apr. 18th - 20th, 2016 academic engagement

www.convetit.comPOWERED BY:

Academic Engagement & Research Methods

A P R . 1 8 T H - 2 0 T H , 2 0 1 6

2 6 1 P O S T S

2 2 P A R T I C I P A N T S

2

Background and Objectives

OBJECTIVES

While university research is a significant driver to forward-thinking discoveries and innovation, methods for identifying professors and engaging them in authentic dialogue on important topics are limited. Their domain expertise is frequently sought after by industry, though there remains a gap in collaborative research between the two. The participants in this engagement have been carefully selected, the discussion and its final output/deliverable will be published to the public and shared with Convetit’s members. We encourage you to share the content generated during this discussion, as well as its final deliverable once it’s completed.

1 2 3 4

Understand the research need for engaging academic peers on specific topics in group dialogue.

Identify specific challenges, and assess the landscape of existing methods and platforms.

Discuss and prioritize the unique benefits of a proposed method, and determine the value proposition required to capture this opportunity.

Solicit advice on what needs to be true for you and your peers to adopt this into a practice (e.g. for peer R&D, public thought-leadership content, paid industry / client-facing panels, etc.)

3

F A C I L I T A T O R C O - F A C I L I T A T O R

Participants

Participants included professors.

Shauna O’BrienDirector of Community Success at Convetit

Ciju NairPh.D., Marketing Science Ambassador at INFORMS

Foad IravaniAssistant Professor of Operations Management at University of Washington

Justin DrakePh.D., Assistant Professor at Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey

Roberto EvaristoPrincipal Consultant at Outthink LLC

Wanda SynstelienPhD, MS, MA, MBA, IT Strategist and College Faculty

Gretchen BaisaI create engaged and loyal communities with relationships and smart content

Daryl E. ChubinDigital Columnist/Interventions Analyst

John M. CastagnaAiding high-performance communications, teaching vision and strategic thinking

Kelleen FlahertyMedical Education, Assistant Professor at University of the Sciences in Philadelphia

Robin KaneHuman Resources Executive/Management Consultant

Alex TaserProject Manager at Convetit

Dave RudermanManagemenInstructor - University of Colorado Denver Business School / Myers Briggs Type Indicator Certified Practitioner

Joshua BrownPhD Candidate, University of VIrginia

Michael Ian RubensteinMediator, Trainer,Consultant. Law Instructor/Professor at Trios, Centennial Colleges

Scott PleasantsDirector of Engineering Technology /Disruptive Technology Entrepreneur

Andrew GilletteAssistant Professor at The University of Arizona

Don McCubbreyClinical Professor at University of Denver, Daniels College of Business

Justin D. CleggHead of Growth at Sonar (500 Startups)

Richard FordProfessor at Stanford Law School

Stephan SiegelAssociate Professor at University of Washington

4

Executive Summary

Vetting Proposed Solution

Today’s discussion brought feedback on a range of uses, potential roadblocks, and benefits of the Knowledge SyndicateTM platform. Participants indicated that there could be substantial difficulty implementing within the university system, but that there were multiple opportunities for benefit while using in tandem or as a follow-up to conferences and other in-person, professional development opportunities. The opportunity to easily generate and leverage content, as well as engage with a diverse group of industry experts was compelling.

Identifying Needs & Assessing Existing Methods

Day 1 conversations focused on the need for engaging academic peers, identifying specific challenges, and looking at the landscape of existing methods and platforms. Generally, the consensus seemed to coalesce around the benefit of collaboration within academia, especially in creating beneficial relationships, sparking innovation, and translating those wins into the classroom.

Value Proposition of Solution

Day three focused on how best to get academics interested in participating in Knowledge SyndicatesTM and what kinds of individual benefits would be proposed by such an engagement, especially in terms of revenue generated. Contributors voiced shared concerns regarding an expected minimum pay that would justify the time and energy spent contributing ideas, though the notion of interdisciplinary collaboration within a forum in order to advance their own research piqued interest.

6


There is a lack of available platforms or methods to encourage academic collaboration.

There is a consensus that the ideal platform will provide an effective and efficient way to discuss topics across a variety of disciplines.

“I think that one of the reasons academics do not collaborate more is that there is not a developed infrastructure to support doing so.”

“It would be useful if there were some platform where interests could be sorted by topic--not discipline but substantive topic: ‘gentrification in cities’ or ‘equal pay for women’ or ‘religious tolerance’ so that people from many different disciplines would have access.”




7


Beyond the lack of a platform, there are inherent built-in challenges with collaborative academic research:

“To compound the issue of visibility of capabilities and interests on the academic side, it is also difficult to identify organization needs – as well as separating those needs between consulting and researchable issues.”

“In addition to the issue of visibility of reliable and validated capabilities and interests, there are other cultural challenges and difficulties – perhaps too many to address in a brief statement... for instance, cross-field work is cognitively and labor intensive.”

“I’d prefer to have evidence-based discussions, especially with faculty from different disciplines. The problem, however, is that disciplines speak different languages, so assumed meanings can be misleading.”

“The ‘publish or perish’ pressure on faculty might, in fact, color their conception of or attempts to collaborate.”





8



Increased collaboration between academia of various disciplines and/or industry can be incredibly powerful.

“More generally, I believe that there is space and need for institutionalized enablers for cross-field and cross-organizational engagement. Such solution needs to carefully structure the types of engagement, concurrently addressing each party’s motivation to join.”

“These collaborative opportunities can increase your scientific brand, open your research to more projects outside your lab, and increase grant opportunities and hence papers.”

“I find that the only way to say something new in my field is to get at an old problem from the perspective of another discipline or mode of engagement. To do this, one needs help.”

“It would be great for intra-institutional collaboration, but probably even better for industry/government/non-profit/academic collaboration.”





10


Participants found multiple value propositions for the platform - particularly with the data out-put and reports.

“1. Collaborative opportunities with persons I respect that would generate additional knowledge through collective processes. 2. Consulting opportunities that would allow for compensation for individuals choosing to participate 3. The data - transcripts of a given Knowledge SyndicateTM, multiple, or cross-syndicate transcripts are of interest.”

“Yes, this seems like a viable alternative to conferences, as conferences often seem to be geared primarily to the research and publish audience (AKA ‘not me’). Teaching subjects that are more practical and hands on, this seems like a more viable route.”

“For some topics yes-- there are projects that involve drafting a report for a client-- governmental agency, non-profit or a paying commercial business in consulting work--where this would be a great boon.”

Joshua BrownPhD Candidate, University of VIrginia




11



Participants contributed thoughtful feedback on pain points of Knowledge SyndicatesTM.

“I would also want to know the associated ‘costs’ that accompany the proposed rewards. No offense to our facilitators, but having sat in on enough ‘expert panels’ and focus groups, they almost always conclude with trying to ‘close the sale’ and get the reviewers on board.”

“I’m less certain of its value for conventional academic research, where one typically works on a discrete question in an in depth way and individual authorship remains the convention.”

“And the issue of vetting (both participants as well as topics, especially if marketed to a similar or same audience) has its own challenges.”




12



Participants are interested in the idea of using Knowledge SyndicatesTM to benefit from a diverse panel.

“In radical innovation you may need a different type of expertise profile (and diversity) across each phase of the lifecycle which is different for associative types of innovation. The key is then (a) understanding the level of diversity of thought and expertise that you need for a given issue being discussed and (b) implementing it by selecting the portfolio of experience from the different alternatives (industry, academics, etc).”

“Yes, and this heterogeneity in discussion would yield very important emergent results that you just can’t get one-on-one or within a specific discipline. This is extremely important. In this Convetit exercise alone I have learned some extremely important out-of-the box, out-of-the-silo things that will influence my thinking about collaboration in the future.”



Value of Proposed Solution

14


There is intrinsic value in having a platform by which professors may communicate and share ideas with experts outside of their own institution.

Value is seen in having the ability to build one’s knowledge by interacting with peers.

Professors will enjoy the ability to investigate problems and arrive at conclusions for the future of their industry.

“Being exposed to other thoughts has helped me reexamine my own, and contributed to my own pool of knowledge. While this should be important to everyone, I think it’s particularly true for a college professor, since we in turn are educating others.”

“In general, I think that profs who will be attracted to the notion of Knowledge SyndicatesTM will be those who want to extend their personal knowledge of a problem domain, gain insights into opportunities for new research paths, and foster new collaborations with industry and within academe.”




15


As an academic leader in your field, what do you value most about the idea of Knowledge SyndicatesTM and engagements? Please choose a maximum of 3.

22.22% | 4 VOTESConnecting with equal

caliber peers

5.56% | 1 VOTEGaining recognition and accolades for advancing your research

22.22% | 4 VOTESReceiving payment for

facilitating/participating in client-facing

engagements

11.11% | 2 VOTESProducing premium content with peers / Syndicate members

22.22% | 4 VOTESLearning about the

new developments and trends in your area of

academic focus

16.67% | 3 VOTESBecoming a Knowledge SyndicatesM Leader

Academic leaders value connecting with equal caliber peers and learning about the new developments and trends their area of academic focus.


16


“What I find compelling is that new and potentially compelling research will be brought out into the marketplace faster and more efficiently than through the traditional academic journal ‘marketplace.’”“Perhaps offer it as a post

conference or post workshop tool that would streamline and improve the process of writing a report on the proceedings. If you did this, you might approach some of the big academic conferences and propose to provide the service for some of the panels or workshops-- this way people could see what the process and finished product is like.”

“Also, in a collaborative exercise such as this undertaking with Convetit, if you’re interacting with a bunch of experts (or ‘experts’) in your field, you’ll more than likely develop a relationship or two with another participant, from which subsequent discourse or even collaboration might occur.”

“There are immediate issues that arise in the course of conference sessions that are noted in a ‘parking lot’ for future discussion. The syndicate could offer a service to probe such leads.”


Robin KaneHuman Resources Executive/Management Consultant



Contributors see Knowledge SyndicateTM reports as a viable offering that could serve a similar function as an academic conference

summary, though in a more efficient manner.


17


“It is one thing to ask ‘experts’ to create content. It is another to task them with selling it as well. I personally don’t have enough time in my day to address all of the requisite responsibilities I have now, let alone seek out an audience for any work I might do above and beyond that.” “I don’t think anybody would do this with the ‘hope’ of generating any

revenue based on sales. Most hourly rates for consultants in research range from $150-$250/hour and on up for more coveted professors so $500 of revenue/person results in about 2-3 hours of work.”

“Working for free until the money shows is not going to work. Having an understanding of minimum pay to expect would be key if you want the kind of experts I think you are asking for.”



Wanda SynstelienPhD, MS, MA, MBA, IT Strategist and College Faculty

Academics find it very important to identify a minimum revenue stream that is viewed as valid compensation for their time,

energy, and expertise.


www.convetit.comPOWERED BY:

“This genre of scholarly work should be impervious to season. Faculty are always looking for opportunities to create. Convince them that this is a useful forum for them occasionally, not in lieu of their mainstream scholarly work or professional service to membership organizations.”

“So, bottom line, for me, this can work if the syndicate is relatively small, comprised of truly top experts from anywhere in the world, focused on a very specific issue (which, of course, can be a moving target which makes it even more compelling), and is supported by Convetit’s method of engagement and periodic dissemination of results.”



ConclusionsParting words of advice from select participants...

apr. 18th - 20th, 2016 academic engagement

Documents