The Expert Perspective: An Interview with Clara Bouffard
What is the difference between licensing-in and licensing-out, and how does a startup know which one to choose?
"Licensing-in is when you obtain the rights to use someone else’s intellectual property," Bouffard explains. "IPs can be a trademark, which is often seen as a brand, a patent, software, or technology. Licensing-out is when you grant someone else the right to use your IP, usually in exchange for financial compensation such as royalties or an upfront payment. So, in a licensing deal, there is always a licensor who grants the right, and a licensee who obtains the rights.
"Both models work for start-ups, but the choice depends on the growth strategy and the stage that the IP is at. If the start-up’s competitive advantage comes from accessing external innovation, licensing-in may be the right approach. If the competitive advantage lies in proprietary innovation that others can leverage, licensing-out can create new revenue streams and extend market reach."
What business use cases do you see for startups and entrepreneurs based on your industry experience?
"The primary use cases are accelerating time-to-market and expanding into new markets. A start-up could license-in when it needs access to proven expertise, like a patent or software, for their new product. Developing this internally would increase the required time and resources. Licensing-in speeds up product development and time to market, but it does reduce profit as a certain percentage of sales would be paid to the licensor.
"Conversely, a start-up could license-out if they have already developed valuable IP that others can use. This allows them to diversify into a new product category via another company that has the manufacturing and sales network already in place. Licensing-out also brings in a regular flow of revenue through royalties, and upfront payments can be used to support funding for future projects. Through licensing, companies generate more awareness, strengthening their reputation and credibility, which can lead to broader collaborations, joint ventures, or even acquisition opportunities."
How can a new business use licensing-in to grow their product range more quickly?
"This goes back to the accelerating time-to-market point. Instead of spending time and money into developing new products with their own technology and innovations, a new business could use someone else’s IP to launch and grow their range and shorten the time to market."
What makes a licensing partnership successful over the long term?
"Long-term success will come from open communication, trust, and effective execution, supported by a strong legal agreement acting as the foundation of the partnership."
Analysing the Two Paths: Historical Success Stories
To contextualise Bouffard's insights, it is useful to look at how both routes operate in the commercial world. Whether an organisation is looking inward or outward depends entirely on its strategic growth objectives and the stage of its own technological development.
Licensing-In: The Super Soaker Revolution
A premier historical example of licensing-in involves the toy manufacturing giant Larami Corporation (later acquired by Hasbro). In the late 1980s, an independent nuclear engineer named Lonnie Johnson invented a high-performance, pressurized water gun.
Instead of spending millions of pounds trying to research, design, and test fluid dynamics to create a competitive toy internally, Larami chose to license-in Johnson's patented technology. By doing so, they completely bypassed the lengthy research and development cycle, instantly securing a massive competitive advantage. Larami applied their existing mass-production facilities and global retail connections to the design, transforming it into the Super Soaker—a multi-billion-pound commercial phenomenon.