KT for TT – Ensuring Technology- based R&D matters to Stakeholders

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
On Target Group Coaching
Advertisements

Henkel’s Stage-Gate Process (Portugal Division)
MODULE 8: PROJECT TRACKING AND EVALUATION
Individul Project: NPD-NET Component 4: Integration and Regional Adaptation of NPD Roadmap Kick-off meeting Region of Central Macedonia – URENIO Research.
Disability Research to Practice Program NIDRR RERC Project Directors Meeting April 3 & 4, 2006.
Begin with Knowledge Translation; Have the End – Technology Transfer – in Mind Begin with Knowledge Translation; Have the End – Technology Transfer – in.
Contextualized Knowledge Translation Packages for Technology Transfer and Product Development ATIA Orlando, Florida January 2012 James A. Leahy Center.
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
1 Introduction to Workforce Planning and Development in State of Alaska Executive Branch Departments.
Planning and Strategic Management
Achieving Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer: Implications for Evaluation Presenter: Vathsala I. Stone University at Buffalo/
TTO Role in University / Corporate Partnership
How to Translate Knowledge in Three States: Discovery, Invention, Innovation Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer University.
Getting from Knowledge to Action: Effectively communicating Research & Development value to multiple Stakeholder Groups. Joseph Lane & John Westbrook RESNA.
Innovation in Universal Design “Universal integration of research, education, innovation and enterprise at DIT GrangeGorman” Joseph P. Lane, University.
KT for TT – Ensuring Use and Impact from Technology R&D Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer University at Buffalo.
Industry – The missing link between S&T Policy and Societal Benefit. Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer University.
From Theory to Practice: Operationalizing Knowledge Translation for Successful AT Commercialization Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for.
SPECA Regional Workshop on Disability Statistics: Dec 13-15, 2006 Purposes of Disability Statistics Jennifer Madans and Barbara Altman National Center.
The New Product and Services Development Process By SK Winning Innovations for Tomorrow (WIT)
Winning your next proposal: “Buzz Tactics” to increase the chances of success Joseph Lane, Jennifer Flagg, James Leahy Center on Knowledge Translation.
Marketing Research Audhesh Paswan Chapter 1: The Nature and Role of Marketing Research.
PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND FORMULATION
Best Practices in Technology Transfer Jennifer L Flagg Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer University at Buffalo.
7 th Continual Improvement & Innovation Symposium 2015 CASE STUDY COMPETITION: INNOVATION TEMPLATE [ Name of the Organization ] [ Innovation Title ]
Disability Research to Practice Program National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) Joann Starks Frank Martin.
National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research 1 The 8th Campbell Colloquium May 12-14, 2008 Vancouver, BC Canada NCDDR Model: Developing.
Research Program Overview National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research Robert J. Jaeger, Ph.D. Interagency and International Affairs Interagency.
National Consortium On Deaf-Blindness Families Technical Assistance Information Services and Dissemination Personnel Training State Projects.
Group Technical Assistance Webinar August 5, CFPHE RESEARCH METHODS FOR COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH.
Professionalizing Mobility Management: Developing Standards and Competencies Julie Dupree, Easter Seals Association of Travel Instruction Conference August.
Tools for Technical, Business & Consumer Analysis in AT Product Development: Expanding the Need to Knowledge Model Joseph P. Lane, Center on KT4TT University.
PRIMARY MARKET RESEARCH Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology Transfer Training Module #4.
The 7th Campbell Colloquium May 14-16, 2007 London, UK Knowledge Translation and Disability and Rehabilitation Research _______________________________________________.
Managing & Communicating Knowledge in Three States Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer School.
Covered California: Promoting Health Equity and Reducing Health Disparities Covered California Board Meeting March 21, 2013.
International Conference on Ageing, Disability, and Independence (ICADI) Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom Wednesday, 8 September 2010 Accommodating.
Bridging the Evidence Gap: Level Of Knowledge Use Survey - LOKUS as a Validated Instrument Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology.
Bridging the Deliverable Gap: Improving Government’s approach to innovation intending social benefit. Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for.
Knowledge Translation Conference KT Solutions for Overcoming Barriers to Research Use Hosted by SEDL’s Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and.
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
Knowledge Translation Conference KT Solutions for Overcoming Barriers to Research Use Hosted by SEDL’s Center on Knowledge Translation for Disability and.
The KT4TT Knowledge Base: Steps and Supporting Evidence to Improve Your Process! Webcast sponsored by SEDL September 29, 2010, 2:00 pm (Central) / 3:00.
CAREER PATHWAYS THE NEW WAY OF DOING BUSINESS. Agenda for our Discussion Today we’ll discuss: Career Pathways Systems and Programs Where we’ve been and.
Stages of Research and Development
Stephen Bauer NIDILRR Program Officer
Four Models to Guide AT Projects Intending Innovative Technology Development Outcomes Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.
Please highlight one choice only
From Theory to Practice: Operationalizing Knowledge Translation for Successful AT Commercialization Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation.
The Social Model for A/T Technology Transfer – AAATE 2010 “From Problem Identification to Social Validation: An Operational Model” Joseph P. Lane,
Bridging the Deliverable Gap: Improving Government’s approach to innovation intending social benefit. Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation.
Translating New Knowledge from Technology Based Research Projects: an End-of-Grant Intervention Evaluation Study. Rationale and Methods Vathsala I. Stone.
Managing & Communicating Knowledge in Three States
Expanding Product Accessibility with Primary Market Research Techniques Jennifer L Flagg Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer, University.
Four Models to Guide AT Projects Intending Innovative Technology Development Outcomes Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer.
Tools for Technical, Business & Consumer Analysis in AT Product Development: Expanding the Need to Knowledge Model Joseph P. Lane, Center on KT4TT.
Joseph Lane & John Westbrook
Industry – The missing link between S&T Policy and Societal Benefit.
Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer (KT4TT)
AEA Annual Meeting , Nov , 2009 Achieving Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer: Implications for Evaluation Presenter: Vathsala I. Stone.
RESNA 2018 Annual Conference
Knowledge Translation Across RERC Activities
Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer
Reconciling Government Policies and Programs with Public Expectations: The Case of Innovation in AT Joseph P. Lane Center on Knowledge Translation.
Knowledge Utility results from Rigor in Methods & Relevance in Content
The Need to Knowledge (NtK) Model: Orienting Scholar “Technology Grantees” to Best Practices in Transfer & Commercialization Joseph P. Lane, Director.
Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer
Please highlight one choice only
8th Continual Improvement & Innovation Symposium 2016 CASE STUDY COMPETITION: INNOVATION TEMPLATE [ Name of the Organization ] [ Innovation Title ]
Presentation transcript:

KT for TT – Ensuring Technology- based R&D matters to Stakeholders Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer University at Buffalo

Session Objectives Define KT and describe how Models, Methods and Measures differ from traditional Dissemination and Diffusion Strategies Present parallels between KT for research projects and KT for development projects; and explain how they link to move from conceptual idea to tangible product. Present KT for TT Model and its relevance to Stakeholders – particularly intermediaries.

Background Convergence of Science and Technology Technology, Medicine & Rehabilitation (Medical Model) → Federal Funding for Basic Research to generate repository of science-based knowledge. Convergence of Science and Society Empowerment & Independent Living (Social Model) → Federal Funding for Applied Research to generate prototype technologies with product potential.

Background (cont.) Mission of NIDRR/USDE Quality of life for people with disabilities through new knowledge and new products. Assistive Technology Defined – AT as a class of Devices and Services to benefit PWD’s. Generate Knowledge from Research and Products from Development – all to improve quality of life for persons with disabilities.

Three Confounds Academic vs. Industry “R&D“ Scholarly vs. Commercial “Product” Supply Push vs. Demand Pull “Innovation”

Academic “R&D” - Research and Dissemination Scientific Method – Systematic Process. Symbiotic Closed System of Scholars and Publishers. Knowledge Producers know market requirements (Author guidelines & peer review). Success defined as contributions to Global Knowledge Base, evidenced via citations.

Industry “R&D” - Product Development and Testing PDMA Method - Systematic Process Competitive and Open System of Entrepreneurs, Corporations and Markets. User requirements and constraints are ill-defined and opportunities are dynamic. Success defined as sales and market share, evidenced by sales and growth.

PDMA Process – 20 Steps

Keys to Confounds Know your Goal - Final product/service innovation. Know your Role – In R/D/P continuum from concept to marketplace. Know your Customer – Motivations in context of Stakeholder Value Chain.

Technology Transfer Domain

Research leads to Development, which leads to Products – RDP Model Input -> Output -> Outcome -> Impact Research output becomes Development input; Development output becomes Production input; Product outcomes impact Target Populations.

RDP Model

What is Knowledge Translation? A method for moving academic knowledge into stakeholder action. Definition – Canadian Institutes for Health Research Origins – Evidence-based Medicine to justify Federal & Public investment. Current models focus on supply push.

KTA Model – CIHR

Analogies between KT and TT End of Grant KT = Supply Push TT – Applying discovery from basic inquiry (Mode 1 science). Integrated KT = Demand Pull TT – Creating discovery from validated need (Mode 2 science). Science has rigor = Industry has relevance. The RDP Model requires both rigor and relevance to optimize chance of success.

Process Stages and Gates Stage 1: Discovery Research GATE 1: Idea Screen Stage 2: Scoping GATE 2: Second Screen Stage 3: Conduct Research and Generate Idea Development GATE 3: Go to Build Business Case? Stage 4: Build Business Case and Development Planning GATE 4: Go to Development? Stage 5: Implement Development Plan GATE 5: Go to Testing? Stage 6: Testing and Validation Production GATE 6: Go to Production Planning? Stage 7: Production Planning and Preparation GATE 7: Go to Launch? Stage 8: Launch GATE 8: Post Production Assessment Stage 9: Post-Launch Review

Process Stages Steps Research Stage 1: Discovery Assess Users’ Needs / Identify Problem Propose Plausible Solutions GATE 1: Idea Screen Stage 2: Scoping Define Concept Perform Preliminary Assessments (Innovation Screen) GATE 2: Secondary Screen Stage 3: Conduct Research and Generate Idea Identify Specific Knowledge Gaps Conduct Appropriate Knowledge Inquiries Compile Findings Propose Components Conceptualize Model/Draft Solution Evaluate Research Findings

Process Stages Steps Development GATE 3: Go to Build Business Case? Stage 4: Build Business Case and Development Planning Build Business Case Implement IP Strategy Initiate Key Co-Development Practices Develop Implementation Plan Allocate Adequate Resources Gather, Analyze and Prioritize Customer Needs Identify Product Features and Specifications GATE 4: Go to Development? Stage 5: Implement Development Plan Build Alpha Prototype Models Test Alpha Prototype Models Refine Models GATE 5: Go to Testing? Stage 6: Testing and Validation Test Beta Prototype with Consumers In Lab Refine Beta Prototype Models Test Beta Prototype with Consumers In Field

Process Stages Steps Production GATE 6: Go to Production Planning? Stage 7: Production Planning and Preparation Refine Beta Prototype Models Further Draft Preliminary Bill of Materials Develop Materials Plan Develop Production and Capacity Plan Plan and Schedule Engineering Plan and Schedule Tool and Process Design Estimate Costs Using Preliminary Bill of Materials Review IP Protection Finalize Marketing and Sales Activities Finalize Distribution Logistics Initiate Trial or Limited Production Runs Test Market or Trial Sell GATE 7: Go to Launch? Stage 8: Launch Launch Product and Provide Product Support GATE 8: Post Production Assessment Stage 9: Post-Launch Review Monitor Fix Review Performance Against Expectations

KT for TT Implications of RDP Model Technology-oriented research projects must consider downstream development and production – the goal. The expected knowledge output must demonstrate validated innovativeness: Novelty in marketplace. Feasibility in design. Utility to function. Principal must define goals and roles.

Where to go from here What should government change? Model and Method for linking Research and Development to generate Product Outcomes. Why should it change? Evidence shows a different approach works better. Why is government following current approach? R&D implementation in 1940’s led by academics.

Where to go from here (cont.) KT is academia’s approach to applying good business marketing practices. Not sufficient – must go full measure of implementing RDP Model to achieve desired outcomes from R&D – to make R&D matter!

KT4TT Program Sponsored by NIDRR to increase application of technology-related grantee R&D outputs. Experiment in small field with large implications. Cross-walk TT to KT, and link KT to TT, demonstrate and test KT4TT model. Validate model in context of prior research as well as context of new grantee practices. Establish “best practices” for Steps & Tasks.

Role of KT4TT Program Apply what we know about TT and KT to create an operational model of KT4TT. Begin with end in mind – both models lead to application and use. Generate evidence from research to speak to academic values. Generate evidence from development to speak to industry values. Link both forms of evidence to change funding and evaluation of government grant programs.

TT and KT Resources Materials on the following slides are useful to all Stakeholders involved in the Research, Development, Production continuum. Project website under construction will contain all relevant resources: kt4tt.buffalo.edu

TT Resources “How to” guides T2RERC Training modules Supply push, demand pull, primary and secondary market research, intellectual property, commercialization, and evaluation Technology Transfer Tactics Best practices Free e-zine

TT Resources Associations and Organizations Association of University Technology Managers Intellectual Property Owners Association Advanced Medical Technology Association Licensing Executives Society

TT Resources Market Research Resources Competing Products General Disability Statistics Specific Disability Statistics Trends Competing Products Abledata Competing Technology USPTO Key resources for developing business plans, commercialization packages, and grant proposals

General Disability Statistics International Disability Statistics World Health Organization- Disability U.S. and Regional Disability Statistics Census Bureau – Disability Resources that offer information on a wide range of disabilities and chronic health conditions Note that these sources will also be very useful for determining market size and segments for both business plans as well as SBIR proposals. 29

Disability-Specific Resources National Institute of Health (NIH) T2RERC Publications Industry Profile on Vision Technologies Industry Profile on Educational Technologies Industry Profile on Wheeled Mobility Coming Soon! Advocacy Organizations American Foundation for the Blind National Federation of the Blind Administration on Aging There are 27 centers and institutes within the NIH

Understanding Trends and Market Growth Longitudinal National Surveys National Health Interview Survey (annual) Activity limitations, instrumental activities of daily living, work limitations; vision, hearing, and mobility limitations; learning disabilities in children; insurance coverage; standard demographics (age, income, race, etc.) Current Population Survey (monthly) Income, employment, occupation, industry; work disability; standard demographics American Community Survey (annual) Income, age, housing, journey to work; hearing, vision, and cognitive limitations; standard demographics Survey of Income and Program Participation (continuous) Labor force, program participation and eligibility; disability; standard demographics

KT Resources National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research Focus Technical Brief Webcasts KT Library Articles Guidelines Models Organizations Research Registries

KT Resources Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Innovations Exchange Canadian Institutes of Health Research Definitions; Strategies; News. Canadian Health Services Research Foundation Resources & Tools Acquisition, Assessment, Adaptation, and Application

Acknowledgement This is a presentation of the Center on Knowledge Translation for Technology Transfer, which is funded by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research of the U.S. Department of Education under grant number H133A080050. The opinions contained in this presentation are those of the grantee and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of Education.