Feb. 5, 1997
The Inside Story by Sig Hecker
UC's relationship with industry
Our Laboratory's relationship with industry continues to evolve as the world moves to a global marketplace and as our missions change. Universities are also reexamining their relationship with industry. I want to share some things I learned last week at the University of California, Los Angeles, at the UC President's Retreat on "The University of California's Relationships with Industry."
The University of California's traditional mission has been knowledge, education and public service. It has recognized there is an important opportunity for stronger ties with industry because industry brings new challenging problems needing solutions. Further more, after graduation more students are prone to be associated with industry than with academia. With expanded industrial relationships, UC can expose students to the industrial world as part of their education. And in parallel, I firmly believe if Los Alamos is to be strong in basic research, it has to have strong ties to the academic community -- whereas if we are to be strong in technology, we have to have strong ties to industry.
Universities face a challenge and an opportunity from communities to help grow the economies in their regions. Concurrently industry faces dramatically different priorities in R&D as it adjusts to the unrelenting competition of the global marketplace. The University of California brought together representatives of its nine campuses, its three Department of Energy laboratories, the President's Office and selected members of industry to think strategically about the role of the university.
I joined Charryl Berger from our Industrial Partnership (IP) Office and Rulon Linford from our Science and Technology Base (STB) Office at the retreat to help factor in the laboratories' points of view and to contribute to the university discussions. Many of the same challenges and opportunities facing universities today are relevant to us as we forge a new relationship with industry. Let me share some of the observations relevant to universities and relate them to the Laboratory's relationship with industry:
Call it industrial partnerships.
The overused term "tech transfer" does not do justice to the breadth and depth of the university or laboratory relationship with industry. A sustainable, productive relationship cannot be one-sided or have the flavor of throwing something (in this case, technology) over the fence for industry to pick up. The exchange must be beneficial in both directions, and there must be body contact for the relationship to thrive. This has certainly been our experience at Los Alamos.
If you try to interact with industry just for the money, you fall into the job shop mode. Neither universities nor the laboratories can justify this type of relationship when our efforts are supported for the most part by federal or state governments. The relationship must be designed to yield intellectual return as well as resources. It should help to contribute to the regeneration of intellectual capital at the institution, rather than just use it up.
Design it for synergy with your mission.
At universities, a new industry partnership should reflect the greater responsibility of the modern university in a knowledge-based society. The university should contribute to the creation, dissemination and application of knowledge. The relationship should be designed to enhance the traditional teaching and research missions of the university. Some say that the modern university is to the information age what the factory was to the industrial revolution.
Our Laboratory has a compelling national mission -- to reduce the global nuclear danger. As long as that mission remains strong and continues to require a vigorous science and technology base, the Laboratory must also participate as one of the key players in the modern R&D community, along with universities and industry. At the Laboratory, industrial partnerships should provide synergy with our missions. They can contribute to mission-oriented programs (such as in the Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative or enhanced weapons surveillance and remanufacturing) or strengthen the core competencies of the institution. Our core competencies such as modeling, simulation and high-performance computing are becoming increasingly valuable to industry. And examples of some of our other work such as clean manufacturing plus biotechnology and biomedicine are very important to industry and to the public.
Remember the public good.
The University of California is a public institution. It must build the new interface with industry to balance the public good with benefit to the individual or corporation. The university must be able to demonstrate that overall its partnerships with industry provide for significant horizontal diffusion and application of knowledge. The public good is just as important to our Laboratory because most of our funding comes from the federal government.
Be prepared for greater risk taking.
New partnerships, especially during this formative stage, will entail greater risks. There will be potential for conflict of interest between individual researcher (whether university faculty or laboratory staff) goals and those of the institution. These partnerships cannot be designed to completely avoid risk and the potential for public embarrassment. Instead, one should learn to manage these conflicts to keep the risks acceptable.
Communities want research universities to enhance regional economic development.
The examples of high-tech business developments around Stanford, MIT, University of Texas/Austin, University of North Carolina/North Carolina State University/Duke University, UC San Diego, etc. are widely known. There are also good examples (such as at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and at Huntsville, Alabama) where federally-funded labs have fostered growth in their regions. The bottom line is job creation; preferably well-paying jobs in clean industries. As knowledge increasingly becomes the competitive advantage of businesses, people will expect universities to play an even larger role in helping to promote economic development. Similarly, local communities in northern New Mexico are expecting the Laboratory to promote regional economic development. In our current contract negotiations, the DOE is supportive of the UC and the Laboratory's interest in playing a much stronger role in promoting economic development in Northern New Mexico.
Economic development must be tailored to the region.
There is no universal solution. Universities and other institutions must work with local communities and businesses to develop a solution appropriate for the region. What worked in Silicon Valley didn't work in San Diego and certainly won't work for us. Goals must be set jointly. State and local governments must help provide support and leadership for such initiatives. This is especially important in Northern New Mexico where relatively little business infrastructure or venture capital exists today. This provides us an important opportunity to work with the communities and the State.
Use metrics to gauge progress for both parties.
The partners must create a profile of what a good collaboration should look like. Metrics for success must be developed jointly. They must reflect the goals of communities (such as job creation) as well as those of the university or the Laboratory (such as synergy with our missions and strengthening our core competencies). Without metrics, these efforts tend to degenerate into feel-good exercises.
It's crucial to communicate with the research staff.
Significant relationships with industry must be built upon the interests and talents of the researchers. It's crucial to have the research staff on board; to get them to use their ingenuity and creativity in building new and beneficial relationships. Likewise, these relationships should involve students and postdocs at every turn in order to integrate these new partnerships with the traditional teaching and research missions of the university. Concurrently, new partnerships with industry will also require creativity from the administration of the university, especially in dealing with complex intellectual property and contracting issues. At the laboratories, it is crucial to keep our research staff informed and engaged. The lack of consensus within the federal government on industrial policy and the consequent reality of budget fluctuations over the past few years have created much skepticism among our staff.
These are my impressions and observations. The President's Office will issue a report and overall recommendations for the University of California. I believe that the report will call for the university to take a strong and aggressive role in forging a new relationship with industry that not only enhances regional economic development but also enhances the teaching and research missions of the University.
Likewise, we continue to evolve our industrial interface. We have established partnerships with industry as a key element of our strategy. We expect to create a mutually beneficial arrangement between our government missions and our industrial relationships. However, we are planning to support more of these partnerships without federal support, by working directly with industry. Furthermore, we are working with the state and the local communities to see how we could enhance regional economic development. Many of the challenges and opportunities we'll face will be similar to what universities are currently facing. The President's Retreat was an excellent opportunity to learn and share our experiences. We are currently reexamining the Laboratory's interface with industry and our role in the general area of civilian R&D; I will return to this subject when our reexamination is more complete.
