Download - stc3832002session1.ppt
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
STC 383KNOWLEDGE & TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER AND ADOPTIONaka: Knowledge, Innovation &Technology
Transfer, Diffusion and Adoption
Theory and Practice
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
STC 383 Session 1 Agenda
• Detailed Introduction to STC 383
• Definitions of KTT
• Introduction to Modeling• Discussion of R&D as a
precursor to KTT and of Sourcing R&D for innovation initiatives.
• 2 Breaks ~ 2:45 and 4:15
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
STC 383 Teaching Team• Dr. David Gibson, Director, Research Programs,
Fellow, IC2; MSSTC Faculty; world traveler, boating and lighthouses, practices yoga, dancing and music, plays the guitar, and dear pet, Helen
• Ms. Meg Wilson, IC2 Fellow; MSSTC Faculty, globe traveler, weaver, gardener, gourmet cook. Perfect spouse, Fred Chriswell.
• Darius Mahdjoubi, UT Austin Ph.D. Candidate, (Topic: Atlas of Innovation). P.E. ; MSSTC TA Member, Association of Professional Engineers Ontario. Hobbies: Travel, Swimming, Mountain Climbing, Classic Music, Cartography.
•
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Course Overview
STC 383 will introduce you to state-of-the-art theory and practice on
knowledge and technology transfer (KTT) and adoption,
focused on transfer and adoption of knowledge & technology across organizational boundaries,
including business, academia, and government at regional, national, and international levels of analysis.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Course Overview
STC 383 will introduce – established and innovative models; – concepts and best practices of innovation
and knowledge management; – organization behavior; – governmental policies; and – communication theory
as all pertain to knowledge & technology
transfer, adoption, and diffusion.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Course OverviewCourse efforts will focus on analyzing thebarriers, challenges, facilitators and metrics onknowledge/technology transfer and adoptionthrough:
– Intrapreneurship, entrepreneurship, spin-outs and spin-ins.
– Industry, government, and academic organizations including R&D consortia, national labs and university research centers
– Regional and global implications of knowledge/technology transfer and application in the digital age
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
STC 383 Sessions
# 1: Overview & Introduction to R&D (Wilson)
# 2: KTT Modeling: Critical Success Factors (Gibson)
# 3: KTT and Marco Issues: The Context of Innovation (Gibson)
# 4: Innovation Policies: Public and Private (Wilson)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
STC 383 Sessions
# 5: KTT Support Structures: Incubators and Benchmarking (Wilson & Gibson)
# 6: KTT and Global Perspectives (Gibson) # 7: University Research
Commercialization Processes (Wilson)
# 8: Consortial And National Laboratory Commercialization Processes (Wilson)
# 9: Indirect Policies’ Affect on KTT and Course Wrap-up (Wilson)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Assignments and Grading
• Overall Class Participation (including Blackboard discussions& critiques, chats, teamwork, and other contributions to class success)
• Critique of Readings #1• Critique of Readings #2• Individual KTT Model• Team KTT Model• Analysis of Direct Government Policy• Ideal Path Analysis• Final KTT Model
15%
7%8%10%15%15%
15%15%
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Assignments and Due Dates
• Individual KTT Model June 24
• Critique of Readings # July 8
• Team KTT Model July 11
• Analysis of Direct Government Policy* Aug 22
• Critique of Readings #2 Aug 28
• Ideal Path Analysis Sept 16
• Final KTT Model Sept 16
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
First Assigment Looming...
• Individual KTT Model: This model should be developed as a power point or word document, identifying key elements of your own work or professional experience with a KTT effort and should include a brief ranked list of barriers, challenges and facilitators.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Housekeeping
1. Syllabus: READ IT & Use It
2. Filenames: crucial• Team assignments: STC383 [team
name] [assignment name]. Example: STC383 GroupW final KTT model
• Individual assignments: STC383 [last name] [assignment name]. Example: STC383 Wilson Individual KTT model
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Housekeeping• Filenames: Use em!• Evaluations: Do em!• Assignments: Email em!• New Info: Post em!• Questions: Ask em!• Suggestions: Make em!• Late Assignment (points)*:
Lose em!
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Keys to Class Success• Active Participation – in class
and online• Active blackboard use for class
integration• Sharing knowledge and
experiences• Creative Modeling • Knowledge Integration
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Integrated Courses• The courses of MSSTC are integrated:
They are interwoven to elucidate the deep and broad concept of “commercialization of technological innovation.”
• The courses of MSSTC - unlike conventional academic programs such as MBA or MS - are not parallel courses with substantial overlaps and holes.
How might we model this difference?
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
MBA Courses
Total: 20 courses, 4 semesters (2 years)
BA384T
BA385T
BA381T
BA380N
BA386T
BA380S
MIS380N
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
Elective
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
MSSTC Courses
Total: 12 courses, 3 Trimesters (1 year)
1st Trimester
STC386T1
TEA
MS
STC380
STC382
STC383
2st Trimester
STC386T2TE
AM
S
STC395
STC394C
STC384
3st Trimester
STC381
TEA
MS
STC396
STC385
STC391
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
MSSTC Students Need to be able to:
1. become familiar with the integrated process of commercialization of technological innovation.
2. analyze and develop “models” to explore, explain and organize the integrated process of commercialization of technological innovation.
3. work in team-organization that are needed for the integrated process.
4. analyze “cases” proper for the integrated process.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
You Need to be able to:5. develop strategies that nurture the integrated
process of technology commercialization and share and integrate this vision in internal reports (strategies).
6. develop, as external reports (business plans) that let you acquire the support needed for the development of a technology commercialization.
7. develop presentations (elevator pitch, VC presentation) to secure the financial and administrative support needed for the development of a technology commercialization.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Models and Integration
• Developing shared views is essential for the team- members to transcend geographic zones, professional backgrounds and modes of learning and to follow the path of integrate courses.
• Proper models play a key role in creating and developing shared views and in sustaining the integration inside teams, companies, courses, etc!
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Modeling Fundamentals
Models can show:1. Actors, stakeholders, key
players
2. Actions, reactions, process flows
3. Timing & Relationships between and among actors, factors and actions.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
The Commercialization Process
Source: Vijay Jolly. : Vijay Jolly. Commercializing New TechnologiesCommercializing New Technologies
3. Incubate
to define
Commercializability
7.Promote adoption
9.
Sustain commercialization
2.Mobilize Interest
and endorse-
ment
5.Demonstrate
contextually in
products and
processes
4.Mobilize resource
forDemo
6.Mobilize market
constituents
8.Mobilize
complimentary assets for delivery
1.Imagine the dual
(techno-market)insight
Source: Jolly, Vijay. 1997. From Mind to Market.
Jolly’s Model of Technology Commercialization
Sub-Processes: Building the Value of a New Technology
Tech Assessment Business Plan
Bridges: Mobilizing the Stakeholders
Venture Analysis
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
A Global Challenge
Education
Innovation
GovernmentIndustry
Creativity
T2
Mechanisms
Processes Metrics
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Two Basic Forms of Technology Transfer to Commercial Applications
private sector
federal labs
universities
consortia
corporate labs
process application
R&D/Mfg.
Marketing/Sales
spin-out technologies
technologyincubator
private sector
federal labs
universities
consortia
ROI
2
1
start-upcompany
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
What do we mean by all of this…
1. What do you think knowledge is?
2. What do you think innovation is?
3. What do you think R&D is?
4. What do you think technology is?
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
TECHNOLOGY
KNOWLEDGE
INNOVATION
Darius’ View of Knowledge, Innovation and Technology
Technological Innovation
MarketInnovation
Organizational Innovation
Creativity and Human Innovation
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
factual information used as a basis for reasoning,factual information used as a basis for reasoning,
and calculation and calculation
the communication or reception of knowledge the communication or reception of knowledge or intelligenceor intelligence
knowledge obtained from investigation, study, knowledge obtained from investigation, study, or instructionor instruction
intelligence, newsintelligence, news
Components of Knowledge?(Webster& Leif Edvinsson and Michael S. Malone,
Intellectual Capital, 1997)
DataData
InformationInformation
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
• the fact or condition of knowing the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained something with familiarity gained through experience or associationthrough experience or association
• acquaintance or understanding of acquaintance or understanding of science, art, science, art, or techniqueor technique
• the fact or condition of being aware of the fact or condition of being aware of somethingsomething
Definitions/Concepts to Think About and to Discuss
KnowledgeKnowledge
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Views on Innovation and Knowledge
Knowledge creation is the key source of innovation in any company.
George von Krogh
Successful innovation depends on converting knowledge flows into goods and services.
Debra Amidon
Innovation is the ability to build on previous knowledge and generate new knowledge.
Leif Edvinnson
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
technical languagetechnical language applied scienceapplied science a technical method of achieving a a technical method of achieving a
practical purposepractical purpose totality of the means employed to totality of the means employed to
provide objects necessary for human provide objects necessary for human sustenance and comfortsustenance and comfort
Definitions/Concepts to Think About and to Discuss
TechnologyTechnology
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Human CapitalHuman Capital
The combined knowledge, skill, The combined knowledge, skill, innovativeness, and ability of the company’s innovativeness, and ability of the company’s individual employees to meet the task at individual employees to meet the task at hand - including company hand - including company values, culture, values, culture, philosophy. philosophy.
Human capital cannot be owned by Human capital cannot be owned by the companythe company
““Wetware”/tacit knowledge/intangibles/Wetware”/tacit knowledge/intangibles/know-how know-how
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Structural CapitalStructural Capital
The hardware, software, databases, The hardware, software, databases, organizational structure, patents, organizational structure, patents, trademarks, and everything else of trademarks, and everything else of organizational capability that supports organizational capability that supports employee productivity;employee productivity;
Customer capital and relationshipsCustomer capital and relationships
Everything left in the office when the Everything left in the office when the employees go home employees go home
(unlike Human Capital) can be owned (unlike Human Capital) can be owned and tradedand traded
Codified knowledge.Codified knowledge.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Intellectual CapitalIntellectual Capital
Human brainpower, brand names, intellectual Human brainpower, brand names, intellectual property that is protected, trademarks,property that is protected, trademarks,
Assets often/traditionally valued as zero on Assets often/traditionally valued as zero on the balance sheetthe balance sheet
HumanHuman ++ StructuralStructural == IntellectualIntellectualCapitalCapital CapitalCapital CapitalCapital
(Leif Edvinsson and Michael S. Malone, (Leif Edvinsson and Michael S. Malone,
Intellectual Capital, 1997)Intellectual Capital, 1997)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
CODIFIEDCODIFIED(Software)(Software)
TACITTACIT(Human capital or wetware)(Human capital or wetware)
The Knowledge-Based Economy
KNOWLEDGEKNOWLEDGEKNOWLEDGEKNOWLEDGE
• books• discs• goods
• talent• skills• know-how
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Technology TransferTechnology Transfer
the adoption of knowledge the adoption of knowledge (commercialization and processes)(commercialization and processes)
A (the?) A (the?) newnew source of wealth is source of wealth is information/knowledge applied to work to information/knowledge applied to work to
create value create value
Walter Wriston, The Twilight of Sovereignty, 1992Walter Wriston, The Twilight of Sovereignty, 1992
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Technology Transfer: Was & Is ?
• Prime the R&D pump.• Over the wall.• Part of a serial process (linear,
sequential, ordered).• Involves a deliverable product—the
more fully formed the better.• Expert to user—technology
marketing.• Trickle out over time.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Technology Transfer Perspectives
Inve
stm
ent
of
Tim
e an
d R
eso
urc
es
Most Passive Most Active
InformationTransfer
Knowledge Capture and Protection
Application Development
Commercialization“Productization”
Seminars, workshops, conferences Trade shows, Invention Fairs
Product Launch
Product Licensing
IP Protection
Prototype Development
Technology Integration
R&D
Joint Venture
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Commercialization Utilization
Deployment Application
The Adoption of Knowledge
Management of InnovationManagement of Innovation Diffusion of InnovationDiffusion of Innovation
Management of Management of TechnologyTechnology
Knowledge ManagementKnowledge Management
Technology Transfer:Technology Transfer:
Other Relevant LabelsOther Relevant Labels
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Technology Transfer Definitions...
"The business transactions or processes, such as patent licenses or start-up companies, by which innovations are moved from one place (such as a university), development stage or application to another place (such as a company) for a commercial purpose. (We include defense conversion as a special case under this definition.)”
Michael Odza, Celebrating ten years of assisting tech transfer professionals via Technology Access Report and Intellectual Property Advice (for researchers)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Another Definition...
"Technology transfer - the dissemination of all the information necessary so that one party may duplicate the work of another party. The information is of two types, technical (engineering, scientific, standards) and the second is procedural (legal, non-disclosure agreements, patent rights, licensing).” Andy Gluck
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Another Technology transfer is an umbrella term that
encompasses the range of processes from most passive to most active: info transfer (what universities do so well); intellectual property protection (allows for legal transfers); technology development; lassoing resources; technology integration; and technology adoption through to the sale of new or innovative products or processes based on a new application of scientific knowledge or technology (and increasingly on innovative business structures). Meg Wilson on former Pax Website
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
and….
Technology Transfer: The range of processes, from knowledge transfer to product or process commercialization, that facilitate the development and adoption of knowledge and technology.
Meg Wilson on former Pax Website
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Perspectives on R&D
Public & Private
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Basic research is Basic research is what I am doing what I am doing
when I don’t know when I don’t know what I am doing…what I am doing…
Werner Von Braun
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Perpetual Tension...
• Vannevar Bush believed that “Basic research leads to new knowledge. It provides scientific capital. It creates the fund from which the practical applications of knowledge must be drawn…”
• He also cited a “perverse law” that “applied research invariably drives out the pure”. * * Lost at the Frontier, US Science and Technology Policy Adrift, Deborah Shapley & Rustum Roy, ISI Press, 1985, pgs 14 – 15.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Science Policy Foundation and Features
$ $ $
$ $ $
Ap
pli
ed S
cien
ce
and
En
gin
eeri
ng
TechnologicalFruit Tree
ContemporaryBasic ScienceFloweringTree
Regional Planning
Skilled Labor
On
th
e S
helf
Scie
nce
Venture
Capital
Instrumentati
on
Public
Support
So
urc
e:
Lo
st a
t th
e F
ron
tier:
U
.S.
Sci
en
ce a
nd
Te
chn
olo
gy
Po
licy
Ad
rift,
De
bo
rah
Sh
ap
ley/
R
ust
um
Ro
y
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Definitions
• Basic Research Objective:– Government/Academic: “to gain more
comprehensive knowledge or understanding of the subject under study, without specific applications in mind
– Private Sector: “research that advances scientific knowledge but does not have specific immediate commercial objectives…may be in fields of …commercial interest.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Definitions
• Applied Research– General: Gaining “the knowledge or
understanding to meet a specific, recognized need”.
– In Industry: “includes investigations oriented to discovering new scientific knowledge that has specific commercial objectives with respect to products, processes, or services”
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Definitions
• Development– “the systematic use of the
knowledge or understanding gained from research directed toward the production of useful materials, devices, systems, or methods, including the design and development of prototypes and processes”.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D is the Key
• R&D is the key precursor to technology knowledge, developments and commercialization.
• The source, sponsor, purpose, documentation and R&D processes affect commercialization paths and thus need to be acknowledged and better yet, be understood.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
US R&D Funding by SourceMillions of Current $
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
180000
1970 1980 1990 1998 2000
Federal Gov't
Industry
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
So What? Who Cares?1. Your government spends of dollars on R&D.
So, you might care about that because they:Are funding research in an area of your expertise
and you need to keep up with the latest technologyAre funding your competitor to do that research
putting you at a disadvantageHave an open competition for performance of the
R&D and you might want to get funded to do that work (supports your agenda and gives you new funding)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
More Reasons... You ... Are pumping millions of dollars into a new area of
R&D and it suggests a new market opportunity to you…!
Have developed a hot new technology and the government allows you to license needed integration components
Need to procure services or R&D efforts or components/equipment and you could get into the government procurement business or find R&D partners.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Final Reasons...
2. Your government might provide tax credits for R&D – goes to your bottom line
3. Your government may regulate private R&D (e.g. medical and pharmaceutical research) and you must operate under those regulations
4. Other governments may regulate that R&D differently (e.g. less stringently) and it may provide you an opportunity to conduct R&D less expensively and at lower risk initially or, conversely, may inhibit your ability to enter a market if the policy barriers are high.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Understanding How to Unlock R&D Resources
• For any of this to happen, you need to:Understand the Context,
Players and ProgramsUnderstand the ProcessesUnderstand the
Information Resources
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Taking Advantage of R&D Resources
• You also need to understand those factors as they relate to:
National, state/provincial, and local funding & research organizations
Agency/national mission-oriented R&D University research structures, roles and funding Private R&D investments and the role they play in
national economies R&D as a measure of competitiveness and
economic health The relationship between R&D and innovation (or
lack thereof…)
Sourcing R&D....
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Understanding How to Unlock R&D Resources
• For any of this to happen, you need to:Understand the Context,
Players and ProgramsUnderstand the ProcessesUnderstand the
Information Resources
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
1800 to ~ 1940 Characterization Creation of the US University Land Grant System (Ag &
Engineering – Morrill Act, 1862), and the general proliferation of universities in the US -- few academic institutions had any kind of scientific program until late in the 19th century.
Dominance in Science and R&D by European universities Independent inventors -- Angel funding (e.g. Tesla) Development of Corporate R&D Labs (e.g.
Westinghouse, Bell, Edison) – there were 4 in the US in 1890 and 1030 by 1930
Industrial funding of individual inventors and universities
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D And Science POLICY: the CONTEXT
• Primary NEW 20th Century Player:
• FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS
• WHY: • World War II• Then the cold war• Space Race
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
1940-present Characterized by Dramatic Changes
Government funding – grew phenomenally into today’s multi $Billion enterprise
University R&D: industrially funded Research Centers were supplemented (sometimes supplanted) by government sponsored Scientific Centers of Excellence and support of individual principal investigators (PIs)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Market Failure Mission CooperativeCoreAssumptions
1. Markets are mostefficient allocator of info &technology2. Gov’t role limited tomarket failures such asextensive externalities; hightransaction costs; andinformation distortions.Mission domain chiefly indefense.3. Innovation flows fromand to private sector,minimal gov’t role
1. The gov’t role shouldbe closely tied toprogrammatic missionsof agencies.2. Gov’t R&D islimited to missions ofagencies – not confinedto defense3. Gov’t should notcompete with privatesector in innovation &technology.
1. Markets not always themost efficient route toinnovation and economicgrowth.2. Global economy requiresmore centralized planningand broader support forcivilian technologydevelopment3. Gov’t can play a role indeveloping technology,especially pre-competitivetechnology, for use in theprivate sector
In US, PeakInfluence
ALL 1945-1965; 1992-present
1982-1994
PolicyResponses
Deregulation; contraction ofgov’t role; R&D tax credits,capital gains tax reduction;little need for fed. Labsexcept in defense
Creation of energypolicy R&D,agricultural labs andother broad missionframeworks.
Expansion of federal labroles in technology transferand cooperative research;manufacturing extensionpolicies.
TheoreticalRoots
Neoclassical economics Traditional liberalgovernance with broaddefinition of gov’t role
“the ‘new’ industrialorganization theory.”
Three Competing R&D Policy Models
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Changes in ‘70-90s
Industry funding surged into the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s. The mainstay players, manufacturers, declined in their R&D investment while information-related technologies more than made up their decline in recent years.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Shares of national R&D Shares of national R&D expenditures, by source of funds: expenditures, by source of funds:
1953-20001953-2000
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Changes in 70s and 80’s
The 1970-1990’s have seen an inventor/ entrepreneur resurgence and a major shift from general manufacturing-based businesses to technology service, information and advanced manufacturing businesses.
We also see an explosion of innovative R&D support structures such as science & R&D parks and technology incubators.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Privatization Policy Impacts • Federal Governments in many countries have
been THE primary source of R&D– Centralized government– Government owned industries and utilities
Privatization in the 80s and 90s has led to an explosion of industrial research and increase in overall research in many developing and
emerging market countries
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Global Trends 80s-90s
• Privatization promotes industry R&D• Cooperative Research programs in EU (now
funding the 5th Framework) -- consortial research expands worldwide
• Japan R&D enterprise expanded significantly.• South Korea builds an R&D infrastructure
from scratch in 40 years• Technopolis development becomes a
conscious policy, globally
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Private Sector Growth
• European Research Council endorsed EU target, recommending that businesses help increase R&D to equal 3% of GDP in each member State by 2010.
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Private Sector Perspectives
• Corporate R&D labs now a vestigial part of former R&D empires.
• R&D moved to divisional responsibility -- R&D seen as a tax on Divisions...
• Outsourcing an increasing strategy for conduct of R&D
• Joint ventures now common
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
What is the prospect for the 2000s?
• Continued erosion of public investments in R&D?• Less basic R&D through companies – more
attention to applied research?• Universities become the bastions of basic R&D –
controversy explodes over their role in R&D• Private sector horns in on key R&D areas
formerly conducted wholly by public/university sources…
• R&D still seen as an engine to economic development (rightly or wrongly…)
• New ethical issues arising to change landscape
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Understanding How to Unlock R&D Resources
• For any of this to happen, you need to:Understand the Context,
Players and ProgramsUnderstand the ProcessesUnderstand the
Information Resources
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Federal R&D support, by Federal R&D support, by performingperforming sector: 1953-2000 sector: 1953-2000
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
U.S., G-7, and OECD U.S., G-7, and OECD countries’ R&D expenditurescountries’ R&D expenditures
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Total R&D as a percentage of Total R&D as a percentage of GDP GDP
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D as a % of GDPR&D as a % of GDP
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
1996/1997
US
South Korea
Japan
Australia*
Mexico
Uganda
Germany
Canada
Brazil
Czech Rep.
Russia
* Australian Ministry for Industry Science and Resources claims Australia has world’s 3rd highest ratio, 1999
NSF National Patterns in R&D Resources, 1998, Science Indicators, 1998
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Changes in share of Federal Changes in share of Federal academic research obligations, academic research obligations,
by field: 1990-99 by field: 1990-99
SOURCE: National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators-2002
Industrial R&D spending flows of U.S. and foreign affiliates, by world region: 1998
SOURCE: National Science Board, Science and Engineering Indicators-2002
U.S. patents granted: 1986–99
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Spending by 5 major Latin American Countries, 1990, 1996
0 2 4 6 8
Brazil
Argentina
Mexico
Chile
Venezuela
Costa Rica
$ Billions for R&D Expenditures
1996
1990
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
US Total Industrial R&DBillions of Current $
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Total
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Selected US Industry Sectors
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Software Pubs.
Comp. Periph
Wireless etc.
Comp. Sys.Design
Pharmaceuticals
Med. Devices
1996 Constant $Billions
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Understanding How to Unlock R&D Resources
• For any of this to happen, you need to:Understand the Context,
Players and ProgramsUnderstand the ProcessesUnderstand the
Information Resources
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Sources/Indicators
• Data Sources: NSF, OECD, UN, World Bank, country-by-country
• Indicators: Ph.D. production, publications, patents filed, patents granted, educational science competitions, workforce data
• OTHER Sources and Indicators?
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
R&D Programs• Agencies: NSF, DOD, EPA, NIH, etc.• Private Sector: Industry Roadmaps,
special R&D, Consortial R&D• Programs: SBIR, ATP, Homeland
Security, DARPA grants, EPCORE• Processes: Grants & Contracts,
appropriations & program White Papers and Congressional Studies, R&D procurement, SBIR/STTR partnering, state-level R&D (e.g. Texas’ ARP and ATP programs)
MSSTC 383 Session 1, 2002
Session Theses: Wrap Up1. Modeling Concept and Practice
Modeling integrates the two Modeling is a key methodology of the
program
2. KTT definitions are not static, nor understood uniformally
3. R&D is the precursor to technology and tracking it allows for more effective R&D prospecting, forecasting, and sourcing – which can lead to new and/or better KTT!