Archived File The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated. See the OER Public Archive Home Page for more details about archived files.archivedOER Public Archive Home Page

OSTP Regional Forum: Research Business Models Mary Ellen Sheridan Associate Vice President – Research University of Chicago Chair, Board of Directors, Council on Governmental Relations

Overview University Research Model Measuring Success Value in Adjusting the Government Funding Model Tweaking “management” in the Research Business Model

Academe’s Business Model: A Marketplace of Ideas Value of Ideas: difficult to quantify Lies in their Intellectual Merit Peer Review – “Value” Estimator Can’t Forecast the Economic Payoff of Research Not a Dictated Research Agenda

Faculty Business Model: Research Success Value Risk Taking Push Science Ahead Productivity – students, publications, promotion & tenure, peer recognition

University Research Business Model: Research Success Cautious Risk-taker Finance and Manage Research & Education Enterprise Concern with Compliance Deliberate Checks & Balances

Government Research Business Model Government/Private Sector Should Have Different R&D Expectations/Goals Fund Universities for Big Issues of National Importance Invest public funds in knowledge creation Attract Best Business Partners

Making the Marketplace more efficient Concentrate on Value Strengthen Collaboration in Research Encourage Collective Problem Formulation and Solutions Create Incentives that consider all stakeholders: faculty, institutions, public and sponsors

Big Science – National Priorities Grand Challenges – Human Genome, Space Multitude of Funding Mechanisms in Hand Regional Initiatives – NIAID RCEs Sustaining Investigator-Initiated Programs

Facilitating Future Collaborations Assure Balance within the Portfolio Discourage Rigidity, Reward Flexibility Access world class,large-scale research facilities

Perceived Government Barriers/Inconsistencies Break down Agency Silos - Incentivize Agency Cooperation Different Agencies Have Different Cultures, Business Practices Press for Consistency in core administrative Requirements (Common Rule for A-110) Ignoring Major Equipment/Facility Needs

Institutional Barriers Recognize contributions to interdisciplinary research Compliance Nesting Syndrome Budget Models That Discourage Cross- campus Collaborations Pursue More Aggressive Inter- institutional research initiatives

IT –the Good Imperative for Research Leadership Take advantage of high speed data transfer Facilitate Remote Research Collaborations Facilitate Submission, Review and Award of Research Funds

IT – the Bad Proliferation of Agency Proposal & Award Management Procedures Lack of Understanding or Willingness to Develop Systems That Will Work in University Environment Government Expects Institutions to Modify Their Systems, Practice

National Labs: Promise of Collaborative Facilities & Scientists Outstanding National Facilities (e.g. APS) National Security Partnerships very attractive “Mission” Focus misses Opportunities Procurement Attitude:W Collaborations sees as “Work for Others” Lab Contracts Place Burdensome Expectations on University

Financing the Research Business Model Goals of a Business Model– aligning roles and responsibilities of all parties Fair and Reasonable Accounting Rules Cost shifting Unfunded Regulatory Mandates F&A Negotiations based on Cost Principles not “Budget Neutrality”

Streamlining Administration in Research Business Model A-110 not uniformly implemented – applaud codifying “research core” Growing Mulitplicity of Agency “Guidance” Costs of Inconsistencies Hurt All Stakeholders

Institutional Management Challenges Management across campus, systems, institutions More cumbersome and intrusive regulatory environment, less research productivity Compliance Concerns Overwhelming

Organizational Changes are Taking Place Complexity of Science is driving change in how researchers work Collaborative Teams crossing disciplines, campuses, regions, addressing global questions Training of students and postdoctorals is changing

Evolving Funding Mechanisms Some Agencies Responsive –portfolio management, array of funding options NIAID’s RCE, RBL – reaction to national need, flawed business model Important to Preserve Investigator-initiated, “curiosity-driven” research Value ”risk-taking” in Research Business Model Development Recognize the costs of infrastructure

Some Questions for Consideration: Is Government Dooming the Fundamental Research Model through Micromanagement? Is the Current Model a Fair and Reasonable Business Relationship?