1 / 24

Research Review Team: Strategy and Status

This research review assesses the effectiveness and linkages of NOAA's Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR), discussing the potential consolidation of labs for a more efficient scientific program. The review team analyzes management structures, processes, and organizational changes, providing recommendations for optimizing research activities. Led by Prof. Berrien Moore III and key experts, the team aims to enhance NOAA's research organization and streamline operational processes.

jvega
Download Presentation

Research Review Team: Strategy and Status

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. Research Review Team: Strategy and Status Berrien Moore III SAB 4 November 2003

  2. Research Review Team: Origins • The 2003 House and Senate Commerce Justice State Appropriations Subcommittee Reports have language pertaining to the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research (OAR). The 2003 House Appropriations Subcommittee Report has requested that NOAA develop a laboratory consolidation plan. The Senate report language calls for a cost/benefit study of breaking up OAR distributing its constituent parts to the other line offices.

  3. The Language: The House • “In recognition of current resource limitations the Committee is forced to operate within, the Committee directs NOAA to review the continued requirements for twelve separate laboratories, six of which are located in Boulder, Colorado. The Committee directs NOAA to submit a laboratory consolidation plan to the Committee by March 15, 2004.”

  4. The Language: The Senate • “NOAA is directed to report to the Committee on Appropriations on the costs and benefits of breaking OAR up into its constituent parts and distributing those parts as desirable to the other line offices. The report should specifically address how the newly configured research sector will directly assist line offices in developing timely solutions to problems confronting NOAA now and in the next 5 years.”

  5. Research Review Team: Charge • Does the research conducted in OAR provide effective support and vision for NOAA? • Is NOAA Research adequately linked to NOAA’s service organization? • How does the management structure and processes of NOAA Research compare to those of other agencies managing research? Should NOAA Research be dissolved into its constituent components and distributed across NOAA, should it be left as is, or should NOAA consolidate all of its research activities in a single organization?

  6. Research Review Team: Charge(cont.) • Focusing specifically on the NOAA Research labs, would consolidation of the labs yield a more effective scientific program? If so, what would you recommend? • Would consolidation of labs yield a more efficient structure, by reducing administrative overhead and infrastructure/manpower? If so, what would you recommend?

  7. Research Review Team: Membership • Prof. Berrien Moore III (UNH), Chair, • Dr. Richard D. Rosen (AER, Inc; now NOAA OAR-AA - NOAA), • Dr. Richard W. Spinrad (NOS AA - NOAA), • Dr. Warren Washington (NCAR), • RADM Richard West (CORE).

  8. The Schedule • The consolidation plan is due to the Appropriations Committee on March 15, 2004. The report is due to the Commerce Department February 2, 2004. • The Review Team should provide its draft report to the SAB by mid-December. • The SAB will meet early January to consider the draft report and deliver its “Final” Report to NOAA by mid-January to allow NOAA leadership time to develop its final consolidation plan by 2 February.

  9. The ProblemThe Strategy • The “Problem” is the Schedule--impossible • The “Problem” is that there are real issues “foreshadowed” or “detected” by the Language • Our Strategy is to deliver a two staged report--Report One in December/January that is consistent with the Language but doable; Report Two is fully compliant with the Language and also addresses consistently the Charge. • It will also likely suggest an even broader review to be conducted by the NRC (or a similar agency).

  10. Reports I and II • Report One: Statement of Organizational and Operational Principles to guide Research management at NOAA and OAR; initial findings and recommendations. • Report Two: Findings and Recommended Organization and Operational Changes • Our Other Problem: Drawing the line between Reports One and Two

  11. Research Review Team: Actions to Date • Weekly Conference Calls • Overview presentation on research in NOAA (by OAR) • 26 September meeting with Adm. Lautenbacher • 22-23 October: Meetings with all OAR and Laboratory Directors and Program Directors (Sea Grant and Global) as well as with all AA’s and with Mary Glackin.

  12. Focusing Questions: Adm. Lautenbacher Meeting • What are the current systemic or other problems with the organization of research within NOAA; within OAR? • What are the guiding principles for where organizationally research is located within NOAA? • What is the status of the on-going organizational changes in NOAA, and in particular, how will the Matrix Management oriented changes affect the research enterprise?

  13. Focusing Questions: Adm. Lautenbacher Meeting • Given the necessity of linking better research with the Operational/Service Line Agencies, what specific changes do you feel need to occur? • Given the fact that NOAA has been designated to serve a leading role in the President’s Climate Change Science Program and that there is not an Operational Line for climate, how should this initiative (and other similar “non-operational” initiatives) be organized to insure the highest quality research? • Given the overarching need of finding a set of policies, paths, and organizational changes that insures excellence and innovation in science while concurrently providing the appropriate level of serving the operational needs—where is that balance?

  14. Focusing Questions: 22-23 October • Overview: What are the current systemic or other problems with the organization of research within NOAA; within OAR? What changes are needed? • Principles: What are the guiding principles for where organizationally research is located within NOAA; how is this reflected within the current structure; how should it be reflected? • Planning: How are research directions, priorities, or initiatives determined within your Lab/Program; how are these reflected at higher levels?

  15. Focusing Questions: 22-23 October (cont) • Execution: How is research executed within your organization? What is the connectivity to other NOAA and non-NOAA organizations? • Evaluation: How is research evaluated within your organization; within NOAA? How should it be evaluated? • Connecting Research with Operations: Given the necessity of linking research with the Operational/Service Line Agencies, what specific changes do you feel need to occur?

  16. Focusing Questions: 22-23 October (cont) • Connecting Research with Goals: How should Climate Change Research Program (and other similar “non-operational” initiatives) be organized to insure the highest quality research? • Existing Structures: How can NOAA take better advantage of many of the existing structures (SAB, Research Council) and bodies within NOAA? • Balance: Guiding role of science with the shorter term operational needs---where is the balance?

  17. Emerging “Observations and Issues” • Research Mission of NOAA Observation: There is a lack of clarity about NOAA’s Research Mission and Research Plans. Question: What is NOAA's research mission? Possible Answer: "To conduct research that leads to the development of products; to make available scientific information needed by the government, industry, and citizens, and to provide leadership to foster NOAA's evolving environmental and economic mission."

  18. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Definition of Research in NOAA Observation: In discussions with the lab directors and AA's it was clear that NOAA uses multiple definitions for research,and management and budget data is difficult to interpret. Question: Would agreement on a single definition of research simplify discussions of research in NOAA. Possible Answer: Leverage off the NSF Definition and obtain consistent management data against that definition

  19. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Research Organization within NOAA Observation: For Research, a single definition may be less important than having a single voice to speak for NOAA's research. There may be too many voices speaking about research plans and priorities. Question(s):Would the creation of a “Research Czar” at the Deputy Assistant Secretary level, with the Research Council reporting to her/him be effective in advancing NOAA's research mission? Can a "single" voice for research in NOAA be effective given NOAA's new matrix approach for managing its programs?

  20. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Research to Operations Planning Observation: The transition of research to operations is occurring at many levels and through many channels, particularly between OAR and NWS; however, in recent years, communication at the AA level between OAR and the Lines Elements has not been adequate. Question: Would a more formal research to operations transition process be helpful to NOAA and in particular to ensuring a strong connection between OAR and NWS?

  21. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Services from OAR Observations: There are numerous examples of important services (e.g., Houston air quality experiment, IPCC, and Great Lakes water level and circulation forecasts) being provided by OAR labs. Question: Is it appropriate for the research organizations in NOAA to provide services that do not go through an operational line in NOAA? How might this activity been enriched?

  22. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Sustained Observations in OAR Observation: Similarly, there are observations (e.g., CO2 concentrations) that are produced routinely but are not routine—namely the quality of those observations and the sensitivity required to monitor and constantly upgrade them requires a research environment. Question: Is it appropriate for sustained observations to be performed in a research organization?

  23. Emerging “Observations and Issues” (Cont.) • Laboratory Structure Observation: Lab directors have substantial independence in setting the research agendas for their labs. There has not been sufficiently strong leadership and processes in OAR headquarters to ensure that the lab activities are well integrated and optimally arrayed. Question: Should OAR have a more comprehensive structure to coordinate activities across the labs?

  24. Concerns • How to meet expectations and schedule? • How to meet with the other key players (Hill, Scientific community and organizations, other research elements in NOAA,…) • Morale • Managing the multiplicity of changes

More Related