1. February 8, 2007 Research at the University of Michigan Business & Finance Forum Stephen R. Forrest Vice President for Research

2. 2 Topics Introduction to Research and OVPR Research numbers Initiatives Tech transfer and industry research

3. 3 Rankings School/CollegeRank (yr. publ.) Architecture & Urban Planning11 (1997) Art & Design34 (2003) Business11 (2006) Dentistry3 (1993) Education9 (2006) Engineering6 (2006) Information5 (2006) Law8 (2006) Medicine11 (2006) Music4 (1997) Nursing3 (2003) Public Health5 (2003) Source: U.S. News School/CollegeRank (yr. publ.) Public Policy8 (2005) Social Work1 (2004) LSA Programs Biology12 (2006) Chemistry17 (2006) Economics11 (2005) English12 (2005) Geology5 (2006) History7 (2005) Math7 (2006) Physics13 (2006) Political Science3 (2005) Psychology2 (2005) Sociology3 (2005)

4. 4 Highest Impact Universities RankUniversityTop Ten Appearances 1Harvard University15 2Stanford University11 3MIT9 4UC-San Diego9 5Yale University8 6UC-Berkeley8 7Columbia University8 8University of Michigan 7 9Caltech 7 10Duke University6 Source: ScienceWatch, Inst for Scientific Information, Vol. 13, No. 5-6, 2002 (Ranked by frequency of Top Ten appearances in academic journals covering 21 fields, 1997-2001)

5. 5 Research Excellence: Succeeding on the International Scale

6. 6 $778M $592M $441M $797M +2.4% Funding visibility into future unclear Expenditure outlook in FY 07 “guardedly optimistic” UM Total Research Expenditures UM Total Research Expenditures (FY 1996-2006)

7. 7 Total R&D Expenditures Total R&D Expenditures Rank of Top 10 Universities and Colleges Michigan$769M$809M Wisconsin$764M$798M UCLA$773M$786M Johns Hopkins 1 $705M$766M UC-San Francisco$728M$754M UC-San Diego$709M$721M Stanford $671M$715M Washington$714M$708M Pennsylvania$597M$655M Duke$521M$631M Source: National Science Foundation 1) Total excludes $670M (2004) and $678M (2005) in R&D expenditures for the federal Applied Physics Laboratory on the JHU campus. Institution FY 2004FY 2005

8. 8 Foundations 2.3% $18,124,274 State/Local Governments 1.2% $9,790,688 Other Funding Sources 3.7% $29,300,832 UM Funds 15.2% $120,932,949 Federal 73.4% $585,231,455 Industry 4.2% $33,585,188 UM Research Expenditures, by Sponsor UM Research Expenditures, by Sponsor FY2006: $796,965,386

9. 9 UM Research Expenditures, by Unit UM Research Expenditures, by Unit FY2006: $796,965,386

10. 10 Office of the Vice President for Research Mission To anticipate new research trends and support interdisciplinary opportunities.To anticipate new research trends and support interdisciplinary opportunities. To engage the disparate communities in the university research enterprise.To engage the disparate communities in the university research enterprise. To expedite the diffusion of new knowledge into the classroom and the community.To expedite the diffusion of new knowledge into the classroom and the community. To promote integrity in research and ensure compliance with government regulationsTo promote integrity in research and ensure compliance with government regulations

11. 11 Snapshot of OVPR Accomplishments in 2006 Launch of Search & Discovery Distinguished Innovator Award New policies for OTT approved New AVP for Social Sciences & Humanities Arts & Humanities Funding Group Established Instituted effort to manage HPC resources & growth Improved IRB Processes in Health & Behav. Sci. eResearch & grants.gov Transition

12. 12 Nanotechnology & Nanoscience Anticipating Opportunities The best research ideas come from the “ground up”The best research ideas come from the “ground up” OVPR can catalyze ideas: making the whole greater than the sum of its partsOVPR can catalyze ideas: making the whole greater than the sum of its parts OVPR can supply necessary “connective tissue” between disparate effortsOVPR can supply necessary “connective tissue” between disparate efforts

13. 13 MaterialsPolicy Alt. Energy Energy Storage GenerationFuels Business & Economics TBD Michigan Memorial Phoenix Energy Institute Supporting and Growing Research & Education for a Clean, Affordable Energy Future A New Initiative: Michigan Memorial Phoenix Energy Institute

14. 14 Established strengths are the core of the Institute –Automotive Engineering –Nuclear Engineering –Solar –Low power/solid state electronics –Hydrogen Priority areas for growth and coordination – Policy, economics and societal impact of the energy challenge – Carbon-free energy sources – Transportation systems and fuels – Energy storage – Energy utilization Defining Energy Research at UM

15. 15 Phoenix Memorial Lab Renovation –$11M from State and UM for facilities upgrade and partial renovation –3rd floor for Hydrogen Energy Technology Lab (~$2M) Schools and Colleges –Commitment for over 4 chaired positions from LSA & CoE –4+ graduate fellowships from/to Rackham Operating budget Resources

16. 16 –Academic Mission Dissemination of knowledge to the public Test concepts and face challenges in the “real world” Encourage partnerships that promote student learning & employment opportunities –Resources Create new jobs in a changing economy Supplement and enable federal research support Generate licensing income for research and education Industry Partnerships: Why Universities Do It

17. 17 Industry Partnerships: Why Companies Do It Gain Access Students Technology (e.g. licensing) Consultants Advanced resources (e.g. eMALL, MNF, libraries, etc.) Research Collaboration Attract government support through academic teaming Reduce research costs through outsourcing Enrich talent base Negotiated rights to IP

18. 18 The Key to University Success Established centers and initiatives that are compatible with regional industrial infrastructure and needs Highly engaged faculty and students with a range of experience: an outward-looking culture Integration of classroom learning with a practical, laboratory perspective A broad institutional concept of the benefits of working with industry

19. 19 Challenges Exist to Improving Our Engagement with Industry –Culture - No deep tradition of industrial research & tech transfer at UM –Location - Lack of high population density, robust technical & funding infrastructure –Knowledge – Limited understanding of how to engage with industry –Reputation – Some view UM as unsupportive of engagement

20. 20 We are doing well, but… Licensing income is not a clear indicator of success with industry partnershipsLicensing income is not a clear indicator of success with industry partnerships To the extent that partnerships contribute, it is far-trailing indicatorTo the extent that partnerships contribute, it is far-trailing indicator Agreements=PartnershipsAgreements=Partnerships 12 U-M Tech Transfer Performance

21. 21 Recent BIG Events Google - selects Ann Arbor for new business center NanoBio - UM faculty spin-off receives $30M investment, one of largest biotech investments ever in Michigan OncoMed - company based on UM technology raises $33M in new investment Pfizer closing

22. 22 UM Research Sponsored by Industry (FY1995-2006)

23. 23 Faculty Advisory Committee Professional & Administrative Staff Group –Charged to formulate objectives,specific plans, metrics, and a path forward Consultation with committed external partners UM Industrial Relations, Research, and Technology Transfer A Plan for Progress Advancing Innovation

24. 24 Change the culture Make long term strategic investments Experiment with solutions: be entrepreneurial Measure success Manage resources Critical Elements of OVPR Proposal

25. 25 Change the Culture Recognize innovators/entrepreneurs commensurate with other academic pursuits Create policies & procedures to promote entrepreneurism –Expedite implementation of eResearch –Provide a user-friendly web portal Move OTT to Central Campus –Create a deeper business/academic connection –Provide “match-making” services for faculty & industry Engage Business School, Med. School and CoE to teach entrepreneurism to practitioners Alter organizational structure and staffing to promote interactions Simplify and expedite COI process

26. 26 Add faculty incentives – examples: – GSRA funding/tuition relief on large grants – Equipment –“Engagement” seed funds –Equalize overhead costs and cost sharing for industry & government Partner to make Ann Arbor the hub for regional development –Ann Arbor SPARK, MEDC, other educational institutions Establish gap fund to move innovations from lab to commercialization –Licensing income –Angel investors –Foundations –Michigan investors –State Establish mechanisms to promote & accelerate commercialization Make Strategic Investments

27. 27 Measuring Success Number of new partnerships Effective placement of students in key roles in emerging industries Michigan gains reputation as: –“Partner of choice” –Center for innovation Adequate resources to sustain activities

28. 28 Managing Resources New pilots and program enhancements will require long term investments Income from technology transfer activities can be used to seed new activity Long-term objective: Create self-sustaining programs & activities

29. 29 Bottom Lines BIGWe have to think BIG and clearly define the “Michigan Difference” We have to invest NOW! We must experiment: not all efforts will lead to success We must be in it for the long term

30. 30 Things that keep me up at night Becoming & remaining the best Streamlining research administration Streamlining tech transfer and development of robust industry research relationships Responding to the unexpected (e.g. Pfizer) Maintaining research integrity while also streamlining IRB and COI procedures Regulations that restrict academic freedom Understanding and support future university computing needs Tightening federal budget and impact on research funding

31. 31 Thank You!