Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
ATB
Advanced Technology Board Study on Globaliza/on
Observa/ons, Findings and
Recommenda/ons
January 3, 2013
1
ATB Outline
Ø Background Informa0on
– Charter, Membership, & Process
Ø Observa0ons and Findings
Ø Recommenda0ons
Ø Addi0onal Informa0on
2
ATB
Background Informa/on
3
ATB Board Charter
Ø Board established by ADNI/AT&F.
Ø Objec0ve is to provide an external perspec0ve on policy, industry best prac0ces, technology breakthroughs and best in class solu0ons.
Ø Board will meet no less than quarterly.
Ø Membership limited to 12 ci0zens from the private sector and academia.
Ø Ini0al term of Board is 2 years.
4
ATB Par/cipa/ng Members
Ø Vicki L. Colvin, Rice University Ø Robert A. Fein, consultant Ø Theodore M. Hardebeck, consultant Ø Daniel E. Has0ngs (co-‐chair), MIT Ø William A. Jeffrey, HRL Ø Alexander H. Levis, George Mason University Ø Richard T. Roca (co-‐chair), JHU/APL
Ø Patrick Cook (staff), MITRE Ø John Prevar (staff), DNI
5
ATB Assignment & Process
Ø CIA Ø Na0onal Research Council Ø Na0onal Security Agency Ø ODNI Ø US Navy Ø USSTRATCOM
Ø Ball Aerospace Ø BAE Systems Ø IBM Ø Lockheed-‐Mar0n Ø QUALCOMM Ø Orbital
6
The ATB was asked to provide advice to the ADNI as to how the IC might better address the challenges of globalization.
It heard briefings from US Government agencies with relevant S&T responsibilities and from various companies in the private sector, both companies focused at supporting DoD and/or the IC and companies who focus at the commercial marketplace.
Using information from these discussions along with the experience base of ATB members, Observations and Findings were created along with several Recommendations for ADNI consideration.
ATB
Observa/ons and Findings
7
ATB Underlying Givens
Ø Science is created throughout the world, not just in a few highly developed countries, and this globaliza0on trend is increasing.
Ø Scien0fic results are being shared globally. But, as the volume has increased and the channels for dissemina0on have mul0plied, the signal to noise ra0o has dropped and greater discernment is required to separate valuable results from those of licle use.
Ø The private sector is driving most areas of technology -‐ par0cularly in data management/movement/processing.
Ø S&T monopolies (whether by country or by ins0tu0on) will last for rela0vely short periods of 0me in highly compe00ve domains.
Ø “U.S. Industry” will maintain technology leadership in some areas but not in all. But, these areas may or may not be of interest to the IC.
Ø Many successful na0onal firms will likely evolve to be mul0-‐na0onal ones.
Ø The U.S. has been the best to date in crea0ng new industries where none existed before.
8
ATB Observa/ons and Findings – 1
Ø Physical engagement in S&T is irreplaceable (in addi0on to literature surveys and scientometrics).
Ø Organiza0ons use fast feedback to guide investments – For profit firms: through product/service marketplace success – Academia: formerly through journals; currently through web based
interest groups. Ø To make money,
– Companies follow markets, talent and IP globally; – Companies are borderless; – Companies have reacted to the changing S&T landscape.
Ø Mul0-‐Na0onal Corpora0ons (MNCs) have geographically distributed networks of labs where R&D is performed.
Ø No widely accepted model for global S&T planning has emerged (other than the above: physical engagement, fast feedback, …)
Ø Industry has created rela0onships with foreign universi0es. 9
ATB Observa/ons and Findings – 2
Ø Companies engage other companies to: – get technology, – influence design, and – influence standards.
Ø Companies use suppliers to get – specialized and/or focused skills, and – exposure to a broader environment.
Ø Companies engage academia worldwide to – get fast follower advantage, – have an opportunity to transfer technology back to the corpora0on
through their employees who collaborate, and – influence academics’ research agendas to be relevant to their
corporate challenges.
10
ATB Observa/ons and Findings – 3
Ø The IC has two principal interests in technology. – It is an observer of the technologies of others and uses this knowledge to
understand the capabili0es of others (Indica0ons & Warnings). – It uses technology to create capabili0es for itself
Ø The development of technology within the IC has certain characteris0cs that influence the IC’s ability to deploy technology. – There is minimal science performed – the focus is on applica0on. – There exist special and innova0ve (but small) ini0a0ves such as IARPA &
In-‐Q-‐Tel that are used to address technological challenges. – Realiza0on processes are Agency specific rather than IC wide. – There is a significant use of secrecy throughout these realiza0on processes. – There is significant use of contractors within these realiza0on processes. – There is uneven engagement by Agencies outside of the IC ecosystem.
11
ATB Key Ques/ons
Several key ques0ons presented themselves as a result of the ATB’s engagement with technology planners and leaders both within the government and outside of it.
1. How should the IC learn about the global use of technology?
2. How should the IC engage with mul0-‐na0onal corpora0ons?
3. What roles should academia (domes0c and foreign) play?
4. How should the IC plan for technology obsolescence?
5. How should secrecy and classifica0on (as barriers to obtaining technology) be addressed?
6. How should all the above be incorporated into IC S&T processes and culture?
12
ATB
Recommenda/ons
13
ATB Overall Recommenda/ons
The Advanced Technology Board recommends the following:
A. Becer leverage the global S&T community.
B. Increase awareness of the IC’s rela0ve S&T global compe00ve posi0on.
C. Apply “first principles” methods to understand capability vulnerabili0es.
D. Exploit leading edge IT technologies such as social networking.
E. Conduct case studies addressing key issues.
14
ATB A. BePer Leverage the Global S&T Community.
Ø Create global academic “centers of excellence” (e.g., Intel model) at which IC staff, academic staff (including non-‐US ci0zens) and MNC staff (including non-‐US ci0zens) join together in open collabora0on (within a research agenda of interest to the IC) that is published. – Consider only those academic ins0tu0ons that are leading edge in their respec0ve fields (even if they are foreign?).
– The first choice of science topics to pursue are those that the IC has iden0fied as areas in which it wishes to be a thought leader.
Ø Encourage temporary rota0ons of IC S&T staff outside of the IC ecosystem in other parts of the government (e.g., NIH, NSF, NIST, NASA) and in the private sector (MNCs, na0onal labs, etc.)
15
ATB B. Increase Awareness of the IC’s Rela/ve S&T Global Compe//ve Posi/on.
Ø Encourage persistent use of the knowledge of S&T global compe00veness within the IC’s S&T management processes. – For example, where appropriate require an analysis of the state of S&T global compe00veness as part of funding requests for investments in technology.
– For example, where appropriate require speaking to the state of S&T global compe00veness during all pormolio reviews.
Ø As an experiment, pick one technology area of interest to mul0ple agencies within the IC and conduct a mul0-‐day colloquium focused solely at global technology ini0a0ves using presenters from throughout the world.
16
ATB C. Apply “First Principles” Methods to Understand Capability Vulnerabili/es.
Ø Apply the first principles based “Submarine Security Program” methodology to key IC capability areas where such analysis can support insighmul capability vs. counter-‐capability planning
Ø Include lessons learned within the Submarine Security Program such as the importance of technical thought leaders, dedicated teams, persistent inves0ga0ons and focused government leadership.
17
ATB D. Exploit Leading Edge IT Technologies Such as Social Networking.
Ø Social Networking has had a profound effect in various segments of society and of the economy.
Ø The Intelligence Community has had internal social networking capabili0es for some 0me. Examples of use by IC include: – Internal to IC S&T Communi0es of Interest
– External to IC S&T Communi0es of Interest
– Crowd sourcing to an0cipate technology trends
Ø Examine current trends in social networking and determine the best strategy for the Intelligence Community going forward in how to exploit these capabili0es for addressing science and technology needs.
18
ATB E. Conduct Case Studies Addressing Key Issues.
Ø Study how one private firm has been affected as it evolved from a US Company into an MNC and has had components of its firm evolve into overseas instan0a0ons.
Ø Study how the IC of one other country has (successfully) addressed the issue of globaliza0on of technology.
Ø Study how one MNC has changed its own realiza0on processes to take into account the globaliza0on of technology. – How is intellectual property protected?
– How are language barriers overcome?
– How are differences in na0onal laws and customs overcome?
19
ATB
Addi/onal Informa/on
20
ATB Industry – Academia Collabora/on Example – Intel Labs Berkeley
The Intel Lab at Berkeley was in downtown Berkeley, a 10 minute walk from campus. It had 2 co-‐directors, one from Intel and one from Berkeley. The Berkeley posi0on was a 2-‐year rota0on (faculty would go on leave). The first one was David Culler (2001-‐03), then Joe Hellerstein (2203-‐05), then Eric Brewer (2005-‐08), and Anthony Joseph (2008-‐11). It had 15 or so full-‐0me Intel researchers [1], several visi0ng faculty researchers, and many Berkeley students who had desks in the lab to collaborate with the Intel researchers. There was a large internship program: each researcher would have at least one, some0mes two interns. Not all of these interns were from Berkeley, although about half were. The focus of the lab would shis with directors; under Culler it focused on sensor networks; under Hellerstein it looked more into databases; under Brewer its big projects were technology for developing regions. Generally speaking, for a research lab of its size, it had a very impressive publica0on record: several of its researchers went on to top faculty posi0ons. The lab shut down in early 2011 as part of Intel's reorganizing its research arm, moving to centers (see part b). Reference hcp://berkeley.intel-‐research.net/people/
21
ATB Industry – Academia Collabora/on Example – Intel S&T Center
SCRUB – Secure Compu0ng Research for Users’ Benefit The Intel Science and Technology Center (ISTC) for Secure Compu0ng The mission of the ISTCs is to build global collabora0ons with academic pioneers who will discover and drive the ways in which compu0ng will enrich the human experience for genera0ons to come, and to be leaders, leveraging the resul0ng insights to influence Intel. Each research community is Intel-‐funded, jointly-‐led, and focused on a specific technology area or discipline, bringing together top researchers from across academia working with Intel to explore and uncover not only new answers, but new ques0ons. SCRUB [2] is one of seven ISTCs set up by Intel. It involves five universi0es (UC-‐Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, Drexel, Duke, and Univ. of Illinois). The Management Team consist of two Principal Inves0gators: David Wagner, Professor at UC-‐Berkeley and John Manferdelli, Senior Principal Engineer at Intel Corpora0on. The Program Director is Rajiv Mathur from the University Collabora0on Office of Intel Labs, Reference: hcp://scrub.cs.berkeley.edu/
22
ATB Industry – Academia Collabora/on Example – Hyundai Center of Excellence
Hyundai Signs R&D Deal with UC Berkeley, UC Davis Posted: September 4, 2012 at 12:39 am
Hyundai Motor Group is kicking off a new long-‐ range R&D program by partnering on automo0ve technology development with the University of California, Berkeley and University of California, Davis. The three organiza0ons have signed a memorandum of understanding to create a Hyundai Center of Excellent at each university. The facili0es will bring together Hyundai engineers and university researchers to work on advanced vehicle dynamics and safety technologies. Hyundai did not disclose the investment involved or indicate when the centers would begin work. The company says business partners in the two centers include Spain’s Applus IDIADA, Austria’s AVL and England’s Ricardo. The ini0a0ve is the first under Hyundai’s new R&D Global Fron0er Program, which aims to bolster the company’s technological prowess through coopera0ve research projects in such areas as ride and handling, NVH, crashworthiness, safety and materials.
23
ATB Case Study -‐ Globaliza/on of Academia “Global Research Universi/es” by D. Normile – Science Magazine ; September 7, 2012 HONG KONG AND SINGAPORE—Ambi0ous academics have always been a mobile lot. But Stephanie Wehner has taken mobility to a new level. And her career choices reflect a fundamental shis in where some of the best science is being done around the world. The 35-‐year-‐old quantum informa0on scien0st completed her undergraduate degree in her na0ve Germany, earned a master's degree from the University of Amsterdam and a Ph.D. from the Centrum Wiskunde & Informa0ca in Amsterdam, and did a postdoc at the California Ins0tute of Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena. Then she asked herself: “Where would it be scien0fically interes0ng for me to go?” The answer took her further west, across the interna0onal dateline, in fact, to the Centre for Quantum Technologies at the Na0onal University of Singapore (NUS). The center, established in December 2007, is already recognized as one of the world's top ins0tutes for quantum studies. “It is unique” in combining computer science and physics, theory, and experiments, says Wehner, who joined its ranks in July 2010. The ins0tute's generous funding from the government—$126 million over 10 years—means there is money for postdocs and state-‐of-‐the-‐art equipment for experimentalists. It also allows Wehner to concentrate on her research without having to apply for grants. A reduced teaching load of only one course a semester is another bonus. With those advantages, it's no accident that the center's 150 researchers hail from 33 countries. Such diversity has long been the norm at the top U.S. research universi0es. For several decades aser World War II, top academic talent gravitated to the United States. Researchers were acracted by generous and rising funding and a con0nually improving infrastructure, the result of broad societal support for higher educa0on and a poli0cal consensus that investment in research reaped economic and social dividends. Foreign-‐born scien0sts s0ll come to the United States, but that faith in the benefits of vibrant universi0es is arguably stronger now in Asia. “Many Asian governments see educa0on as a very cri0cal way of societal and economic advancement, so they are inves0ng very heavily in their universi0es,” says NUS President Tan Chorh Chuan. To achieve academic excellence, “acrac0ng, nurturing, and retaining top talent is the most vital strategy,” he adds. With the region's rising investment in educa0on, he says, “condi0ons are right for Asian universi0es to acract top faculty from the rest of the world.” GLOBAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES It's not a fluke that the United States is home to most of the leading research universi0es in the world. But it's also not a given. Many countries have paid close acen0on to what it took for the United States to climb to the top of the global academic research ladder in the past half-‐century. Some have now translated those lessons into na0onal strategies that they hope will lis them up the ladder. What will it take for them to reach the top rungs? Over the next several months, Science will examine the key ingredients needed to create and maintain what we have labeled global research universi0es. Indeed, ranking these universi0es has become a cocage industry. Although there is licle consensus on what metrics to use, most scien0sts carry around in their heads their own list of top schools, compiled on the basis of anecdotal evidence, reputa0on, and personal preferences. The first story in the series explores the role of mobility by focusing on the increasing flow of talent into East Asia, in par0cular Hong Kong and Singapore. Subsequent stories will look at other important factors that shape an ins0tu0on's ability to become a global research powerhouse. More than bragging rights are at stake in this race to the top. A world-‐class university system is a powerful engine for economic development, and research is the fuel powering that engine. Although its impact on academic mobility is hard to quan0fy, the great recession that has staggered Western economies appears to have given Asia an edge. “People on my science advisory board say this is a good 0me to hire Americans because there are no jobs and funding is looking dreadful,” says geologist Kerry Sieh. In 2009, the former tenured professor at Caltech became founding director of the Earth Observatory of Singapore, another one of the city's five centers of excellence, based at Nanyang Technological University. Most of the center's 54 researchers were lured from posi0ons overseas. The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST) has made worldwide recrui0ng a firm policy. “We are filling all posi0ons—faculty, deans, vice-‐presidents, and presidents—through open interna0onal searches,” says Khaled Ben Letaief, the school's dean of engineering. Hong Kong and Singapore schools aren't alone in recrui0ng globally. The Na0onal Research Founda0on of Korea has commiced $728 million for a 5-‐year World Class University Project that has acracted 321 foreign academics, most on full-‐0me appointments. Three years ago, Japan's Ministry of Educa0on began a program to interna0onalize both the faculty and the students at its universi0es, although budget constraints have crimped the effort. And Taiwan's Ministry of Educa0on has an Aim for the Top University Project that supports overseas recruitment. China has employed a variety of schemes in the past decade to lure back scien0sts who went overseas for advanced degrees or jobs. These include the Ministry of Educa0on's Changjiang Scholars Program and the Chinese Academy of Sciences' 100 Talents Program. Last fall, it broadened that search by launching a program aimed at hiring 1000 nonethnic Chinese scien0sts, engineers, and entrepreneurs over 10 years. Universi0es are tapping into these schemes, but in most countries they are star0ng from a low level of interna0onaliza0on. The Korea Advanced Ins0tute of Science and Technology in Daejeon has used the government support to more than double—to 49—the number of nonethnic Koreans holding tenure-‐track posi0ons since 2007. The University of Tokyo is aiming to boost the percentage of non-‐Japanese permanent and fixed-‐term staff members from 7% to at least 10% by 2020. (Only 2.4% of its current full-‐0me faculty is nonna0ve.) And Na0onal Taiwan University is aiming to recruit 20 foreign full-‐0me faculty members each year for the foreseeable future to bolster their presence, now at 7%. 24
ATB Case Study – USAF Materials Center at JHU
Johns Hopkins Center will support next genera/on of military aircra ̀ Air Force selects university to conduct research aimed at developing
lightweight, durable components for future aircra ̀ A team of Johns Hopkins engineers has been selected by the U.S. Air Force to start a new materials research Center of Excellence that will develop novel computa0onal and experimental methods to support the next genera0on of military aircras. The Center of Excellence on Integrated Material Modeling (CEIMM) will advance the Air Force’s Computa0onal Integrated Materials Science and Engineering Ini0a0ve. Their research will contribute to the design of high-‐performance devices and components in future aircras structures and turbine engines. The center brings together the na0on’s top academic, military, and industry researchers under a $3 million U.S. Air Force award. Somnath Ghosh, the Michael G. Callas professor in Johns Hopkins’ departments of Civil Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, is the new director of CEIMM. "We’ll start by understanding exis0ng materials from the atomic scale all the way to the structural scales through state-‐of-‐the-‐art research, and then we’ll move to designing a new genera0on of advanced aerospace materials,” Ghosh said. Researchers will focus on advanced computa0onal and experimental methods of determining how different materials respond to different levels of loading and temperatures that can cause failure in aircras engines and other components. The center will operate within the Hopkins Extreme Materials Ins0tute (HEMI) which opened earlier this year. “With the establishment of HEMI, and now this center, we have pulled together the na0on’s leading academic, industry and military leaders to pave the way toward a 21st century genera0on of materials,” said Nicholas P. Jones, Benjamin T. Rome Dean of the Whi0ng School of Engineering. “This mission is cri0cal to the na0on’s security, and we are proud to play a key role.” The Air Force award for the center also will provide funding for new educa0onal opportuni0es. It is expected to support research that will involve more than a dozen doctoral students, postdoctoral researchers and undergraduates annually. (JHU Gazece October 2012)
25
