SubscribeIn the News: First Council Meeting Highlights Potential, Challenges
The January 14 first meeting of the Governor’s Innovation Council showed the promise and the challenge of such councils.
On the one hand, there was a good chunk of energy in the room as a mix of big and small businessmen and women, elected officials, government types, higher ed folks, venture capitalists, nonprofit leaders and others shared stories and ideas.
There was a challenge from Gov. Bev Perdue to come up with really good ideas, a request that we “work a little miracle” and “make something good happen here,” and a promise that she would listen and take recommendations seriously.
There was great analysis of the world and national climate for innovation from Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, who gave a sobering assessment of where North Carolina is currently and its possibilities (the Triangle is strong, we have an above average concentration of scientists and engineers and a good business climate; according to his criteria, we have a weak “entrepreneurial climate,” a lack of easily-objectively-measurable innovation results in our rural areas and not nearly enough people with education beyond high school).
Entrepreneur Joe Desimone of UNC-CH and NCSU, discussed how he has been able to work in the space between disciplines to found three companies and secure 110 patents that promise to improve health and create wealth in North Carolina, and laid out an agenda NC might follow to increase innovation in the state.
Younger entrepreneur Judd Bowman, who started Motricity in his dorm room at the NC School of Science and Math and is currently working on his second startup, Pocketgear, talked about why he liked NC and how it could work better to attract more innovators.
John Hardin, head of the NC Board of Science and Technology, reviewed the recommendations of the board’s report, “Advancing Innovation in North Carolina,” and challenged the Council to consider some of those recommendations.
Jay Chaudhuri, Senior Policy Advisor to State Treasurer Janet Cowell, updated Council members on the status of the proposed $250 million Innovation Fund, which will attempt to invest a small percentage of state pension funds in potentially high return innovative NC companies.
And I talked about the efforts the UNC system is taking to become more innovative and some of the good ideas that are coming from commenters on changepapers.org.
But after all the talking, it was time for the Council to go to work, and the comments revealed the Council has a ways to go before it can identify and implement meaningful change.
As we’ve discussed in previous posts, one of the big challenges for blue-ribbon panels is the difficulty of focus. Since they are non-legislative bodies peopled with volunteers that have day jobs, in order to be successful, councils like this HAVE to concentrate on just a few high-leverage recommendations.
At this initial meeting, the ideas were almost universally interesting and useful, and given enough time or power or energy, if implemented, could meaningfully change North Carolina’s climate for innovation.
We heard ideas about the importance of beginning to teach innovation and entrepreneurship at all, creating a variety of new tax credits and funding streams to support innovation, of changing the culture for innovation in universities, of holding on to out of state and out of country highly educated Ph.D. or recruiting back innovators who have left the state. We heard about the importance of getting rid of the paperwork that can snarl innovation, of getting rid of the barriers that make it hard for universities and private companies to work together, and were reminded that many of these ideas have been tried other places and we need to benefit from the lessons others have learned.
So what are the FEW things that are HIGHEST leverage? What could the Council rally behind and get changed that will really make a difference? UNC President Erskine Bowles says “if you’re about everything, you’re about nothing.” The challenge to us will be to explore, yes, but then to narrow and get serious about the few things we can be about that can get change going.
What do you think the “few things” are? And how do you suggest an Innovation Council get some momentum behind efforts to change those things? Let us know with your comments!
Tags: Erskine Bowles, Gov. Bev Perdue, Governor's Innovation Council, Innovation Fund, Joe Desimone, Judd Bowman, Motricity, Pocketgear, Rob Atkinson, Treasurer Janet Cowell
Wonderful analysis and feedback.
The fundamental decisions we need to make toward any direction is to create a series of reliable numeric analyses of pros and cons. The Pilot Campus Workday [an upcoming effort by 5 UNC schools working to pilot creative ways to increase innovation] will address many common challenges facing UNC systemic transfers. These projects often reflect high tech inventions, medical patents/devices, and royalty arrangements of many shorts. The anticipated outcomes in monetary terms are known and fairly reliable, often informing the most convincing arguments.
In a parallel process, I suggest that some of us that define Innovation beyond the boundaries of high tech, form a group to provide comparable metrics and relevant analyses. Perhaps we could name our project “the effects of innovation in complimentary contexts.” For instance, a creatively theatrical educational bundle to high school dropouts or prisoners on how to formulate future self-employment, may convert just one person. One of our challenges would be to provide precise economic benefits for not going to prison again for assault, given a myriad of peripheral failures as they add to the cost (that we end up paying anyway). Or we may have to estimate the gross benefits of a very innovative incubator of over 20,000 square feet and seven acres of land, to support the concept of urban community “nursery.” In there, the expected co-habitation ought to be much longer than the typical year or two. Many citizens of our region need longer to establish, survive, and flourish a small business, or many other endeavors. How can one enumerate the cohabitation benefits of new business, entrepreneurial support networks, religious services, an art studio/gallery, a community clinic, a library of Hispanic books and sewing classes, an organic garden to create and eat the gifts of the land, and much much more? These are just a couple of illustrative examples of innovation with social impact. Many of you will add projects and dreams with great cultural diversity, innovative approaches, and novel effects.
If interested in this discussion at all, WSSU would be honored to host a meeting to explore possibilities, to define domains that pertain to our key concepts, and to ultimately form reliable and why not, Innovative metrics.
My concern is that by not precisely defining innovation in its broader sense, we might waste talents and approaches that enrich our home.
One of the few things the Innovation Council should focus on is opportunity to innovate in the aviation and aerospace sector, and here’s why.
Aviation and aerospace has has not run its course in North Carolina. While aviation has no representation at the collegiate level anywhere in our state, aerospace has only marginal representation. However, if we create capacity in our educational system to meet the demands of this growing industry our ‘human capital engine’ will create a innovative workforce and bring jobs to our state.
Aviation and aerospace enables the global movement of people and goods, it enhances the global acquisition and dissemination of goods and services, it is vital to national defense and security, and it has a long track record of inspiring innovators. That is to say that if you innovate anywhere, aviation and aerospace will have benefit everywhere ~ for example.
Aviation and aerospace make it possible for our scientists and researchers in RTP to reach the globe with innovation. In eastern North Carolina aviation and aerospace enables our military to provide security and defense to our homeland. In the Triad it enhances the transportation and logistics network that has attracted employers like FedEx and Honda Aircraft. Aviation and aerospace also holds manufacturing opportunities for our rural communities that specialize in the technical processes that the industry depends on.
Did I also mention that were, and are, ‘First in Flight?
The challenge of any innovation program is the unavoidable opportunity to “boil the ocean”. It is difficult to select only a few key focus areas but it is necessary if innovation activities are to succeed. My recommendation would be to seek innovation in three major areas: 1) tax policy that ensures businesses can create new concepts more efficiently which will drive new intellectual property creation, leading to new businesses and jobs, 2) innovations in educational policies and programs, meant to explore new teaching methods which create better educational environments and outcomes, so we create more young adults ready to work, live and thrive in a 21st century environment and 3) innovation in the state government, focused on revolutionizing the way the government works and delivers services. If we can change these things, we tie together major constituencies that have often worked in opposition, and create a climate that sponsors innovation in all walks of life.