growingthescholarly&( researchenterprisethrough ......• mingling – an opportunity to...
TRANSCRIPT
Growing the Scholarly & Research Enterprise through
Speed Networking
2014 NORDP Conference
May 20, 2014
Erica Gambrell, Coordinator of Research Services Angie Sho:s, Coordinator of Research Support
Brief Overview of who we are: • RD is a component of the Office for Sponsored Programs • Previously worked in either pre or post award • Provide services (networking, workshops, etc.) for all UA faculty • Both have a variety of assignments in conjuncOon with RD acOviOes
The first networking session – geEng approval: • “Speed Networking” was originally presented at a VPR’s monthly ADR
meeOng • Received both posiOve and negaOve feedback • The negaOve comments halted the discussion • It appeared the possibility of providing something in this format ended
• Serendipity unexpectedly intervened during a meeOng in my office • Hey Joe . . . .
• By partnering with an Associate Dean for Research who made the informal request to the VPR, we received approval to coordinate a session on “Health Related Research” and the OVPR would provide lunch for the faculty
OrganizaGon of the first session: • Campus wide invitaOon to all faculty (list serve and weekly email to ADRs
for distribuOon) • November 30, 2012 – unsure if the demands of the end of the
semester would be a hindrance
• Scheduled on a Friday from 11:30-‐2:30 • Pre-‐registraOon and the compleOon of a Profile Sheet was required • ParOcipants were divided into 4 groups, with one half “networking” during
the Ome alloaed for lunch. (34 registered, 23 aaended) • Speed Networking sessions (5 minute pairings) were for 1.5 hours
• 30 minute follow-‐up Ome with coffee and cookies
Outcome of the first session: • Received immediate posiOve feedback
• Email sent to the VPR at 5:15 pm on the date of the session: “ . . . the speed networking session was the most valuable faculty development exercise that I have seen from OSP in 22 years . . . I came up with 5-‐6 contacts that I will definitely follow up with . . . if we did something like this monthly . . .”
• Faculty who aaended event shared with their colleagues and ADRs how the session was
producOve and worthwhile
• A post session survey was sent to the parOcipants and had a very high response rate • We iniOated the VPR sending an email to all parOcipants thanking them for parOcipaOng
and encouraging conOnued collaboraOve efforts
• The overall percepOon of RD acOviOes had a dramaOc change on campus • Sessions scheduled for the following semester included highly respected Senior faculty
who enjoyed the somewhat chaoOc structure and “different” experience
Lessons learned from the first session: • Providing lunch was a disincenOve – it made the session longer and faculty wanted
individual pairings with all aaendees • Sessions on Fridays that start at 2:00 p.m. are well aaended
• Fewer faculty are late because a student stopped by unexpectedly • No one has contacted us staOng they had class and would be late • Even on football home game weekends the aaendance has been high
• Faculty would like to receive the profile sheets prior to the session • Allowing faculty who have a conflict complete a Profile Sheet is an opportunity to build
rapport with faculty and reinforce that RD is service oriented • For future sessions, we increased the number of reminder emails encouraging faculty to
let us know if they have a last minute conflict so we may adjust the pairings
Speed Networking Event Structure: • Profile sheets completed beforehand including headshot, main areas of
interest, desired collaboraOon experOse and long-‐term goals for research • Networking Packets are given including profile sheets and a contact list for all
parOcipants • Grouping Researchers from different disciplines together for 5-‐7 minutes in
order to discuss research interests • Depending on number of parOcipants, there can be as many as 3 rotaOon
rounds
• Allow Ome at the end of the session for conOnued discussions • CollaboraOon cards used to follow-‐up with Researchers ager event
Agenda 2:00 – 2:15 Welcome and Introductions 2:15 – 3:00 Round 1 Speed Networking in pairs. Each pair will have 5 minutes to discuss possible collaboration or recommendations of other UA faculty to contact. The Blue group (both 1 & 2) will sit on the outside and remain seated; the Red group (both 1 & 2) will sit on the inside and rotate to the next table. 3:00 – 3:10 Break and change of seating by group. Red group and Blue group will now move to the same line of tables, with similar numbers on the same side. Those with a “2” on their name tag will sit on the inside and those with a “1” will sit on the outside. 3:10 – 3:30 Round 2 Speed Networking in pairs. Those with a “2” on their name tag will move to the right at the end of 5 minute pairings. 3:30 - 3:45 Round 3 Change of seating by group. Pairings/grouping will continue. The four groups are determined by the same color and number on the name tag. For example, all Red 1 will sit together. 3:45 – 4:00 Round 4 Small groups or “catch-up” of pairings who did meet in Rounds 1-3 (i.e. someone was late or had a phone call, etc.) 4:00 - 4:30 Wrap up and final comments Coffee and free time for those who would like to stay and continue discussions.
Recent VariaGons to Speed Networking: • Interprofessional Research Socials
– Ager hours “mixer” with a job fair atmosphere – A select group of Researchers prepare PowerPoint presentaOons
highlighOng their research focus – Discussions can be in job fair or round-‐robin format – Researchers have the opportunity to brainstorm new projects outside of
teaching hours
• Networking concept has branched out to other areas on campus: – Research Partners lunch – CAPS – Interprofessional Breakfasts
Growing the Scholarly and Research Enterprise
through Speed-Networking
2014 NORDP Conference
Gretchen Kiser, PhD Director, Research Development Office for Gail Fisher, JD, MSS Manager, Research Development Office
May 20, 2014
Who Are We and What Do We Do?
• We are the Research Development Office (RDO) at the University of California, San Francisco
– Sit within the Office of Research
• UCSF only offers graduate degrees in medicine and biomedical sciences
– School of Dentistry – School of Medicine – School of Nursing – School of Pharmacy
2
Who Are We and What Do We Do?
• The RDO contains five programs: – Building Teams for Innovative
Research (BTIR) – Large Grant Development Program
(LGDP) – Limited Submission Program (LSP) – Resource Allocation Program (RAP) – Special Strategic Projects (SSP)
3
Components of Speed-Networking
• Setting the ‘theme’ • Determining correct combination of
investigators in order to maximize potential for partnerships
• Appropriate venue • Properly configured event • Incentive for investigators to
participate
4
Our Audience (and what we know going into it)
• Scientists (sometimes socially awkward!)
• Timing matters – Actual time of day – Length of event – NIH deadlines, clinic schedules, etc.
• Incentive matters, too
5
6
What Are the Implications of What We Know?
• Has to be highly structured – Mingling has to be orchestrated, but
look effortless
• Has to be easy for them to fit it into their schedules – End of day, near end of the week
• Needs to be effectively incentivized
7
Who Did/Do We Want to Attract?
• Cross-section: – Disciplines/approaches – Schools/ORUs/div’s/depts – Faculty levels – ‘Under-represented’ faculty groups
• Senior faculty: – Lend gravitas – Mentoring – modeling good leadership
8
How Did We Get Them There? • Listservs • Department Chairs • Research networking tool (UCSF
Profiles) - areas of expertise • Other considerations
– With whom do we have good relationships?
– Who has been supportive of the RDO?
– Who “gets it”?
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
Podium
Mingle Area
Physical Set-Up
Collaborator Cards
Collaborator Cards
And the Star of the Show…
Actual Event (2 hours) • Pre-Mingle (20 minutes) • Introduction (10 minutes)
– Director, RDO • Rationale for the grouping • “Charge” to the group
– Explanation of Process (by facilitator) • Rotations • Potential for seed-funding
• Rotations (1 hour) – 4 minutes per dyad
• Mingling / Follow-Up (30 minutes)
15
So They’ve Met Everyone, Now What?
• Mingling – An opportunity to follow-up with those
found interesting – An opportunity to meet others from
the same “team” – Email introduction sent for matches
and set of short bios sent to all
• Seed-funding Proposal – Submission – Proposal Review and NOGA
16
Challenges
• Choosing a theme • Deciding what combination of
investigators to invite in order to maximize potential partnerships
• Time (to send invitations, of event and timeline)
• Can expect one third of invitees to attend
• How do you handle late arrivals?
17
What to Anticipate
• People will be late • People will cancel at the last minute • People will not show up, even
though they rsvp’d and didn’t cancel
18
Strategies to Manage Surprises
• Anticipate there will be bumps • Make sure know how you might re-
distribute people to keep numbers equal on “both sides”, on the fly
• Director of RDO can participate • One person may just have a four-
minute period of relaxing, if not partnered
19
Remember..!
• The hiccups are felt more deeply by us than by the participants, so don’t worry!
20
Metrics: what do we want to capture?
• Short-term: – How many first-time introductions
were there? – How many potential collaborations? – How many proposals received? – How many proposals funded? – Through survey, faculty satisfaction
with event
21
Metrics: what do we want to capture?
• Longer-term, through survey at 6mo, 1yr, 2yr: – Has communication persisted? – Have matches or awardees leveraged
the event and/or seed-funding to pursue outside funding?
– If so, were funds awarded? – If so, how much?
22
Special Thanks to…
• Gail Fisher, JD, MSS, Manager Research Development Office • RDO colleagues
– Erin Bank, PhD – Emy Volpe, JD
23
24
Gretchen Kiser, PhD Director, Research Development Office
[email protected] 415. 502.1665
Gail Fisher, JD, MSS Manager, Research Development Office
[email protected] 415. 502.1807
