1 gps ge 3 ls series: optimizing the impact of genomics research professor jeremy hall...
TRANSCRIPT
1
GPS GE3LS Series: Optimizing the Impact of Genomics Research
Professor Jeremy HallEditor-in-Chief, J. of Engineering & Technology Management
Editorial Boards: J. of Business Venturing; Technovation
Beedie School of BusinessSimon Fraser University
8888 University Drive, Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5A 1S6
[email protected] 778-782-5891
Acknowledgements: Genome Canada/BC; SSHRC
Ottawa Sept. 27, 2011
My Current Genome Canada Projects (2011-2014)
Genomics-Based Forest Health Diagnostic and Monitoring – PI: Prof. Richard Hamelin (UBC Forestry)
Harnessing microbial diversity for sustainable use of forest biomass resources
– PI: Profs. Lindsay Eltis and Bill Mohn (UBC Microbiology) My current GE3LS Team Dr. Stelvia Matos Dr. Vern Bachor
My Perspective: Managerial and Social Implications of Innovation & Entrepreneurial Dynamics
Langford, Hall, Josty, Matos & Jacobson (2006). Indicators and Outcomes of Canadian University Research: Proxies becoming Goals? Research Policy
Hall, Matos, Silvestre & Martin (2011) Managing Tech., Commercial, Org. & Social Uncertainties of Industrial Evolution, Tech. Forecasting & Social Change
Hall & Martin (2005). Disruptive Technologies, Stakeholders and the Innovation Value Chain: R&D Management
Hall, Daneke & Lenox (2010) S.D. & Entrepreneurship, J of Business Venturing Sustainable Supply Chain Innovation (e.g. IJPR, IJPDLM, JCP, JOM, etc) Hall, Matos & Langford (2008) Social Exclusion & Transgenics J. of Bus. Ethics Hall, Matos, Sheehan & Silvestre (FC?). Entre. & Inn. in Emerging Economies:
A Recipe for Inclusive Growth or Social Exclusion? J of Mgmt Studies Hall & Vredenburg (2005) Managing Stakeholder Ambiguity Sloan Mgmt Rev. Hall & Vredenburg (2003). Challenges of S.D. Innovation, Sloan Mgmt Review Chrisman, McMullan & Hall (2005). The Influence of Guided Preparation on the
Long-Term Performance of New Ventures, J of Business Venturing
The Challenges of New Product DevelopmentWheelwright & Clark 1993
Number of new ideas
Concept Commercialisation
The Challenges of New Product DevelopmentClark and Wheelwright, 1993
Number of new ideas
Concept Commercialisation
Ability to influence outcome
The Challenges of New Product DevelopmentClark and Wheelwright, 1993
Number of new ideas
Concept Commercialisation
Ability to influence outcome
Actual management activity
Traditional Approach to Technology / Product Development Planning
Tech. Assessment and Forecasting
Market Assessment &
Forecasting
Project Management and
ExecutionNot typically integrated
‘Contemporary’ Development Funnel Clark and Wheelwright, 1993
Technology Assessment &
Forecasting
Market Assessment &
Forecasting
Development goals &
objectives
Aggregate project plan
Project management & execution
Post-project learning &
improvement
Technology Strategy
Product/Market Strategy
Technological Issues
Development goals &
objectives
Aggregate project plan
Project management & execution
Post-project learning &
improvement
Commercial Issues
Organizational Issues
Social Issues
More recent thinking also considers the role of:– Organizational issues; appropriability (e.g. Teece) – Social Issues (E3LS; stakeholder theory; mindfulness?
VALORISATION, etc.)
Exogenous technological developments, market trends, global financial conditions, etc.
Social trends, legal issues, etc.
Valorisation - recognizing economic and social values: Parallels with the entrepreneurship discourse
Baumol (1990) and the ‘Entrepreneurship Paradox’:
– Productive entrepreneurship: net social benefits (e.g. innovation)
– Unproductive entrepreneurship: rent seeking (e.g. lobbying)
– Destructive entrepreneurship: net social loss (e.g. crime) Alert entrepreneurs (Kirzner; 1973) - those able to see/act on
previously unnoticed opportunities/ exploit existing information, vs. Schumpeterian entrepreneurs dependent on knowledge creation
– Alert entrepreneurs can be productive, unproductive or destructive (Hall et al, F/C)
– Are we channelling incentives in the right direction?
Innovation is ComplexOptimize or satisfice (Simon, 1969)? Is it feasible to optimize the impact of genomics research, especially
when considering valorization?
Innovation is Risky True risk vs. uncertainty vs. ambiguity (Knight, 1921) Stakeholders are heterogeneous:–Perceive risk differently (e.g. investment opportunity vs. avoidance of harm) –‘Stakeholder Ambiguity’ (Matos & Hall, 2007)
Innovation is IdiosyncraticStakeholders are heterogeneous, sometimes ambiguousVaries with time, context, but often measured homogeneously, reinforcing linear model (Langford et al, 2007)
Implications Need to developing appropriate heuristics for valorisation:
– Technological, commercial and organization uncertainties differ but often based on similar heuristics (e.g. scientific methodologies)
– Social uncertainties often differ significantly
Is harmony the best way – or competition?
Issues from the ‘Ivory Tower Trenches’– Increased funding has come along with pressure for tangible
results, increased transaction costs, administrative hurdles (e.g. auditing) and research ethics requirements
– Are the best researchers able to handle these new pressures –are we turning our best researchers into mediocre bureaucrats?
– Are the incentive structures aligned with these new pressures?