1 / 13

Incentive Prizes: Designing and Measuring for Impact

Incentive Prizes: Designing and Measuring for Impact. Cristin Dorgelo Assistant Director for Grand Challenges Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Office of the President. 2013 Priorities for Public Sector Prizes. Designing for higher impact, broader scope

erelah
Télécharger la présentation

Incentive Prizes: Designing and Measuring for Impact

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Incentive Prizes:Designing and Measuring for Impact Cristin Dorgelo Assistant Director for Grand Challenges Office of Science and Technology Policy Executive Office of the President

  2. 2013 Priorities for Public Sector Prizes • Designing for higher impact, broader scope • Portfolio/laddering approach • Similar mechanisms • Legacy planning • Solution sharing • Resources • Assets • Partners • Vendors • Communications • Capturing impact (focus of today!) • Community stewardship

  3. Prize Types from the McKinsey Report • Exemplar (recognition) • Point-solution • Exposition • Participation • Network • Market stimulation

  4. Evolving Understanding of Prize Types • Exemplar (recognition) • Point-solution • Apps challenges, often built on “open data” • Algorithm and coding challenges • Design/plan/proposal competitions (intersecting with Exposition & Participation) • Exposition • Ideation challenges • “Plan + implementation” challenges (intersecting with Participation) • Participation • Identifying and developing promising talent/workforce • Community-focused/behavior change (intersecting with Exposition & Network) • Network • Market stimulation • Complex technology demonstrations (intersecting with Point-solution) • New markets/industries vs. existing markets (intersecting with Network)

  5. Intersection with Other Trends • Ideation (internal/external; online/offline) • Collaborative innovation (without competition) • Hackathons/Codeathons • Idea “Boot Camps” • Crowd-sourcing platforms • Crowd-funding • Open data • Grand Challenges

  6. Planning Prizes Along the Innovation Chain • Ideation • Exposition • Participation • Market Stimulation (new markets) • Market Stimulation(existing markets) • Point Solution • Apps, Algorithm, & Coding Challenges • Design/Plan/Policy Challenges • Participation • Exposition • Network

  7. Wide Variety of Possible Success Criteria • Return on investment (ROI) • Cost-effectiveness of competition • Financial leverage during competition • Follow-on investment post-competition • Quantity/quality/viability/diversity of submissions • Quantity/diversity of participants • Performance improvement compared to current solutions • Public awareness • Community engagement beyond “solvers” • Media impressions (traditional/earned media; social media) • Survey results • Sponsor/donor/partner satisfaction/engagement • Behavior change, adoption, and decay rate

  8. Wendy Schmidt Oil Cleanup X Challenge • Target: 2500 gpm at 70% efficiency, 2x today’s standard oil recovery rate • 350+ narrowed down to 10 finalist teams • $1,000,000 First Place Winner Elastec(Illinois) • Achieved 4x today’s standard oil recovery rate in <6 months product development • 4670 gallons per minute at 89.5% efficiency

  9. Impact of the Oil Cleanup Challenge (1 of 2) • Return on investment (ROI) • Cost-effectiveness of competition • What did teams spend to compete? • Tracking industry investments in winning/qualified technology • Tracking job creation and mergers & acquisitions • Quantity/quality/viability/diversity of submissions • 10 finalist teams had widely diverse approaches • 7 met 1 of the 2 minimum performance thresholds (rate or efficiency) • 2 of 3 prize purses awarded for meeting thresholds for both recovery rate and efficiency • Quantity/diversity of participants • 300+ initial teams>10 finalists>2 winners • 5 domestic finalists; 5 international • 5 known industry players; 5 new to industry

  10. Impact of the Oil Cleanup Challenge (2 of 2) • Performance improvement compared to current solutions • 4x improvement over existing solutions • Multiple options optimized for diverse environments • Public awareness • Significant media impressions tracked through PR firm • Key stakeholder awareness • Sponsor/donor/partner satisfaction/engagement • Donor agreed to support follow-on prize • Sponsor participated in post-prize briefings to Federal agencies

  11. Impact on Prize Design • Submission templates • Judging protocol • Tracking public relations/social media data • Post-competition surveys, interviews, and anecdotes • Participants • Followers • Stakeholders • Research partners • Required reporting from solvers/winners • Legacy plan for post-competition tracking

  12. Annual Report to OSTP/Congress • Due 12/31 (LAST MONTH!) • Need an extension? • Reporting on impact…consider all of the above • Dealing with and reporting failures & lessons learned

  13. Thank Youcdorgelo@ostp.eop.gov

More Related