1 / 50

Overview

ayanna-gibbs
Download Presentation

Overview

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Starting a Network:Reflections of a Networks of Centres of Excellence Managing Director Lessons Learned  in the Frying Pan and the FireDiana Royce, EdDPrincipalThe Deerfield GroupPalliative and End of Life Care Research Networking Infrastructure Workshop,February 21, 2003, Toronto, ON

  2. Overview • NCE Program • HEALNet • Learnings

  3. Networks of Centres of ExcellenceMission Statement (1989) “To mobilize Canada’s research talent in the academic, private and public sectors and apply it to the task of developing the economy and improving the quality of life of Canadians”

  4. The NCE Program: • Permanent program of the Government of Canada supporting research in universities and hospitals in partnership with private and public sectors • Fosters synergies between creators, users and “receptors” of knowledge • Addresses complex areas of critical importance to Canada (integrated projects) • Multidisciplinary research from basic to applied in a variety of disciplines

  5. NCEs in Context $77M NCE Funding $1,431M $6,815M Federal Funding of University R&D R&D in University $20,871M R&D in Canada

  6. Why Canada built Networks TL•NCE PENCE SFM AquaNet CGDN Wood-Pulps ISIS GEOIDE CIPI CBDN CANVAC IRIS CSN CAN Auto21 CLLRnet StemNet CWN CITR MITACS HealNet Micronet Vast country Dispersed institutions Link strengths Create critical mass

  7. NCE’s Primary Contributions to Innovation New Knowledge • Stimulate the Production of Advanced World Class Research Training: • Train and Retain World Class Highly Qualified People Partnering for Knowledge Transfer: • Encourage the Transfer and Diffusion of Technology and Knowledge to Industry and Society to stimulate innovation

  8. Innovation The process through which new economic and social benefits are extracted from knowledge. OECD definition used in Canada’s Innovation Agenda (2002)

  9. NCE Scale of Activity • 20 NCE’s • 5,900 People: • 1,400 professors and researchers in University • 300+ industry and partner researchers • 4,200+ research associates and students • 900+ Canadian organizations • 90+ universities and hospitals • 130+ government agencies (federal/provincial) • 700 industry and other partners

  10. International Collaborations • NCEs collaborate with researchers around the world: • USA, Europe, Asia • …and with diverse organizations: • 43 universities, • 7 hospitals, • 7 gov. agencies • 88 companies, • 63 other organizations

  11. Current Fields of Research (1) • Health, Human Development and Biotechnology • Arthritis CAN • Vaccines CANVAC • Bacterial diseases CBDN • Genetic diseases CGDN • Cardiovascular strokes CSN • Proteins PENCE • StemCell STEMNET • Early Child and Society CLLRNet

  12. Current Fields of Research (2) • Information and Communication Technology • Microelectronics Micronet • Telecommunications CITR • Photonics CIPI • Geomatics GEOIDE • Intelligent Systems &Robotics IRIS • ICT related • Mathematics MITACS

  13. Current Fields of Research (3) • Natural Resources / Environment • Aquaculture Aquanet • Mechanical Wood Pulps MWP • Sustainable Forests SFM • Clean Water CWN • Engineering and Manufacturing • New materials and smart structures ISIS • Automobile of the 21st Century Auto21

  14. NCEs are Virtual Institutes • Governed by a Board • Directed by Scientific Director • Supported by Administrative Centre Two primary agreements: • Funding Agreement • Network Agreement Guidelines: • Environmental Assessment of Projects • Ethics and Conflict of Interest Rules Accountability: • Mid-term reviews • Annual Financial Audit of Administrative Centre • Annual Audit of Compliance with NCE Administrative and Financial Policies

  15. A typical NCE Birth of NCEs 1989: 8 /14 1995: 4 1998: 3 1999: 3 2000: 4 2003: 2-3 • Lead by Scientific Director / Research Management Committee • 15-25 Projects in 4-6 Themes • 50-60 Professors in 12-20 Universities • 100-150 HQP (Assoc., Students, PostDoc) • 20-50 Companies • $CDN 3-6 Million from NCE per year • Doubled with Partner’s Cash and In-Kind • Quadrupled with individual research grants

  16. NCE Management Structure

  17. Life Cycle of an NCE • Two stage competition (18 months) • LOI (Open Competition, 20-40 applications) • Invited Proposals (4-8 retained), 25K$ support • 2-3 funded • Setup & Launch (3-4 months) • 1st Cycle: 7 years with mid-term review • Can compete for a 2nd cycle • (max 14 years)

  18. Preparing for an NCE: Next Competition – 2005 (web: end of March 03) 2003 Competition LOI Jul 12, 2002 Proposals Mar 7, 2003 Launch Oct 1, 2003 Sept 2003 - call for proposal due (LOI) Nov 2003 - invitations issued for full submission Feb 2004 - site visit March/Apr. 2004 - Announce funded NCEs April 2005 - NCEs start operations Five Criteria for successful proposal • Excellence of the researchers and program • Capacity to train highly qualified professionals • Strength of the networking and partnerships • Capacity for knowledge exchange and technology transfer • Quality of the management

  19. Be Prepared to demonstrate that you can… • perform outstanding research; • nurture and develop effective research partnerships with the public, private, and not-for-profit sectors; • exchange knowledge and exploit technology; • train graduate students who go on to work in industry and in other critical sectors; and • run a national research consortium.

  20. Other Key Questions (based on how the NCE evaluates itself) • Does the program support internationally competitive research in areas of critical importance? • Does the network result in new educational and training approaches in universities and other sectors? • What kind of start-up companies could be created? • How many patents might be applied for? What impact could the network have on socio-economic policies, norms, standards, and regulations? • How many international contracts could be awarded as a result of this research?

  21. Success Factors • Multisectoral research “readiness” • Must include Social Science Research • Unique niche, focus – no one group can achieve the mission on their own • Ongoing interactions with stakeholders • Researchers, Gov, Industry, other ultimate users • Broadly-based external financial support (cash and in-kind) • Vigorous leadership, many champions, strategic communications, regular opportunities to develop new relationships

  22. Improving Canadian Healthcare Decisions: The Experience of HEALNet: 1995-2002

  23. HEALNet Funding • $2.4 million / yr NCE (69%of revenue) $16M/7yrs • + > $1 million / yr cash and in-kind $24M/7yrs • 62% spent on research; 24% networking, education and dissemination programs; 14% spent on administration

  24. Leadership

  25. HEALNet Organizational Structure 1998 - 2002 Board Of Directors Dr. Kathryn Hannah, Chair Executive Committee Dr. Kathryn Hannah, Chair Scientific Advisory Committee Dr. Jim Cimino, Chair Management Committee Dr. Vivek Goel, Scientific Program Leader and Chair Budget and FinanceCommittee Ms. Mary Gibson, Chair Educational OpportunitiesAdvisory Committee Dr. Andrew Grant, Chair User Interface Committee Mr. Ron Kaczorowski, Chair Administrative Centre Dr. Diana Royce, Managing Director Research Program 1.0 Performance Assessment Module 2.0 Decisions and Evidence Module 3.0 Information Retrieval and Synthesis Tools Module 4.0 Strategic Initiatives

  26. Partnership Structure 2000-2001

  27. The HEALNet Legacy: PEOPLE • National infrastructure of researchers, stakeholders and decision-makers with collaborative “know-how” who are providing leadership to the range of health services research funding organizations and to future research projects • 5 years ahead of peers

  28. The HEALNet Legacy: PEOPLE con’t Young health services and EBDM health research scholars with: • a transdisciplinary perspective on applied health services research and research transfer • an advanced network of contacts across disciplines and sectors • experience working collaboratively with research users and across levels of decision-making

  29. HEALNet Legacy Organizations • Regionalization Research Centre – Canadian Centre for Analysis of Regionalization and Health • Canadian Knowledge Management and Transfer Centre – Knowledge Utilization Database - Laval • E-health Accelerator – Centre for Global E-Health Innovation • Canadian School of Health Information • emerging spin-off Networks - e.g. workplace health and safety • Canadian Research Transfer Network

  30. Learnings

  31. V I S I O N ? V I S I O N ?

  32. Adopt a Transformative Mission, define Strategic goals, linked to specific deliverables

  33. System Performance and Workplace Function Understand your Network’s niche, value-added Health System and Workplace Influence Health service Performance provision Citizens, Decisions governance, Worksites , health funding of health institutions, health Collate and Interpret providers, consumers services System Data e.g. CIHI, ICES, HSURC Facilitate Research Transfer HEAL Net - Research on Health services accountability e.g. CCOHTA, CHN, CHSRF, Support of health the Transfer and Use of CIHR, CIHI, Cochrane research Evidence Research Groups Research Funding Applied and Basic Applied and Basic Evidence e.g. Change, CHSRF, CIHR, WCBs General – e.g. Universities, CIAR Workplace – e.g. IWH, IRSST, OHSAH Research Infrastructure Policy and Management – e.g. CHEPA, e.g. CFI, CANARIE, CHIPP CPRN, HSURC, MCPHE, GRIS, ICES

  34. Begin with the end in mind… catalyze new relationships, research, innovations and culture change. provide the academic equivalent of seed money, or venture capital, taking risks by supporting projects that break new ground. act as an incubator for teams of researchers who would not have otherwise received funding to collaborate with research users on projects critical to economic and social innovation.

  35. Integrated Research Program

  36. Other Key Factors for Success • Committed, visionary leadership at multiple levels • Internal and external communication, marketing and branding strategies linked to values • Define the “value-propositions” for participants and partners

  37. Other Factors for Success, con’t • Experienced administrative leadership to ensure coordination, continuity, overall project management • Ensure funding for regular networking and face-to-face interactions among researchers (competitive advantage) • Encourage adaptability and responsiveness (strategic initiatives)

  38. Focus on Capacity Building: People form partnerships Partnerships Enhance Performance Performance achieves progress Progress benefits people

  39. Factors for Success, con’t Build KT Bridges with partners: Invite partners & potential future funders to participate in the network’s research program better enables them to use findings (KT)

  40. Challenges • Traditional university reward structure, culture conflicts with networking culture – entrepreneurship, KT undervalued • passive approach to dissemination • Can disadvantage early career researchers • Identifying incentives that align with mission, vision • entitlement – resource allocation decisions • time (on the margin) and financial disincentives (sharing) • Conflict between disciplinary approaches and people • Interaction costs are critical, but funding sources are scarce • Partnerships with industry can raise ethical issues – academic freedom and IP challenges

  41. Networks require a spirit of “adventure”… The whole world is a field – and life a game of adventure. It is a grand thing to be on the gridiron instead of in the gallery. Sir Wilfred T. Grenfell, Inscription in Adrift on an Ice-Pan, given as a gift to Charles W. Coleman, “As a reminder of …Dr. Grenfell's story told Oct 24, 1913, told in the first person.”

  42. Contacts: Diana Royce, The Deerfield Group dianaroyce@sympatico.ca Networks of Centres of Excellence Program www.nce.gc.ca Achieving Excellence: www.innovationstrategy.gc.ca

More Related