Design and Evaluation of Technology

Creation “Ba” in Academia

Y. Nakamori

School of Knowledge Science

Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

1. Knowledge Science and an Important Application Field

2. Redefinition of “Ba ” (a Japanese word meaning place, center, environment, space, etc.) for Technology Creation via Systems Concepts

3. A System for Evaluating “Ba”, A Preliminary Survey, and Implication

Knowledge Science

Modeling and management of

knowledge creation process.

School of Knowledge Science

Knowledge conversion theory,

knowledge systematizing

methods, and methods for

development of creativity in

management science.

Knowledge science should

help researchers produce

creative theoretical results, in

important natural sciences.

New Direction

An environment “Ba”, including

place, people, context, etc., that

supports the development and

practice of knowledge creation.

Necessary Environment

A vehicle which integrates

theory and practice, and

combines knowledge in social

science and knowledge in

natural science.

COE Program

Target

A new research field: study of

scientific knowledge creation.

Target

This system will continuously create scientific knowledge, offering an

advanced model for setting important research priorities and promoting

research and development, and thereby affecting management of research

and development in other universities, research institutions, or enterprises.

A Creative System for Research and Education

This system trains graduate students to be:

Knowledge Coordinators:

Talented people having broad judgment and can support creative research.

Knowledge Creators:

Talented people with the advanced research-and-development capability.

Existing Scientific Knowledge

NewScientific Knowledge

X

Y

F

Enhance the Function:

Interaction of theory and practice

Knowledge creation theory

FZ WF

Knowledge discovery Knowledge representation Technology road mapping Knowledge database

Accumulation of social information

Knowledge creation support systems

Knowledge systematization Thinking support system Knowledge management system Visualization system

Knowledge Creators

Talented people with advanced research-and-development capability

Talented people who can manage creative research activities

Knowledge Coordinators

Y=F(X) Y=F (X)ZW

PlanningInformation

Experiment

Deep Woods

Death Valley

commercialization industrializationAnnouncement

Knowledge Creators

Knowledge Coordinators

“Ba”

Lab

Information Gathering　 Data/text mining technology　 Data/knowledge-base systemsTheories of Technology Strategy　 Knowledge management theory　 Strategic innovation theory

Knowledge Creation Theory　 Design of environment Systems methodologyResearch Planning Support　 Imagination supporting media　 Road mapping methods

Research Management Document management Information exchange system Knowledge Representation Knowledge systematization Visualization technology

Announcement of Research Results, Archive System

Management of Technology andIntellectual Property

Toyama and Nonaka (2000) called the dynamic context which is shared and rede

fined in the knowledge creation process "Ba", which does not refer just to a physi

cal space, but includes virtual spaces based on the Internet, for instance; and mor

e mental spaces which involve sharing experiences and ideas.

They regard "Ba" as a "concept of locationality which includes the space-time wh

ich acts as the ground of human existence". Knowledge is not something which c

an exist independently; it can only exist in a form embedded in "Ba", which acts

as a context that is constantly shared by people.

Consequently, in order to conduct effective knowledge creation, there is a need t

o create a "Ba" to act as the existential ground of that knowledge. The "Ba" provi

des energy to the knowledge creation process, and determines the quality of kno

wledge which is produced.

"Ba" for Knowledge Creation (1)

Toyama and Nonaka (2000) listed the following as conditions for "Good Ba" to facilitate knowledge creation:

1. A self-organized location with its own intention, purpose, directionality and mission, etc.

2. Commitment of participants (Commitment to the purpose of the "Ba", and active participation in events occurring in the "Ba").

3. Simultaneously providing two viewpoints: from the inside and from the outside.

4. Direct experience by participants.5. Dialog is conducted relating to the essence of things.6. Boundaries are open (Participants come and go freely, and the shared context i

s endlessly changing).7. A "Ba" for practice where explicit knowledge can be internalized through prac

tice.8. Heterogeneous mixing occurs.9. Impromptu interaction occurs.

"Ba" for Knowledge Creation (2)

What is the best definition of "system" in knowledge science?

Knowledge science addresses not only scientific knowledge, but also subjective k

nowledge based on experience and insight, so systems in knowledge science must

include the participating people, the knowledge of the participants, and previous d

ata and information which have been codified as knowledge.

A complex whole including human beings and information can be understood as a

system. However the system so understood is not a reality per se. This is because

wholes like this have a complexity and diversity which must be recognized as a sy

stem which differs depending on the subject.

Systems like this are called soft systems. Checkland's definition of "system" is aw

are of soft systems, and can be regarded as having a philosophical background in c

ommon with the "Ba" of Nonaka.

Redefinition of "Ba" via Systems Concepts (1)

Now, in order to improve the possibilities for manipulation and concept sharing, we introduce the following schema:

Ba = Infrastructure + Actors + Information

Infrastructure which do not include people are designed and built. This is the design and building of real systems including things like locations, rules and information infrastructure. It is engineering.

The idea is to overlay this with the social science of what sort of people and what sort of information should be added. Substance and energy must be invested in the system but we assume that they have already been woven in as things which the infrastructure should have.

The theory of designing all these things is called "Ba design theory", and if it is applied to a site of science and technology development, that is exactly the "scientific knowledge creation theory" we are aiming for.

Redefinition of "Ba" via Systems Concepts (1)

To achieve a "Good Ba", it must become a self-organized space-time with its own

intention, purpose, directionality and mission, due to the interaction of its element

s: infrastructure, actors and information. Therefore, being aware of the interaction,

we can also suggest:

Ba = Infrastructure x Actors x Information

If we accept this, there is no incongruity in saying "Ba = System". Here we organi

ze the situation as follows, using systems concepts:

Ba = { Set of elements, Set of characteristics, Set of relationships }

•Set of elements = { Infrastructure, Actors, Information } •Set of characteristics = { Emergence, Hierarchy, Communication, Control, etc.

} •Set of relationships: Complex (Investigation of this is the issue)•Subsystems in scientific, social, and creative dimensions

Redefinition of "Ba" via Systems Concepts (1)

i-System

Creative Dimension

Insight

Wisdom

Inference

Intuition

Sense

Knowledge

Synthesized

Discovered Problem

RequirementPerspective

Scientific Dimension

Information

Recognition

Public Knowledge

A Systems Methodology for Knowledge Integration

Social Dimension

Will, Desire, Hope

Experience-based Knowledge

Wisdom-based Knowledge

ImaginationIntelligence

Involvement

InterventionIntegration

Measure: Ability to collect and manage knowledge in the laboratory

Measure: Ability to transmit and hand down knowledge in the laboratory.

Measure: Ability to acquire and create knowledge in the laboratory

Evaluation of Research and Education Environments Based on i-System

Social dimension

Scientific dimension Creative dimension

Action = Integration

Agency=Intelligence

Agency=Involvement

Agency=Imagination

Action = Intervention

i-System

Definition of system structure and elementsDiagnosis of system structure and elements

Evaluation of system performance: Research Progress and Member Growth

Evaluation of system elements: Infrastructure Actors Information

Infrastructure Actors Information

Scientific Dimension

Social Dimension

Creative Dimension

Effect of interaction

Effect of management

Emergence

D1:Research progressingD2:Papers and patentsD3:Knowledge and skillsD4:Technical transferD5:Social contributionD6:New research fundsD7:New theme creationD8:Research successorsD9:Lab administration

Diagnosis

Time difference

Diagnosis of system elements considering system performance (emergence)

E1:Activity E2:EmpathyE3:Persistence E4:AutonomyE5:Thinking skill

A1 A2 A3

B1 B2 B3

C1 C2 C3

Survey sheet concerning system elements

Evaluation sheet concerning research progress and results

Evaluation sheet concerning member growth

(A) Checklist on the ability to collect and manage knowledge in the laboratory

(A1: about infrastructure) A11: Have the books/magazines/references and experimental equipment necessary for research been consolidated? Or can they be obtained easily?A12: Have things like the research papers of instructors and previous students, and records of seminars and experiments, been consolidated?A13: Is it fully furnished with collection systems and network systems for external information?

(A2: about actors)A21: Do members have a strong interest in science and society?A22: Do members understand the mission of the laboratory, and are they working hard to collect and manage the necessary information?A23: Are members conducting research and development using diverse information?

(A3: about information)A31: Has information relating to the current state of science and technology, research trends, academic society trends, and key domains been collected and consolidated?A32: Has information relating to government policy, regulations, society, economics, the environment and other information relating to the development or constraint of research been collected and consolidated?A33: Has information relating to research planning/development management and intellectual property management been collected and consolidated?

Evaluation of Knowledge Management Capability in the Laboratory

(B) Checklist on the ability to transmit and hand down knowledge in the lab.

(B1: about infrastructure) B11: Have locations for opinion exchange (seminar rooms, collaboration spaces, lounges etc.) been consolidated? B12: Have education programs been established (research guidance, exchange with researchers from the outside etc.)? B13: Have things like opinion exchange systems and groupware been consolidated?

(B2: about actors)B21: Is leadership being demonstrated? B22: Have members been trained in presentation skills and communication skills? B23: Are members interested in the research of their fellow members, and do they actively express their opinions?

(B3: about information)B31: Is knowledge, relating to the conduct of research based on the experience of instructors and senior participants, being effectively used? B32: Is information which is not immediately necessary for the conduct of research being accumulated? B33: Is a dialog being conducted on things like the motivation of the research life, and the value of living it?

Evaluation of Knowledge Management Capability in the Laboratory

(C) Checklist on the ability to acquire and create knowledge in the laboratory

(C1: about infrastructure) C11: Have places (individual rooms, booths, coffee break rooms etc.) been provided where individuals can concentrate? C12: Are things like experiment rooms, experiment equipment, computers and research expenses satisfactory? C13: Have things like idea generation support systems and knowledge systematization systems been consolidated?

(C2: about actors)C21: Are members actively taking the initiative to create knowledge? C22: Are the planning skills, analysis skills and problem solving skills of members satisfactory? C23: Are the member's patience, persistence, sensibility and will to succeed satisfactory?

(C3: about information)C31: Is new knowledge coming into being due to the creativity and insight of members? C32: Is new knowledge coming into being due to the impromptu interaction of members? C33: Do members have information on planning methods, experiment methods, organizing methods and presentation methods?

Evaluation of Knowledge Management Capability in the Laboratory

Are boundaries open?

Does heterogeneous mixing occur?

Can members experience directly?

Do the members have own intention, purpose, directionality and mission, etc.?

Does the commitment of participants exist?

Can actors internalize explicit knowledge through practice?

Are there viewpoints from the inside and from the outside?

Is dialog conducted relating to the essence of things?

Is impromptu interaction possible?

Infr

astr

uctu

reA

ctor

sIn

form

atio

nIntelligence Ba Involvement Ba Imagination Ba

Correspondence with the conditions of "Good Ba" by Toyama and Nonaka

• Information search systems

• Mining systems• Databases• Knowledge bases

• Information collection systems

• Information transmission systems

• Document management

• Equipment management

• Visualization systems

• Understanding and thinking power

• Responsibility toward learning

• Curiosity

• Leadership and follower-ship

• Power of expression • Empathy and support

skill

• Creativity • Power of

concentration • Initiative-taking

attitude

• Knowledge management theory

• Innovation theory• Business practice

theory

• Systems methodologies

• "Ba" design theory

• Road mapping• Presentation

technology • Documentation

technology

Infr

astr

uctu

reA

ctor

sIn

form

atio

n

Intelligence Ba Involvement Ba Imagination Ba

Correspondence with “living skills” and with “knowledge science”

Infra. Actors Info. Infra. Actors Info. Infra. Actors Info.

0.50 0.72 0.24 0.47 0.57 0.69 0.64 0.19 0.43

0.61 0.62 -0.02 0.18 0.43 0.60 0.77 0.02 0.05

0.61 0.82 0.72 0.68 0.68 0.87 0.68 0.75 0.83

0.06 0.27 -0.14 -0.04 0.18 0.16 0.14 -0.29 -0.05

0.21 0.12 0.52 0.19 0.42 0.18 0.05 0.43 0.31

0.40 0.23 -0.29 -0.48 0.03 0.17 0.47 -0.23 -0.52

0.50 0.87 0.68 0.33 0.65 0.81 0.56 0.57 0.66

0.74 0.76 0.63 0.26 0.74 0.78 0.73 0.60 0.44

0.72 0.69 0.09 -0.00 0.43 0.66 0.85 0.16 -0.01

-0.00 -0.49 -0.68 -0.36 -0.17 -0.45 -0.06 -0.65 -0.79

Research progressing

Papers and patents

Knowledge and skills

Technical transfer

Social contribution

New research funds

New theme creation

Research successors

Lab administration

Members’ happiness

Correlation Coefficients (Good Ba and Research Progress)

Intelligence Ba Involvement Ba Imagination Ba

Activity Empathy Persistence Autonomy Thinking skill

Infrastructure

Actors

Information

Infrastructure

Actors

Information

Infrastructure

Actors

Information

0.36 0.10 0.77 0.26 0.04

0.21 0.56 0.85 0.84 0.77

-0.28 -0.17 0.68 0.38 0.39

-0.62 -0.26 0.23 0.25 -0.12

-0.28 -0.09 0.59 0.35 0.11

0.10 0.36 0.88 0.70 0.55

0.30 0.35 0.82 0.45 0.21

-0.16 -0.18 0.76 0.29 0.26

-0.46 -0.03 0.50 0.57 0.45

Correlation Coefficients (Good Ba and Development of Students’ Ability)

ImaginationBa

InvolvementBa

IntelligenceBa

Research Progress

Social Dimension

Scientific Dimension

Creative Dimension

Infrastructure

Member Growth

Actors

Information

Knowledge and skill accumulation Research laboratory vitalization Personnel development Research progress Organizational education

Infrastructure

Actors

Information

Infrastructure

Actors

Information

Collaboration with the outside Improvement of social impact Acquisition of research funding

Activity (creativity, curiosity, foresight)

Empathy (support skills, communication skills)

Persistence (concentration, planning skills)

Autonomy (sense of responsibility, initiative)

Thinking skill (analysis skills, logical thinking)

Preliminary Survey (Linear Dependence)

Strongeffect

Weakeffect

Strongeffect

Using the evaluation given by ten professors in materials research laboratories at JAIST, we found the following linear relationships

1. Three factors – "accumulation of knowledge and skills", "vitalization of the research laboratory", and "personnel development" -- are strongly and linearly related to the quality of "Ba".

2. Actors in "Intelligence Ba", information in "Involvement Ba", and infrastructure in "Imagination Ba" are linearly related to "knowledge and skill accumulation", "research laboratory vitalization" and "personnel development".

3. "Collaboration with the outside", "improvement of social impact", and "acquisition of research funding" are not linearly related to the quality of "Ba". These are things which are related to the hard work of professors, so these results are understandable.

1. Among the five skills of members, "persistence" is strongly and linearly related to the quality (good or bad) of "Ba".

2. Actors in "Intelligence Ba", information in "Involvement Ba" and infrastructure in "Imagination Ba" are linearly related to member growth.

Results of Preliminary Survey

Conclusion

We tried to design a “Good Ba (Environment)” for scientific research in academia based on systems concepts.

We actually prepared a list of evaluation items (a check list), carried out a preliminary survey at the school of material science, and obtained an understandable result.

Future work should include:

Refinement of the list of evaluation items, consulting many scientists.

Modeling of the relation between “Ba’s” and research outputs.