We were promised new products and services, instead we got more journal articles
-
Upload
jeffrey-funk -
Category
Business
-
view
123 -
download
0
Transcript of We were promised new products and services, instead we got more journal articles
A/Prof Jeffrey Funk
Author of Technology Change and the Rise of New Industries, Stanford University Press
For information on other technologies: see http://www.slideshare.net/Funk98/presentations
Peter Thiel Understated the Problem
In reality, we mostly got more science and engineering papers
Because of (or in spite of) dramatic increases in R&D
Non-Defense
Government R&D
has Risen by more
than 50 times
since 1953
and 2.5 times
since 1970
Excluding Space,
it has risen by
more than 3 times
since 1970
http://theconversation.com/drop-in-uk-research-spending-leaves-it-trailing-rest-of-the-eu-24311
Similar Increases for University Research
35 times
increase
since 1953
and about
four times
since 1970
Did we Get Better Products and Services? Robert Gordon demonstrates in “The Rise and Fall of
American Growth” there was more
growth between 1870 and 1940
than between 1940 and 2010
He demonstrates this by analyzing many studies of
inflation adjusted productivity growth by sector
changes in product and service features
changes in longevity and other health data
His analysis suggests technology change has been slower since the post WWII increases in government R&D spending
Robert Gordon, The Rise and Fall of American Growth, Princeton University Press, 2016
For a summary and analysis of his book, see: http://www.slideshare.net/Funk98/has-technology-change-slowed
According to Gordon
An American of 1870 would not recognize life in 1940
Indoor plumbing
Canned and jarred food, refrigerators
Cable cars, subways, autos, trucks, and aircraft
Electricity, home appliances, and lighting
Newspapers, telephones, records and radio
Urban department stores, skyscrapers
But an American of 1940 would recognize life today
Small changes in the above items
Only a few big changes: large screen color televisions, computers, mobile phones, Internet
Robert Gordon, The Rise and Fall of American Growth, Princeton University Press, 2016
For a summary and analysis of his book, see: http://www.slideshare.net/Funk98/has-technology-change-slowed
http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21694990-old-fashioned-ways-reporting-new-discoveries-are-
holding-back-medical-research
What we got was More Journal Articles
How Useful are These Papers?Many argue that few papers are read or cited
One estimate for percentage of papers not cited
82 per cent in humanities
32 per cent in social sciences
27 per cent in natural sciences
Even if a paper is cited, this does not mean it
has actually been read
According to one estimate, only 20 per cent of
papers cited have actually been read
Prof No One is Reading You, Straits Times Op-Ed, Asit K. Biswas And Julian Kirchherr
One Can Only Laugh
Title of Article: Academics Actually Write Papers Arguing Over How Many People Read (And Cite) Their Papers
Article’s Conclusion: “Hopefully, someone will figure out how to answer this question definitively, so academics can start arguing about something else.”
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/half-academic-studies-are-never-read-more-three-people-180950222/#ofli1LZIOZm6MdlO.99
What About Companies? Are they reading science and engineering papers?
Do they use their ideas to create new products, services, or businesses?
Consider Wall Street Journal’s billion-dollar startup club (as of September 2015)
Recent startups (still private)
valuations over $1 Billion
still private (no IPO yet)
have raised money in past four years
at least one venture capital firm as investor
Category TotalNumber ofstartups
Percentage of Startups with Patents Citing Science and Engineering Papers (SEPs)
Citing ≥ 1SEP
Citing ≥ 10different SEPs
Citing ≥ 50different SEPs
Software 41 27% 2.5% 0%
E-Commerce 28 0% 0% 0%
ConsumerInternet
37 2.7% 0% 0%
Financial 15 0% 0% 0%
Hardware 10 50% 0% 0%
BioTech, Bio-Electronics
8 88% 75% 75%
Energy 2 50% 50% 0%
Space 1 0% 0% 0%
Retail 1 0% 0% 0%
Total 143 18% 5.6% 4.2%
Members of WSJ’s Billion-Dollar Startup Club
Also Don’t Read Science and Engineering Papers
Few Startups have Patents that Cite Science and Engineering Papers
Only 4.2% of all startups have patents that cite 50 or more different papers
Only 5.6% of all startups have patents that cite 10 or more different papers
Even for U.S. startups, the percentages are low
Only 5.4% of U.S. startups have patents that cite 50 or more different papers
Only 7.6% of U.S. startups have patents that cite 10 or more different papers
Startups for a Few Categories Have Patents that Cite Science and Engineering Papers
75% of BioTech/Bio-Electronic startups had patents that cited more than 50 scientific papers
One of two (50%) of energy startups had patents that cited more than 10 scientific papers
All of these startups are U.S. startups
In comparison
Only 7.3% of the software startups
None of the e-commerce, consumer Internet, or hardware startups
had patents citing 10 or more scientific papers
Pure Science vs. Engineering and Computer Science
The BioTech/Bio-Electronics and energy startups had patents that cited papers in pure scientific journals
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Only one startup outside of these categories cited papers in pure science journals
Palantir, a software startup
It cited more than 10 scientific papers including Nucleic Acids Research and Bioinformatics
Bottom Line for Startups
Few cite science and engineering papers in their patents
Instead, patent applications and other analyses reveal
startups are reading practitioner articles, blogs, and websites and not academic articles
they are monitoring impact of improvements in Internet speed, smart phones, and electronic components on new types of products, services, and content
Thus, little need to read academic papers if you want to create new products and services or start new businesses
What About All Those Technologies Coming out of University Labs?
Let’s look at MIT, the world’s leading engineering university
MIT’s Technology Review produces a list of 10 break-through technologies each year (2001, 2003-2014)
These lists are based on conversations with academic experts at MIT and elsewhere
These lists reflect research, teaching, and publishingactivities of America’s leading engineers and scientists
What are current market sizes of predictions?
Market Sizes for MIT’s Predictions 1 of 40 has greater than $100 Billion in sales: Data mining
(i.e., big data)
3 others have sales greater than $10 Billion: power grid control (i.e., smart grid), biometrics, distributed storage (i.e., cloud storage)
1 has sales between $5 and $10 Billion: micro-photonics (photonic crystals)
28 have sales less than $5 Billion
Data could not be found for 7 technologies probably because the names were too broad to gather data
Should predictions be more specific?
Vague definitions also suggest problem with predictions
Some important technologies were also missed………
MIT’s Technology Review Missed Some Big Markets that Have Emerged in the 21st Century
Technology Global Market, 2015
Smart Phones $400 Billion
Cloud Computing $175 billion
Internet of Things $130 billion
E-commerce for apparel $65 billion
Tablet Computers $60 billion
Social Networking $24 billion
Fintech $20 billion
eBooks $15 billion (only U.S.)
Wearable Computing $14 billion
Technology
Review’s
Predictions
Only one (Big Data)
has sales larger than
$100 billion
No others have
sales larger than
$50 billion
Only three others
have sales larger
than $10 billion
(biometrics, cloud
storage, smart grid)
Technologies Chosen in Place of Missed Markets 2005 Airborne
Networks
Quantum Wires
Silicon Photonics
Metabolomics
Magnetic-Resonance Force Microscopy
Universal Memory
Bacterial Factories
Enviromatics
Cell-Phone Viruses
Biomechatronics
2004 Universal
Translation
Synthetic Biology
Nanowires
T-Rays
Distributed Storage
RNAiInterference
Power Grid Control
Microfluidic Optical Fibers
Bayesian Machine Learning
Personal Genomics
2003
Wireless Sensor Networks
Injectable Tissue Engineering
Nano Solar Cells
Mechatronics
Grid computing
Molecular imaging
Nanoprintlithography
Software assurance
Glycomics
Quantum cryptography
2001
Brain-Machine Interface:
Flexible Transistors
Data Mining
Digital Rights Management
Biometrics
Natural Language Processing
Microphotonics
Untangling Code
Robot Design
Microfluidics
Orange: <$100 Million sales; Blue: too broad and vague to gather data
Green: Over $10 Billion sales
Would You Read About Those Technologies?
Science and Engineering papers aren’t read because they don’t discuss topics or technologies that companies want to read about
Companies (and students) want to read about smart phones, Internet of Things, Cloud Computing, Tablet Computers, Social Networks, eBooks, Fintech, Wearable Computing
Not about quantum wires, nanowires, T-rays, enviromatics, glycomics, quantum cryptography, untangling code
Universities need a better balance between
What’s going on now and
What might happen in 20 years
Too Many Academic Papers Also leads to problems in teaching
When professors focus on esoteric and futuristic technologies in their research, they also do so in teaching
Derek Bok, former president of Harvard University, argues in Higher Education in America that emphasis on research causes
increase in narrowly focused courses and decrease in general courses that are much more relevant to students
distracts attention away from skills that students need in their careers and personal lives
This problem can be seen in above data
current research and papers of professors have little relevance for the technologies that are actually being commercialized and thus the types of things that students need to learn
Too Many Academic Papers (2) Also leads to problems in research
research suffers because academic journals emphasize a different set of criteria than do markets
Academics need to think about improvements in cost and performance because this is what markets emphasize How can they make these improvements?
How to speed up process of commercialization
Collaboration between universities and companies should become deeper and broader
In summary, universities need better balance between Teaching
Publications
Collaboration with companies