Design and Evaluation of Technology Creation “Ba” in Academia

1. Design and Evaluation of Technology Creation “Ba” in Academia • Knowledge Science and an Important Application Field • Redefinition of “Ba ” (a Japanese word meaning place, center, environment, space, etc.) for Technology Creation via Systems Concepts • A System for Evaluating “Ba”, A Preliminary Survey, and Implication Y. Nakamori School of Knowledge Science Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

2. Target Knowledge Science A new research field: study of scientific knowledge creation. Modeling and management of knowledge creation process. School of Knowledge Science COE Program Knowledge conversion theory, knowledge systematizing methods, and methods for development of creativity in management science. A vehicle which integrates theory and practice, and combines knowledge in social science and knowledge in natural science. New Direction Necessary Environment Knowledge science should help researchers produce creative theoretical results, in important natural sciences. An environment “Ba”, including place, people, context, etc., that supports the development and practice of knowledge creation.

3. Target A Creative System for Research and Education 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. This system trains graduate students to be: Knowledge Creators: Talented people with the advanced research-and-development capability. Knowledge Coordinators: Talented people having broad judgment and can support creative research.

4. Knowledge Creators New Scientific Knowledge Talented people with advanced research-and-development capability Talented people who can manage creative research activities Interaction of theory and practice Y Knowledge Coordinators Knowledge creation theory Y=F(X) ZW F Z W F F Accumulation of social information Knowledge creation support systems X Knowledge systematization Thinking support system Knowledge management system Visualization system Knowledge discovery Knowledge representation Technology road mapping Knowledge database Existing Scientific Knowledge Enhance the Function: Y=F(X)

5. Information Gathering Data/text mining technology Data/knowledge-base systems Theories of Technology Strategy Knowledge management theory Strategic innovation theory Knowledge Creation Theory Design of environment Systems methodology Research 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 and Intellectual Property Project Framework Lab Information Planning Experiment Knowledge Coordinators Deep Woods commercialization industrialization Announcement “Ba” Knowledge Creators Death Valley

6. "Ba" for Knowledge Creation (1) Toyama and Nonaka (2000) called the dynamic context which is shared and redefined in the knowledge creation process "Ba", which does not refer just to a physical space, but includes virtual spaces based on the Internet, for instance; and more mental spaces which involve sharing experiences and ideas. They regard "Ba" as a "concept of locationality which includes the space-time which acts as the ground of human existence". Knowledge is not something which can 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 to create a "Ba" to act as the existential ground of that knowledge. The "Ba" provides energy to the knowledge creation process, and determines the quality of knowledge which is produced.

7. "Ba" for Knowledge Creation (2) Toyama and Nonaka (2000) listed the following as conditions for "Good Ba" to facilitate knowledge creation: • A self-organized location with its own intention, purpose, directionality and mission, etc. • Commitment of participants (Commitment to the purpose of the "Ba", and active participation in events occurring in the "Ba"). • Simultaneously providing two viewpoints: from the inside and from the outside. • Direct experience by participants. • Dialog is conducted relating to the essence of things. • Boundaries are open (Participants come and go freely, and the shared context is endlessly changing). • A "Ba" for practice where explicit knowledge can be internalized through practice. • Heterogeneous mixing occurs. • Impromptu interaction occurs.

8. Redefinition of "Ba" via Systems Concepts (1) What is the best definition of "system" in knowledge science? Knowledge science addresses not only scientific knowledge, but also subjective knowledge based on experience and insight, so systems in knowledge science must include the participating people, the knowledge of the participants, and previous data 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 system which differs depending on the subject. Systems like this are called soft systems. Checkland's definition of "system" is aware of soft systems, and can be regarded as having a philosophical background in common with the "Ba" of Nonaka.

9. 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.

10. 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 elements: 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 organize 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

11. Will, Desire, Hope Social Dimension Public Knowledge Experience-based Knowledge Wisdom-based Knowledge Information Recognition Involvement Scientific Dimension Creative Dimension Insight Wisdom Inference Intuition Sense Imagination Intelligence Intervention Integration Requirement Perspective Synthesized Discovered Problem Knowledge A Systems Methodology for Knowledge Integration i-System

12. Evaluation of system elements: Infrastructure Actors Information Measure:Ability to transmit and hand down knowledge in the laboratory. Social dimension Agency=Involvement Creative dimension Scientificdimension Agency=Intelligence Agency=Imagination i-System Measure:Ability to collect and manage knowledge in the laboratory Measure: Ability to acquire and create knowledge in the laboratory Action = Integration Action = Intervention Evaluation of system performance: Research Progress and Member Growth Definition of system structure and elements Diagnosis of system structure and elements Evaluation of Research and Education Environments Based on i-System

13. Diagnosis of system elements considering system performance (emergence) Diagnosis Infrastructure Actors Information Scientific Dimension A1 A2 A3 E1:Activity E2:Empathy E3:Persistence E4:Autonomy E5:Thinking skill Social Dimension Evaluation sheet concerning member growth B1 B2 B3 Creative Dimension C1 C2 C3 D1:Research progressing D2:Papers and patents D3:Knowledge and skills D4:Technical transfer D5:Social contribution D6:New research funds D7:New theme creation D8:Research successors D9:Lab administration Survey sheet concerning system elements Effect of interaction Effect of management Evaluation sheet concerning research progress and results Emergence Time difference

14. Evaluation of Knowledge Management Capability in the Laboratory (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?

15. 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?

16. 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?

17. Correspondence with the conditions of "Good Ba" by Toyama and Nonaka Involvement Ba Intelligence Ba Imagination Ba Infrastructure Actors Information

18. Correspondence with “living skills” and with “knowledge science” Intelligence Ba Involvement Ba Imagination Ba Infrastructure Actors Information

19. Correlation Coefficients (Good Ba and Research Progress) Intelligence Ba Imagination Ba Involvement Ba Infra. Actors Info. Infra. Actors Info.Infra. Actors Info. Research progressing Papers and patents Knowledge and skills Technical transfer Social contribution New research funds New theme creation Research successors Lab administration Members’ happiness

20. Correlation Coefficients (Good Ba and Development of Students’ Ability) Activity Empathy Persistence Autonomy Thinking skill Infrastructure Actors Information Infrastructure Actors Information Infrastructure Actors Information Intelligence Ba Involvement Ba Imagination Ba

21. Preliminary Survey (Linear Dependence) ScientificDimension Research Progress Infrastructure • Knowledge and skill accumulation • Research laboratory vitalization • Personnel development • Research progress • Organizational education Actors Strong effect Information Social Dimension • Collaboration with the outside • Improvement of social impact • Acquisition of research funding Infrastructure Weak effect Actors Information Member Growth Creative Dimension Activity (creativity, curiosity, foresight) Empathy (support skills, communication skills) Persistence (concentration, planning skills) Autonomy (sense of responsibility, initiative) Thinking skill (analysis skills, logical thinking) Infrastructure Actors Strong effect Information

22. Results of Preliminary Survey Using the evaluation given by ten professors in materials research laboratories at JAIST, we found the following linear relationships • 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". • 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". • "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. • Among the five skills of members, "persistence" is strongly and linearly related to the quality (good or bad) of "Ba". • Actors in "Intelligence Ba", information in "Involvement Ba" and infrastructure in "Imagination Ba" are linearly related to member growth.

23. 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.