QUT Codes in Duck Walk Lock Step?

Track down your own institution's governance framework and summarise how it maps onto the relevant code(s), in particular the Australian Code.

QUT in Duck Walk Lock Step?

Referencing my boss’s response to a local code or governance of research framework inquiry there is nothing immediately available here in Korea regarding my own institution of employment so I rely upon the easily accessible policies available at my educational provider in QUT.

Compliance with and implementation of the Australian Code appears evident and expounded upon in QUT’s Manual of Policy and Procedure (MOPP) which includes a governance framework mostly covered by D/2.6 QUT Code of Conduct for Research, with additional documents providing more details such as MOPP B/8.1 Code of Conduct, MOPP D/2.7 Procedures for dealing with allegations of research misconduct, MOPP D/2.8 Management of research data (to be approved), and MOPP D/5.4 Code of Good Practice for Postgraduate Research Studies and Supervision at QUT.

MOPP D/2.6 QUT Code of Conduct for Research: Covers principles for the responsible conduct of research, roles and responsibilities for responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, management of research data, supervision and training of research students and staff, publication and dissemination of research findings, authorship, peer review, management of conflicts of interest relating to research activities, and collaborative research with other institutions. These subsections correlate highly with the Australian Code in both Parts A and B as may be seen in the following chart.

MOPP D/2.6 QUT Code of Conduct for Research	Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research
2.6.1 Principles for the responsible conduct of research	Section 1 General principles of responsible research 1.3
2.6.2 Application	Dealt with at length in description of institutional, individual responsibilities for each subsection.
2.6.3 Roles and responsibilities for responsible conduct of research	Responsibilities of researchers and supervisors of research trainees 3.1
2.6.4 Research misconduct	Section 9 Breaches of the Code and misconduct in research 9.3
2.6.5 Management of research data	Section 2 Management of research data and primary materials 2.1
2.6.6 Supervision and training of research students and staff	Section 3 Supervision of research trainees 3.1
2.6.7 Publication and dissemination of research findings	Section 4 Publication and dissemination of research findings 4.1
2.6.8 Authorship	Section 5 Authorship 5.1
2.6.9 Peer review	Section 6 Peer review 6.1
2.6.10 Management of conflicts of interest relating to research activities	Section 7 Conflicts of interest 7.1
2.6.11 Collaborative research with other institutions	Section 8 Collaborative research across institutions 8.1
http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/D/D_02_06.jsp	http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/r39.pdf

It is interesting to note that the ranking for misconduct are so highly positioned in the QUT document reference as compared to falling under Section 9 of the Australian Code. Surely this does not indicate order of importance or evidence of disregard?

QUT MOPP B/8.1 Code of Conduct: This document explores the QUT designation of conduct code above and beyond the Australian Code description which defines national guidelines while local Queensland legislation includes institutional and individual compliance from The Public Sector Ethics Act 1994:

respect for the law and system of government

respect for persons

integrity

diligence

economy and efficiency

QUT MOPP D/2.7 Procedures for dealing with allegations of research misconduct: Elaborates upon the Australian Code however requires modifications in description of procedural investigations of complaints dependent upon collective bargaining agreements differentiated among: academic, professional or senior staff. The Australian Code does not itself make such distinctions but permits institutions to do so. This might represent differentiation in representational allowances and/or effect private or public investigations or publication of results.

QUT MOPP D/2.8 Management of research data (to be approved): As this section is being reviewed it must indicate that it is an area of necessary improvement at QUT for alignment with Australian Code requirements.

QUT MOPP D/5.4 Code of Good Practice for Postgraduate Research Studies and Supervision: Responsibilities are clearly described in the areas: institution, department, supervisor and candidate. It is refreshing to note that the candidate’s list is shorter than the others.

In conclusion, is it possible that the Australian Code and the QUT Code might have been written by the same group of perhaps itinerant authors?

Three Visionary Research Organisations

Discuss the similarities and differences that you think are important between CISRO, Wolcock Research Institute and CW+L at UniSA.

Similarities: These are all innovative research organisations in Australia with clearly defined scope of vision and mission objectives. They all started small or didn't exist at all. Their collective reasons for existence are to fulfill research needs that improve the knowledge and lives of Australians as well as incorporation of international collaboration in their reach and relevance to the world at large. It wasn't until someone expressed their vision and mission that any of them got started at all. Each could be said to share similar reasons for existence whereby through differences in scope and scale of research study all were designed to organize groups of people to work together for common purposes to find innovative solutions to improve quality of life whether through science, medicine or societal study. Each fulfills societal needs either for new products, better treatments or ways to understand important societal needs.

While the two smallest ships seemingly grew out of the passion, care and leadership of two individuals they have successfully grown their original direction into group and team oriented research organisations. While they are smaller than CISRO they are not small and have proven big enough in terms of vision and mission to survive the vicissitudes of time, relevance, and funding. Not all do.

Most importantly they all support the adage that together we rise and divided we fall. Perhaps indicative as well is that over time these organisations have only grown as a result of further inclusivity, dynamism and cross-disciplinary synergies which engage and perhaps "t-bone" and/or combine various disciplines to the benefit of collective and diffusive knowledge sharing.

Differences: In terms of strategy CISRO’s scope is the vastest considering it employs over 6000 people, has a high profile and is the largest of these three tall ships. It also possesses the longest pedigree and has grown substantially over several decades to incorporate numerous cross indexed charters (perhaps an elder form of the favoured expression of mission) which help define and categorize the numerous research specialisations present which include: information services, manufacturing and minerals, environment, energy and agribusiness.

In terms of mission and vision CISRO is the most grandiose in keeping with its significant scientific inventions, commercial successes and incorporates its vision and beliefs system to address:

1. A people oriented innovation policy of world class performance.

2. A commitment to safety and environmental sustainability.

3. Seeks deep science and innovation solutions.

4. Implements an effective and appropriate risk management system.

5. Supports individual creativity and flexibility.

In contrast, The Woolcock Medical Research Institute was crafted from its association with The Prince Albert Hospital of The University of Sydney with the individual drive and leadership of Professor Wolcock who began study of asthma with one patient and who grew the organization into the area of respiratory and sleep-related health care research. Our notes credit significant tax provisions provided by government incentives for the establishment of the centre itself. In terms of strategy the vision and mission expanded out of the skills and dedication of one researcher into the collaboration of many where now over fifty different research projects operate at the same time.

Wolcock Institute incorporates its mission of improvement in respiratory and sleep health of Australians through: research, education, prevention and care.

The Centre for Work and Life (CW+L) is still led by its original founder Professor Barb Pocock and focuses on work and quality of life research driven to improve understanding of current and future needs of Australia's stressed out and over-worked workers. In terms of strategy Pocock appears most entrepreneurial of the three considering her eloquence in the ABC Interview of 2007 available in the media section.

Her initial engagement in research of the sociology of work in Australia was made from a particularly left-wing and perhaps rebellious perspective which led to progressive self-realization and perhaps well defined and honed negotiation skills. Her description of finding a niche in the research environment at UniSA is very similar to the process through which many business oriented enterprises find their own unique customer oriented valuation. This is no surprise considering her economics specialization and interest in and abilities for hard work appear inspiring. This appears to be the humanities-based research example among the three ships.

The CW+L Charter includes five goals:

1. To improve the quality of work and life in Australia through analysis and innovative thinking.

2. To use logic and reasoning to assist organisations in generating policies which support the first goal.

3. To encourage collaboration through quantitative and qualitative research.

4. To train life and work researchers.

5. To widely share knowledge and information about life and work in Australia.

Powering Ideas: Robbing Peter to Pay Paul?

Powering Ideas: Robbing Peter to Pay Paul?

What is the role of individual research organisations in the national innovation system?

BACKGROUNDER

First I note the whirlwinds of political intrigue surrounding the personages and required readings of this our first week of discussion on the innovation fleet of Australia. The plight of Horatio Nelson and the Battle of Trafalgar appear picturesque by comparison.

Enter Terry Cutler well seated at Melbourne and the CISRO Board of Directors quickly detailing his definition of "the coalition of the willing" describing commercialisation of research to be a "misguided focus" better suited to business than university research programs in this interview with Gerhard Vorster and Deloitte. His aim of reaching the first 25% quartile of all OECD innovation measures in the next decade based on the 2020 Conference seems occupied with positioning and ranking in international statistics from competitor nations that may or may not over or underestimate their innovation spending. His own recommendations total an estimated 3 billion dollars of tax payer-fronted debt something it appears Australia had minimized during the Howard administration according to Chart Seven State Net Debt in Dimarco, Pirie and Au-Yeung.

Dr. Denise Bradley also resides in nearby South Australia with a long history at UniSA but now a ready government employee and most recently appointed to the Chair of TEQSA - Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency a new level of toothy government oversight recommended in her own landmark Review of Australian Higher Education.

Like-minded but elected Senator and member of ruling Australia Labour Party Kim Carr is a former teacher and Minister of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research. His website details several South Australia highlighted initiatives based on Powering Ideas and his government is now led by Ms. Julia Gillard resident of South Australia, former Minister of Education, former socialist and former Deputy Prime Minister under the tragic leadership of the Brisbane-based resigned fluently Mandarin Kevin Rudd. This sine quo non resulted in his ownership of the "Resource Super Profits Tax" proposal to be levied on Australia's top two export trade sectors the proceeds possibly earmarked to pay for the innovation renovation of the third sector based on the proposals of Cutler, Bradley, Carr and the Group of Eight study " Adding to Australia's Capacity" authors unknown but surmised to resemble a "Band of Brothers and Sisters." The latest Minister of Education Crean another resident of Victoria career politician-union stalwart appears to be under-reporting educational reforms limited to PCs in every high school classroom in his latest radio interview. It is also evident that the socialists have definitely turned against P.M. Gillard.

What is the role of individual research organisations in the national innovation system?

The report Powering Ideas does not specifically detail the role of individual research organisations in the national innovation system other than participation in and compliance with what appears "top down" style managerial reform proposals. In the introduction mention is made of increased science and innovation budgets, with a 25% increase from 2009 to 2010 detailing a declining productivity and reduced spending since 1993-94 coinciding with the last Labour Party government of Paul Keating.

The National Innovation Priorities listed seem to coincide with campaign promises made by Kevin Rudd while mention is made that the duties of universities and public research domains remain the provision of knowledge and skilled workforces rather than any commercialisation of research. This in line with Cutler's admission that research commercialisation be made a dirty word. Their contribution is listed to include propagating an increase in the numbers of internationally benchmarked research groups, organize more vigorous industry research partnerships, form more collaborative team research projects across institutions, gather project financing from the Education Investment Fund detailing several recent disbursements already in its third round, and conforming to well detailed business and public sector innovation initiatives such as increasing business engagement by 25% and developing better policy direction and improvement decisions management by 2020.

Individual research organisations are expected to participate in increased collaboration efforts to realize a doubling effect over the next ten years which would require approximately 7% growth per year to 2020. However as the report details on page 20 the rate of R & D spending growth is already 8% a year thus the doubling effect of such a growth rate suggests the 2020 goal in research funds increases may be reached in 7.5 years or 2017 second quarter rather than 2020. This might prove a useful incentive to suggest the innovation renovation platform in Powering Ideas is simply political.

For example, the OECD estimates of 2.5% of GDP in countries like Korea may be accurate but the oversight accountability and transparency of such funds dispersal and application results may be difficult or impossible to trace. This is also the dilemma often faced by sales agents in many corporations who require boosts in sales figures to justify performance based review while undermining actual profit earnings through negotiated concessions and other tax breaks to secure deals which might provide a lower level of actual net benefits to funds spent. Might the same not be said for funding future collaborations?

For example, while CISRO basks in profit earnings based on patent royalties certain of our required readings recommend universities and individual research organisations dispense with intellectual property protections which copyright and patent laws allow for more open source and knowledge transfer benefits to reduce the estimated 30% of funded research conducted in duplicate. One cannot hope to implement a national research policy based on the successes of only one research organisation and at that expect the followers to give up their golden gooses/geese. Especially if the benchmarked leader has yet to do so. Where would the lauded cochlear bionic ear be if it had not been a patented and rights protected innovation?

Hallelujah!

Lightfoot's Hot Foot

Tribute to the end of exam grading...

Carl Sagan - 'A Glorious Dawn' ft Stephen Hawking (Symphony of Science)

Rock on Brrrrrrrrrrruce!

For those anonymous rubbish stirrers...

Contracts: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

What does RM need to know before entering into negotiations with a potential sponsor?

RM has to plan and prepare a solid agenda based on the requirements of the research at hand to establish whether a contract is indeed practical or possible. Contingency, concessions equitable distribution and perhaps restrictions and constraints such as those present in Guide to Contract Negotiation & Preparation of Contracts at ANU will need to be well planned for in advance and written in stone and otherwise memorized to make sure no boundaries are exceeded.

It appears fairly standard that University IP should never be surrendered in Australia. At the same time this appears as a standard not applied to many generic drug manufacturers in the sale of their products to poorer nations where there have been many cases of international legislation which require corporations provision their IP to assist in making medicine more affordable for those who can least afford it to the entire sector. Unrestricted licensing to the funding partner might also be difficult to regulate in many foreign markets if the sponsor is an international corporation they might perhaps be making billions off the university licensed IP abroad while the university itself sees no further profits without a bold contingency on future earnings in place.



At the same time universities may see increasing ethical and legal challenge in when or if their IP rules may be restricting global development. So far I have not read of any one challenging university IP rules but heterodox economist Chang Ha-Choon takes on the entire neo-liberal market approach in Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective. (2002)

Minimizing University exposure to unrecoverable liabilities also appears to be an important consideration as ANU relates that larger multi-party negotiations will increase the risk of unforeseeable liabilities claims or challenges. Yet, is there not some form of research risk insurance or force majeure clause for small ventures provided by the Australian Government similar to export nonpayment insurance which reduces exposure to small businesses with 90% risk coverage? It appears to work for the exporters wouldn't it work to encourage more small multiparty research consortia?

It seems universities seek to ensure the research project can actually be completed in the time and with the assets required in the contract. This would imply that failure to do so will extract late delivery and penalty as potentially with export shipments.

While these terms appear fixed positions most businesses might see them as potentially limiting shared interests and the RM would need to include a central university legal team to review the final document, screen all agreed terms, vet departmental endorsements, investigate commercial forecasts, ensure term sheets are in agreement with contract terms, perform final sign off on any boiler plate contract, present final draft to research director, pass to research department chair, witness signing and provide copies by and to all principals, provision signed copy to Chancellery for final signature, forward copies of the contract to department, Chancellery and legal team and and assign to filing cabinet for as long as a couple of decades or university dictates decree. No bureaucracy there?

As product lifecycles are increasingly short in most competitive commercial sectors any delay could reduce the possible profits of the research itself. While the university legal team may provide final content review and lead negotiator the more the involved RM can confirm through understanding and moderating the negotiation process the easier it may be.

The RM could enroll in some form of course work to gain greater competency in the legal aspects of sponsored research management contracts. Additionally the RM could employ tactical training in real negotiations, arbitration and conflict management.



Experience is often not the only or best solution to improving skills in contract negotiation. In fact, as my Notre Dame Certificate taught me in 2007 crucial human weaknesses such as cognitive biases, emotions and irrationality, partisan assumptions,and selective information filtering all often reinforce zero sum positions rather than provide opportunities for shared interests. Good RMs seek the creation of value or shared gains through collaboration, but with lack of negotiation training might be encouraged to practice judgmental overconfidence in one's own skill set only reinforcing innate human aversions to loss or risk as well as the perpetuation of reactive devaluation. No manager really wants to hear they lack negotiation skills or the ability to frame good questions to gather the best information possible contributing to their decisions. But having lived outside the western world for more than a decade I often fear it's aversion to risk is it's biggest disadvantage. This would apply to the interests of collaborative research rather than isolated enclaves in terms of positions on multiparty contracts.

What should RM be aware of concerning existing funding contracts when planning for new funding cycles and applications?

As an apocryphal, in the worst case scenario conflicts of interest or IP sharing would be found post contract signing as a class mate indicated and this would imply a lack of due diligence in which case in common law it would be potentially challenging for the university to recoup any losses of IP protection, patent or copyright. Conflicts between current and future contracts need to be anticipated and I am certain the best RMs out there are as popular for their smooth negotiation skills as they are for their competent juggling of BATNAS (best alternative to negotiated agreement) and their knowledge of university IP reservation points, restrictions and constraints. An RM's past performance in managing contracts will implicate future responsibilities.

Research Collaboration: Orientation to the Future

Research Collaboration: Orientation to the Future

Any experiences you may have had in the past good or bad with collaborations? Would you manage things differently now?

The impetus for my taking on these studies was an APEC Asian Research Project Proposal that came my way via linkedin and a former Wollongong resident now manager of a Boutique NGO recruitment business in Bonn, Germany. He had found my listing which includes training in operations and research management already through my studies at UOW and Concordia/FITT (Forum for International Trade Training Canada) which would have been applicable to the TOR requirements of a Pan Asian analysis of operational food security provisions.

Following the proposal rejection after application and approval process which took a few months I realized the best way to capitalize on such a marvellous missed opportunity was to acquire more training in the role of an RM to add curbside appeal to my already excellent future potential usefulness to similar organisations who might be found fishing around Korea in future. As Paige recommended at the beginning of the course by trying to imagine the role of RM as an impending future reality ~ something I wouldn't mind juggling parallel to my teaching position ~ I look forward to realization of such a goal by positioning myself here in Korea as perhaps one of the rare few who might then hold such qualifications without having had to leave here or sacrifice gainful employment to achieve in the meantime.



Discuss any issues that may occur when running a research project funded by both an industry collaborator and a seperate unrelated grant.

Many of you have mentioned here the potential pitfalls of a multi-sponsored research project including the competitive interests of business versus researcher goals namely the possible divide between commercially viable and IP protected or academically publishable and socially beneficial knowledge sharing results and the conflicting milestones which might prevent benefits for both without sacrificing one facet or goal of joint venture research over the other. The other perspective is that you might end up running two seperate projects which might see conflicts in terms of informational cross-over which might tend to encourage some forms of moral hazard.

To address Paige's issues regarding moving from informal to formal terms of cooperation and collaboration one might easily consider the generally accepted practice of recommended export practices and procdures. Appreciate any comments to see whether these procedural issues have any actual cross-over.

1. Where one could compare a university to a domestic economy or at least at times smaller cities those rare instances of external or export sales/short-term contract collaborations will provide a company or research department with a record of transactions and/or potential industry partners when seeking larger scale collaborations in future. It would seem reasonable to expect collaborators to proceed on a mutual interests level of progressive gains over time.

2. To pursue foreign market oriented sales or further industry research collaborations many companies/universities often need to employ new middle management team techniques and more warm bodies to ensure the goals of future research collaboration growth are being met at the level of which core decision makers may have overall control. Many researchers would need to delegate and designate an RM other than the lead researcher out of a lack of extra time above and beyond their regular duties to solicit or respond to unsolicited enquiries, stack a date book of future projects well in advance of milestones for larger scale future exports or research collaborations.

3. Focusing on a key market for future export or research collaboration itself requires significant market research itself in terms of research competitors and dynamic global environments as others have pointed out. Decision makers might not need to rely exclusively on subject matter experts or even core research personnel if they possess the resources to hire consultants in country or to canvass the corporate world to provide new contacts and possible corporate research funding leads then they are recommended to do so.

4. Possibly the best university to corporate research collaborations rely heavily on key contact relationships which may have evolved personally over lifetimes of friendship, professional association, university alumni groups, etc. Regardless of the actual contractual details if there are not strong extra-curricular linkages for many I'm sure the research scale will remain minimal in its synergies. While many of our paper readings this week suggested otherwise, face to face contact is still integral if not with regular site visits then through localized up and downstream research consortia which appear not dissimilar to supplier-based JIT systems in terms of factory and industrial site collocations all over Asia. The same appears to be happening in Australia with the increased incidence of incubator and innovation parks adjacent to university sites. This cannot be a coincidence and makes for cozy bedfellows I'm sure.

5. While the financing and budgets of the research itself need to be closely monitored no small scale collaboration will evolve into a large and long term association or joint venture until real profits are being generated. No increasing scale of budgets will be supported without direct industry or consumer adoption or utilisation of the results of the research. This is the corporate monkey mantra: See no results, Hear no results, Have no more bananas. While I realize there are many academics who would be quite satisified to make repeated progress without commercial results aside from possible CSR or dog and pony shows (as BP's recent scandal fueled Gulf of Mexico gaff indicates) even essential corporate research is often overlooked or under-performed.



In another word: Toyota.

6. It is the RM's responsibility to look beyond the actual terms of agreement to forsee future problems before they are encountered and some understanding of corporate terms of agreement such as binding versus non-binding letters of intent and possible tutelage in the agreements on general terms and conditions terminology as well as consultation with a university lawyer would probably be of benefit to any future RM on campus.

These would be some of the steps in accessing a foreign export market. Is there not some alignment with RM collaboration needs?

Proposals, Grants and Funding Cycles

Proposals, Grants and Funding Cycles

1. How do research proposals for established companies vs. university grants differ?

I would think as many of our resources this week indicate that corporate research is better funded, structured and managed to lead to profit-based results which will increase the value of product or service and shareholder interests. In terms of Brian Martin's Assessment Orientation Table 1 corporate funding appears to rely more heavily upon administrative and performance-based funding decisions. In contrast university resources appear to be more publicly funded and thus more accountable to administrative requirements in terms of disbursements with a greater focus on peer review and equal allocation. Perhaps fewer information sharing limitations might exist which encourage more open data sharing? Does the public and university research sphere provide the proving ground for more confidential corporate research?

Our global innovation industry profile indicates the software & internet, health, computing & electronics, technology, aerospace & defense and automotive research fields are the largest and most competitive in terms of sales ratios while probably also the most highly commercialized and corporately funded. "Everything else" from humanities to creative industries or community-based projects would more highly contend with university-based research grant allocations. Independent self-funding researchers might enjoy this short presentation by Elizabeth Gilbert on the nature of creativity among non-sciences based researchers.

2. Why is it important to be aware of grant cycles?

The research proposal itself would need to be iteratively reviewed and updated to ensure that the grant funding cycles do not end prior to completion of research. If various grants are being cobbled together to complete a longer term of research than a few months at a time there would need to be many consecutive milestones or sets of results to achieve some level of entrenchment to carry over from one stage of research to another. It appears many grants are short-term in orientation and so without consecutive successful applications to provide for various sequential results based elaborations on previous research conclusions it would be at times impossible to meet research goals and time constraints in funding sources.

Spring in Korea

Universities look into the future

Universities look into the future (BBC)

By Mike Baker

Will universities in the future still look like this?
The current funding crisis will transform Britain's universities by 2020.

University campuses will be unrecognisable.

The conventional image of today, which is still fondly perpetuated in the media, is already as antiquated as college scarves and sherry with the tutor.

The 18-year-old school leaver, living on campus, studying full-time for a purely academic, three-year undergraduate degree is fast becoming a minority species.

The current financial squeeze, which is set to continue for the next decade, will accelerate a transformation that has begun in many universities.

Already more than one in three students studies part-time and one in six is from overseas. READ THE FULL ARTICLE HERE

Commentary: If things look this bleak in the UK how much better can they be in Canada?

IB Dream Jobs: Vienna University of Economics and Business PhD Studentship

The Institute for International Business (IIB) at the Vienna University of Economics and Business is seeking to fill two positions for Research and Teaching Associates. Positions may be filled at the doctoral level. The successful candidates will provide part-time support to the IIB faculty in teaching and administrative work while pursuing an active program of research. English is the operating language of the group.



Members of the IIB group are active in research in a variety of areas of international business, international management, and strategy. The group maintains a strong collaborative atmosphere with active research-oriented programs for doctoral students. IIB faculty serve on the editorial boards of major journals including the Strategic Management Journal, Journal of International Management, Management International Review, and Global Strategy Journal. One of our members currently serves as Editor-in-Chief of Long Range Planning. We have published in journals such as the Strategic Management Journal, Journal of International Business Studies, Organization Science, Administrative Science Quarterly, Journal of International Management, Management International Review, International Business Review, Research Policy, Organization Studies and many others. IIB also regularly hosts academic visitors from major North American, European and Asian universities.

Established in 1898, Vienna University of Economics and Business has over 20.000 students and 400 full time faculty. It is one of the largest business schools in Europe. The university offers Bachelors, Masters, Executive Masters, and PhD programs in traditional and specialized areas. The University is ranked in the Financial Times European top 50 and the FT top 25 for Business Administration. The joint Masters in International Management (CEMS) is ranked first in Europe by the FT. The university maintains partnerships with 200 universities on all continents and has strong ties to the business community.

Vienna is the capital of Austria and a major center of business for the region. Vienna also is world renown as a center of culture. The city offers exceptional attractions in music, art, and popular culture, as well as world-class dining and a high standard of living. Vienna hosts a variety of international organizations including the UN Atomic Energy Agency, UNIDO, and OPEC. Vienna also serves as the gateway to Central and Eastern Europe; it is the European regional headquarters of more than 200 multinational corporations in IT, financial services, pharmaceuticals and other industries. Vienna is consistently ranked one of the world’s most livable cities by Mercer Consulting.

Minimum requirements for the positions: Candidates must possess a university degree in business studies, social sciences, or a related field.

Informal inquiries should be directed to Professor Björn Ambos. Tel. +431313365121, Email: Bjoern.Ambos@wu.ac.at

To apply please visit the following link (http://www.wu.ac.at/structure/servicecenters/hr/jobs) or send your applications to Vienna University of Economics and Business, HR Department, Augasse 2-6, 1090 Vienna, Austria. Ref. 1532

To be considered for the position, your application including curriculum vitae and three letters of reference must be received by 21.4.2010.

Thoughts on Reading, Writing and Researching

Thoughts on Reading, Writing and Researching

I think there does need to be a balance between the "publish or perish vibe" my classmate and this article (Publish or Perish? Re-Imagining the University Press) describe and having "high but realistic aims" as described by another classmate. My own motivations for formats to publish are somewhere in between and somewhat simplistic or naive. I am often just happy enough and feel I have succeeded in making progress in learning of my discipline just to have the time and inclination to write down and organize my own thoughts in my own chosen way whether that should earn value or exceed requirements among any community is often above and beyond my intrinsic needs.

A recent CBC Ideas podcast by Frank Faulk discussed the importance of internalized codes of moral certainty which are exceedingly difficult to adapt to situational contexts and may even be genetic in their patterns of cognitive expression. This might explain cultural in group versus out group aspects impacting on choices of (or lack of) formats of publication where larger market monopolies and returns on investment may have turned against constructive intellectual debate.

While academics often appear to defend their theses with excessive statistical data which obviously requires greater investment in review they often isolate those readers who should play a larger role in their primary audience which appears to be lost due to uber-competitiveness to be published. Namely their undergraduate and graduate students should provide an audience eager to learn from their publications. However many humanities disciplines have lost prominence and popularity perhaps because they no longer provide relevant thoughtful debate or communicate directly enough to attract higher rates of enrollment and profit-earning tuitions.

As an English Literature undergraduate I was taught to analyze and give significance to written patterns and symbols of communication to thereby possess an ability to identify values and recognize the vitality of human culture embedded in contexts of written English language and present my results in as vital and interesting a forum as possible. I try to avoid controversy and I make it as far as my own dry blog frequently but even in the beginning of that I was fearful of sharing my own thoughts with a sea of strangers. I have gained confidence in this area over time.

Of course English Literature studies as a base are possibly the most heavily derided and misunderstood humanities subject possible. There is a certain cultural aspect of perceived redundancy and I have noticed if most people read anything at all anymore it is as likely to be a TV Guide or some form of pulp fiction let alone an academic paper or a book of non-fiction or history. Let alone write anything at all other than brief emails or SMS texts. That as many as 50%of my fellow Canadians may be functionally illiterate suggests more of them might be studying English Literature or something (anything) to find a reason to read.

For example, plagiarism appears the norm rather than the exception in some studies a percentage of up to 60% of falsified data and seemingly progressively increasing in frequency at the graduate and doctoral levels (Price & Price:2005). Without exemplary leaders and managers these learners are failing their own potential and they bring being taught to think independently into question rather seem to be refining those skills which lead them to being merely opportunistic. As is often said of children perhaps we get the students we deserve. How much of a link is there between functional illiteracy and plagiarism?

Does such a trend indicate how far research academia has insulated itself from the common interests of our world's intrinsic leadership and managerial needs even at the most basic levels? Are we forgetting that teaching people to read, write and research assists in the self-awareness of developing one's own self-image and embodiment or identification with one's own culture? If so, are we collectively witnessing a lost determinant search for the self in this wilderness of plagiarism? It appears obvious nearly half of all academics are not really reading (even) their own students' works.

Price, J. & Price, R. (2005) " Finding the true incidence rate of plagiarism," International Education Journal, 6 (4), 421-429.

[Accessed: March 25, 2010]

Publication Venues and Research Management Considerations

1. How do you decide what format of publication is optimal for you area of research?

When I arrived at my current position I was told people do not usually publish until they have earned their PhDs and that it would be good to develop an enjoyment of reading and writing about this international business graduate discipline. So that’s what I do and I have been doing for in excess of seven years and I am in that holding pattern without regrets until the right PhD program and faculty may appear or reveal itself to my recognition of mutual interests and I really like this job too much to leave it before that time anyway.

I joined JIBS the Journal of International Business Studies which is top flight and has mostly provided scope in terms of junior faculty conferences available with an active mailing list of global conferences and journal submission requests which is a daily reminder that the day will come when I will prepare and plan some form of submission to one or another which I would consider within reach. As I was considered a perfect fit for this position I would hope to be considered a perfect fit for a PhD program with a well matched and patient advisor who truly values cross-cultural experience, global learning and self-improvement goals and who would mesh nicely with my sense of progression and reasonable renumeration rewards to desire higher goals. That would be a pretext to publications.

Money is a motivator.

As my classmate described even with proper preparation many of those with the necessary training and skills may never lead or manage a research project. I would agree internal growth and motivations beyond training are required and there can be no transformation from one stage to the next without it being natural, necessary and inherently part of one’s character at present. There's no way to force it unless it becomes an essential requirement to my personal measures of success. I even have a few other course goals I would like to complete before making a PhD leap. But perhaps not until this lily-pad becomes untenable.



2. In your research field, what factors should the RM consider before publishing?

For money or consultant motivated publication: I believe the RM needs to consider the Terms of Research (TOR) as the first factor to review if only because the contract needs to be clarified if, when and how the results may or may not be published, deseminated or shared and if possible the terms need be reviewed to ensure that the RM's best interests are being met in engaging the research management of the project in question. For example our notes referred to a case where researchers were restricted from access to all results in a private funded project. This would feel like working ona puzzle with a blindfold on to me. Misrepresentation of possible results became an ethical question.

Furthermore, if the RM is working as a consultant on a multinational project then the abstracts, background, perliminary resources, methodology and processes, requirements, stages and deadlines will need to be prsented, confirmed and addressed clearly and known from the outset to coordinate with a lead consultant whereby the deliverables are agreed as well as payments schedules and budgetary needs fixed and known all prior to start with changes only by mutual consent following contractual agreement.



As a classmate and our resources indicate in cases of patent clearance procedures, restrictions and requirements need to be maintained to ensure IP protection. However many of the procedures appear to place the researcher in a Catch 22 position. In terms of hinting at a new discovery or product development in publications I remember a lot of viral hype about some new gadget to revolutionize the way we think of transport and it turned out to be the Segway -building hype into a product that does not deliver or worse yet is subject to recalls - might damage a researcher's reputation if the marketing has been overblown.

New way of fish farming could help fix environment

New way of fish farming could help fix environment
Biologists study whether sea creatures could be used to counteract damage to ecosystems
By Randy Shore, Vancouver SunMarch 25, 2010 New designs for fish farms could keep them in the ocean and help restore damaged marine environments at the same time, says a biologist working on a five-year nationwide aquaculture project.

Marine biologists in New Brunswick and in B.C. are employing mussels, oysters, sea cucumbers, urchins and seaweed to dramatically increase the amount of food created by salmon farms, and they believe they can extract excess carbon and nitrogen pollution from the sea in the process. FULL STORY HERE

A correction to my post on obtaining unbiased data.

I would like to thank Mr. Feroze Khan Vice President of Stratford University for reading my post on steps to obtaining unbiased data and correcting my misinterpretation of the facts in the Helios Air Accident Flight ZU 522.

On Research Leader's Necessary Skills

1. What do you think are the most important skills of a research leader and why?

I believe in reflection and that there is no complete or sufficient empirical "grand list" that can address the essentially intuitive nature of good leadership. However I heavily rely upon W. Edwards Deming's insights, yet again, as I wholly trust his nature to populate my thinking as his thoughts are so finely and resolutely formed and shared. These points reside heavily within his " five deadly diseases" and I freely adapt them for my own purposes to answer this question. Curiously, I am also not completely convinced that leadership be justly separated from the principles of quality management. I believe in attempting to separate them we lose some aspects of their intangible qualities (duality or pisces nature) essential to their best practice in an over-desire to analyze for competitive advantage alone where the " yin and yang" of self-improvement of both aspects of leadership and management direction do signal the processes of future successful human progress. I believe we do need more good managers who are leaders and good leaders who are managers. No less and no more.

Therefore a good research leader:

1.Has constancy of purpose, plans for the future, and defines long-term goals.

2. Emphasizes long-term profits, benefits and budgets & sustains goals for growth.

3.Evaluates performance in ways which are just and moralizing to followers, encourages systems & long-term thinking, teamwork and abolishes fear.

4.Deeply commits to the research team, with strong history of association, profound knowledge of the team, understanding & empathizing with their problems and challenges.

5.Leads and manages beyond statistical analysis and seeks to include the unknown and unknowable, creatively deviates from traditional schools of thought and thus becomes distinctive, unique and an intangible asset to the research.

6.Knows how to listen and how to speak and is the team's personable PDCA cipher.

2. Do skills differ with different research streams?

Different streams imply the possibilities of there being different skills for successfully leading in those streams. The leader of a logistics company requires different skills and knowledge than the leader of a cosmetics company. Therefore, I would opine different skills would certainly be required if one sought to transfer from one to the other. Some leaders might be able to cross-over successfully from logistics to cosmetics due to basic leadership/needs similarities on the Pavlovian or Maslowvian hierarchies. Non-complementary streams and the nature of the scope of distances or differences between them would suggest some leaders would not successfully navigate from one to the other. In the cases of comparing cognitive knowing versus affective influencing leadership skills, for example, computer skills versus charisma, one might suggest all leaders do share certain core competencies in the latter rather than the former. Even if one had no charisma other leadership skills might present themselves to make up the difference.

In the human brain there is an affective area of influencing the opinions, decisions and actions of followers through which a leader might mirror precedence, competitors, market conditions, and other examples while neither absolutely knowing the level of follower compliance to suggestive guidance nor what particular stimulus or incentive even provides the best follower compliance. This would suggest that leadership is perhaps at the best of times an acting performance and an ongoing experiment in testing out affective change management to a range of cause and effect possibilities and contexts.

No regrets listening to this: The Sociology of Richard Sennett

Flesh and Stone: The Sociology of Richard Sennett - Part Two

I like this tune for some reason?

In case you haven't noticed I punctuate my homework and reflections with musical selections.

ANU PhD Scholarship in IB

PhD Scholarship in International Business
Australian National University

Applications are invited for a full-time PhD scholarship in the School of Management, Marketing and International Business funded by a grant under the Linkage Scheme of the Australian Research Council.

The project aims to understand the factors that impacted on the investment decisions of European companies in Australia and of Australian companies in Europe through firm-level surveys. Some of those factors are the international experience of firms, their core competencies, their asessment of opportunities and risk in the foreign business environment, as well as the ways in which they accommodated and mitigated elements of perceived risk through the choice of location, entry mode, local partners etc.

The student involved in the project will develop skills in implementing and developing surveys and analysing the results of the surveys using both qualitative and quantitiative techniques.

The scholarship includes a tax-free stipend of A$26,140 per year for three years. Applicants are expected to have an honours or Masters degree or equivalent qualification in business studies, commerce or economics, or a cognate field of academic study. Both Australian residents and international students may apply.

Application deadline: Friday 19 March 2010.

Enquiries and applications: rso.cbe@anu.edu.au or +61 2 6125 3664

-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-0-

Pierre van der Eng, Associate Professor
School of Management, Marketing & International Business (MMIB)
ANU College of Business and Economics, Copland building 24
The Australian National University
Canberra ACT 0200
Australia
Tel. +61 2 6125 5438
Fax +61 2 6125 8796
ANU CRICOS provider number is 00120C

Concerning Best Practices in Research

1.What training is required for new research staff and what information do they need to be made aware of?

New research staff should first be made aware of their contractual obligations to observe and maintain policies, regulations and ethical requirements as to safeguard the appropriate application of research funds to ensure best practices are maintained. Beyond also being provided with the opportunities to acquire training in methods to develop good thesis and data collection techniques (such as these eGSA courses?) new staff should be acquainted with terms of research requirements and codes of conduct as exemplified by our resource list.

While there are great similarities among the provided codes such as QUT policies, Australian NHMRC regulations, Dupont and the like academic versus business requirements will vary across national and international domains and possibly the extent of their institutional research domains. It also appears that both academic and business codes of conduct share similar frameworks and influence each other in areas of collaborative interest. Our resource list provides evidence of close interconnectivity and collaboration among research organizations around the world which through their experience have encountered similar challenges in managing their research regulations necessitating quite explicit codification of employee requirements perhaps through bitter experience. Obviously ethical requirements are an often debated subject such as the Milgram Electroshock of 1961 or the Zimbardo Prison Experiments of 1971 at Yale University which were considered overly emotionally stressful for volunteer participants on an absolute versus relative approach to ethics (Zimardo:1973).

Zimardo, P.G. (1973) "On the ethics of intervention in human psychological research: With special reference to the Stanford prison experiment," Cognition, 2, 243-256. [Accessed: March 6, 2010]

2. Why do research organizations need retention of data policies?

University and business research programs and institutes provide the environment to develop strategic and profit-making enterprises for the benefit of income earning divisions, shareholders or incubator spin-off corporations who often provide the seed financing required to conduct the research and employ the researchers. Policies concerning the confidentiality and provenance of research conducted seek to ensure competitive advantage in a global business environment often observed to provide challenges in terms of patent protection and infringement of intellectual property rights. The clearest example of recent public document policy oversight concerns the global warming debate and several hacked emails from the University of East Anglia in Cambridge England. Sufficient information security might have prevented the revelation that conflicts of interest and terms of peer review ethics may often come into question "in harsh daylight" even with the prevalence of well organized terms and codes of conduct and policy (Keleman: 2009). On the other hand, large corporations conducting unsustainable business practices have the most to lose from greater regulatory measures to curb industrial influence over research and have often been complicit in the ruination of research reputations among those who question their global business practices as described in numerous publications by Brian Martin at UOW.

Martin, B. (2001) "Environment and Public Health," Censorship: A World Encyclopedia, Volume 2, edited by Derek Jones (London: Fitzroy Dearborn, 2001), pp. 740-743. [Accessed: March 6, 2010]

Keleman, P. (2009) "What East Anglia's E-mails Really Tell Us About Climate Change," popular Mechanics, December 1. [Accessed: March 6, 2010]

3.Identify professional divisions at your university and discuss what each of them does.

While this is a brief list (way to go exceeding our posting length!) it did acquaint me with a large number of Daejin University institutes providing confirmation of their associations and involvement where possible with internet references. Please consider this a brief of scan of a lenghty list.

SOCIAL SCIENCES

Daejin University Academy of Daesoon Thought: Conducts Daesoon philosophy research considered one of East Asia's fastest growing religions.

Daejin University Institute of Local Economy: Conducts research into local technological competitive growth and innovation strategies.

Daejin University Institute of Construction: Conducts research inconstruction engineering and management to improve efficiency based upon collaborative efforts of industry, academia, and research exchanging and sharing technical knowledge, experience, and information through cooperation.

Daejin University Institute of Environment: Conducts research in energy, agriculture and design best practices.

ENGINEERING/BUSINESS

Daejin University Institute of Industrial Technology/ Institute of High-Tech Materials: Conducts research in association with the KREONET-NOC the Korea National Science and Research Network.

Daejin University Institute of International Trade: Conducts research into developing international growth partnerships and business collaboration.

Daejin University Institute of Basic Science: Conducts science and technology research.

EDUCATION

Daejin University Institute of Education Attached to the Graduate School of Education: Conducts education research.

Daejin University Institute of Reading Culture: Conducts research into literacy and literacy training.

Daejin University Institute of Chinese Studies: Conducts active research program in developing the university's Chinese market specialists orientation and cooperative development of the DUCC China campus programs. Daejin University is a Korean market leader in this offshore development.

Daejin University Institute of Humanities: Active in developing digital humanities archives.

Daejin University Institute of Northern Districts /Institute of Local Government's Policy: Assists in local and regional collaborative research projects in Pocheon County and Gyeonggi Province two of the fastest growing regions adjacent to Seoul.

Daejin University Institute of Social Capital: Conducts research into the value and application of social networks to increase individual and group productivity.

Daejin University Institute of Legal Policy: Conducts research in legal and legislative affairs.

Daejin University Institute of Cyber World's Culture: Conducts research into e-business, webometrics and social sciences.

BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY COLLABORATION

Daejin University Industrial and Academic Cooperation Agency: Provides recruitment and employment assistance in cooperation with four regional growth markets in China and Korea.

Daejin University Center for Inauguration and Nurture of Enterprise Research: A research unit which develops information technology applications concerning security and trust, intelligence, multimedia convergence, wireless and mobile communications in a future oriented ever changing commercial environment.

Daejin University Center for Industrial Academic Cooperation: Through membership in the Korea Association of Industry, Academy and Research Institutes assists SMEs with fast paced and economical technical development. Focus is on next-generation growth industries in biotechnology, green technology, and nano information technology.

Daejin University Center for Intellectual Property: Conducts studies upon Information Security and Assurance such as modeling, simulations and applications including computing systems and devices.

Gyeonggi-Daejin Technopark: An SME business incubator located on campus with assistance and development plans with 80 knowledge-based high tech enterprises and research institutes around the province seeking to lead regional economic growth through local industrial and market development research. Companies include biotechnology, IT/electronics, auto components, medicine/chemistry, nanotechnology and mechatronics among others.