1. Identifying the Impacts of research & related activities: A Case Study FPTT Annual meeting June 2008

2. Review - 2007 Bibliography: Identifying Benefits of Technology Transfer Beyond Commercialization (FPTT June 2007) Literature Review/Research Design: Developing a College-Based, Evidence Informed R&D Impact Assessment Framework (Niagara College/Centennial College December 2007)

3. Proof of Concept to test conclusions of literature review: Case Study Research Design Logic Model Evaluation Framework 11-dimension impact typology (Godin & Dore 2004) Qualitative, simple approach; minimum of assumptions R&D Impact Assessment Study: March 2008

4. Methodology – Case Study Case study research method (Yin 1994/2003) –Recognized social science research method –Design allows for valid generalizations based on a hypothesis/propositions Not business school or clinical case study Salter & Martin 2001

5. Methodology – Logic Model Organizing Framework Inputs Activities Outputs Impacts

6. Methodology – Impact Typology Science Technology Economy Culture Society Policy Organization Health Environment Symbolic Training Godin & Doré (2004) 11-dimension typology of impacts of research

7. Data Collection Telephone interviews – all stakeholders Review of internal/external documents Bibliometric analysis Unit of Analysis –A discrete research project over a 10- year period –Including research, development, knowledge/technology transfer activities: Research & Related Activities

8. Results - Case study method PhillipsKPA 2006 Effective approach Identified intended/unintended results Labour intensive ~ $40-$50k/200-250 hours Apply satisficing Limit interviews/use surveys Identify all stakeholders and activities to build case history

9. Results – Logic Model Useful for separating inputs, activities, outputs and impacts Nature of RRA (causality, attribution, interactions) All stakeholders influence impacts Strict logic model probably not suitable: too linear - serves as model for an organizing framework that better reflects complexity of interaction Separate performer from users (outcomes/impacts)

10. Results – Impact Typology Compelling matrix for standardizing impacts across all types of RRA Requires adaptation/refinement Confirmed presence/absence of impact dimension/sub dimensions; not significance, frequency, magnitude Impacts based on perceptions of stakeholders

11. Conclusions Simple method provides qualitative evaluation of impacts of RRA that reflect broader expectations Further refine approach with additional case studies Impacts not attributable to single stakeholder (e.g. performers) but to entire network Build a portfolio of case studies for conclusions about impacts Need to consider complete RRA (network): all stakeholders