Systems approach to university research chairs pre proposal workshop-mb [compatibility mode]
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Systems approach to university research chairs pre proposal workshop-mb [compatibility mode]

on

  • 530 views

Applying systems approaches to university research chairs programme

Applying systems approaches to university research chairs programme

Statistics

Views

Total Views
530
Views on SlideShare
530
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Systems approach to university research chairs pre proposal workshop-mb [compatibility mode] Systems approach to university research chairs pre proposal workshop-mb [compatibility mode] Presentation Transcript

  • APPLYING SYSTEMS APPROACHES TO UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CHAIRS PROGRAMME Maurice Bolo, PhD Bolo@scinnovent.org / ochibolo@gmail.com NACOSTI Pre-proposal Development Workshop 17th October, 2013
  • Presentation outline • Research chairs in the context of national competitiveness • The context for science is changing.... • What does this (change) mean for us? • How should we respond? • Towards systems approaches.... • Closing the loop – from research to innovation in agri-biotech/health systems • What next?
  • Drivers of Global Competitiveness Government forces Labor market efficiency Institutions Infrastructure Higher Education and Training Business sophistication Global Competitiveness Financial market development Innovation Legal and regulatory systems Technological readiness Macro-economic environment Market forces
  • Enhancing Kenya’s competitiveness through Research Chairs • Improving the institutional environment to foster creativity, collaboration, innovation and entrepreneurship • Improving the research infrastructure thro’ investment in laboratory equipment and machines • Supporting high level postgraduate training • Fostering innovation and technological readiness
  • Enhancing Kenya’s competitiveness through Research Chairs • Providing skilled and highly trained manpower into the labour market • Leveraging financial support to research from private sector and other financial institutions • Improving IP systems and innovation governance • Policy recommendations to improve the macroeconomic environment
  • BUT, it can’t be business as usual We have to re-think our approach to science From ‘model 1’ science …..to ‘model 2’ science
  • The context is changing........ Mode 1 Science However, •Linear model linking science to society and economy •Research priories are determined by the scientific community •Research is carried out by universities and other institutions largely isolated from the surrounding society (ivory towers) •Scientific excellence based on recognition of merit and originality by peers The research should be participatory and avoid the linear approach used to research on people rather than with the people •There is need for personal and institutional transformation and an enabling policy environment
  • The context is changing........ Mode 2 Science •Science as part of an innovation system •Many feedback loops •Opportunities for interaction with the broader society Mode 2 Science •Scientists’ work valued not for its intellectual merit, but also for its contribution to society’s social and economic needs •Scientific priorities selected according to social and economic priorities •Priority setting process a dialogue between scientists and the broader community
  • Theoretical and empirical Implications • The old linear models will be of little use as a result of the nature of life sciences knowledge production. • The complexity of the problems and the wider variety of competence bases required are impossible to satisfy within a single discipline. • This makes multi-disciplinary teams/networks imperative.
  • Theoretical and empirical Implications • Research and commercialization of the products are expensive; requires sustained investment over a long period of time. • Coordination among groups of divergent knowledge types, habits and belief systems requires careful networking management. • This requires the scientists to develop other sets of soft skills – beyond their technical expertise e.g. leadership, management, networking, negotiation skills
  • How should we respond? Methodological Change -Participatory problem identification and priority setting -Participatory research -Collective Action Planning -Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
  • How should we respond? Organizational change From bureaucratic, non-learning organization to flexible, learning organizations -Strategic thinking and decisionmaking -Different outlook, methods, priorities -Different incentives and rewards -Different attitudes, habits and practices - Different organizations structures
  • How should we respond? Personal change Reverse attitude •Multidisciplinary approach •Seek feedback from partners We know They don’t know We don’t know They know •Experiment to remain innovative •Seek best ways to assist your partner •Foster creativity and innovation We know They know We don’t know They don’t know
  • (Innovation) Systems Approach • Focus on innovation – Neither science or technology or invention, but the application of knowledge. – Can be acquired through learning, research or experiences. Often its new combinations of existing knowledge • Role of Interactions – Never in isolation; involves broad range of diverse actors in the public, private spheres – Linkages, partnerships and networks. – Learning is interactive, requiring people with different knowledge basis.
  • Innovation systems • The role of policies – Innovation not determined by the outcome of single policy, but a set of policies work together to shape innovative behavior. • Institutions are key – The habits and practices of organizations that shape their propensity to interact, to learn, to access and share knowledge and to take risks. • Learning, competencies and skills – Propensity to innovate, collaborate and share are learnt behaviors emerging through experiences, interaction, training – Technological, managerial and other skills can be developed if habits and practices encourage learning.
  • Innovation System Actors, Institutions and Linkages Suppliers suppliers clients Interaction Financing Institution R&D actors Traditional Habits & Practices of Actors Source: Mytelka (2007)
  • From research to innovation…closing the loop Diagrams, Models, descriptions Invention Introduced into the market/ economic use/ Practical application Potential for application Innovation Novel idea Diffusion Dominant design Mature Product/ process Dominant market capture Selection
  • Agri-biotech Innovation System Health Systems
  • Some Food for Thought Where is the industry in its evolution? Has the dominant design emerged yet? Can it be offered at scale? Are customers willing to pay for value delivered? Who are the target market? How large is the target segment? Do competitive offering exist? How does this innovation differ from what already exists in the market? How will the innovation be used? How is it a solution to the customer’s problem? How should the product be presented as a solution to customers problem, and not merely a novel item/gizmo? What will it cost to deliver value to the customer? Are costs’ volume sensitive, and if so, how? How can imitators be held at bay?
  • What next? The selection Process 1 2 3 4 5 Subject matter Selection by experts Program Secretariat Expressions of Interest Preproposal Workshop 7 6 Peer Review by Independent expert panel Full proposals 8 9 Verification survey Top proposals chosen Research Chairs Awarded
  • www.scinnovent.org