Written evidence submitted by HDR Architecture
(TIC 41)
1.0 DECLARATION
OF INTERESTS
1.1 HDR Architecture is a US owned architecture,
engineering and planning practice. It is the world's largest practice
dedicated to science, technology and healthcare facilities and
has a number of international offices, including London.
1.2 The Company has master planned many science
park campuses across the globe and completed the design of related
science park facilities, including research laboratories, business
incubation units and training support facilities in support of
the creation of dynamic environments for knowledge transfer and
technology commercialisation.
1.3 We are active members of - and contributors
to - such organisations as the UK Science Park Association (UKSPA),
the International Association of Science Parks (IASP) and the
Association of University Research Parks (AURP) in the US. We
were the principal sponsor of UKSPA over 2006-09.
1.4 This depth of experience has given us, we
believe, a sound understanding of the challenges for a successful
"Technology Innovation Centre", such as the Fraunhofer
Institutes model, and how such designs - physical, structural
and virtual - can be developed to the benefit of the UK research
economy.
1.5 HDR would be pleased to offer its expert
personnel to support future discussions on this matter.
2.0 OUR SUBMISSION
2.1 Technology innovation can drive economic
recovery and strengthen competitiveness. Consequently, such innovation
has become a national imperative in many nations around the world.
Three key aspects to be considered in relation to applied research
and technology transfer for successful "innovation to commercialisation"
models include:
- Virtual and Networks (global).
- Knowledge Transfer Conferences (regional but
can also be global).
- Physical (the campus).
2.2 The approach set out by the Research Councils
UK (RCUK) in its Large Facilities Roadmap 2010 and Delivery Plan
2008/09 to 2010/11, in relation to research and the benefits of
collaboration, is impressive and undoubtedly demonstrates the
UK's leading research capabilities. Arguably, the complementary
structures (political/organisational/physical) are not ideal to
maximise the great efforts of the RCUK and enhance commercialisation
opportunities. In such circumstances, the Inquiry into Technology
Innovation Centres, such as the Fraunhofer Institutes, has great
merit.
2.3 Whilst acknowledging the current, challenging
(public) financial environment, it should be recognised that the
UK's % of GDP invested in science and technology is low compared
to other nations. In addition, it has been demonstrated (in Silicon
Valley and elsewhere) that tough economic times do not halt the
evolution of technologies and their applications. In consideration
of potential, increased investment in the UK, it would be important
to look at improvement of the "return"; this can be
enhanced with appropriate exploitation of:
- more global networking for technology transfer,
e.g. satellite locations around the world;
- more global corporate R&D (private) JV's
for development;
- focus on applied research (e.g. the Fraunhofer
Institute model in Germany); and
- a portion of funding should go to commercialisation.
2.4 The demonstrable improvement of technology
transfer demands an appropriate measure. Whilst a number of measures
of success are currently employed, this is a new field and success
indicators are not yet uniformly established. Various measures
include: the number of inventions disclosed; the number of patent
applications filed, patents issued and licenses consummated; the
amount of licensing income; and the number of commercial products
produced and sold. Some institutions track the number of industrial
interactions and research projects funded as a direct result of
marketing initiatives. In the US, others point to spin-off industries
and related incubation facilities, which tend to grow next to
highly innovative universities: Silicon Valley, Research Triangle
Park and Route 128 are well known examples.
2.5 In terms of helping to secure public support
to such future investment, it is interesting to note that marketplace
products in the US are recognised by the public as a tangible
outgrowth of its support of basic research. An example of the
impact of university technology transfer on the marketplace is
found in the biotechnology industry. This entire industry - and
ten thousands of new jobs it created - is based upon university
research. The Cohen-Boyer patent, licensed by Stanford University,
is used by all biotechnology companies. In addition, many of these
companies were founded to develop university inventions, whether
related to specific genes, monoclonal antibodies or potential
drugs.
2.6 A recommended and proven environment for
enhanced commercialisation combines the best of the physical and
virtual worlds. Organisational aspects (satellite locations, communication
infrastructures, etc.) should be complemented with a focal location
and physical building (knowledge base, central data repository,
information "node", etc.). This is often accommodated
with urban links to University and Corporate R&D (as seen
in Cambridge, MA; Cambridge, UK; Silicon Valley; and Route 128,
Boston). Arguably, most of the UK's science parks are too remote/disparate
other than those (clusters) in such locations as Manchester and
Cambridge. The (academic) research undertaken in, for example,
Oxford and London could, potentially, be better exploited with
appropriate and local Technology Innovation Centres or such equivalents.
2.7 As reported in a recent IASP conference,
regional technology centres, from Brazil to Bangalore, are finding
that technology development thrives in an environment of creative
intellectual energy that offers a networked economy, proximity
to research institutions and universities, unique intellectual
property development, a diverse base of high-tech talent, access
to investment capital and complementary infrastructure. Innovative
businesses and regions are appearing and flourishing by making
global connections, tapping into virtual opportunities and building
regional innovation engines - what IASP keynoters termed "future
knowledge ecosystems."
2.8 But as technology development centres in
places like China, the Gulf states, India, Israel, Korea, Russia,
South America, Southeast Asia and Taiwan become stronger links
in the new, complex technology innovation chain, there is increasing
concern in the US that foreign students graduating in science
and engineering from US universities are leaving to pursue job
opportunities in their home countries. This has prompted a Duke
University report, entitled "Losing the World's Best and
Brightest", which highlights the likely negative impact on
the US economy. The concern that UK graduates and researchers
could follow this trend should be considered.
2.9 The internal and external environment
of the Technology Innovation Centre will be an important consideration.
A study of biology technology companies in the Boston Cambridge
area was undertaken by the MIT Sloan School of Management to test
whether the geographic clustering of start-up, high technology
companies had any benefits. The study found that communication
and knowledge transfer was very effective in close proximity and
fell away rapidly with distance, showing that broadband communication
is still not a substitute for frequent face-to-face interaction.
Similarly, a physical, central space - recreational square, restaurants,
common car parking, transit station, etc. - provides an environment
for serendipitous contact where "a lot of knowledge was transferred"
and, more importantly, future collaborations were set in motion.
2.10 In addition to the benefits of knowledge
transfer, the social interaction of researchers in a campus or
cluster setting has been demonstrated to assist individuals' transition
from rivalry to collaboration. Social places can help with getting
scientists to see each other less as competitors and more as partners,
to the potential benefit of their respective organisations.
2.11 The Boston Cambridge study data also supported
the importance of major pharmaceutical companies (industrial/commercial
partners?) being within the cluster. Whilst the cluster was built
around a major university, the large companies, both biotechnology
and traditional pharmaceutical companies, appeared to play a significant
role. In particular, they had central positions in the network
that were also critical to developing not only the network but
also the communication, helping to make the cluster effective.
Thus, the role of potential industrial/commercial "partners"
within a cluster or Technology Innovation area should not be under-estimated.
2.12 An adjacent "research hotel" may
offer an economic development tool for commercialisation whist
also acting as a physical attraction to the Technology Innovation
Centre for both academic/research and corporate organisations.
A research hotel may be modelled on traditional hotels to encourage
the development of science partnerships. National or local economic
development would benefit by branding these research hotels as
innovation focal points and encourage local participants "to
make reservations" as a means to supplement their existing
science agendas. The research hotel would offer research and development
spaces with a flexible and transformable "kit of parts"
in addition to amenities to rival a hotel's offering, such as
conferencing facilities.
2.13 With reference to the internal environment
of a Technology Innovation Centre, many past research facilities
have a hierarchy of private offices, few places for casual, impromptu
meetings and obsolete video conferencing facilities. Today, this
should be considered an outdated type of work environment, previously
based on a cellular business model with a stratified business
culture, which does not foster inter-office connectivity. It is
important - and challenging - to develop a workplace design strategy
that aligns with the organisation's business goals and its research
effort. In particular, it has to be designed for the "next
generation" of researchers - a generation that is comfortable
with all forms of technology, can handle multi-tasking, is multi-cultural
and is less hierarchical.
2.14 It must be remembered that balancing fiscal
responsibility with the need to attract the best talent of the
next generation requires an understanding of potential employees'
diverse life styles, familiarity with and reliance on new technology
and their global perspective.
2.15 Even with the Fraunhofer Institute model,
it must be noted that commercialisation can be slow and other
complementary mechanisms (eg technology exchange and legal agreements)
have to be pre-empted and put in place to ensure speed and efficiency
in the "bench to market" life cycle. One of the most
recent, well-known successes of Fraunhofer Institutes is the MP3
digital audio encoding format but this success did not happen
overnight. It started in the 1970's through the research of Dieter
Seitzer, a professor at the University of Erlangen and culminated
with the development of MP3 technology by Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft
in 1996. While Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft now licenses the patent
rights to the audio compression technology, it was a 20+ year
process which got them there. In summary, the "macro environment"
of applied research has to be acknowledged and addressed, wherever
possible.
HDR Architecture
1 December 2010
|
