3rd Generation Engineering Research Centers

1
3rd Generation Engineering Research Centers
Engineering Research Centers Program

• Partnerships for Innovation in a Global World

2
Foreign Competition from Japan Europe Motivated
1st Generation ERCs

• 1985
• Competition from Japan Europe
• US predominance in innovation challenged
• US engineers trained in engineering science
• ENG graduates lacked experience with design,
  manufacturing systems
• Few academic partnerships with industry
• 45 of ENG Ph.D. students foreign 11 female,
  few minorities

• 1st Generation 1985-1990
• Next-generation systems
• Cross-disciplinary culture
• UG Grad students engaged in research to the
  systems level
• Integration of ERC research into courses
  degrees
• Active partnerships with industry in research
  education required
• Graduate students increasingly foreign, diversity
  slowly increasing

3
Transforming Economic Forces Motivate 2nd
Generation 2 ERCs

• By 2005
• Global market place for engineers and production
  resources
• Broad, global competence in knowledge generation
  innovation
• Commodity engineer is bought offshore
• Industry grazing for RD
• 55 of ENG Ph.D. students foreign 17 female
• US enrollments in science and engineering in
  decline

• 2nd Generation ERCs 1994-2006
• Transforming, frontier systems to position US for
  long-term competitive strength
• ERC graduates excel at integrating knowledge to
  speed innovation
• Broad-based educational impact from K-grey
• Industry shifts focus to short to medium term
  research, hard to engage in frontier areas
• 55 of ERC Ph.Ds foreign, 26 female, 4
  minorities

4
US Economic Strength Challenged by Broadly
Distributed Global Competence

• Engineering Research and Americas Future (NAE,
  2005) Committee to Assess the Capacity of the
  U.S. Engineering Research Enterprise
• The Engineer of 2020 (NAE, 2004) and Educating
  the Engineer of 2020 (NAE, 2005)
• Rising Above the Gathering Storm Energizing and
  Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future
  (NRC/COSEPUP, 2005)
• Innovate American National Innovation Initiative
  Final Report (Council on Competitiveness, 2005)
• The World is Flat, A Brief History of the
• Twenty-First Century, Thomas L. Friedman, 2005

5
Remarks by Arden Bement at NSB Engineering
Education Workshop at MIT, October 20, 2005

• Knowledge human capital are key driving forces
  in global economy
• Concentrations of ST competence now more broadly
  distributed globally
• Industry buys commodity engineers manufacturing
  globally
• US has to produce engineers who provide 4-5 times
  value added through innovation

6
Changing Role of US Industry in RD in the last
20 Years

• Shifted away from investment in long-term
  research
• Industry RD staffs scouting and grazing for
  innovation from all sources
• Increased role of small businesses in high risk
  areas
• Industry sponsored US University research has
  recently stagnated and licenses/options declining
• Industry turning to foreign universities offering
  favorable IP rights

7
Major Recommendations That ERCs Can Act Upon

• Optimizing efficiency product quality not
  enough, must optimize society for increased
  innovation
• Support a culture of innovation, a symbiotic
  relationship between research and
  commercialization, and life-long skill
  development
• Stimulate diverse domestic and international
  talent to pursue engineering careers in the US
• Engineering education needs to impart capacity to
  create exploit knowledge for technological
  innovation
• Engineering research must lead in bridging
  discovery and technological innovation
• Engineering graduates must function in a global
  world where design and production efforts cross
  national borders

8
Possible Features of 3rd Generation ERCs to
Respond to these Challenges

• Retain ERC Key features and
• Strengthen collaboration with science to speed
  innovation based on frontier knowledge
• Ramp up role of innovation in ERC research and
  education
• Ramp up role for small firms in innovation inside
  ERCs
• Let proposing university/industry partnerships
  propose a membership structure that work for
  their sectors
• Provide US students with experiences
  collaborating with non-US universities from
  different cultures
• Support collaboration through the
  cyberinfrastructure
• Ramp up pre-college outreach diversity in ERCs

9
For Discussion How can 3rd Generation ERCs
evolve to address these challenges?
Challenges
Possible Changes in ERCs

• Fund small pre-ERC groups to explore wholly new
  fields thru new office of ENG
• Focus ERC on frontier fields at the cusp of SE
  with systems potential
• Strengthen collaboration with social scientists
  who study means of adoption of new technology and
  its impacts

• Create wholly new fields at the interface of
  science and engineering
• Technological innovation requires integration
  across disciplines
• Successful impact requires knowledge of public
  policy, society/technology interfaces, etc.

10
For Discussion How can 3rd Generation ERCs
evolve to address these challenges?
Challenges
Possible Changes in ERCs

• US leads in discovery but lags in innovation
• Engineering education needs to link discovery to
  innovation through systems
• Align engineering education with skills needed
  for innovation

• Increase focus on innovation in ERC research
  education
• Engage small RD firms in research inside ERCs
  using student/industry teams
• Increase integration of systems research
  education
• Partner ERCs with innovation/ entrepreneurship
  programs
• Create new modes of industrial collaboration for
  the new industrial climate

11
For Discussion How can 3rd Generation ERCs
evolve to address these challenges?
Challenges
Possible Changes in ERCs

• Engage non-US universities in ERCs as partners
• What about IP?
• Can we expect real integration
  deliverables across national borders?
• Would this work better for global problems
  (hazards, environment) than for competitive
  technology

• Engineers and production resources accessed
  around the world
• Competence in discovery
• innovation broadly distributed globally
• To lead in a global economy, next-generation US
  engineers must function across cultures and
  national borders

12
For Discussion How can 3rd Generation ERCs
evolve to address these challenges?
Challenges
Possible Changes in ERCs

• Build effective collaborations among
  faculty/students broadly distributed in the US
  and, perhaps, aboard, i.e. shared data, shared
  experimentation, shared simulations/test beds,
  education

• Virtual private networks to support ERC partners
  in research/experimentation
• Shared educational activities via the
  cyberinfrastructure for partners and pre-college
  populations

13
For Discussion How can 3rd Generation ERCs
evolve to address these challenges?
Challenges
Possible Changes in ERCs

• Stimulate diverse domestic engineering talent and
  
• attract engineering
• students globally

• Increase pre-college outreach to teachers
  students
• Tenure/promotion practices need to include
  outreach/ mentoring
• Expand involvement of underrepresented groups in
  ERC through diversity recruiting practices and
  increased outreach to LSAMPs, MSIs, etc.

14
US Meet Global Challenges through Innovation,
Openness to Change, Creativity, Hard Work
15
Clearly, it is now possible for more people
than ever to collaborate and compete in
real-time, with more people, on more kinds of
work, from more corners of the planet, and on a
more equal footing, than at any previous time in
the history of the world

• Thomas L. Friedman, The World is Flat, 2005