collaborative research 18.7.11

Professor Andrew CampbellResearch Institute for the Environment & Livelihoods18 July 2011

Governing and Managing Collaborative Applied R&D

LESSONS FROM THE FRONT LINE

2

Outline

1. Applied R&D

2. Collaborative Applied R&D

3. Governing and Managing Collaborative Applied R&D

This presentation owes a

great deal to many

insights, tips and advice

offered sagely, cheerfully

and sometimes

provocatively over many

years by Peter Cullen

— a champion in

maximising the influence

of research and telling

truth to power.

RIEL Research Themes

• Natural Resources-based Livelihoods

• Coastal and marine ecology and management

• Freshwater ecology and management

• Savanna management and wildlife conservation

• Tropical Resource Futures

Collaborative Applied R&D

5

• Efficiency in investment—Best use of limited resources—Builds critical mass—Reduces duplication—Sharing risk

• Be very clear why you are collaborating

• Invest in relationships—“fund the arrows”—explicit accountability—watching transaction costs

• Attribution can be hard—Loss of brand identity

Collaboration• 3 levels – communication, coordination, co-investment• A sensible approach for common & cross-cutting issues

Governance of Collaborative R&D

• The focus here is not on how to do R&D, but on how to govern applied, collaborative R&D

• Draws mainly on LWA & consultancy experience over 20 years across a wide range of collaborative R&D programs– learning from failures as much as successes

– E.g. TRaCK, SEACI, Grain & Graze, Managing Climate Variability, National Program for Sustainable Irrigation, National Dryland Salinity Program, South-east Australia Program (fisheries) and several CRCs

• There is a rich menu of possible approaches to the business of organising collaborative R&D

Governance of Collaborative R&D (2)

• Need to clarify expectations of all parties• Articulate the value proposition (why

collaborate?)• Set out how decisions will be made

– and conflicts resolved

• Three key instruments:1. Program Management Agreement/MOU (between co-

investors)• Including R&D Plan and obligations of Managing Agent

2. Program Management Committee – comprising reps of funders and/or end-users and/or technical

expertise

– can be complemented by stakeholder and/or technical advisory panel(s)

3. Project-level research contract• Contracts for clarity and shared understanding, not litigation

• A key instrument for managing knowledge outputs (assuming smart design)

Governance Options

3 levels of collaboration:

Co-investment; Coordination; Communication

1. Co-investment

– Pooled resources, one bucket, integrated management

2. Coordination— Some tied resources and separate management,

but ability to influence partner actions and priorities

3. Communication— Agreement to share information, but each makes

own decisions and manages own resources

Governance Option 1

1. Full Co-investment model– Pooled resources, one bucket, integrated management

• Advantages

— Simplicity of management

— Possibility for genuine integration of effort, shares risk

— Most efficient use of limited resources, maximises critical mass, minimises risk of duplication and confusion

— Outputs more likely to be influential (shared ownership)

• Disadvantages

— Views of smaller partners can become submerged

— Risk of lowest common denominator approaches

— Takes time to build the social capital needed to fully exploit this model

Governance Option 2

2. Coordination (partial co-investment) model– Some pooled resources, some tied resources, one bucket,

coordinated management

• Advantages— Non-cash partners can still play and contribute

— Retains capacity to coordinate effort across multiple partners

— Efficient use of limited resources, manages risk of duplication and confusion

• Disadvantages— Higher transaction costs

— Increased risk of duplication

— Tied resources limit scope to get best overall bang for bucks

Governance Option 3

3. Communication model– No pooled resources, many buckets, separate

management

• Advantages— Simplicity — low transaction costs, quick & easy to get

going

— Partners retain autonomy and brand identity (and risk)

— Left hand still knows what the right hand is doing

• Disadvantages— Lack of critical mass

— Higher risk of duplication and inefficient use of resources

— “railway gauge issues” across jurisdictions

Managing collaborative applied R&D

13

14

Strategy – program and project level

• Scoping research questions is critical• $$ invested at this end have a short payback

period• Be very clear (SMART) about program objectives • Understand the adoption context of the intended

end-users before considering research methodology

• Understand the nature of the knowledge need• Understand the type of knowledge required• Understand where knowledge sits c.f. other

factors– market or policy failure, values, institutions etc– knowledge may not be the key limiting factor…

www.triplehelix.com.auwww.cdu.edu.au/riel

For more info