|
Networking for Results: Assessing Collaborative Projects on Science and Technology
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Ruslan Rakhmatullin, TCD, School of Business Studies, rakmator@gmail.com
|
| Louis Brennan, Trinity College, brennaml@tcd.ie
|
| Abstract:
This paper will attempt to provide insights into advantages and possible consequences of the pre-competitive scientific networking. Although there is some general consensus that increasing levels of collaboration amongst academics produce 'better' results, and which generally mean higher quality, the issue of collaboration and its impact on research outcomes remain an uncertain area with a wide variety of views of what roles such collaboration plays and its general implications for scientific performance . The research paper seeks to address this gap in existing literature by answering the following research question:
Can some of the research outputs and outcomes be attributed to researcher's participation in scientific network activities? , or is it just a bureaucratic novelty?
This study brings together the fields of evaluation theory and performance management by investigating creation of added value through pre-competitive scientific networking. As such formal scientific networking is touted and perceived as an added value activity, this research attempts to search for evidence that will either support or reject this perception. This research paper consults relevant literature to build a theoretical framework to reflect the objectives of the proposed research, which are to understand whether some of the scientific outputs and outcomes can be attributed to researchers' participation in formal networking projects and whether such participation is reflected in improved performance.
|
|
Review of Research Teams in Chinese Academy of Sciences: Identify the Effective and Efficient Team Building
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Jiaofeng Pan, Chinese Academy of Sciences, pjf@hq.cas.ac.cn
|
| Qiang Li, Chinese Academy of Sciences, lq@casipm.ac.cn
|
| Bing Shi, Chinese Academy of Sciences, bshi@cashq.ac.cn
|
| Abstract:
Based on self-evaluation worksheets of research institutes in CAS, this study analyzed the personnel structure of PI teams and their disciplinary layout or research activities and identified four possible types of research teams. This study also reviewed typical possible teams in typical institutes by quantitative assessment, interview with researchers and managerial staff, expert workshop as well as self-cognition of institutes, and achieved rational understanding of team building status in institutes. This study also investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of team building and put forward suggestions on classified administration of different teams.
|
|
Applying Network Analysis to Science and Technology Development: Examples From the European Commission (EC Evaluation Part 2)
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Francis Cunningham, European Commission, frank.cunningham@ec.europa.eu
|
| Franco Malerba, University of Bocconi, franco.malerba@unibocconi.it
|
| Caroline Wagner, SRI International, caroline.wagner@sri.com
|
| Marko Grobelnik, Josef Stefan Institute, marko.grobelnik@ijs.si
|
| Nicholas Vonortas, George Washington University, vonortas@gwu.edu
|
| Abstract:
Traditional approaches to evaluating research and deployment programs have focused on inputs, outputs and outcomes and have left untouched the dynamics within the interactions. The European Commission's DG Information Society and Media has been at the forefront in developing methodologies and tools to assess the 'behaviour additionality' of the EU RTD intervention in terms of linkages and networks. Collaborative programs such as the EU's 7th Framework Program ICT research and the ICT Policy Support Program of Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Program aim to strengthen the knowledge bases of research and innovation actors and enhance the prospects for subsequent exploitation and innovation. New methods are needed to represent the impact of these programs: network analysis offers a great deal of promise towards this goal. This panel presents evaluation based on network analysis (2004-2008) sponsored by the EC. It explains how the work is contributing to policy and planning.
|
| | |