Docstoc

RTO Studie

Document Sample
RTO Studie Powered By Docstoc
					Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009




      Contribution of RTD to Developing Sustainable Knowledge-
        Based Economies in Central and South East Europe,
                      22-23 May 2009, Dubrovnik


                                          Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs
                                                   Manfred Spiesberger
                                         Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI), Austria



                                                                                       0
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009


                  Comparative Study of Governance Models of RTOs
 ● Study of Governance Models: comparative analysis of 8 RTOs commissioned
      by Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT)

 ● Project Consortium:
      - Society for Research (GFF)                   GFF

      - Austrian Research Centers (ARC)

      - Centre for Social Innovation (ZSI)

 ● Time frame of study implementation: spring-autumn 2008; approved by Ministry
      in February 2009

 ● Methodological approach:
      - document study/desk research,
      - interviews with representatives of supervising authorities/decision
      makers/funding bodies & with representatives of RTOs,
      - analysis and compilation of study in ppp format
                                                                                      1
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009




                                          Scope of Analysis

              ● Corporate & Public Governance of RTOs
              ● Legal status, supervisory authorities/decision makers & ownership, supervisory
                   bodies (e.g. boards), legal status

              ● Management, controlling, planning, evaluation; internal and external decision
                   making processes

              ● Role of RTO in respective National Innovation System (NIS): links to other actors
                   – universities, business, commercialisation and spin-off strategies

              ● Activity fields of RTOs
              ● Funding profiles of RTOs: basic versus competitive funding




                                                                                                    2
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009


Sample of national Research and Technology Organisations (RTOs)

                                       Austrian Research Centers,
                                                                           Criteria for choosing the RTOs:
      ARC
                                                 Austria

      FhG                                Fraunhofer Gesellschaft,   ● Relevance of RTO in national context
                                               Germany
      IJS                                 Jožef Stefan Institute,   ● Interaction with public decision makers
                                                Slovenia
      KIT                                 Karlsruhe Institute for   ● Identification of Good-Practice-Models for
                                          Technology, Germany
                                                                      improving of performance
      PSI                                Paul Scherrer Institute,
                                              Switzerland
                                                                    ● Comparability with previous studies
      SINTEF                                       SINTEF,
                                                   Norway
      TNO                                         TNO,
                                               Netherlands
      VTT                                           VTT,
                                                   Finland
                                                                         ZSI analysed: ARC, IJS, PSI, SINTEF

                                                                                                                   3
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

Main features of RTOs (I)
       Research and Technology               Year of Establishment            Legal status                         Decision Maker/                     Links to
          Organisation (RTO)                                                                                    Supervising Authority 2)              Universities

 FhG                                                   19491)                  Association                           Ministry - BMBF                       M 3)

 TNO                                                   1930, §        Public Research Organisation                   Ministry - MBKW                       M 3)

                                                                                                                                                             -
 VTT                                                   1942, §        Public Research Organisation                    Ministry – TEM
                                                                                                                                                             -
 ARC                                                    1956            Limited liability company                Ministry - BMVIT, main
                                                                                                                      shareholder
 SINTEF                                               1950/85                  Foundation                                   RCN                            M 3)

 PSI                                                  1955/91        Institute of the Swiss Federation                      ETH                            M 3)


 IJS                                                  1949/92         Public Research Organisation                   Ministry - MEST                       M 3)

 KIT                                             2008, § planned      Public Research Organisation              Ministry - BMBF/State of                   M 3)
                                                                                                                 Baden-Württemberg

  1)              § = established on the basis of a specific law                       MBKW              Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
  2)              e.g. Ministry, etc.                                                  TEM               Ministry of Employment and the Economy
  3)              M = Management involved in University                                BMVIT             Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology
  RCN             Research Council of Norway                                           MEST              Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology
  BMBF            Federal Ministry for Education and Research                          ETH               ETH Board (for ETH Domain)

                                                                                                                                                                     4
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

Main features of RTOs (II)
                              Personnel           Personnel
        RTOs                    (2007)             Trend 2)                Locations                  University links               Subsidiaries                 Spin Offs5)
                                                                             40,
FhG                                                                   20 offices & int.          56 heads of Institute are          17 Subsidiaries,             65 Spin Offs,
                                13.630                                   offices                    Univ. Professors           Venture Group, 4 Cluster           4 sold off

TNO                                                                         10 in NL,                                          50 majority shareholdings,
                                 4.634                                     27 overall                      n.a.               36 minority shareholdings          6 Spin Off‘s
VTT                                                                        14, 6 local
                                 2.740                                      offices                   Project related              4 Profit Centers              13 Spin Off‘s
ARC
                                  976                                          10                       Lecturers                   4 Subsidiaries               3 Spin Off‘s
                                                                             2 main,                                            4 Research companies +
SINTEF                                                                     10 nat.&int.                                             SINTEF-Holding
                                 2.041                                      offices                  500 collaborators             (5 Sharholdings)              12 Spin Off‘s


PSI                          ca. 1.300 3)                                       1                      70 Lecturers           Competence Center CCEM              1 Spin Off
                                                                                                 54 Professors + 8 Ass.;                                               4),

IJS                                                                                              101 Prof. part time + 33    2 Subsidiaries + 1 Shareholding   2 Spin Offs without
                                  854                                           2                         Ass.                           (Uni)                   shareholding
                                                                                                      266 Univ.-Prof.,
KIT                             7.959   1)                                      2                     63 FZK Prof.          For the moment only networks         outsourcing
1) Operational as of January 2009; 2) Growth ofver past 5 years;
3) 2006; 4) currently because of legal limitations not possible; 5) for   respective reference year
                                                                                                                                                                             5
                                       IJS
                                 KIT
                                             PSI
                                                                  VTT
                                                                              FhG
                                                                        TNO




                                                   ARC
                                                         SINTEF




    1) Activities
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                        X
                                                                                    Mobility, Transport




    compiled into broad fields
                                 X
                                       X
                                             X
                                                                        X
                                                                                    Particles and Matter
                                                                                    Production and




                                 X
                                       X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X
                                                                                                                                       Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

                                                                                                           Thematic fields1) of RTOs




                                                                                    Process Technologies
                                                                                    Materials and




                                 X
                                       X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Surfaces
                                                                                    Microelectronics and

                                       X
                                             X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Microstructures
                                       X                                            Energy and Nuclear
                                             X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Technologies
                                                                                    Environment and Life
                                 X
                                       X
                                             X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Sciences
                                                                                    Policy advise and
                                 X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Social Sciences
                                 X
                                       X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    ICT
                                       X
                                             X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Biotechnology

                                                                                    Security and Defence
                                                          X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Technologies
6




                                                                                    Scientific
                                 X
                                       X
                                             X
                                                   X
                                                         X
                                                                  X
                                                                        X
                                                                              X




                                                                                    Services/Consulting
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009


Income profiles of RTOs 2007 (I) – indicative percentages
         RTOs                 Basic funding                Project/Programme revenue                              Contract research     Income

   FhG                              30,0 %                            32,0 % 1)                                           38,0 % 2)   € 1.320 Mio.

   TNO                              13,1 %                             20,7 %                                             66,2 % 3)   € 579 Mio.
   VTT                              33,0 %                               23 %                                             44,0 % 4)   € 232 Mio.
   ARC                              35,3 %                             18,3 %                                             46,4 % 5)   € 126,3 Mio.
   SINTEF                            2,8 %                            19,2 % 6)                                           78,0 % 7)   € 291 Mio.

   PSI                              85,0 %                              4,0 %                                             11,0 % 9)   € 174,4 Mio.

   IJS                              14,9 %                             29,2 %                                             55,9 % 8)    € 41 Mio.

   KIT                           73,0 % 10)                                 -                                             27,0 %      € 707 Mio.

   1) FhG: federal/regional and EU income                            6) SINTEF:   Other income calculated to programme income
   2) FhG: national + international                                  7) SINTEF:   national contracts de facto around 50% programme
   3) TNO: 16,6 % public contracts + EU funding                      income
   4) VTT: incl. 14 % international                                  8) IJS: including 27 % public contracts
   5) ARC: national + international contracts + 8,7 % other income   9) PSI: Incl. other income
                                                                     10) KIT: federal/regional partly programme funding



                                                                                                                                                     7
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009


 External decision making structures
                External decision                      Members                               Competence
                  making body
 SINTEF SINTEF Board                        9 members: 4 from industry, 2      Strategy, budget, group economy
                                            from University of Trondheim, 3
                                            SINTEF
    PSI       ETH Board                     11 members: 4 from ETH             Strategic guidance, budget, performance
                                            domain, 7 from industry &          agreement & control of its implementation
                                            science
    IJS       Board of Governors            9 members: 5 ministry, 2 IJS, 2    IJS statute, annual business plan,
                                            nominated by director - industry   institute director

   ARC        Supervisory Board             17 members: 3 ministry, 5          Strategy, group policy & structure,
                                            industry, 6 ARC, 3 public bodies   management, important investments


Competences of Boards overlap. But qualitatively, the influence and relevance of boards differs
importantly. Besides boards, owners, national R&D funding bodies, etc. have influence.
                                                                                                                      8
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009



 Planning and control structures
                          Targets, Planning              Time horizon                    Evaluation
 SINTEF Targets set by Group President, top-        Annual planning           External evaluations occasionally
        down & bottom-up planning                                             Monthly audits by group
                                                                              management
    PSI       Performance agreement with ETH        4 year planning           Annual evaluation by ETH.
              Board (4 years), top-down & bottom-   (annual reporting)        Annual reporting, self
              up                                                              evaluations, international
                                                                              evaluation panels every 6 years
    IJS       Business Plan                         Annual planning           Annual evaluation by scientific
              Top-down planning                                               council and directorate, self
                                                                              evaluations
   ARC        Targets set by Group Management       Annual planning (in       Monthly and quarterly reporting
              Bottom-up & top-down planning, in     future 4 year planning)   (in future external evaluation)
              future performance agreement


                                                                                                                9
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

Main results of study I
● Policy making: RTOs are important actors in their respective National Innovation System (NIS) as well
     as in the European Research Area (ERA); RTOs are used as instruments for R&D policy making and
     R&D policy implementation.

● Legal Status: different forms exist; most RTOs are Public Research Organisations, but also association,
     foundation or company.

● Interaction RTO-decision maker/supervising authority: different patterns can be met from rather
     independent to more dependent on supervising authority.E.g.:
     More independent for SINTEF (foundation, RCN renounced on seat in SINTEF board) and PSI (clear
     regulation via performance agreement, ETH board as buffer towards federal authorities).
     Less independent: ARC and IJS, more important influence of policy makers in boards; are also stronger
     in number in boards; for IJS majority has been moved to ministries in board.

● Performance agreements gain more and more importance; they are used for clarifying the scope of
     activities of the RTO between the RTO and the decision makers/supervising authority.



                                                                                                      10
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

Main results of study II
● Evaluations: important feature for all RTOs; some kind of evaluation is undertaken in every RTO.
     Different forms exist: self evaluation, internal & external evaluations, reporting, audits, controlling, etc.
     For some RTOs, the board is more implicated in evaluation (e.g. SINTEF – board meets at institutes and
     the heads of institute report to board)

● Funding: basic grants/basic funding/block funding is on average 30%. Relatively low for SINTEF;
     relatively high for PSI – but this is an important research infrastructure, funds are allocated to little extent
     based on performance – funding allocation based on performance within ETH domain; multi-annual
     budget planning (4 year planning cycles) provide planning security.
     Balance basic- versus competitive funding: in NO trend to increase basic funding, in SI trend to
     increase competitive funding allocation via calls for project proposals.

● Strategy of RTOs is influenced by decision maker/supervising authority via basic funding or programme
     funding respectively.

● Links to universities: some kind of links to universities exist for all RTO‘s (personnel, joint labs, etc.),
     but important differences in relevance. Good practice SINTEF – innovation chain university-RTO-
     business, same campus with university, university representatives in board, personnel exchange, joint
     laboratories; IJS co-founded University of Nova Gorica. Links facilitate personnel recruiting, acquiring of
     know-how, etc.                                                                                         11
Governance and Benchmarking of RTOs, 23 May 2009

Main results of study III
● Links to business/commercialisation: is a hot topic for most RTOs and is approached more and more
     strategically. E.g. via contract research, via establishing of commercialisation holdings (e.g. SINTEF
     Holding), via establishing of Technology Transfer Offices (e.g. PSI); shareholding in Technology Park
     (IJS)
     Spin-off strategies: systematic and strategic approach in several RTOs (e.g. SINTEF, PSI, IJS)

● Balance basic versus applied research/technology development is an important point; basic
     research oriented RTOs such as IJS or PSI move towards applied, while applied oriented such as
     SINTEF move more towards basic research.

● Public policy advice is performed by and relevant for several RTOs, e.g. for specific technologies
     (environment, testing, etc.) or via specialized social science units (e.g. ARC, VTT).

● Regionalisation has to be seen in context of federal structures of the respective country, or with getting
     closer to customers, etc. Is important e.g. for FhG, TNO und VTT.

● Internationalisation is for all RTOs an important topic, especially regarding participation in the EU
     Framework Programme for RTD. For some RTOs it is also relevant in an expansionary and growth
     sense, via establishing offices or institutes abroad (e.g: SINTEF, FhG)
                                                                                                          12

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:1/27/2012
language:English
pages:13