From dbd7768f3deb911f66905321ef505cb7774d2ff1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: moliver28 <63178353+moliver28@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 18:49:11 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] make it michaels --- _bibliography/papers 10.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 11.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 12.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 2.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 3.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 4.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 5.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 6.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 7.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 8.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers 9.bib | 117 ------------------ _bibliography/papers.bib | 117 ------------------ _config.yml | 24 ++-- _pages/about.md | 13 +- _pages/postscript.md | 42 ------- _pages/teaching.md | 49 -------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 10.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 11.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 2.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 3.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 4.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 5.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 6.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 7.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 8.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 9.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1.md | 79 ------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 10.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 11.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 12.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 2.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 3.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 4.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 5.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 6.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 7.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 8.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 9.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2.md | 176 ---------------------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 10.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 11.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 12.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 2.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 3.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 4.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 5.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 6.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 7.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 8.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells 9.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-5-castells.md | 108 ----------------- _posts/2021-10-7-stories 2.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-10-7-stories 3.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-10-7-stories 4.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-10-7-stories 5.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-10-7-stories 6.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-10-7-stories.md | 21 ---- _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 2.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 3.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 4.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 5.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 6.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3.md | 72 ------------ _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 10.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 11.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 12.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 2.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 3.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 4.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 5.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 6.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 7.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 8.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 9.md | 70 ----------- _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4.md | 70 ----------- _projects/COVID_engr.md | 20 ---- _projects/ENTRE_541.md | 32 ----- _projects/MisraWilson_asee.md | 35 ------ _projects/legged_robots.md | 49 -------- _projects/moonbeam.md | 21 ---- _projects/rl.md | 8 -- _research/capstone-covid.md | 101 ---------------- _research/capstone.md | 96 --------------- assets/css/main 2.css | 4 +- 84 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 7554 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 10.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 11.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 12.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 2.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 3.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 4.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 5.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 6.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 7.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 8.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers 9.bib delete mode 100644 _bibliography/papers.bib delete mode 100644 _pages/postscript.md delete mode 100644 _pages/teaching.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 10.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 11.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 7.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 8.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 9.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-17-innovation1.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 10.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 11.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 12.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 7.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 8.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 9.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-27-innovation2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 10.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 11.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 12.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 7.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 8.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells 9.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-5-castells.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-10-7-stories.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-1-innovation3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 10.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 11.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 12.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 2.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 3.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 4.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 5.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 6.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 7.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 8.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 9.md delete mode 100644 _posts/2021-11-23-innovation4.md delete mode 100644 _projects/COVID_engr.md delete mode 100644 _projects/ENTRE_541.md delete mode 100644 _projects/MisraWilson_asee.md delete mode 100644 _projects/legged_robots.md delete mode 100644 _projects/moonbeam.md delete mode 100644 _projects/rl.md delete mode 100644 _research/capstone-covid.md delete mode 100644 _research/capstone.md diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 10.bib b/_bibliography/papers 10.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 10.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 11.bib b/_bibliography/papers 11.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 11.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 12.bib b/_bibliography/papers 12.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 12.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 2.bib b/_bibliography/papers 2.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 2.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 3.bib b/_bibliography/papers 3.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 3.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 4.bib b/_bibliography/papers 4.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 4.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 5.bib b/_bibliography/papers 5.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 5.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 6.bib b/_bibliography/papers 6.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 6.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 7.bib b/_bibliography/papers 7.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 7.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 8.bib b/_bibliography/papers 8.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 8.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers 9.bib b/_bibliography/papers 9.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers 9.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_bibliography/papers.bib b/_bibliography/papers.bib deleted file mode 100644 index bb858b7f37c5..000000000000 --- a/_bibliography/papers.bib +++ /dev/null @@ -1,117 +0,0 @@ ---- ---- - -@string{aps = {American Physical Society,}} - -@inproceedings{weininger2021guaranteed, - title={Guaranteed Trade-Offs in Dynamic Information Flow Tracking Games}, - author={Weininger, Maximilian and Grover, Kush and Misra, Shruti and Kretinsky, Jan}, - booktitle={2021 60th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={3786--3793}, - year={2021}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2021}, - abstract = {We consider security risks in the form of advanced persistent threats (APTs) and their detection using dynamic information flow tracking (DIFT). We model the tracking and the detection as a stochastic game between the attacker and the defender. Compared to the state of the art, our approach applies to a wider set of scenarios with arbitrary (not only acyclic) information-flow structure. Moreover, multidimensional rewards allow us to formulate and answer questions related to trade-offs between resource efficiency of the tracking and efficacy of the detection. Finally, our algorithm provides results with probably approximately correct (PAC) guarantees, in contrast to previous (possibly arbitrarily imprecise) learning-based approaches.} -} - -@inproceedings{anderson2021should, - title={What Should Teachers Do? Visibility of Faculty and TA Support Across Remote and Traditional Learning}, - author={Anderson, Morgan Elizabeth and Wilson, Denise and Bai, Ziyan and Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has altered best practices for instructors and teaching assistants (TAs) to support student learning in engineering. This does not necessarily mean that instructional support has diminished as a consequence of the transition to remote learning. In this study, instructional support was explored using quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis. Surveys from over 600 students in sophomore and junior level courses in engineering at a large public institution were collected in the Spring of 2020 and compared to results from similar courses offered prior to the start of the COVID-19 crisis. Likert-scale items, as well as short answer items, that independently measured faculty support and TA support were analyzed in this study. - -Initial t-tests indicated that perceptions of faculty support were not significantly different between remote and traditional learning. To consider the possibility that failure to reject the null hypothesis was due to course-by-course variations, additional t-tests were used to compare student perceptions of faculty support across pairs of courses taught in both settings. Post-hoc tests showed that faculty support was significantly higher in the remote learning setting in three of seven pairs of courses and significantly lower in the remote learning setting in the four remaining courses (p < 0.05). Similarly, in considering TA support, an initial t-test indicated that perceptions of TA support were not significantly different in remote learning compared to traditional learning, but in course-by-course comparisons, students believed they were offered significantly higher TA support in remote learning in three pairs of classes and significantly lower TA support in one pair of classes (p < 0.05) with three classes indicating no significant difference. - -Students in both settings were also asked to identify one thing that faculty could do and one thing that TAs could do to better support their learning. Inductive coding of these short answer responses revealed that while in traditional learning, students emphasized faculty support in in-class and out of class delivery of materials, in remote learning, the emphasis shifted to needs for support in out of class delivery and out of class interactions. For TAs, student expectations were balanced between in-class delivery and out-of-class interactions in traditional learning but their needs for more out of class interactions dominated their concerns in remote learning. Overall, for faculty, about 20% of students requested greater availability in both remote and in-person settings. For TAs, 44% of students requested greater availability of and access to their TAs in remote learning, compared to 18% in in-person settings. - -The analysis of both Likert-scale and short answer data regarding TA and faculty support in this study reinforces the importance of availability of -instructional support regardless of setting. As students, TAs, and faculty continue to navigate the uncharted waters of the traditional college education -system gone online, the nature of connection differs yet its importance remains the same.} -} - -@inproceedings{kardam2021students, - title={What Do Students Need from other Students? Peer Support During Remote Learning}, - author={Kardam, Neha and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - website={http://labs.ece.uw.edu/community/Covid19/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has isolated students as they work from home, often in different time zones and in different locations around the world. In traditional learning settings, college students have ample opportunities for face-to-face interactions to work and learn together. In contrast, in remote learning settings, social isolation drastically reduces these opportunities which puts the responsibility on faculty and administrators to offer alternative means for students to develop peer support. Through over 1,000 surveys and a convergent parallel, mixed-methods approach, this study examined peer support among students using both close-ended and short answer questions in both remote and in-person settings. Students from 16 courses junior and sophomore level classes in electrical and mechanical engineering at a large public research institution reported present and preferred levels of peer support within in-person and remote learning settings. Statistical analysis of all courses showed that there was no significant difference in perceived peer support between remote and in-person learning environments. This result was also supported by qualitative analysis of short answer questions over multiple courses coded based on the cooperative learning framework. However, when both quantitative and qualitative analysis was repeated for those individual courses that were surveyed both during in-person and remote learning settings, significant differences were observed in students' perceived peer support in some courses. These analyses suggested that course-to-course and instructor-to-instructor variations overshadowed any differences in perceived peer support. The qualitative data shed light on a different aspect of peer support differences in the two settings. Notably, qualitative data indicated that students more frequently expressed an expectation for peers teaching peers (i.e., peer instruction) when participating in study groups in-person as opposed to remotely. Furthermore, while the peer support needs were mostly similar in both settings, the tools to achieve those needs changed between the classroom and remote context. This is exemplified by student responses that were unique to the remote learning context such as the need for peers to be more respectful over chat and to be considerate of others during Zoom sessions. In the remote context, students also mentioned frequently a desire for forums or discussion boards, where they could share and check approaches and answers to problems in an online setting. This study underscores the importance of peer support regardless of setting and suggests that peer support is easier to achieve in in-person than on-line. However, engineering students are a creative lot, and they had much to offer in terms of improvements to peer support during remote learning including the creative use of a wide range of tools on Canvas, Zoom, or Slack and rules of conduct expected in chat, audio, and video features when using those tools. Students are willing to adapt to remote learning and the data from this study have provided valuable input to faculty for supporting students in doing so.} -} - -@inproceedings{bai2021differences, - title={Differences in Perceptions of Instructional Support between US and International Students Before and During COVID-19}, - author={Bai, Ziyan and Wilson, Denise and Misra, Shruti and Anderson, Morgan and Kardam, Neha}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - press = {https://www.ece.uw.edu/spotlight/asee_awards_wilson_bai/}, - abstract = {The COVID-19 public health crisis has influenced the way American higher education institutions operate and support student success. As a result of the crisis, institutions that traditionally provided in-person instruction abruptly moved to a virtual space with little preparation time in the spring of 2020. Considering the critical roles that both faculty and teaching assistants (TAs) play in student learning and engagement, this study explored the contribution that this abrupt transition to remote learning made in international students’ perceptions of faculty and TA support, and positive emotional engagement, compared to U.S. students. Data collected from surveys in in-person settings prior to COVID-19 and in spring of 2020 immediately after COVID-19 impacted the delivery of higher education (N = 1,212) were used to study if and how the remote setting influenced international student perceptions of faculty and TA support and positive emotional engagement. The pre-COVID surveys were collected from students enrolled in sophomore and junior-level engineering courses prior to 2020, and the remaining surveys were collected from students enrolled in remote learning courses in the spring of 2020. Seven of the courses were the same in both the remote and in-person survey populations, and the remaining five courses were similar (in mechanical or electrical engineering and involving significant TA support). - -The data were analyzed cross-sectionally using hierarchical linear models. All models considered demographics (gender and citizenship status), behavioral engagement, and emotional engagement variables. The study found that international students’ perceived level of faculty support was more sensitive to their level of self-efficacy than that of their U.S. peers. International students’ perceptions of TA support were also found to be generally higher than that of U.S. students. Finally, international students’ positive emotional engagement was higher than that of U.S. peers, more sensitive to participation, and less sensitive to perceptions of TA support. - -Faculty and TA support are both important to student learning and this is particularly true for international students. Contrary to the perception that remote learning is substandard compared to traditional learning, this study suggests that students overall felt that the instructional team provided adequate support during the COVID-19 crisis. This study was not able to explain whether this effect will “wear off” as remote learning continues, and students become less charitable in their assessments. Although this data was collected from only a single institution, it suggests that what engineering faculty and TAs did in the first term of remote learning worked; and carrying forward those practices into future remote instruction and instruction beyond the COVID-19 pandemic may be recommended.}, - award={Best Diversity Paper
in the Division} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2021industry, - title={Industry-University Capstone Design: How did students adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic?}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Wilson, Denise}, - booktitle={2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access}, - year={2021}, - abbr={ASEE 2021}, - abstract = {A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. - -This study compares student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. Close-ended survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods and short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. - -The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption. The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, -and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. -By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, -while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected.} -} - -@inproceedings{misra2019learning, - title={Learning equilibria in stochastic information flow tracking games with partial knowledge}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Moothedath, Shana and Hosseini, Hossein and Allen, Joey and Bushnell, Linda and Lee, Wenke and Poovendran, Radha}, - booktitle={2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)}, - pages={4053--4060}, - year={2019}, - organization={IEEE}, - abbr={IEEE CDC 2019}, - abstract = {Dynamic Information Flow Tracking (DIFT) has been proposed to detect stealthy and persistent cyber attacks in a computer system that evade existing defense mechanisms such as firewalls and signature-based antivirus systems. A DIFTbased defense tracks the propagation of suspicious information flows across the system and dynamically generates security analysis to identify possible attacks, at the cost of additional performance and memory overhead for analyzing non-adversarial information flows. In this paper, we model the interaction between adversarial information flows and DIFT on a partially known system as a nonzero-sum stochastic game. Our game model captures the probability that the adversary evades detection even when it is analyzed using the security policies (false-negatives) and the performance overhead incurred by the defender for analyzing the non-adversarial flows in the system. We prove the existence of a Nash equilibrium (NE) and propose a supervised learning-based approach to find an approximate NE. Our approach is based on a partially input convex neural network that learns a mapping between the strategies and payoffs of the players with the available system knowledge, and an alternating optimization technique that updates the players' strategies to obtain an approximate equilibrium. We evaluate the performance of the proposed approach and empirically show the convergence to an approximate NE for synthetic random generated graphs and real-world dataset collected using Refinable Attack INvestigation (RAIN) framework.} -} - -@misc{misralittle2018symposium, - title={Supporting student-teachers to develop inclusive and culturally aware STEM curriculum}, - author={Misra, Shruti and Little, Devon}, - booktitle={2018 University of Washington 14th Annual Teaching and Learning Symposium}, - year={2018}, - organization={University of Washington}, - abbr={T&L Symposium 2018}, - abstract = {As part of the Pipeline Project, Alternative Spring Break programs (ASB) are a unique -opportunity for UW students to design their own STEM curriculum during a winter quarter -seminar, and subsequently teach that curriculum to students in rural or tribal communities -throughout Washington state. The preparatory seminar has three overarching goals: 1) to -encourage a supportive learning community amongst student-educators 2) to cultivate skills in -cultural responsiveness and 3) to advance a constructivist model of learning. The main basis for -the approach is the intertwined relationship between culture and education. According to -UNESCO Guidelines for Intercultural Education, “Culture forges educational content, -operational modes and contexts because it shapes our frames of reference, our ways of thinking -and acting, our beliefs and even our feelings”. The seminar emphasizes the importance of -developing a culturally aware STEM curriculum and teaching approaches built on relationships -of mutual trust, between students and teachers. Thus, when student-educators are working with -different communities, they are aware of the communities’ cultural norms in relation to their own -norms and can educate without alienating the communities’ culture. Since the seminar is -ongoing, its overall result will be analyzed at the end of ASB, after Spring Break. However, a -major observed result is, student-educator awareness and proactivity to connect their curriculum -to the culture of communities’ they are going to visit. The main challenge in developing this -seminar is guiding curriculum planning such that it incorporates science standards, community- -building and cultural investigation coherently. Encouraging students to discover the right balance -of the three is a major part of the process. Student awareness about this balance, is a -transformative impact in itself. By driving equitable and inclusive learning environments, we -hope to make science relevant to student lives, and encourage them to contribute to it via their -own cultural lens.} -} diff --git a/_config.yml b/_config.yml index 8c1d4b35666e..910da9caec46 100644 --- a/_config.yml +++ b/_config.yml @@ -3,14 +3,14 @@ # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- title: blank # the website title (if blank, full name will be used instead) -first_name: Shruti +first_name: Michael middle_name: -last_name: Misra -email: shrm145@uw.edu +last_name: Oliver +email: oliver.researching@gmail.com description: > # the ">" symbol means to ignore newlines until "footer_text:" - A simple, whitespace theme for academics. Based on [*folio](https://github.com/bogoli/-folio) design. + Michael Oliver's portfolio using GitHub Pages. footer_text: > -icon: SM # the emoji used as the favicon +icon: 𝕄 # the emoji used as the favicon url: # the base hostname & protocol for your site baseurl: # the subpath of your site, e.g. /blog/ last_updated: false # set to true if you want to display last updated in the footer @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ navbar_fixed: true footer_fixed: true # Dimensions -max_width: 800px +max_width: 900px # TODO: add layout settings (single page vs. multi-page) @@ -45,13 +45,13 @@ og_image: # The site-wide (default for all links) Open Graph preview image # Social integration # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- -github_username: shruti-misra +github_username: moliver28 gitlab_username: # your GitLab user name twitter_username: # your Twitter handle -linkedin_username: shrutim14 # your LinkedIn user name -scholar_userid: dXU04GkAAAAJ&hl # your Google Scholar ID +linkedin_username: michaeleoliver # your LinkedIn user name +scholar_userid: # your Google Scholar ID orcid_id: # your ORCID ID -medium_username: shrutimisra # your Medium username +medium_username: moliver-ux # your Medium username quora_username: # your Quora username publons_id: # your ID on Publons research_gate_profile: # your profile on ResearchGate @@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ disqus_shortname: al-folio # put your disqus shortname # https://help.disqus.com/en/articles/1717111-what-s-a-shortname external_sources: - - name: medium.com - rss_url: https://medium.com/@shrutimisra/feed + - name: + rss_url: # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Collections diff --git a/_pages/about.md b/_pages/about.md index 464de7cc8f35..a038ebd1fb0c 100644 --- a/_pages/about.md +++ b/_pages/about.md @@ -2,18 +2,15 @@ layout: about title: about permalink: / -description: Ph.D., University of Washington - -profile: - align: right - image: prof_pic3.png +description: UX Researcher, GitLab Inc. news: false # includes a list of news items # selected_papers: true # includes a list of papers marked as "selected={true}" social: true # includes social icons at the bottom of the page --- +Beginning as the inaugural UX researcher at my first company, Higher Logic LLC, I established robust research methodologies and championed a user-centric ethos. After leveraging my background in advanced statistics to develop a single-score benchmarking metric that became a default product feature, I discovered a passion for integrating data science techniques with UX research methods to address foundational and strategic research questions. + +This experience paved the way for my subsequent role at the industry-leading technology company, GitLab Inc., during the transition from startup to post-IPO. There, I seamlessly integrated my mixed-methods skills with existing enterprise-level teams and processes. In an initiative to elevate the collective skills of the UX Research team, I introduced the Jobs to Be Done (JTBD) framework into my research designs and created numerous guides and templates to support future research. -With a background in data science and computer engineering, I bring extensive experience in handling diverse datasets and using advanced statistical and machine learning methods. I also enjoy storytelling by designing interactive data visualizations (often in Python or Tableau), to effectively communicate data-driven narratives to diverse audiences. - -Presently, I am broadening my skill set to encompass areas such as time series analysis and machine learning methods tailored for examining trends in energy systems. I am eager to continue my learning new ways to extract actionable insights from data within fast-paced and collaborative environments. \ No newline at end of file +On my journey to becoming a complete product researcher, I am committed to acquiring any necessary skills and adopting relevant frameworks to comprehend users and the surrounding market. This demand-side thinking has proven to be an invaluable asset to my stakeholders and will undoubtedly continue to generate unique insights in the future. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/_pages/postscript.md b/_pages/postscript.md deleted file mode 100644 index 8c2f1954dd5d..000000000000 --- a/_pages/postscript.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,42 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -permalink: /ps/ -title: postscript -order: 6 -description: -nav: true ---- -
- -## Latest favourites - -
- - -### Currently reading.... -- Caves of Steel: Issac Asimov - -
- -### Books -- Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman -- Night Circus: Erin Morgenstern -- A Gentleman in Moscow: Amor Towles - -
-### Music -- Introduction, Presence: Nation of Language -- New Me, Same Us: Little Dragon -- Starlight 99: Argonaut & Wasp - -
-### Blogs and Articles -- Stratechery by Ben Thompson -- Cassie Kozyrkov's Medium -- Why Design Thinking Works? - -
-### Podcasts -- Freakonomics -- ReThinking with Adam Grant - diff --git a/_pages/teaching.md b/_pages/teaching.md deleted file mode 100644 index 122532145ef0..000000000000 --- a/_pages/teaching.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,49 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -permalink: /teaching/ -title: teaching -order: 3 -description: -nav: true ---- -
- -## Industry Sponsored Engineering Design Capstone - -Since 2018, have been the lead TA for my department's senior design capstone in which students work on industry projects for two quarters, during which I have achieved the following: - -- Led the growth and success of 5 cohorts of the program, during which the number of students grew from over 85+ (20+ projects) to 250+ students (52 projects). - -- Managed a growing team of TAs that grew from 2 to 4 members in five years. - -- Designed and implemented an innovative curriculum for the program, including assignments, meeting and presentation schedules, and community events, resulting in higher student engagement. - -- Mentored over 150 students (50+ teams) by providing guidance and support for design project scoping, technical assistance, interpersonal conflict resolution, and project management, resulting in successful project completion and student satisfaction. - -As a result of my work, I was a finalist for the Outstanding Teaching Award in 2022 across all UW departments, and in 2019, I won the Outstanding Teaching Assistant Award, which was presented by the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. - -
- -## Alternative Spring Break (ASB) - - - -The program is a part of Riverways Education Partnerships (formerly known as The Pipeline Project) and serves rural and tribal schools across Washington State. I first participated in the Environmental ASB (EASB) in 2013 during which I: -- Developed and delivered an engaging curriculum to elementary and middle school students at the Quileute Tribal School in La Push, educating them about Washington's diverse environment. - -- Facilitated meaningful learning experiences for students by implementing interactive activities, resulting in high student engagement and positive feedback. -- Contributed to the success of the program by collaborating effectively with team members, and demonstrating strong leadership skills, resulting in an impactful program. - -I returned to the program in 2017 to pilot an engineering focused ASB program during which I : -- Founded and directed the Engineering Alternative Spring Break program for high school students in Yakima Valley, Washington, providing a unique opportunity for students to engage with engineering concepts. - -- Recruited and trained a team of 5 students to design and implement a weeklong engineering-focused curriculum at Granger High School, resulting in high levels of student engagement and positive feedback from both students and teachers. - -- Led a seminar series for 20+ university students, providing guidance and support in developing culturally responsive STEM curricula that met the needs and interests of multicultual student populations. - -- Contributed to the development of inclusive and equitable STEM education practices by incorporating culturally responsive teaching techniques and promoting inclusion and equity in the Engineering Alternative Spring Break program. - -
- -## Other Engineering Courses -During my Masters I have TA'ed for all of the courses in the embedded systems series including Introduction to Microcontrollers (EE 299), Digital Circuits (EE 271), Digital Design (EE 371), Introduction to Embedded Systems (EE474) and Embedded Systems Capstone (EE475). In all of these classes, I facilitated lab sessions, graded assignments and exams and provided technical assistance to students for their lab work. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 10.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 10.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 10.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 11.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 11.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 11.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 2.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 3.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 4.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 5.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 6.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 7.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 7.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 7.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 8.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 8.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 8.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 9.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 9.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1 9.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1.md b/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1.md deleted file mode 100644 index d74638dec6d7..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-17-innovation1.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,79 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.A - What is innovation? -date: 2021-10-17 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- - -Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. Over a year ago, I asked some of my students what innovation meant to them. - -

- -Unsurprisingly, I found that innovation meant different things to different people. This diversity of definitions of innovation existed not only in personal opinion, but is also reflected in definitions used across different fields in academia, industry and government [1], as you can see below. - -

-
- Image from: Various definitions of innovation across different organizations -
- -The concept of innovation has a long history with vague and fluid definitions. However, in the 1940s, Joseph Schumpeter paved the way to rigorously study innovation from an economic perspective by popularizing the term “creative destruction”[4]. He used the notion of “creative destruction” to explain how new markets and economic structures are created through the destruction of old ones and that technological innovation was at the heart of this process. Since then, the concept of innovation has been further studied and built upon by academics in economics, management, network science etc. -In order to study innovation, academics and others have attempted to define the concept in a way that is generalizable. While there still are multiple definitions of innovation in various fields of study, some have been widely accepted. One such definition of innovation that I like to consider is used by the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development [5]: - -
-“Innovation is a new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s (organization, firm, nation etc.) previous products or processes and that has been made available to potential users (product) or brought into use by the unit (process).” -
- -I like this definition as it encompasses a couple of nuanced ideas about the concept of innovation : (1) innovation is not just the creation of a new product (a thing or tangible object), it also encompasses the creation of a new process. An example of this maybe a new laboratory process to make an existing compound more efficiently or economically. (2) innovation is not just about creation; it is also about application. It is defined as a new and improved product or process and has been made available for potential use. These nuances may not be obvious to everyone, given the previous responses of my students regarding what they define as innovation. This definition of innovation also opens the door to a more systemic view of the process that is concrete yet messy and involves multiple stakeholders. - -Let’s me explain what I mean through an example. When I think of an innovation, I think about the first iPhone, which I then associate with Apple and Steve Jobs, as they brought this product to market. However, when we look under hood of the iPhone, there are a myriad of technologies that Apple did not create. - -

-
- Image from: The Entrepreneurial State by Mariana Mazzucato [6] -
- -These technologies were often created in research labs in universities, funded by various public agencies. If innovation was only defined as creation, then how much of an innovator was Apple or Steve Jobs? They did not create the various technologies embedded in an iPhone. However, without Apple, these technologies might have never reached customers in the way they have today. Therefore, defining innovation as process of creation and application motivates us to start thinking about it as a system of interacting entities involved in innovating novel technologies, instead of subscribing to the myth of a lone inventor in their garage. -As an engineer, I like to think in systems as it provides a simplified framework to organize and analyze complex relationships. It so turns out that in the literature of innovation studies, there is a concept of a system of innovation (SI). An SI can roughly be defined as components and relationships between those components that determine and affect the process of innovation. - -

-
- National Innovation System Model [7] -
-

-
- MIT’s five stakeholders in an innovation ecosystem [8] -
- -According to this literature, the system of innovation has three components: - -* Organizations: These are formal structures that are consciously created and have an explicit purpose. Organizations are the agents/actors in an SI. They are akin to the players of a game. Examples of some important organizations in an SI include firms, universities, venture capitalists, public agencies etc. -* Institutions: Set of common habits, norms, routines, established practices, rules or laws that govern the relations and interactions between individuals, groups, and organizations. They are akin to the rules of a game.. Examples include patent laws, along with the rules and norms influencing the relations between universities and firms -* Networks: These are the relationships between different organizations that determine how information flows between various entities in an SI. - -Together, the interactions between these components can determine how effective an innovation system is. All of this sounds abstract and theoretical, so in my next post I will attempt to make this a little more concrete with a couple of examples. - -## Main Takeaways -The main takeaways from this are: - -* The concept of innovation has multiple definitions depending on the context. -* Innovation is not just about creation, but also application -* Innovation involves not just the creation of a product or an object, but can also involve the creation of a new process -* Innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions, which determines the outcome of the innovation process - -## References - -1. Taylor, S. P. (2017). What is innovation? A study of the definitions, academic models and applicability of innovation to an example of social housing in England. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 5(11), 128–146. - -2. https://innovation.microsoft.com/en-us - -3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/innovation/strategy/introduction - -4. A Schumpeter, J. (2021). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. - -5. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, & Statistical Office of the European Communities. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for collecting, reporting and using data on innovation. OECD publishing. - -6. Mazzucato, M. (2011). The entrepreneurial state. Soundings, 49(49), 131–142. - -7. Arnold, E., & Kuhlman, S. (2001). Research Council of Norway in the Norwegion Research and Innovation System. Informe de base, (12). - -8. Budden, P., & Murray, F. (2019). MIT’s Stakeholder Framework for Building & Accelerating Innovation Ecosystems. Retrieved from MIT Lab for Innovation Science and Policy website: https://innovation. mit. edu/assets/MIT-Stakeholder-Fram. ework_Innovation-Ecosystems. pdf. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 10.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 10.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 10.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 11.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 11.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 11.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 12.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 12.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 12.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 2.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 3.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 4.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 5.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 6.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 7.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 7.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 7.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 8.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 8.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 8.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 9.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 9.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2 9.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2.md b/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2.md deleted file mode 100644 index 05eb95b441c2..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-27-innovation2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,176 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part I.B-Systems of Innovation -date: 2021-10-27 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is adapted from my talk at the University of Washington’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering. ---- -In my previous post I talked about the various definitions of innovation and introduced the notion of a system of innovation consisting of organizations, institutions, and networks. One of the main takeaways was that innovation is not a solo endeavor (the myth of the lone inventor). It is facilitated by a system of interacting organizations steeped in various institutions and networks, which determines the outcome of the innovation process. -In this post, I attempt to make this idea concrete through a couple of real-world stories. - -
- -# The Story of Route 128 and Silicon Valley (in the 1980s-1990s) - -This story is adapted from AnnaLee Saxenian's popular comparison of the Silicon Valley and Route 128 [1]. - -

- -Silicon Valley is a major hub of technological innovation. It is known to be the home of innovative technology giants such as Facebook, Apple, Google and many more. However, in the 1980s the picture was different. Silicon Valley was not the only technology hub in the country, it was competing with Route 128, located near Boston. Between 1959 and 1970, Route 128 had a higher total high-technology employment than Silicon Valley, indicating its dominance in the electronics industry. However, after 1975, the trend changed and Silicon Valley surpassed Route 128 in the total high-technology employment. Furthermore, between 1985 and 1990, the number of fastest growing electronics companies was declining in Route 128 and increasing in Silicon Valley. These trends provoke the question- what was going on? Here are two systems of innovation (SIs), one growing fast while the other declining. -What might be driving this pattern? To answer this question, I look at what some of the organizations in both regions were doing. - -

- -## 1.1 The Giants: HP and DEC - -

- -Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)and HP were both major organizations in the electronics industry in the 1980s. Both were established early on in the history of electronics. DEC was established in Maynard, Massachusetts (Route 128) in 1957 and HP was founded in Palo Alto, California (Silicon Valley) in 1939. Moreover, DEC dominated Route 128 unlike any other company (including HP) dominated Silicon Valley. However, HP is still around, while DEC got acquired by Compaq at the end of the 1990s, which ironically got acquired by HP in 2002. What did HP and DEC do differently? We can analyze these difference through the lens of innovation systems and examine the institutions and networks driving both of these organizations. - -### 1.1.1 HP & DEC: Institutions - -There were notable institutional differences in how HP and DEC functioned. - -* Proprietary vs. Open systems: DEC was adamant about building proprietary systems. They believed that the value of their products was in the "secret sauce" of their hardware and software systems. Whereas HP encouraged emerging open systems such as the UNIX operating system, which made their products compatible with other products in the market. Furthermore, HP was an early investor in the Reduced Instruction Set Computing (RISC) microprocessor architecture, which was faster. Consequently, by1990, HP controlled 31% of the $8 billion RISC computer market, in which DEC still had no presence. DEC was still very focused on furthering the vision for its proprietary VMX operating system and VAX architecture, despite the industry shifting to UNIX and RISC based technology. In 1992, when DEC finally introduced its own RISC processor, it was too late and they ended up controlling only 13% of the market. -* Organizational Structure: HP was a large, decentralized firm and had an autonomous divisional structure that trained general managers while also giving them the power to make decisions fast. The benefit of this structure is described by a 16-year veteran of DEC who later switched to HP: - -
-"Running a business at the division level, you get a chance to be a general manager. You get a chance to learn . . . to be creative. . . . There are a lot of new divisions springing up [within HP], new ideas springing up, brand new businesses, and old divisions that couldn't make it anymore transform themselves into new businesses" - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -Thus, HP was fostering entrepreneurial opportunities and innovation within it. In contrast, DEC's highly centralized matrix structure disincentivized such efforts by concentrating decision making power in a few top executives. Moreover, HP's decentralized structure provided it with the agility required to survive in the highly competitive market of the time, while DEC's centralized structure prevented it from making quick decisions and moving fast. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP's open and decentralized institutions allowed it to quickly capitalize on emerging trends in technology. It's readiness to acknowledge and adopt changing trends was driven by an organizational structure that supported experimentation and autonomy at lower levels of the organization. These institutional characteristics allowed HP to remain ahead of the curve and adapt to changing times. -On the other hand, DEC's proprietary and centralized institutional practices prevented it from making the quick changes it needed to remain competitive. Its reluctance to recognize and adapt to technological shifts was furthered by a centralized organizational structure. This meant that the power to govern DEC's direction was concentrated in a few number of top executives, who refused to acknowledge new technological trends and caused DEC to lose its edge by the 1990s. -

- -
- -### 1.1.2 HP & DEC: Networks - -In early 1980s, both HP and DEC had a high level of vertical integration. However, later in the decade HP recognized that it could not produce everything in-house and decided to build external alliances . It started outsourcing some of the fabrication to external partners and worked with local companies offering complimentary technologies. Being part of a vibrant external network provided HP with access to a wealth of information about new technologies. This allowed them to identify and capitalize upon emerging trends such as open-source systems and RISC. -Meanwhile, DEC decided to stick with vertical integration. Route 128's autarkic culture meant that the region offered little social and technical support for DEC to pivot to a more flexible and connected organizational model. Since most organizations in the region preferred to be vertically integrated and operated in isolation, the region did not lend itself to supporting a thriving network of smaller companies and open exchange of information. Tom Furlong, an engineer working for DEC at the time articulates this as follows. - -
-"The same job of bringing a new workstation to market takes two times as long in the East coast and many more people than it does here. In Maynard (DEC), I had to do everything inside the company. I can rely on the other companies in Silicon Valley. It's easier and cheaper for me to rely on the little companies in Silicon Valley to take care of the things I need, and it forces them to compete and be more efficient." - (From Saxenian 1996) -
- -By creating a market for local companies to compete in, HP was encouraging them to innovate. These innovations would then find their way back to HP, giving them a competitive edge. However, DEC did not have the same access to information as it was not connected to an external network in the same way as HP. Therefore, it was unable to identify technology trends in time, and when it did, its centralized institutions did not allow it to move fast enough, causing DEC to be left behind. - -My favorite vignette from this story is that DEC's Palo Alto lab had developed state-of-the-art RISC and UNIX technologies in the early 1980s. However, its discoveries were ignored by the HQ in Route 128, which favored its existing profitable VAX-VMS system. Industry insiders believe that DEC's Palo Alto lab contributed more to Silicon Valley firms than it did to DEC, as their findings were quickly disseminated through the Valley's burgeoning networks. - -### *TLDR - -

-HP intentionally built external alliances and plugged into Silicon Valley's network of local firms, academics and smaller companies. Through this network, they were able to quickly obtain "the word on the street" about upcoming technological trends and capitalize it to maintain their competitive edge. By partnering with external contractors and smaller companies, they also created a competitive market for these companies to innovation. - -DEC was internally focused and vertically integrated. This was partly because the isolated culture of Route 128 meant that there wasn't much of an external network that DEC could leverage even if they wanted to. DEC's isolated position also meant that they did not have similar access to information about new technologies like HP did, resulting in them not adapting to changing trends as quickly. -

- -These trends are not characteristic of large companies in the two regions. Similar tendencies can be observed in smaller companies in both regions. - -
- -## 1.2 The Newcomers: Sun Microsystems vs. Apollo Computers - -

- -Both Apollo Computers and Sun Microsystems were founded in the early 1980s in Route 128 and Silicon Valley respectively. By most accounts, the Apollo workstation was initially superior to that of Sun. But, by 1989 Apollo Computers had fallen to 4th place in the industry and was eventually acquired by HP, while Sun led the industry with over $3 billion in sales. The story of these companies is similar to their larger counterparts DEC and HP. - -Apollo Computers' institutions favored proprietary hardware and software, while Sun Microsystems was pioneering open systems. Apollo's organizational structure was like DEC in its centralization. Apollo hired Thomas Vandeslice a long time East Coast executive as its CEO. Vanderslice brought a traditional, risk-averse management style focused on establishing rigid decision-making procedures, cost cutting and diversifying the firm's customer base. On the other hand, Sun developed a decentralized organizational structure focused on the flexibility to survive in a highly competitive tech market of the time. Corporate strategy was generated by discussions among representatives of autonomous divisions, instead of a centralized authority. Information communication, participation and individual initiative was encouraged. - -Apollo Computers also designed and fabricated its own central processor and specialized circuits. In contrast, Sun purchased almost all its components from external vendors and subcontractors, plugging into the network of smaller organizations in the Silicon Valley region. The focus on purchasing equipment also allowed Sun to develop complex new products quickly and economically, thus staying ahead of competitors and imitators. Their products were cheaper to produce and sold for half the price of Apollo Systems'. - -### *TLDR - -

-Apollo's proprietary and centralized institutional practices isolated position suffered from the same pitfalls as their larger counterpart, DEC. They refused to acknowlege and adopt new technologies such as RISC and UNIX and favored existing proprietary systems. Apollo's centralized organizational structure made it inflexible to industry changes. Their sluggish response was also compounded by a sparse regional network, which limited the resources and information they needed to adapt and pivot. -On the other hand Sun Microsystem's open and decentralized institutions and external network reflected that of HP. Sun Microsystems pioneered UNIX and RISC based systems, even encouraging competitors to adopt them. By leveraging Silicon Valley's industry based networks, Sun was able to cheaply produce their products with immense speed and stay ahead of competitors and imitators. -

- -

- -## *Main Takeaway - -The main innovation of Silicon Valley was its system of innovation (SIs). - -From these example we get a glimpse of how the Valley's organizations, institutions and networks interacted together in a way that allowed the region to adapt and stay ahead of the fast paced technological and market changes. These organizations, institutions and networks created a unique system of innovation that is flourishing to this day. -As for Route 128, its innovation system was insufficient to support adaptation to the changes in the high-tech industry. However, the region found its edge in the biopharma industry. Today, the Boston/Cambridge region leads the country's the biopharma industry supported by a different innovation system consisting of its own organizations, institutions and networks. - -
- -# 2. Motorsport Valley in the UK (2009-present) -Let's look at another story, in a different place at a different time. This story is adapted from Henry et. al's study of the Motorsport Valley [2] - -

- -Like a lot of people, I have been hooked to the new Netflix documentary about Formula One. The sport combines entertainment and drama with high performance engineering - the perfect mix. Out of sheer coincidence, I stumbled upon Henry et. al's article about the Motorsport Valley (MSV) and it fit right into the innovation systems (SI) framework. - -Motorsport Valley (MSV) is a small cluster of firms around the Oxfordshire and Midlands region of the United Kingdoms (UK). These companies supply cutting-edge technology not only to Formula One, but also Formula E and other motorsports. The Valley dominates the design and manufacturing of components used in the majority of world's racing today. It consists of about 4,500 companies, of which 87% export their products and services. The region also spends a massive amount on R&D, with a turnover of 25%, dwarfing the R&D spending of UK's pharmaceutical industry. - -

- -What's fascinating is that motorsport is in the center of a 'UK high-performance engineering star', where technology developed for motorsport is transferred to other sectors such as aerospace, biomedical etc. Unlike Silicon Valley, the MSV's development has largely been driven by robust public-private partnerships. For example, the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), a private organization strategically coupled with the government's foreign and trade policy to place MSV at the center of the motorsport global production network. Already we are getting an idea of the diverse organizations involved in driving innovation in MSV. The system of organizations, institutions and networks underlying MSV become more prominent in the face of two challenges faced by the region in 2008. - -## 2.1 The Challenges - -

- -* 2008 Recession: The first challenge was the global financial crisis, which throttled one of the major investment drivers of motorsport- global sponsorships. -* Disruptive Technologies: Around the same time, global policy and industry focus was shifting towards green, low carbon automotive technologies, as made evident with the 2008 release of Tesla's first electric car (the Roadster). At this point Motorsport was largely focused on traditional gas based technologies. - -It was time for MSV to innovate out of these challenges and leverage its existing system of innovation to do so. - -## 2.2 The Solution - -Two main drivers helped address these challenges: - -* The UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) launched many substantially funded sector-based investment organizations targeted at R&D investment and supply chain development. The Automotive Investment Organization (AIO) was one of them. With the involvement of the Motorsport Industry Association (MIA), the AIO placed motorsport at the center of its three R&D priorities, namely: advanced propulsion, lightweighting and intelligent mobility. The organization strategized to position the UK motorsport industry's R&D capabilities as a competitive advantage for companies, within the system of global automotive and mobility R&D. - -* The national government quango Technology Strategy Board launched the 2013 MSV Launchpad, which was a 'national' R&D intervention that placed motorsport and its high performance engineering at the center of developing adjacent low carbon technologies as shown below. - -

- -Instead of looking at low carbon technologies as disruptive, the various public-private stakeholders in motorsport positioned the industry to solve the very challenge that was disrupting it. The partnerships between various public and private organizations created the appropriate institutions that leveraged existing networks in the Valley to innovate out of the challenges faced by the industry. - -## 2.3 Did it work out for them? - -Yes. - -The above initiatives worked really well for MSV. Some examples of success include: - -* An MSV spin-off Flybrid's Kinectic Recovery Systems technology was sold to Volvo and eventually used in vehicles like London buses, trams and JCB diggers. This is evidence of the successful low carbon techonology transfer from MSV to traditional automotives. - -* Formula E all electric racing was launched in 2014, with its HQ at Donington in MSV. This would further serve as a platform to develop high performance low carbon technologies. - -* A Williams Hybrid Power engine won the Le Mans 24 Hour Race for Audi, indicating that hybrid engines are on par with conventional ones. The technology was developed in MSV. - -* In 2012, 43% of the surveyed MIA members were selling to other sectors such as energy, electrical and medical, further indicating the significance of MSV and its technology for other industries. - -Economically, it also worked out for MSV. By 2012, the largest 10 non-F1 MSV companies had already bounced back from the 2008 financial crisis and reported their highest turnover ever. Moreover, in 2014, the UK had a continued global Formula 1 share of between 70% and 75% of supply chain value and, in addition, a 40–60% global share of supply chain value of the new Formula E based on electric power. - -## *Main Takeway - -

- -In this case, MSV was an already established innovation system that was forced to pivot. It made use of its organizations, networks and institutions to turn challenges into opportunities and ended up being at the forefront of UK's low carbon automotive technologies. -Public-private partnerships such as MIA and UKTI or organizations such as the Technology Strategy Board were responsible for structuring the vision for MSV in light of the challenges it was facing. These organizations then launched institutions such as the Launchpad to facilitate the development and commercialization of new technologies, spurring the region to innovate. - -
- -# 3. Conclusion - -In this post I talked about two stories from three different regions spanning two different eras and industries. Both stories were different from each other. -The need for innovation in Route 128 and Silicon Valley was fueled by competition among firms, organizational dynamics and fast paced technological and industry changes. This case looked at individual organizations from both regions and compared them in to form a picture of what was working and what wasn't working for them. Key differences between Route 128 and Silicon were: proprietary vs. open systems, centralized vs. decentralized organizational structures and isolated vs. network-based production practices respectively. - -For Motorsport Valley innovation was required to address external disruptive challenges to the industry, such as the 2008 financial crisis and a focus on low carbon technologies. The story looked at how government and private organizations came together with a concrete vision of how to position MSV to address these challenges. They created institutions and leveraged existing networks of MSV by having it pivot towards being an innovation hub for low carbon technologies. Unlike Silicon Valley and Route 128, in this case, stakeholders organized innovation as a response to challenges. - -Regardless of the motivations and mechanisms, these stories show that innovation is not a solo endeavor by one person or entity. It is a messy complex process consisting of interactions between organizations, their networks and institutions that form unique systems of innovation that might work or not. A systemic perspective of innovation presents a starting point for us to think about what it takes for innovations to be impactful. We can start by identifying organizations, networks and institutions involved in specific innovations and analyzing their interaction to start thinking about how to innovate effectively, responsibly and sustainably. -
- -# References -[1] Saxenian, A. (1996). Inside-out: regional networks and industrial adaptation in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cityscape, 41–60. - -[2] Henry, N., Angus, T., & Jenkins, M. (2021). Motorsport Valley revisited: Cluster evolution, strategic cluster coupling and resilience. European Urban and Regional Studies, 09697764211016039. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 10.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 10.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 10.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 11.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 11.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 11.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 12.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 12.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 12.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 2.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 3.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 4.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 5.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 6.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 7.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 7.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 7.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 8.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 8.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 8.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 9.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 9.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells 9.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells.md b/_posts/2021-10-5-castells.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6d0e33a8aa51..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-5-castells.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,108 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Castells, Networks and the Pandemic -date: 2021-10-5 11:12:00-0400 -description: ---- - -Over a year ago, in one of my classes, I was introduced to the work of Manuel Castells and was intrigued by his take on media networks and society. Manuel Castells is a prominent sociologist whose work spans a broad category of topics from internet studies to network theory to organization studies. Castells theorized the concept of the "network society",which is a society whose networks are embedded in the use of information and communication technology. His body of work has had deep impact on media research as he has brought to light the notion that digital technologies are not just infrastructure, but also form the social structure of our modern-day society. - -Upon reflecting on the nature of our social interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, to me, his work offers a profound perspective on how information and media networks influence and mediate social interactions in all aspects of life and work. It is this perspective that I would like to discuss in this piece. In the rest of the article, I will describe my (limited) understanding of Castells’ work and to use it to synthesize and articulate my understanding of the network society during the pandemic. - -
-
- -
- Graphic from: https://opendatascience.com/tides-of-information-flow-visualizing-our-digitally-mediated-reality/ -
-
-
- -
- Watching people wake up on Twitter (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-
-
- - - -
- -## What is Castells’ Network? - -Castells defines a network as a set of interconnected nodes. These nodes can be organizations, individuals, services etc., the definition of which depends on the network. Castells’ networks are open and expanding structures as long as the nodes share the same “communication codes”, such as values or performance goals. For example, individual mobile devices, people operating those devices, social media companies, content producer, server centers etc. all form the global network of information. The various technical protocols (such as TCP, HTTP, WiFi etc.) and mechanisms of social interaction form the “communication codes” of the global network of information. The crux of Castells argument is that the structure of information networks and who is included/excluded from them, organize the key structures and activities in our society. -
- -## Who has power? - -According to Castells, digital networks mediated by computer systems and advanced telecommunications is where power now lies. He undermines the state-centric understanding of where power lies; knowledge, not military is might. Castells argues that media networks are now the dominant social organizations that concentrate power and manage resources. He describes two types of “network power”: switching power and programming power. Switching power is the ability to project power over existing networks by directing ideas, resources, and people to a subnetwork. “Switchers” are one of the main powerholders in a network society due to their ability to connect different networks together. They are intermediaries who broker information across different networks, negotiate and gatekeep information that flows between different networks, which grants them immense power. For example, this might be someone who works across multiple fields of study and can interpret information across those fields. That is, they speak the language of those disciples and can translate between them. Programming power is the ability to “program” new networks by selecting ideas, resources and people and designing linkages between them. Politicians often hold programming power. They “program” policies, laws, and systems that align with their own interests and values. They also form strategic alliances between dominant players in different networks, thus designing linkages. - -
- -## Assumptions of the Network Perspective - -In Castells and the Media, Philip Howard provides an overview of Castells’ broad body of work. Howard highlights that the “network perspective” as developed by Castells has three fundamental assumptions. - -* The first assumption is that the network perspective goes beyond analyzing large groups and organizations as a unit of analysis and examines the individual content producers, and the content itself. While large organizations exercise substantial influence on media, there are plenty of instances where individuals themselves have significant political and cultural impact simply by using a social media platform on their phones. Think, Instagram influencers or Twitter users with a large following. Similarly, digital media artifacts such as websites also provide meaningful insight into the structure of social interaction. Case in point- the role of 4chan and memes in the 2016 presidential race in the United States. -* The second assumption of the network perspective is that more often than not, the links between the units of analysis reveal more than the individual units themselves. Simply studying actors of a network in isolation might not be as insightful as understanding the relationship between those players. -* The final assumption is that the structure of a network can both enable and constrain social action. While a network may serve as a bridge across individuals, organizations, and content, it may also tie together similar individuals, organizations, and content, resulting in an echo chamber or “bubble communities”. A popular example is YouTube’s recommendation algorithm creating political echo chambers. The algorithm optimizes for viewers to keep watching. In doing so it recommends similar videos to those that viewers already like to watch, pushing them further towards a specific preference, opinion, or stance. - -In this way, Castells’ networks emphasize the relationships and linkages between the nodes of a network as a way of understanding how a network may enable, limit or complicate social interactions and their outcomes. - -
-## Space of Flows and Timeless Time - -My favourite concepts from Castells’ theory are his proposed notions space and time: space of flows and timeless time - -

-
- Image from: Dali, Salvador. The Persistence of Memory. 1931, Museum of Modern Art, New York. -
- -### Space of Flows - -Traditionally, a space is a physical location that people live in. It invokes a sense of physical contiguity. However, information networks have the capability to organize activities and connect people in disparate parts of the world. People can participate in the same activities, at the same time without being physically near each other. They are connected by the space of information flows. Castells’ describes the space of flows as "The material arrangements that allow for simultaneity of social practices without territorial contiguity". He said "the space of flows ... links up distant locales around shared functions and meanings on the basis of electronic circuits and fast transportation corridors, while isolating and subduing the logic of experience embodied in the space of places" - -### Timeless Time - -Time is a notion we use to organize a sequence of activities in our lives often in a physical space. However, as the notion of traditional space breaks down, so does the notion of time as we understand it. Timeless time refers to how information and communication technologies distort the notion of time by (1) compressing time into the almost instantaneous speed of electronic networks or (2) blurring the sequence of the past, present and future. For example, hyperlinks on webpages remove any notion of a sequence of events in time (or space), by taking a user from one location on the web to another in an instant. - -
- -## Space, time and capitalism - -

-
- Image from: Schweitzer, Frank, et al. "Economic networks: The new challenges." science 325.5939 (2009): 422-425. -
- -The space of flows and timeless time have collectively ushered in a distinct form of capitalism structured around networks of financial flows. Previously, finance would be physically restricted to banks or other financial agencies governed by trading hours or bank hours. However, in this new form of capitalism, information networks facilitate the accumulation of capital by investment and reinvestment of profit over global financial networks that exist everywhere and nowhere. Financial capital dictates the fate of high-technology industries. However, the technology and information produced, partly by high-technology companies are essential in generating profit, which may then be reinvested over financial networks, thus accruing capital. Therefore, there exists an interdependent relationship between financial capital, high technology, and industrial capital, playing out over global information networks and globalizing the accumulation of capital. - -Meanwhile, labor has become more disaggregated due to the decentralized structure of information networks. This is exemplified by the relationship between the Silicon Valley chip designer, the individual assembling the chip in a Southeast Asian production line, and the manager who might commute between the two regions. Therefore, while capital gets accumulated over the network of financial flows, labor is dissolving from the collective to the individual. The maintenance of capitalist relationships in light of the disaggregation of labor, results in an increasing separation of capital and labor in space and time. In this space of flows, the practice of labor and location are no longer interdependent, and practice now occurs globally, over electronic networks, as flows of information. - -An overarching theme in Castells’ work has been that of decentralization in many aspects of dominant social functions. In the economic sense, this is demonstrated in examples of how firms are moving from a hierarchical (Fordist) organization to more horizontal and decentralized way of firm organization. The breaking of hierarchies has also permeated into the public and political spheres, where political campaigns are now being run in a much more decentralized manner. A similar pattern is observed in the cultural sphere of society, where instead of major studios consolidating production and distribution of content, which was delivered at a specific time (primetime TV, movie show timings etc.) and specific spaces (theaters, living rooms etc.), content is produced and distributed across networks mediated by platforms such as Instagram, Tik Tok etc. It does not rely on places or time to be delivered. However, this is also coupled with a centralization of power that is associated with media elites who own much of the information infrastructure. - -
-## The Network Society and the COVID-19 Pandemic - -
-I … use Zoom for church youth activities. [I] use Zoom for meetings. I order groceries and takeout food online. We arranged for a ‘digital reception’ for my daughter’s wedding as well as live streaming the event.” - – Woman, 44. (Pew Research Center) -
- -If anything, the COVID-19 pandemic has further enmeshed us into the network society. As physical spaces became off-limits, our social interactions increasingly occurred via information and communication networks. Our physical realities further started becoming entwined with our digital spaces. As school, work and other aspects of life that were strongly grounded in a physical space were uprooted and transitioned into a space of flows, our sense of time also got distorted. Before the pandemic, the passing of time was marked by a transition of physical space. Going to school, going to work, coming back from work, taking an evening yoga class all required us to keep track of time. In fact a study has found that our sense of time depends on our sense of space and that if our understanding of space is off, our understanding of time is also dislocated. However, during COVID-19, days blend together as we hop from one Zoom call to another. People are working remotely from home, attending meetings at the same time from different locations and time zones, further disaggregating labor. Students are also attending classes simultaneously, while being in different states and countries. Just like labor, education and learning is also beingdisaggregated. Conflicting emotions of physical isolation and “Zoom fatigue” allude to a sense of confusion that we face with respect to our physical selves and its disembodied digital counterpart. The pandemic has further swept us up intothe space of flows that dominate our lives while losing track of time. However, this has also been a moment of awakening for many who realize the importance of physical social interactions grounded in real space and real time. - -

-
- Broadband availability in the US (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
-

-
- Household broadband adoption by state (https://www.vox.com/a/internet-maps) -
- -The pandemic has also revealed the seams of the global networks of information flows. The inequity in the distribution of reliable digital infrastructures has been made more prominent, as essential social domains such as education have moved to a remote environment. The digital divide associated with internet infrastructure and affordability has exacerbated the social divide with regards to who gets educated and who can work safely from home. At the start of the pandemic, 15 million of the 50.7 million public school students in the US lacked adequate connectivity to learn online at home. Moreover, 10% of public school teachers did not have sufficient internet capacity for online teaching. Unsurprisingly, lower income, minority and rural households are more likely to struggle with the digital divide (Pew Research Center). As Castells’ suggests, who gets included and excluded from these digital networks form the structure of the network society. The pandemic laid bare the fact that the criteria for inclusion/exclusion from digital networks are determined along socio-economic and racial lines. Similarly, organizations that own digital infrastructures have accumulated more power and exercise greater control over more and more social domains of daily life, recording, controlling and commercializing how we interact. - -However, Castells’ network society is complex. While “switchers”, “programmers”, and nodes with a high level of centrality wield a lot of power in a network, nobody has absolute control over how we interact and the outcomes of those interactions. This is exemplified by how misinformation over digital networks has affected vaccination against COVID-19. Researchers have found that scientific-sounding misinformation is strongly associated with a decline in vaccination intent. Recently, YouTube banned all content that spreads vaccine misinformation and took down pages that claim vaccines are not safe or inaccurately describe vaccine ingredients. However, many pages on the platform are still active that spread vaccine misinformation. Moreover, after the YouTube ban, a lot of vaccine misinformation migrated to other less-regulated platforms such as Rumble. This indicates that while YouTube has a lot of power, it still cannot control how information flows, mediates social interactions, and affects individual opinions. By attempting to constrain the misinformation phenomena, YouTube simply redirected the information flow to other less powerful nodes in the network (like Rumble) and handed them the mantle of power, illustrating the complexity of how power is transacted over networks. - -Overall, the pandemic has had a complicated impact on the network society. On an individual level, it has made us value and long for interactions we previously took for granted, such as being around other people at school or work. But it has also created new expectations for life and work in a post-pandemic world and the role of digital networks in it. For example, the conversations around hybrid work highlight how we are negotiating the boundaries of the physical and the digital. It alludes to our increased comfort with transitioning work into a space of flows but also trying to retain what was good about working in a physical space. It is a reckoning of what it truly means to be in a network society as an individual; what works and what doesn't work. On a societal level, the pandemic has exposed the edges of the network society while concealing the inequities exacerbated by it. The importance of digital networks in how they connect disparate physical locations together and conduct essential social activities, is unequivocal. Numbers, graphs, and statistics show how the digital divide has affected society’s most vulnerable. Those who are not included in these networks were unable to participate in basic social activities such as education and work and were pushed further behind. However, in the space of flows, the creative Zoom backgrounds, the ability to turn off one’s camera and microphone and only interact via chat and text conceal the realities of an individual’s situation. It creates a virtual reality where everyone is equal and where there are no empty seats to indicate who is missing. The pandemic has changed the structure of the network society and the network society has changed the course of the pandemic by manipulating the flow of information. What comes next is uncertain. What’s certain is the fact that the post-pandemic world will look very different from a pre-pandemic one and the digital networks and flows that created it will continue to play a leading role in its makeup. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 2.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 3.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 4.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 5.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 6.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories.md b/_posts/2021-10-7-stories.md deleted file mode 100644 index 7411158bc7e8..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-10-7-stories.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Learning how to interview and crafting stories -date: 2021-10-7 11:12:00-0400 -description: Reflections on qualitative research ---- - -

-
- Image from: https://www.esquiresg.com/how-to-steer-deflecting-counter-conversation-talk-negotiate-to-your-favour-tactfully/ -
- -As part of my research regarding understanding innovation practices in an industry sponsored engineering capstone program, I conducted interviews with students who had enrolled in the program in the last year (2019–2020). As someone who comes from a quantitative engineering background, qualitative research methods have been difficult for me to grasp. I recognize the value of such methods as being vital to tease out the stories that underlie experiences of individuals. However, for someone who has been so thoroughly steeped in a post-positivist approach to research and inquiry, the process of constructionist, postmodern or critical qualitative inquiry is an mix of mystery, excitement, anxiety and fulfillment. - -Once I had my research question hashed out, I developed my first semi-structured interview protocol with help from my advisor. The protocol was initially developed for IRB (board for the protection of human subjects in research) purposes and therefore I assumed that the questions I put in it for absolute and final. I was feeling fairly confident going into the interviews-I had my set of questions and prided myself as being somewhat of an easy conversationalist. Moreover, I also assumed that my avid podcast listening might have magically and “unconsciously” schooled me in the art of interviewing. What was there to worry about- it’s just a conversation with some students about their experience, right? - -Well yes and no. The interviews began and I realized that my podcast listening did not really come in handy. For my first couple of interviews, I was adamant on following the order prescribed in my protocol. All of my engineering education had trained me to go step-by-step and follow the order of instructions, just like executing lines of code. I felt like I can’t simply jump around. Moreover, I was also adamant on covering all the questions on my protocol- what if I missed something important? Not realizing that doing that can not only interrupt the flow of the conversation, but take away the depth of a response that I might’ve cut short to stick to time. I thought I was doing pretty great-sticking to the protocol. My advisor, who was kind enough to sit-in on these interviews, basically told me that I need to do things differently. The way I assumed the protocol to be structured was taking away depth of potential information. Instead of probing further and being comfortable with taking the conversation in an unplanned (un-protocoled) direction, I was just moving on to the next question. It was then that the implication of “qualitative research is messy” (words of one of my professors) dawned upon me. -There is no way for me to precisely plan for the direction that someone else’s story is going to take. It is this process of shaping someone else’s story by filtering it through my questions that has been so astonishing. The questions are like the numbers in the connect-the-dots picture. The protocol gives us an idea of how many dots there might be to connect, but not necessarily their order. The order roughly depends on the interviewee and the flow of conversation. If placed and asked appropriately, the questions reveal a full coherent picture. Two interviewees may not offer the same picture and therefore the placement and form of the questions may differ greatly between the two. Recognizing and responding to these differences is what I think a practiced interviewer is good at. - - -To me, the goal of qualitative interviews is crafting a story based on multiple peoples’ experiences. It’s about threading together bits and pieces of information that is scattered across multiple (subjective) experiences, steeped in personal assumptions and may suffer from recall bias. Unlike the highly objective process of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is about context, uncertainty and being comfortable with subjetivity. Being steeped in STEM for as long as I have, the fluid and subjective characteristics of qualitative research have been challenging to square with. But at the end of the day, I learned that all I need to remember is that with interviews, I’m trying to tell other peoples’ story. Those stories may have unexpected turns that may not fit my hypothesis but offer value nonetheless. Accepting the subjective and going with it has been my key learning from this process. It has not just made me a better qualitative researcher but has opened up another lens to look at the world with and marvel at the myriad of stories it has to offer and learn from. diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 2.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 3.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 4.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 5.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 6.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3.md b/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0435d65a4046..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-1-innovation3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,72 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part II- Innovation and Leadership -date: 2021-11-1 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Elizabeth Scallon’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about innovation as a key leadership function. Elizabeth leads the Go To Market & Operations at Amazon’s Alexa Fund and has been involved in the innovation ecosystem for over a decade. ---- - -In her talk, Elizabeth emphasized the role of leadership within an organization as being integral to the process of innovation, as leadership is responsible for setting the stage for innovation along the following four aspects: - -

- -Innovation does not take place in isolation and simply thinking about good ideas do not make them happen. It requires an intentional approach on the part of an organization and its leaders to plan and organize processes that foster innovation and growth within the organization. This is not just relevant to corporations but can be applicable to any organization such as universities, government, and non-profits. In fact, being steeped in the university culture for so long, I have observed how changing the leadership can impact everything, from funding for student clubs to curriculum to the name of a department. These university leaders were able to set a vision, strategize and gather resources to make, what they thought were innovative changes at the institution. - -To foster and catalyze innovation in an organization, Elizabeth proposed key questions along 4 dimensions, that leadership should contend with: - -

- -
- -# I. Problems - -To ensure the survival of their organization, leaders need to constantly keep an eye out for problems that need to be solved and provide relevant growth opportunities, whether in their market or adjacent markets. The best way to identify problems is asking questions and engaging with people, be it employees or customers. Elizabeth offered three methods to do that: “5 Whys”, the Scientific method and the Socratic method. The goal of these methods is to understand the root cause of an issue and dive deep into the fundamentals of what might seem to be a superficial problem. She suggested doing this by not just talking to people but testing hypotheses and collecting data to demonstrate the significance of the problem being considered and crafting a vision and story around it. - -In line with the Schumpeterian idea of “creative destruction”, a disruptive innovation disturbs the existing market by fundamentally changing its structure and making obsolete what was the dominant technology in that market. For example, Uber disrupted the taxicab industry by essentially creating a new technology (and labor) market, which rendered obsolete the traditional way of getting a taxi. It was a culmination of various technologies coming together (GPS, mobile apps, mobile payments etc.) to fundamentally solve a problem and challenge the status quo. Therefore, it falls upon leadership to deeply think about existing problems and start congregating the right ideas, people, and resources to solve them. - -
- -# II. People - -People are a vital aspect of the innovation process. Simply having a compelling problem to solve is not sufficient, there needs to be the right team with the right set of skills to tackle the innovation challenge. The key question that leadership needs to ask here is: who are the people engaged in the innovation process at an organization? There are two aspects to this question. - -

- - -How an organization structures its innovation processes determines who is involved in it. For example, whether an organization has an innovation lab or a single executive working on innovation provides a picture of who are the decision-makers and influencers in the innovation process. The behavioral aspect is more fundamental as it asks who is empowered to innovate? Does everyone feel like they can bring an idea to the table? Do they feel heard? This is the key area where diversity, equity and inclusion efforts play a vital role in the success of an organization. As Elizabeth mentioned in her talk, people tend to believe in a meritocratic system, where good ideas will eventually bubble up, without much effort. However, who gets a seat at the table is determine by a pre-existing set of biases, which are inevitable. Therefore, it is up to the leadership to determine how they can empower lesser heard voices to speak or include more voices to be part of the conversation. Including a diverse group of people also allows for scoping the problem in a manner that addresses a variety of perspectives and can increase the reach of the potential innovation (product or process) to a larger customer base. - -
- -# III. Solutions - -Once there is a problem to solve and a diverse team to solve it, the next step is to source a variety of solutions. Again, according to the talk, it is the role of leadership to determine the process of idea generation and evaluation. Does an organization like to source ideas internally or work with external partners and entities to do so? How does an organization determine whether an idea is good? Are there measures and evaluation criteria in place to do so? Having a systematic process to source and evaluate ideas allows for a data-driven and informed way to make decisions around which ideas are worth pursuing and which aren’t. The leadership of a company determines the processes and mechanism that implement how ideas are brought to the table, who brings them to the table and who gets to evaluate potential solutions. - -A concrete example of this was examined in the previous post. It discussed how DEC and Apollo Computers leadership in Route 128 chose to be secretive and internal about their innovation process, while Silicon Valley companies like HP and Sun Microsystems leveraged the burgeoning and open Silicon Valley networks to be agile and innovate quickly. This is not to make a value judgement and say that one approach is better than the other but point out that how leadership decides to source and evaluate innovation is critical and makes a difference in the success of an organization. - -
- -# IV. Resources - -No idea can be brought to fruition without money and resources. The leadership of a company determines how resources are allocated to the innovation process. Firstly, is there a budget for innovation, such as R&D investments etc.? What happens to the budget when funding is tight? The answers to these questions often indicate how serious leadership is about innovation and their priorities around it. Another aspect of resource allocation is determining whether there is a systematic process behind it. For example, are there phases to funding an innovation, such as starting from a pilot and scaling up? Or is it more informal? Therefore, the resource allocation strategy of the organization’s leadership controls how an innovation is brought to market and whether it is profitable or not. - - -# Takeaways - -These four functions of leadership in its role in an organization’s innovation process can be distilled into the following takeaways: - -

- -* Leadership requires creating a safe space for experimenting with, identifying, and communicating relevant and fundamental problems that need to be innovated upon. - -* Leadership involves creating an open environment for ensuring that everyone is empowered to innovate through engaging a diverse group of employees and stakeholders to participate in the innovation process. - -* Leadership is about challenging the status quo thinking and pursing potentially unconventional ideas. - -* Leadership for innovation requires ensuring that the business survives by creating mechanisms and processes to fund and grow innovation. - -

- -# Connecting the Dots - -In my previous posts I talked about innovation systems (SIs), which comprise of organizations, institutions and networks and interactions between them determine the dynamics of the system and affect the innovation process. Elizebeth’s talk about innovation as a function leadership presents a view of how can people within organizations create effective institutions for innovation. Unlike my previous examples of Silicon Valley, Route 128 and Motorsport Valley that offer a zoomed out, ecosystem level perspective about SIs, this talk really honed in on what can leaders and individuals do to foster innovation in their organization. The talk emphasized that decisions by leaders are what create the institutions and environment for innovation, which impact the entire innovation system and can lead to effective innovation. - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 10.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 10.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 10.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 11.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 11.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 11.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 12.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 12.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 12.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 2.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 2.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 2.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 3.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 3.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 3.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 4.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 4.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 5.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 5.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 5.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 6.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 6.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 6.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 7.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 7.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 7.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 8.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 8.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 8.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 9.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 9.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4 9.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4.md b/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4.md deleted file mode 100644 index b12122624598..000000000000 --- a/_posts/2021-11-23-innovation4.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,70 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: post -title: Understanding Innovation, Part III-Equitable, Responsible and Effective Innovation -date: 2021-11-23 11:12:00-0400 -description: This post is a reflection on Io Blair-Freese’s talk for my department’s speaker series, where she talked about responsible and effective innovation in the context of developing countries. Io is a program officer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, focusing on the delivery side of health interventions like vaccines in the developing world. ---- - -One of my favorite core ideas from Io's talk was her definition of responsible and effective innovation and how it incorporates equality. - -

-
- Adapted from Io's slides -
- -Responsible innovation asks the questions: where are the people who need a specific innovation/intervention the most? Who are the various entities (governments and organizations) that serve these people? - -Effective innovation touches on optimization and maximization. It asks the questions where are the people who can benefit the most? How do we maximize our resources to reach the most people and have the largest impact? - -Oftentimes, responsible and effective innovation do not overlap. Individuals and societies that need a specific innovation the most often don't have the infrastructure and resources to support it, while communities where an innovation can have the maximum reach already have some technology and technological infrastructure built to support it. An example of this is the socioeconomic technological divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in the context of education. A study found that access to internet at home increased the likelihood of completing assignments on time. Furthermore, another study found that a high speed internet connection and a higher number of internet-enabled devices was linked to higher levels of student engagement. This has resulted in the "homework gap" between students who had reliable home broadband access and those who do not. The "homework gap" is an indicator of whether a student will be able to complete their homework and succeed in school alongside their peers who have internet. According to a Pew Research Center study, nearly half (46%) of the parents with lower incomes whose children's schools closed reported that their children faced at least one problem related to the 'homework gap'. Therefore children, especially from lower income backgrounds who need education the most are getting left behind. In this example, online learning technologies have been an "effective" innovation in the sense that they were able to keep education going to some degree during the pandemic. However, their use may not have been responsible, as it was skewed towards specific communities and regions (rural vs. urban). - -

-

- -
- -## Getting the right data - -

-
-GRID3 project on the Geospatial Analysis of Measels Immunization Coverage. Estimated coverage during the campaign at 1×1 km, highlighting low coverage areas with <50% coverage in red and other coverage classes in different colors. The white dots indicate settlements located within the low coverage areas. Source: https://grid3.org/spotlight/geospatial-analysis-of-measles-immunisation-coverage -
- -In her talk Io discussed a couple of examples regarding how the Gates Foundation and particularly her group uses Geographic Information System (GIS) and remote sensing technologies to map health risks in developing countries. One such solution was GRID3, a multi-stakeholder effort (government, United Nations, academia and private sector) to produce maps that visualize vaccination sites, comorbidity risks and vaccination requirements (such as vaccines, number of teams, devices etc.). In such cases, it is often not sufficient to simply look at satellite data. This is because even though the data may provide a top-level view of the hospitals in a region, country borders, etc., it needs to be integrated with data "on the ground" such as surveys of staff and individuals in the relevant communities to provide a complete picture of what resources are available where and to whom, along with who has the most need for specific interventions. - -Io provided an interesting insight into the challenges associated with collecting data in urban and rural settings. While urban settings may provide ample "ground level" data such as staff and supply information, the mapping aspect can be challenging due to urban density. The contrary is true to some degree in rural areas. The sparsity of rural landscapes might lend themselves well to a geospatial analysis, however validating where a structure still exists and gathering "ground level" information such as the number of staff in a hospital, supply of vaccines etc. is challenging due to lack of reporting systems in these settings. In fact, Io mentioned, some communities (and tribes) don't even show up on maps. - -Therefore, we need to think carefully about how we are gathering and utilizing data in lower resource, developing world settings. Simply imitating a technology and/or methodology from high income countries does not always work. This is primarily because low resource regions may not possess the fundamental technological infrastructure such as internet and even reliable electricity to support the technology. - -The Last Mile connectivity challenge embodies the problem of lack of technological infrastructure. The "last mile" is used to refer to the final leg of telecommunication networks that deliver services to the end-user. In distant and rural areas, it is often expensive for telecommunication service providers to offer high speed and high bandwidth services when compared to the number of people being served. The economics often does not work out. Therefore, many low resource settings are constrained on connectivity and technologies that support it, such as the number of devices/computers. - -An example that Io provided, that stuck with me was about asking the right questions. For example, if a survey is being conducted on a computer regarding the health of a community, it is important to keep in mind that individuals in the target region (for example, a village) may just have one or two computers available to them and thus the amount of information collected might be constrained. Therefore, the type of questions that the survey is asking may have to be changed from "who in your family…." to "who in your community…" to get as much information about the entire community as possible. - -
- -## It's not just about the technology…it's also about partnerships and people - -

-
-Source: https://petrobras.com.br/en/about-us/profile/stakeholders/ -
- -Having the right data or even the right technological infrastructure is often not enough. It is equally important to engage the right stakeholders to drive effective and responsible innovation. For example, Io mentioned that in their work in Africa, the proximity of a community to a country' border significantly impacted the resources the community got. This is due to the prevalence of border disputes, where none of the governments involved might want to take responsibility for communities around the border, leading to lower resource availability. Moreover, most of the work around planning and allocating resources for health and other critical public services often occurs within government ministries. However, governments may turnover every four to eight years. While that is a positive indicator of democracy, the challenge is to ensure that the data and technology infrastructure established under one government is sustained long term under future governments. Therefore, it becomes important to engage the private sector in digital innovation efforts through seed funding, incubator and accelerator programs along with direct investments in partnerships with governments to build long term relationships, exchange know-how and train officials to ensure sustainable impact. - -
- -## Takeaways - -The concept of effective and responsible innovation touches on the idea of equitable innovation. That is, how do we maximize the impact of a technological innovation while equalizing access and reaching people who need it most? How do we align effective with responsible innovation? Some key ideas from Io's presentation were: - -* Recognizing that a technological innovation may serve different purposes in different cultural, socioeconomic or situational contexts. Therefore, simply transplanting technologies that work for high income or dominant group to a low income/low resource or minority setting might not be effective. One solution is to engage universities and research institutions in high income countries to study the applications of new technologies in low resource settings. This involves not only studying the technological details but also the behavioral, cultural and other social dimensions of these applications. Holistically addressing the introduction of a new technology from a socio-technical perspective may not only increase access but also maximize impact. - -* Actively building relationships with key stakeholders. Whether its governments, academic institutions, non-profits or the private sector, buy-in from these and other relevant institutions is critical to creating sustainable technological change and advancement. - -* Building up the private sector through seed funding, accelerators, direct investments etc. to ensure that a system for innovation is in place even if governments turnover. - -Effective and responsible innovation is not just about creating new and advanced technologies. It is about understanding who uses these technologies, why, how and what is the socio-technical context they are embedded, while identifying who are the actors that might advocate for, support or block technological advancement from occurring in communities of interest. - - - - diff --git a/_projects/COVID_engr.md b/_projects/COVID_engr.md deleted file mode 100644 index 1b5a4fea74a7..000000000000 --- a/_projects/COVID_engr.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,20 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Supporting engineering students during COVID-19 -description: -img: -importance: 3 -category: research ---- - -**Co-authors:** This study was led by Prof Denise Wilson and was a collaborative effort of PhD students from the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and the Department of Education at the University of Washington. The study included Morgan Anderson (Department of Education), Dr. Ziyan Bai (Department of Education, Neha Kardam (Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering) and Shruti Misra (Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering)\ - -**Relevant Links:** Engineering Education COVID-19 Project - -
- -## The Setting - -On March 11, 2020, the WHO not only declared COVID-19 a pandemic but also expressed serious concern regarding inaction on the part of many countries around the globe to stem the spread of the pandemic. By the end of May, 42 states and territories had followed suit, impacting 73% of U.S. counties in doing so (Center for Disease Control, 2020). Remote instruction became the norm for many colleges and universities in the U.S. during the pandemic despite the fact that less than 5% of budgets associated with colleges and universities is dedicated to IT support (Gallagher & Palmer, 2020). Under normal circumstances, remote instruction can be beneficial as it provides students and instructors with the flexibility to teach and learn from anywhere. However, the abrupt nature of the transition during the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be compared to traditional models of online learning. These models involve prior planning and preparation to deliver course content tailored to the online setting. The development time for a fully online university course can range between six to nine months prior to its delivery. Moreover, it can take two or three iterations of an online course for faculty to feel comfortable with teaching it. During the COVID-19 pandemic, instructors did not have the time to carefully design and transition face-to-face courses to an online environment. Remote learning during the pandemic was a temporary response to a quickly evolving crisis. Due of the abrupt transition from traditional classroom teaching to teaching remotely, the assumption was frequently made that the quality of education would drop. However, we have found these assumptions to be true in some but not all cases. Nevertheless, the transition to emergency remote teaching has resulted in a shift in student expectations of how, when, and how much faculty and TAs will be available to them for help as well as how many and what types of resources will be made available to students to support their learning. Students have also adjusted how and how much they interact with their peers and some of the tools they have acquired and acclimated to are likely to remain in their toolbox as they head back into in-person learning in the traditional classroom. - -We conducted surveys of a wide range of engineering courses at the University of Washington's Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, to understand what happened to instructional support during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey included both Likert-scale items to measure faculty, TA, and peer support as well as short answer questions. diff --git a/_projects/ENTRE_541.md b/_projects/ENTRE_541.md deleted file mode 100644 index fb001d993d83..000000000000 --- a/_projects/ENTRE_541.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,32 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Bringing Tech to Market -description: Developed a commercialization plan for a UW research technology -img: /assets/img/tech-transfer.png -importance: 1 -category: entrepreneurship ---- - -**Skills learned:** Lean Canvas, Cloverleaf Analysis, Primary Research (interviews), Secondary Research (market research) \ -**Project Team:** Aslam Hasan, Sean Cameron, Nathan Yuan, Joshua Skelly\ -**Main sources used:** BCC research, Gartner, Pitchbook, Statista -
- -As part of the Technology Entrepreneurship Certificate, I took a class on technology commercialization in Spring 2021. The goal of the class was to learn various tools and methodologies to effectively evaluate an emerging University of Washington (UW) research technology and craft a commercialization plan for it. Throughout the quarter, I worked in a team with four MBA student to analyze a UW technology, conduct a market and opportunity analysis, interview potential customers and draft a recommendation for potential ways to commercialize the technology. - -
-## The Technology - -

-
- The MUST Sensor -
- -My team worked on a Mobility Unit for Sensing (MUST) integrated sensor technology developed by researchers at Smart Transportation Applications and Research lab (STAR Lab) at the University of Washington’s department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. The technology was designed to be applied in smart cities applications, specifically for monitoring traffic and addressing congestion problems that cities face. MUST is a sensing and communication technology that can be used for a range of applications such as parking lot management, vehicle counting, roadway monitoring etc. The device consists of a variety of integrated sensors and bundles multiple functions into one unit: road surface, weather data, traffic sensing, data fusion and computation and communication. - -You can view a writing sample from this project here - - - - - diff --git a/_projects/MisraWilson_asee.md b/_projects/MisraWilson_asee.md deleted file mode 100644 index 6019bbf0cedd..000000000000 --- a/_projects/MisraWilson_asee.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,35 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Engineering student adaptations during COVID-19 -description: A study about how engineering students adapted their capstone projects due to COVID-19 -img: /assets/img/ENGINE.png -importance: 1 -category: research ---- - -**Skills learned/applied:** Mixed methods research design, exploratory factor analysis, statistical analysis, document analysis - -## The Setting - -A 2015 survey of 256 institutions from the US revealed that 70% of their capstone programs were funded by industry and government sponsors. This indicates the pervasiveness of capstone programs that partner with external sponsors to provide a “real-world” design experience to students. In this vein, the industry-sponsored Engineering Innovation and Entrepreneurship (ENGINE) capstone program was established at the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at a large research university in the US. ENGINE is designed to provide a holistic and professional engineering experience to students in an educational setting, where student teams work on a six-month long project under the guidance of an industry and a faculty mentor. The program is overseen by a course instructor and teaching assistants who manage the course structure and expectations. -
- -## The Study - -In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 virus a global pandemic [1], which necessitated preventative measures such as social distancing and forced many higher education institutions to close campuses, abandon traditional practices of in-person classes and rapidly switch to remote learning environments. Consequently, students had to adapt to their new and unprecedented learning environments in very limited time. -This study focuses on the ENGINE capstone ato understand how students perceived, adapted to, and mitigated the impact of the pandemic. The study compared student experiences in ENGINE during remote learning necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic to those in traditional, in-person learning. ENGINE students were surveyed in Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 to understand which components of the ENGINE program mattered most to student learning and how. The work complements existing studies by taking a quantitative and qualitative look at how and when capstone design students adapted to the abrupt transition from traditional to remote learning. - -
- -## Methods - -* Close-ended Likert scale based survey responses were analyzed using statistical methods such as Exploratory Factor Analysis and independent sample t-tests. -* Short answer questions were analyzed using qualitative methods in a sequential, mixed methods approach. -
- -## Results - -Exploratory factor analysis of the Likert-scale items revealed that measures of instructional support and “real-world” experience contributed to student learning. No statistically significant differences in these measures between remote and traditional learning environments emerged. To address this lack of difference, a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand how the student capstone design experience changed during the pandemic. The qualitative analysis revealed that the lack of significant difference may be due to the fact **that students rapidly adapted to the remote learning disruption.** - -The results provide an insight into the various ways in which students acclimated to the crisis circumstances. These adaptations manifested in the form of product and process adaptations, in which students swiftly adjusted their final product or design process to respond to the evolving crisis. Students used various strategies such as changing team roles and ways of communication, using different tools and technology, and creative technical solutions to drive product and process adaptations. However, these adaptations may have come at the cost of students' mental health. By shedding light on student experience of the capstone during the pandemic, this study acknowledges the resilience students have displayed during a crisis, while recognizing that the cost of such resilience must not be neglected. - diff --git a/_projects/legged_robots.md b/_projects/legged_robots.md deleted file mode 100644 index 0d58cfa531d9..000000000000 --- a/_projects/legged_robots.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,49 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: A Python Framework for Legged Robots -description: -img: /assets/img/Passive_dynamic_walker.gif -importance: 3 -category: technical ---- - -* Tools/Programming languages used: Python, MATLAB - -In this project, I ported from MATLAB to Python, a computational framework for simulating two different models of legged hybrid systems: a passive dynamic biped and a bounding quadruped. - - -
- -# Background - -Legged robotic systems usually fall under the category of hybrid dynamical systems. Hybrid dynamical systems can be thought of as a combination of properties of continuous and discrete -systems. In case of legged locomotion, when a foot/feet collide(s) with or leave(s) the ground, the continuous dynamics of the legged body are disrupted and need alteration. The instances when these disruptions occur are known as events. -The “jump map” dictates how the system will behave when an event occurs. The “jump set” (also known as the “guard set”) of the system determines when an event has occurred. The occurrence of an event is commonly characterized by a zero crossing of some state or function that is being monitored during simulation. The “flow map” directs the continuous dynamics of the system. - -This project builds upon the MATLAB framework for legged systems as provided in [1] and attempts to convert it to Python. The advantages of Python over MATLAB are twofold. -Firstly, Python compilers are available on most operating systems, free of charge, unlike MATLAB. Secondly, Python code can run on microcontrollers such as the Beaglebone, and thus can directly be used to run on real robotic systems. Two -examples of legged systems were used in this project: the passive dynamic biped and the bounding quadruped. The former system as rightly named is passive and does not involve any actuation. The bounding quadruped on the other hand is -modeled as an activated system, where the activation function was obtained from [1] and [2]. The product of this project can be a tool to aid further reseach into legged systems with a Python based framework. - -
-
- -
- Passive Dynamic Walker -
-
-
- -
- Bounding Quadruped -
-
-
- - -
- -# Further reading - -A detailed description and results of the project can be found here.
-The code for the framework can be found here. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/_projects/moonbeam.md b/_projects/moonbeam.md deleted file mode 100644 index bd4f174ddd00..000000000000 --- a/_projects/moonbeam.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,21 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Moonbeam-Congregate -description: I interned at Moonbeam as an Innovation Platform Engineer -img: /assets/img/Moonbeam.jpeg -importance: 2 -category: entrepreneurship ---- - -**Tools used:** HTML/CSS, Moonbeam's Exchange Platform, Pitchbook \ -**Programming Languages used:** HTML/CSS - -
- -## Moonbeam - -Moonbeam is a small startup company in Seattle, with two lines of product: Moonbeam Exchange and Moonbeam Envision. - -Moonbeam Exchange is a software platform that matches startups and small contractors with government and non-government opportunities (such as grants, SBIR funding etc.) and allows larger innovation labs to connect with startups. The goal is to effectively match the demand and supply side in an innovation ecosystem. - -Moonbeam Envision is a virtual reality platform that allows professional teams to collaborate, brainstorm, design and create in a virtual setting. diff --git a/_projects/rl.md b/_projects/rl.md deleted file mode 100644 index 1e6f1b0ff95f..000000000000 --- a/_projects/rl.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Basics of Reinforcement Learning -description: -img: -importance: 4 -category: technical ---- diff --git a/_research/capstone-covid.md b/_research/capstone-covid.md deleted file mode 100644 index 486b70633d53..000000000000 --- a/_research/capstone-covid.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,101 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Engineering Design Education During COVID-19 -description: As part of my dissertation research I studied the difference between student design experiences pre and post COVID-19 -img: /assets/img/engine.jpeg -importance: 2 -category: work ---- - -The COVID-19 pandemic led to preventative measures such as social distancing, resulting in many higher education institutions closing their campuses and transitioning to remote learning. While remote instruction can be beneficial, the sudden shift to online learning during the pandemic was not comparable to traditional online teaching models, which require prior planning and preparation. Consequently, the educational experience for students may have been compromised, despite instructors' intensive preparations. However, not much attention has been given to how students adapted and demonstrated resilience during the pandemic. **This study focused on the industry-sponsored design capstone at a large public research institution to understand how students perceived, adapted to, and mitigated the impact of the pandemic.** - -
-
-

Role

-

Primary Researcher

-
-
-

Company

-

Research Project

-
-
-

Timeline

-

June 2020 - March 2021

-
-
-

Study Design

-

Mixed-Methods

-
-
-
- -# Key Questions -
-- What are the factors that contributed to student perceptions of learning in the ENGINE capstone program during COVID-19? -- Was there a difference in student perceptions of learning during the COVID and non-COVID iteration of the capstone? -- How did the student capstone design experience change during the COVID-19 pandemic? -
-# Participants -The study involved two cohorts of students who participated in the design (ENGINE) capstone in 2018 and 2020. The ENGINE capstone is a 20-week program consisting of two quarters, with about 115 students, most of whom are electrical and computer engineering majors. The program offers about 35 projects, with 90% of them being sponsored by industry. During the program, students develop and scope a project proposal with their industry mentors in the first quarter, and in the second quarter, they work on project realization until the end of the program. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Spring quarter of the capstone design experience shifted to remote learning, and all meetings with TAs and mentors, project presentations, and poster fair were conducted virtually. - -# Methodology -The study used multiple sources of data. Ordinal data was collected from student surveys using a Likert scale to understand how various aspects of the course contributed to student learning. In addition to surveys, qualitative data was used from two major documents submitted by student design teams during Spring 2020: a COVID mitigation plan submitted at the beginning of the quarter, and a final project report that described how the pandemic had affected their project. - - -## 1. Surveys -### Purpose -To understand how learning was impacted during COVID-19, the first step was to define what students perceived that they learned during the capstone. To do so, I collaborated with he College of Engineering's Engineering Teaching and Learning department to design a survey that would be administered to students during the capstone. The goal of the survey was to collect large-scale quantitative data to obtain factors that impacted student's perceptions of learning. - -### Method -The survey was conducted online, mid-way through the Spring 2018 and Spring 2020 quarters. It enabled students to self-report which aspects of the program aided or inhibited student learning. A total of 96 students were surveyed in 2018, with a response rate of 26%, while 115 students were surveyed in 2020, with a response rate of 69%. Participation was voluntary, and no identifying information was collected. Factors measuring students' perceptions of learning emerged from an Exploratory Factor Analysis in R. These factors were compared for survey responses pre and post COVID-19 using independent sample t-tests. - -### Outcome -Thirteen survey items were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. The analysis revealed four factors: "Real-world Experience", "Assessment", "Instructional Support", and "Task Value" that impacted students' perceptions of learning. These factors accounted for 76% of the total variance and showed adequate reliability (Cronbach's alpha > 0.7). - -The "Real-world Experience" factor included items associated with experiential learning. The "Assessment" factor consisted of items associated with student assignments such as presentations and evaluation. The "Instructional Support" factor contained three items related to faculty, instructor, and TA guidance. The "Task Value" factor consisted of two items measuring students' expectations and appreciation for the capstone. - -Surprisingly, independent sample t-tests did not find any significant differences differences between traditional and remote learning. This gave rise to the hypothesis that lack of significant difference maybe because students adapted rapidly to the remote learning disruption. To explore this hypothesis, we analyzed qualitative data from student assignments. - -
-## 2. Qualitative Analysis -### Purpose -The quantitative results from the survey highlighted that there was no difference in students' perceptions of learning in the traditional vs. remote environment. This was surprising given the fact that in the remote setting students had to pivot to doing hands-on project work online. A qualitative approach was deemed suitable to identify common themes among the unique and varied experiences of the 35 student teams during the pandemic. To achieve this, the final project reports and COVID-19 mitigation plan assignments of each team were analyzed. The reports contained technical and non-technical aspects of the projects, while the mitigation plan assignments detailed how the teams would adapt to the remote setting and if they needed additional resources. - -### Method -The two sources of qualitative data were analyzed using an inductive approach to identify emergent themes. The constant comparative approach was then employed to establish and refine boundaries to the categories and summarize their content. Finally, the categories were compared across different sources of data to identify patterns in the students' experience during the capstone program. - -### Outcome -The qualitative analysis found that the ENGINE capstone experience for students was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in three basic ways: product adaptations, process adaptations, and no change. The study suggests that COVID-19 caused major disruptions to the traditional student experience of the capstone program, despite the absence of significant differences in student perceptions. - -- **Product Adaptations:** Half of the capstone projects had to adapt due to the pandemic by reducing their project scope, switching from physical to software prototypes, or forgoing subsystem integration. The inability to access labs and equipment was the main reason for these adaptations, especially for hardware-leaning projects. Hindered communication and collaboration, difficulty in transporting hardware, and shipping delays were also factors. Teams adapted by recalibrating and reducing expectations, changing project deliverables, and relying on lab space and different retailers for parts. - -- **Process Adaptations:** Around 28.6% of projects had to adapt their design process due to pandemic-related constraints, such as lack of access to lab resources, closure of data collection and testing sites, shipping delays, and hindered communication. Teams resorted to using limited datasets for testing, reducing expectations for project deliverables, and changing the methods of proving their system works. Some students raised concerns regarding reduced work efficiency and team coordination, as well as the difficulty of expressing ideas remotely as challenges that hindered their process. - -- **No Change:** About one-third of the projects in the capstone were not affected by the pandemic because they were purely software-based, which allowed them to work remotely and share resources easily. The only challenge these teams faced was the switch to remote interaction and time zone changes for some team members and industry mentors - - -
- A mapping of COVID-19 constraints and project changes. Numbers indicate the number of projects in each category -
- -### How did students adapt? - -Students used a variety of strategies to overcome challenges in team roles and structure, tools and technology, technical changes, resource coordination, and communication. Students used independent roles, screen sharing, project management tools, messaging platforms, and creative technical solutions to complete their projects. They also increased meeting frequency to stay engaged and ensure everyone remained on track. Despite the pandemic disruptions, student perceptions of learning were not different across the remote and traditional setting, as students mitigated the effects of the pandemic by adapting their strategies and decisions to the uncertain environment. - - -
- Student adaptations to project changes due to COVID-19 -
- -
-## Limitations -The study examines the perspectives of engineering students during a pandemic-adapted capstone design experience at a single institution. While the study provides a set of factors that measure student perceptions of learning, the low response rate and potential for self-selection bias in the survey results limits their generalizability. The qualitative analysis is limited by the subjectivity of the researcher, who was also a teaching assistant for the capstone program. However, the study offers valuable insights into how students adapt to crisis circumstances that can inform future capstone and engineering design instruction. -
-## Impact -The study suggests that college seniors are capable of adapting to sudden changes in their education and design trajectories, which opens up possibilities for offering dynamic and real-world experiences for undergraduate education. However, while students showed significant resilience in the face of the pandemic, many also admitted to the toll it took on their mental health. The study highlights the importance of providing appropriate instructional support and adjustment in summative assessments, while also acknowledging the price paid for resilience that cannot be neglected. Overall, the study emphasizes the need for a balance between academic rigor and student well-being. - -
-## Further Reading -The study was published in proceedings for ASEE 2021 and can be found here - - diff --git a/_research/capstone.md b/_research/capstone.md deleted file mode 100644 index b1f95e35cc72..000000000000 --- a/_research/capstone.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,96 +0,0 @@ ---- -layout: page -title: Student Needs in Engineering Design Capstones -description: I studied the relationship between support students received from their teammates and industry mentors and learning outcomes in design capstones. -img: /assets/img/capstone2.jpg -importance: 2 -category: work ---- - -The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the support students receive from their peers (teammates) and industry mentors during an industry sponsored engineering design capstone and their perceptions about technical and non-technical learning outcomes. Capstone design courses are an important requirement for undergraduate engineering programs, and industry sponsored capstone programs are one way to provide students with the opportunity to work on real-world problems. However, these programs vary widely in implementation, and there is a gap in understanding the influence of peer and industry mentor support on student learning outcomes in the capstone experience. - -
-
-

Role

-

Primary Researcher

-
-
-

Company

-

Research Project

-
-
-

Timeline

-

June 2022 - March 2023

-
-
-

Study Design

-

Mixed-Methods

-
-
-
- -# Key Questions -
-- What are the relevant factors necessary to explore student learning outcomes? -- How were (industry and teammate) support linked to student learning outcomes? -- How and why were student learning outcomes impacted by instructional support? -
-# Participants -The study involved a cohort of students who enrolled in the industry sponsored engineering design capstone (ENGINE) during the 2021-2022 academic year. The capstone is a two (ten week) quarter program spanning winter and spring quarters for a total of 20 weeks. In 2021-2022, the program hosted 184 students, 177 of which were electrical and computer engineering majors. Students had an opportunity to select from about 48 projects. Approximately 80% of the projects were sponsored by industry, while the remaining were sponsored by government organizations. -
- -# Methodology - -I designed a self-reflection survey to collect large-scale quantitative data on students' perceptions of support and learning. The self-reflection survey contained 36 closed-ended (Likert type questions) and 5 open-ended questions. The close-ended questions were adapted from different scales developed to assess engineering design performance, entrepreneurial and students' innovation competencies and faculty support along with items that I newly developed for this study. - -## Close-Ended Questions (Quantitative) -### Purpose -The goal of using close-ended questions was to pinpoint the essential factors needed to investigate student learning outcomes and their relationship with students' views on teammate and industry mentor support. - -### Method -Since all survey items were either adapted to or newly developed for this capstone setting, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted in R. The EFA helped to identify learning outcomes, independent variables, and control variables. A linear regression model was then utilized to investigate the relationship between the dependent, independent, and control variables identified from the EFA. - -### Outcomes -The outcome of the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) revealed two distinct factors related to student learning in the capstone setting. The first factor, named "Engineering Design and Decision-Making," highlighted students' perceptions of their ability to learn more about systems engineering, ethical implications of design, and decision-making. The second factor, labeled "Adaptability," focused on students' ability to manage changes in project scope, deal with ambiguity, and obtain necessary information to move forward. Together, these two factors accounted for a total variance of 70.5%, which exceeded the desired threshold of 60%. - -The EFA also resulted in four factors associated with students' sense of support and other controlling variables: design self-efficacy, preparedness, teammate support, and industry mentor support. These factors represented a total variance of 72.1%, exceeding the desired threshold of 60%. The analysis identified specific areas where students perceived their skills and support to be strongest, providing valuable insight for improving the capstone experience. - -Once the factors were identified, the relationship between them was investigated using a linear regression model. -- The independent variables were teammate support and industry mentor support -- The controlling variables were design self-efficacy and preparedness -- The dependent variables were engineering design and decision-making and adaptability. - -Two regression models were created for each of the dependent variables. The final model for engineering design and decision-making had an adjusted R^2 of 0.50, meaning that the independent variables and interactions between them explained 50% of the variance in the data. All independent variables were significantly and positively associated with engineering design and decision-making, except for industry mentor support. - -Similarly, the final model for adaptability had an adjusted R^2 of 0.55, indicating that the independent variables and interactions between them collectively explained 55% of the variance in the data. All independent variables were significantly and positively linked to adaptability. - -The analysis also identified two significant interaction effects between the independent variables. In the first model (for engineering design and decision-making), interactions between preparedness and teammate support were significant, indicating that teammate support played a more significant role in students' engineering design and decision-making skills when they did not feel well-prepared for the project. Likewise, in the second model (for adaptability), the interaction between preparedness and industry support was significant, indicating that industry mentor support had a stronger impact on students' adaptability skills when they felt less prepared for their projects. These findings provide valuable insights into the factors that influence students' engineering design and decision-making and adaptability in the capstone setting. - -
-## Open-Ended Questions (Qualitative) -### Purpose -To understand and explain the relationship between the independent, dependent and controlling variables, a qualitative analysis of the open-ended survey questions was conducted. - -### Method -The method used for the thematic analysis of the qualitative data involved a deductive coding process, which categorized student responses into perceptions of support, design self-efficacy, and preparedness for each of the learning outcomes. This was followed by frequency analyses to generate counts within different categories for each learning outcome, allowing for a better understanding of the relationship between the dependent and independent variables. - -### Outcomes -- **Teammate support:** The study found that in engineering design and decision-making, students rely heavily on teammate support for solving technical problems, achieving goals, brainstorming ideas, balancing designs, and adapting to challenges. Students emphasized the importance of effective project management, organizational structure, and communication among team members. -- **Industry mentor support:** Industry mentor support played a significant role in students' adaptability, with technical feedback and flexibility being the two most prominent aspects. Having an involved mentor who could provide feedback and approve out-of-the-box ideas helped students adapt to changes and solve problems effectively. However, delayed mentor support could also negatively impact project outcomes. While not statistically significant, students also looked to mentors for high-level support and well-defined expectations, allowing them to design with more clarity. -- **Preparedness:** Two aspects of preparedness - technical and project plan - are important to students' perceptions of engineering design, decision-making, and adaptability. Students who felt more prepared for their project were able to organize their team's direction more effectively. Preparedness also mediated the relationship between teammate support and engineering design and decision-making such that students who felt more technically prepared for the project could better support their team. Also, Industry mentor support emerged as being vital to preparing students to -adapt to unforeseen changes by providing a concrete vision of the project goals. -- **Design self-efficacy:** The ability to self-learn and apply new knowledge was found to be key to positive perceptions of engineering design, as students were able to pivot their problem framing and access online resources to overcome technical challenges. However, some students expressed frustration with the burden of self-learning and a lack of teammate or industry mentor support. -
- -# Limitations -The study focuses on the role of support, design self-efficacy, and preparedness on learning outcomes in a single institution, which limits its generalizability to other academic settings. The qualitative analysis is subject to researcher subjectivity, but the use of open-ended questions serves as triangulation. One of the authors' positionality as a teaching assistant may have influenced the interpretation of the themes. Despite these limitations, the study offers valuable insight into how teammate and industry mentor support influence students' perceptions of the technical and non-technical skills gained during the capstone. - -
- -# Impact & Future Work -We found that teammate and industry mentor support as critical elements of students’ capstone design experience. Design self-efficacy and preparedness play an important role in controlling for the impact of support on learning. Therefore, capstone instructors should prioritize developing structured ways to facilitate teammate and industry mentor support. - -- Evidence-based best practices should be developed, which enable industry mentors to support students while fulfilling their goals and motivations for participating in capstone programs. -- Capstone instructors should consider developing interventions that help students feel supported by their teammates through alignment in expectations, expertise, and communication. -- Further, instructors and course designers should ensure that students feel technically supported throughout the capstone by having the appropriate educational resources and help. -- Instructors should impart effective collaborative project planning and management strategies so that students can develop a clear understanding of their project in conjunction with their teammates and industry mentors early in the project cycle. diff --git a/assets/css/main 2.css b/assets/css/main 2.css index c59f9585afbe..e5f16986a3ea 100644 --- a/assets/css/main 2.css +++ b/assets/css/main 2.css @@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ } html[data-theme=dark] { - --global-bg-color: #424242; + --global-bg-color: #181818; --global-code-bg-color: #2c3237; --global-text-color: #e8e8e8; --global-text-color-light: #e8e8e8; --global-theme-color: #2698BA; --global-hover-color: #2698BA; --global-footer-bg-color: #e8e8e8; - --global-footer-text-color: #424242; + --global-footer-text-color: #181818; --global-footer-link-color: #000000; --global-distill-app-color: #e8e8e8; }