The Getting of Knowledge funding

1
The Getting of Knowledge- funding managing
applied RD

• Andrew Campbell 6 December 2006

2
Outline

• The Getting of Knowledge
• Strategy
• Governance
• Management
• Communication
• Legacy
• Evaluation
• Take home messages

3
Introduction

• Research investors are keepers of the long view
• It is a highly strategic business
• It is big business, involving billions and
  hundreds of organisations
• But there is little written on how to do it
• This guide is aimed initially within LWA
• But may be of some interest more widely

4
Acknowledgments

• Investing in RD is a strategic privilege
• Bobbie Brazil the LWA Board for the sabbaticals
• Current and former colleagues
• Especially Nick Schofield for much of the detail
• Current former directors
• PMC members from LWA and our partners
• RD Corp partners - especially fellow EDs

5
Land Water Australia

• One of 14 Rural RD Corporations and related
  companies - Statutory Authority (PIERD Act 1989)
• research to support sustainable resource
  management
• we buy, broker and manage research, we dont do
  it
• managed corporately, independent Board (CAC Act)
• 12.8m appropriation 33m RD spend (2005-6)
• gt30 co-investing partners
• Were in the knowledge business

6
RD Programs

• Industries
• Sustainable Irrigation
• Grain Graze
• Managing Climate Variability
• Land, Water Wool
• Healthy Soils
• SAGE Farmers
• People
• Social Institutional
• Land Water Resources Audit
• Indigenous

• Landscapes
• TRACK (Tropical Rivers)
• Environmental Water Allocation
• Riparian Lands
• Native Vegetation Biodiversity
• Agroforestry (through RIRDC)
• Weeds
• Innovation
• Innovation Call
• Scholars Fellows

7
About Applied RD

• ABS categorises research into four types pure
  basic strategic basic applied and
  developmental
• This work focuses on the last three, especially
  applied
• Applied research seeks to acquire new knowledge
  with a specific application in view
• We know the application context
• We know the intended end-users beneficiaries
• We can tease out the nature of the knowledge need
• We can identify prospective adoption pathways

8
(No Transcript)
9
The many hats of a research funder

• The focus here is not on how to do RD, but on
  how to invest in and manage applied RD
• This draws mainly on LWA experience over 15 years
  across a wide range of RD programs
• learning from failures as much as successes
• A significant emphasis on collaboration
• There is a rich menu of possible approaches to
  the business of funding and organising RD

10

• Focus on Return on Investment (ROI)
• Balanced portfolio across asset classes
• Balanced portfolio risk
• Posit and target where future returns may be
  generated long term perspective
• Regularly review and adjust portfolio

11

• Funds collaboration and linkages the arrows,
  not just the boxes
• Understands who is doing what and has a good
  understanding of national capacity
• Centre of the nervous system and has the best
  overview
• Looks for and brokers links across boundaries
• Builds and nurtures relationships and develops
  networks

12

• Efficient, accredited systems, and professional
  contract staff
• Strong service capability (legal, financial,
  business, communication)
• Process accountability (governance, risk
  management, reporting, audit)
• Emphasises capability as an investment vehicle
  for other investors

13

• Recognises fosters creativity, develops ideas
• Spontaneous rather than directed
• Treats each innovation as a separate entity
• Flexible financing model able to move and
  commit funds quickly
• Opportunistic and entrepreneurial
• Not rigid about process

14

• Independent, skills-based Board, with strong
  corporate governance accountability
• Leadership and influence, top-down agenda setting
• Strategic alliances and partnerships
• Commercial focus
• Efficiency and performance orientation
• Hierarchical, rationalist, managerial in
  structure and process

15

• Works very hard to understand client needs,
  culture and values
• Works within clients operating systems to meet
  their needs
• understands their systems and leverage points
• Action learning and participative processes
• involves clients in designing RD
• Shares knowledge and develops priorities jointly
• Uses and builds on existing delivery pathways for
  adoption
• Respects and incorporates non-scientific knowledge

16

• Clear destination and purpose
• Strong real-time intelligence gathering,
  constant external scanning
• Accepts that there are many alterative futures
• Highly responsive to new opportunities
• Continually refines course- as opposed to rigid
  five year plans
• Focus on monitoring and evaluation in an adaptive
  sense, rather than after the fact

17

• Knowledge is the base capital
• drives economic growth, jobs and behaviour
• Explicit about epistemologies how we know what
  we know
• Pays attention to knowledge assets- even old
  projects programs
• Recognises all forms of knowledge and respects
  different knowledge domains
• Articulates links between data, information and
  knowledge
• Recognises complexity and uncertainty
• Analyses knowledge systems and applies knowledge
  management concepts tools

18

• Negotiates research focus between researchers and
  end-users translates knowledge needs into
  researchable questions
• Synthesises research outputs across projects
  programs to meet defined end-user needs
• Able to understand and be understood by both
  scientists and end users
• Combines technical literacy and know-how with
  client empathy and credibility
• Analyses and understands delivery pathways and
  how to plug into them
• Analyses knowledge gaps and needs, stays in close
  touch with end-users

19
Strategy - corporate

• doing the right things right
• So how do you work out those right things?
• Strategy starts with purpose the business niche
• Maintaining strategic capacity
• scanning, analysis, evaluation, reporting
• Strategic navigation vs 5 year plans
• A portfolio approach
• Avoids having all eggs in one basket
• Spreads risk
• Enables a mix of hats or approaches according
  to specific contexts

20
Evaluation

• It must be
• hard-wired in from the start
• adequately resourced
• instilled into the culture of the organisation
• Done well, it can improve program management
  within the life of a program
• At a portfolio level it generates valuable
  intelligence, especially through time
• LWA has evaluated 30 of total portfolio back to
  1990 with consistent methodology and transparent,
  conservative assumptions (see Chudleigh, Simpson
  Schofield 2005)
• Benefitcost ratio 4.8 (and rising) IRR 24

21
Strategy program and project level

• Scoping the research questions is critical
• Understand the nature of the knowledge need
• Understand where knowledge sits c.f. other
  factors
• market or policy failure, values, institutions
  etc
• knowledge may not be the constraint
• Understand the type of knowledge required
• Understand the adoption context of the intended
  end-users before considering research methodology
• Be very clear (SMART) about program objectives
• invested at this end have a short payback
  period

22
Strategy program and project level

• Science is just one knowledge domain
• Others may be equally relevant to the particular
  mix of knowledge required
• E.g. farmers local knowledge, Indigenous
  knowledge, strategic or organisational knowledge
• Think about the mix and embed it in program
  design
• Some initiatives targeting other knowledge
  domains
• Community Fellowships
• Recording Traditional Knowledge (Victor
  Steffensen, Balkanu)
• Knowledge for Regional NRM
• SAGE Farmers

23
Management

• Procurement
• Project Management
• (not discussed today)
• Knowledge and Adoption
• Legacy
• Evaluation

24
Procurement

• Core business for research investors
• Fundamental to overall performance, efficiency
  and risk at the organisational level
• Reputation and credibility are on the line in
  every procurement process
• Research procurement is not the same as letting a
  tender for cleaners, IT, or printing
• We are concerned with building the knowledge
  base, RD capacity, and coordinating research
  effort (objects of the PIERD Act)

25
Procurement pathways

• Alternatives
• Open Call
• Select Tender
• Commissioned
• Joint Venture
• Discriminating criteria
• Clarity of RD question, scope, opportunity
• Degree of integration, collaboration,
  capacity-building required
• Knowledge about available providers
• Desired level of contestability transparency
• Cost-effectiveness (including leverage potential)

26
(No Transcript)
27
Pros and Cons of different procurement options
28
Collaboration

• Efficiency in investment
• Reduces duplication
• Enables coordinated approach to cross cutting
  issues
• 3 levels communication, coordination,
  co-investment
• Be very clear why you are collaborating
• Must invest in relationships
• Attribution can be hard

29
(No Transcript)
30
Governance

• Crucial to get governance frameworks right at
  corporate, program and project levels
• PIERD/CAC Acts excellent at the corporate level
• At the program level, governance is trickier,
  especially for collaborative investments
• We use 3 key instruments
• Program Management Agreement (between
  co-investors)
• Program Management Committee (comprising reps of
  funders plus end-users and/or technical
  expertise) pursuant to S89 of PIERD Act
• Project-level research contract
• Contracts are more about clarity and shared
  understanding, not as a basis for litigation

31
Factors influencing practice change in NRM
32
Information and the Practice Change Cycle
33
Communication (knowledge adoption)

• Make it real
• Resource it
• Instil it in the culture of the organisation
• Plan KA from the start. It will
• influence the research methodology
• encourage involvement of stakeholders in design
  and management of the research
• target research questions to user needs
• assist implementation, and
• improve the adoptability of research results

34
Managing the knowledge legacy

• The legacy must be planned and budgeted for
• How will research results be managed over the
  adoption timeframe?
• How will people access info after the program has
  finished?
• Project level results may be less useful than
  synthesis products or activities across projects
  or even across programs - targeted at user needs,
  in their context at the appropriate scale
• Consider a harvest year
• Engaging with intended users or stakeholders,
  even just market testing products, can help
  ensure that outcomes are used and embedded

35
Knowledge assets of interest
Magazines
Spatial datasets

Reference books (Guidelines and manuals etc)
Funding opportunities
Journal articles
Anecdotal evidence
Conference proceedings
Knowledge needs
Current research projects
Decision frameworks
Models
Spreadsheets
Current research programs
36
NRM Toolbar interface
NRM search Google Australia Organisation
assets Advanced Searches on selection Square
icon indicates which search engine is selected
Click to see current alerts plus access alert
settings
37
In summary

• Research investors are keepers of the long view
• Applied research is targeted investment
• Understanding the knowledge need is crucial
• The RD (scientific inquiry) process itself must
  be nested within an appropriate framework of
  governance, management, adoption and legacy
  effort
• Knowledge and Adoption and Evaluation processes
  must be hard-wired into program design from the
  outset
• Smart research investment demands skilled
  all-rounders
• Ive been lucky to have worked with some of the
  best!

38
for more info www.lwa.gov.au www.aanro.net Canpri
nt 1800 776616