Ian Scheffler
Vanessa Chan, Jonathan and Linda Brassington Practice Professor in Materials Science and Engineering (MSE), brings a wealth of experience and a passion for innovation to her new role as the inaugural Vice Dean of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Penn Engineering.
With a career that spans co-leading McKinsey’s innovation practice, founding her own company, re.design, and serving as the U.S. Department of Energy’s Chief Commercialization Officer, Chan has a unique perspective on bridging the gap between groundbreaking ideas and real-world impact.
Penn Engineering sat down with Chan to discuss her background, her vision for building on the School’s long legacy of fostering entrepreneurship, and her plans to inspire the next generation of engineers to tackle global challenges and create meaningful change.
How have your experiences across the private and public sectors shaped your approach to education, innovation and entrepreneurship?
One of the key themes throughout my career has been my love for science, engineering and technology. Every single role I’ve taken has centered around those passions. What I’ve always wanted to understand is: how does technology actually create impact?
Across all the organizations I’ve worked with — whether it’s a large company, a startup, an academic research lab or the federal government — I’ve realized that we don’t do enough to teach people how to bring technologies to market. We focus heavily on the hard science and the technology itself, but we don’t always address the equally critical skills needed to commercialize those innovations.
What’s been fascinating for me is that, despite working in very different ecosystems, the fundamental challenge is always the same.
How did you first become aware of the challenges — and the importance — of commercializing new technologies?
After earning my Ph.D. at MIT and joining McKinsey, my very first case study was on technology commercialization — and that’s where I got hooked.
We were working with a company that had invented a sensor to measure emissions like sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide. It was being developed for the auto industry, where commercialization can take five years. The company was pouring money into this technology without generating any revenue, so their question was: where else could this technology be used where we can generate money more quickly?
We explored different industries that need to measure these gases and found new applications for the technology. That experience opened my eyes to the fact that academia doesn’t really teach people how to take technologies from the lab to the market.
How would you describe the importance of teaching engineers these skills?
Engineering education focuses heavily on understanding the fundamental science — math, physics and the laws of nature. That’s crucial because science is at the core of all technology, and a deep understanding of these fundamentals is essential.
However, what we’re not doing enough of is teaching engineers about the real-world problems they need to solve. Inventing something is hard, but it is equally as hard to bring a technology that fundamentally works to market: You have to understand if you can scale it economically, there are often regulatory hurdles to overcome and you need to understand the value chain decision-makers that you need to navigate to bring the technology to market. In fact, there are times when you understand the commercialization barriers and you actually need to change the technology (and therefore go back to the lab) to make it work. It is the interface of the real world to technology that is critical to understand if you want technology to make an impact.
Before I went to the Biden administration, I taught Senior Design in the Materials Science and Engineering department. I taught students how to conduct cold calls to industry professionals, how to explore the value of their technology and how to present their ideas effectively. Engineers often get caught up in explaining the process rather than emphasizing why their work matters.
If I could wave a magic wand, I would want every Penn Engineering graduate to feel empowered with these real-world skills. These aren’t formally part of the curriculum, but they are essential. It’s not hard to teach these skills — it’s more about creating a practice that systematically brings them into the engineering education experience. Engineers who are equipped with both deep technical knowledge and the ability to navigate the real world can truly excel as leaders, and I believe they’re already capable of doing anything — we just need to provide them with these additional tools.
How has the culture of entrepreneurship at Penn Engineering evolved since your time as an undergraduate in Materials Science and Engineering, and where do you want to take it now that you’re leading the School’s efforts in innovation and entrepreneurship?
When I was at Penn — I graduated in ‘94 — Engineering Entrepreneurship didn’t exist yet. Thanks to Tom Cassel, who has been leading the program, we just celebrated its 25th anniversary. Back when I was a student, not many engineers were starting companies, but now it’s much more common.
I’ve been in academia, the federal government, big companies and startups, and one common thread I’ve observed is that success isn’t just about technical skills. What sets people apart is having a broader skill set — the ability to lead, collaborate and communicate effectively. That’s what we’re trying to cultivate: giving students the tools to be leaders, no matter what path they choose. Whether you become a Dean, a CEO or a Venture Capitalist, there are leadership skills that are common across successful leaders that go beyond technology.
Entrepreneurship isn’t just about starting companies. It’s about empowering people to create impact in any setting. If you’re going to become a professor, for example, you need to understand how to lead a group, navigate team dynamics and write effective research grants. Communicating your ideas well is just as important as the ideas themselves.
That’s really the goal: to sprinkle some of these entrepreneurial skills into every engineering graduate. I love our entrepreneurship minor, but not everyone has the time to pursue it. One thing I’d like to explore is how we can integrate these concepts more broadly across all engineering majors.
A great example how entrepreneurship can change someone’s trajectory is the Widjaja Entrepreneurship Fellows program, which the team is incredibly proud of. Tom has put a lot of time into building it out, and I had the chance to meet a few of the Fellows — they’re truly amazing. They get a chance to connect with leaders who are bringing their technologies to market and to intern in their companies, to really understand the secret sauce of how to have impact through science. I really wish this program had been around when I was at Penn. I think it would have changed the way I approached my Ph.D.
We also are lucky to have Jeffrey Babin as one of the leaders of the team who recently was awarded the Educator of the Year by Technical.ly. It’s impossible to count the number of engineering students he has mentored who have successfully launched their technologies — from Strella to ChompShop. He has personally helped to develop the leadership skills that these students need to be successful.
The key as we think about innovation and entrepreneurship is to create opportunities that cater to different levels of involvement. Some people might want something deeper, like the Fellows program, while others might prefer a lighter touch. The challenge is how we can offer these opportunities in a way that meets people where they are, depending on how deeply they want to engage.
There’s no shortage of opportunities for entrepreneurially minded students these days. They could skip higher education entirely and apply for something like the Thiel Fellowship, or go to a business school. What’s the unique value proposition of Penn Engineering?
At its core, technology is driving change in the world, and being deeply grounded in scientific rigor is crucial to understanding where things are headed. You have to understand the science behind the technology to truly grasp its potential.
While many engineering schools focus on the fundamentals of science and technology, where Penn Engineering stands out is in how we integrate leadership alongside that technical depth. We don’t just teach students how to master technology, we also teach them how to make it impactful in the world. What increases the likelihood of something being successfully commercialized? That’s a key question we address.
When you’re powered by Penn Engineering, you gain the technical expertise to go on to places like MIT for a Ph.D., but you’re also equipped to become an intrapreneur in a large company or to launch your own venture.
It’s about providing a more holistic education — not just focusing on deep science and technology, which is essential, but also cultivating the leadership skills that transform students into impactful leaders.
To learn more about Vanessa Chan and her new role as Vice Dean of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Penn Engineering, please visit her webpage.
If you represent a startup or investment firm and want to partner with Engineering Entrepreneurship, please email Chan at vanessaz@seas.upenn.edu.