前印度海军军官,他也积极地参与决策者加强该国的技术基础。
Paulraj,之前在印度建立了三个研究实验室搬到斯坦福大学,迄今为止建造和销售三个科技公司,建议美国和中国政府在科技政策。编辑摘录:
我们等新兴技术的功能是什么5克吗?
印度拥有大量的技术劳动力为高通和华为等跨国公司工作。有出色的人才。我三家公司生产和销售,所有人都在印度后端中心。印度最好的无线芯片是建立起来的,因为有大量的数学。
您可以构建世界上任何东西,但如果公司不是总部这里,零位控制。任何国家的影响,存在和力量如果公司总部。数,在信息和通讯技术(ICT)地区,印度市场份额几乎为零。
它是资本或政府政策,不是帮助印度?
显然,这里的技术人才。丢失在班加罗尔和海德拉巴的一件事是,它也需要市场营销和产品管理等技能。这些技能,从技术上讲,坐在总部(跨国公司)和印度单位只有科技商店。
为什么我们在接近于零的?没有有效的政府政策。技术是在这里,不是因为理工学院。事实上,大多数的有才华的工程师通常来自未知的工程学院。
在印度失踪的一件事是风险资本。在这个高风险业务,80%的公司失败,无论是在中国还是在美国。科技公司失败,因为市场竞争如此激烈。成功的公司之一,使很多钱;这是VC支撑。使风险投资资金还没有发生,政府失败的政策。
什么印度错过了在塑造政策吗?
中国从来没有买技术一般不要求技术转让。它会说,我必从你买这个喷气发动机劳斯莱斯,下一代的喷气发动机应该有5%的中国总部IP。你可以开公司,基金完全,但它是在我们的管辖。IP系统的一部分,如果没有我将从通用电气购买发动机。他们会对另一个公司。所有这些公司,为了获得市场份额,将准备好。
我们创造了在印度没有()机制。在过去的25年里,我们会买可能接近8000亿美元的高科技的东西,但是我们没有转让技术。我们需要这样做,我们需要雇佣最优秀的人才来为我们做这件事。我们的技术知识,但缺乏市场营销的知识。今天的中国邀请的人…在这个国家工作。我们也应该这样做。我们应该创建一个像深圳这样的城市,高新技术企业可以茁壮成长,从一个生态系统。
大型印度IT公司呢?
印度IT公司已经取得了巨大的钱通过服务。高科技道路很危险。它会伤害他们的商业模式,因为他们必须与他们的客户。他们不建议构建产品。
工业大学合作在印度怎么样?你看到发生吗?
我曾与Anurag库马尔教授,印度科学研究所的主任5克委员会对印度。Kumar说IIT董事如何移动针,没有一个想法(5克)技术来自印度。教授告诉他失踪的是创业的热情。
开始一个公司是非常困难的。这些人很舒服,政府给的钱。在斯坦福大学,我必须争取每一美元来资助我的学生。写论文是很容易的,建立原型和处理硬件是混乱和困难的工作。坦率地说,预计不了多少。最终,如果系统工作,人们赚钱;他们(印度教授)将承担风险。今天,壁垒太高冒险。
