1 / 15

TTN – WP3 report

TTN – WP3 report. TTN meeting, June 24, 2009. Agenda. WP3 story: members, goals, work already done, questionnaire origin Questionnaire and accompanying documents Preliminary analysis of the questionnaire Work plan for the next 6 months Questions. WP3 members (final list). Objectives.

ratana
Télécharger la présentation

TTN – WP3 report

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. TTN – WP3 report TTN meeting, June 24, 2009

  2. Agenda • WP3 story: members, goals, work already done, questionnaire origin • Questionnaire and accompanying documents • Preliminary analysis of the questionnaire • Work plan for the next 6 months • Questions

  3. WP3 members (final list)

  4. Objectives • To investigate, define and classify a set of criteria for TT activities measurement in PP • How? To build a set of indicators and metrics • overview of the situation in our institutions • elements of comparison between us, and us vs overseas • guidance for newcomers • performance improvement measurement  How to select those indicators? • bibliography • adjustment to our research profile • testing using a questionnaire • define the final ones

  5. Work done • Bibliography: • a lot of literature on patents, but not focused on results from academic research and RIs • interesting questionnaires and surveys: APRU (Association of Pacific Rim Universities), ASTP/MERIT (EU), AURIL (UK), AUTP (US), CREST Report (EU), PROTON (EU), SWITT (Swiss)… • Preparation of a first questionnaire sent to a subset of MS CERN institutions, and to overseas HEP PROs • Result analysis (in progress) from 12 MS CERN and 5 overseas PROs

  6. CERN MS PRO (Public Research Organism) Institute 1 Institute 2 Institute 3 Part devoted mainly to PP, NP or AP Questionnaire scope: selecting domain & PROs 1 HEP sub-domains: PP, NP, AP for the core, but also transversal applications originated from our TT 2 Which PROs or subsets are in the scope? Up to each to define its own scope, to be able to give most relevant figures on HEP activity

  7. Questionnaire: how to adjust to the right level? • if too low: non relevant information, inadequate coverage • if too complex: no answer from a large part of institutions  a lot of discussions, and a selection of questions with • a glossary • a letter to explain our objectives, the process, and that a blank answer is also significant

  8. Questionnaire building: headings

  9. Questionnaire first analysis • Today status on the analysis made by Massimo Caccia from completed questionnaires: 12 from CERN MS, but only 1 from overseas rather complete feedback (BNL) • For the moment, only: • Invention disclosures • Patent applications • Patent grants • License agreements • Research agreements • Assuming as basic figures the Executive Summary indicators of the 2006 ASTP survey for fiscal year 2006 • Normalized to 1 year and per 1000 FTE’s

  10. Questionnaire first analysis: summary table

  11. Questionnaire first analysis: • The spread among the different institutions is terrifying : there’s a solid rock motivation for the TTN • Patent number is not the most significant indicator • Licensed patents are more interesting • But too few patents in HEP vs other scientific domains • KE towards other disciplines and Research agreements with other scientific community has definitely to be pursued

  12. Questionnaire analysis continuation • Our PROs are too different and the sample too small to get general statistics • However, we will continue this analysis on the other questions to define our future indicators • Objectives are also to provide : • a multidimensional diagram for a global view • a tool for each PRO to help in improving by using PDCA process (Plan Do Check Act)

  13. Some comments & suggestions (June, 23) • Check WP1 impact • Learning process on good and bad indicators • Work again to have a comparison with non European institutions • Some members wanted answers to some questions will remain confidential • Incredibility useful for us, but we have to think on how to communicate on these results! • how to go further in measuring all impacts on enterprises, on the society? • …

  14. Work plan for the next 6 months • New completed questionnaires are expected • Questionnaires analysis continuation and exploitation • Communication of results in September • Booklet of results • Resulting indicators and target values, including WP1 impact • Adding an indicator about TTN helping in TT • Defining processes for indicators and metrics implementation • Report on this work next TTN board (December) • After: a long way…

  15. Questions?

More Related