Administrative Staff Questionnaire. Overall technical direction. Management and administration of center. Management of individual research projects

Similar documents
REPORT ON THE EUROSTAT 2017 USER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Contribution of the support and operation of government agency to the achievement in government-funded strategic research programs

POLICY ON INVENTIONS AND SOFTWARE

ISO in the Construction and Manufacturing Companies: A Case Study from the Construction Industry of Hyderabad and Karachi, Pakistan

California State University, Northridge Policy Statement on Inventions and Patents

IT ADOPTION MODEL FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

Sustainable Development Education, Research and Innovation

Indo Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (IAJMR) ISSN:

National Standard of the People s Republic of China

Intellectual Property Ownership and Disposition Policy

Accepting Equity When Licensing University Technology

COUNTRY: Questionnaire. Contact person: Name: Position: Address:

Public Consultation: Horizon 2020 "Science with and for Society" - Work Programme Questionnaire

MoneyTreeTM. Report. Some $171 million VC financing invested in hi-tech companies in Q compared with $255 million in the second quarter 2012

IP and Technology Management for Universities

Revisiting the USPTO Concordance Between the U.S. Patent Classification and the Standard Industrial Classification Systems

Technology Competency Descriptors Students will be able to identify, compare, and utilize appropriate technological applications.

Meeting of International Authorities under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

U.S. Document Imaging Scanner Survey Report: 2007

Lewis-Clark State College No Date 2/87 Rev. Policy and Procedures Manual Page 1 of 7

Controlling Changes Lessons Learned from Waste Management Facilities 8

General Services Administration Federal Supply Service Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Price List. Contract No.: GS-00F-342CA

Incentive System for Inventors

A Technological Innovation Management Based on the Audit

The role of patents in technology transfer

New York University University Policies

Municipality of Tirana. General Directorate For Strategic Project & Foreign Investments. Strategic Projects Directorate.

WORLDSKILLS STANDARD SPECIFICATION

A. This section specifies procedural requirements for Shop Drawings, product data, samples, and other miscellaneous Work-related submittals.

TQWL-42 TOTAL QUALITY OF WORK LIFE MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT

PATENT AND LICENSING POLICY SUMMARY

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR CONSULTANTS

2016 Southern Miss Interior Design Alumni Survey

Community Pharmacy Patient Questionnaire Results for Miltons Chemists

Proposed Data Collection Submitted for Public Comment and. AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),

Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP)

Policy Contents. Policy Information. Purpose and Summary. Scope. Published on Policies and Procedures (

Studying the Role of Public Research Organisations

WORKING PAPER 04 MAY 2002 Dr. Jim Ryan Tony Forde

MATRIX SAMPLING DESIGNS FOR THE YEAR2000 CENSUS. Alfredo Navarro and Richard A. Griffin l Alfredo Navarro, Bureau of the Census, Washington DC 20233

Enhancing Opportunities for Diversifying STEM Faculty. Carla Fehr Trina Ramirez Sharon R. Bird

Accepting Equity When Licensing University Technology

Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP)

New A Level Design and Technology: Product Design

Strategic Network Formation with Structural Hole in R&D Projects: The Case Study on Japanese Cosmetic Industry

Enfield CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only

Oxfordshire CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only

Southern Derbyshire CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only

South Devon and Torbay CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report Version 1 Internal Use Only

Portsmouth CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only

Graduate Council Meeting Minutes September 14, 2016

ISAE - Institute for Studies and Economic Analyses

The Role of Science and Technology Parks in Productivity of Organizations

101 Sources of Spillover: An Analysis of Unclaimed Savings at the Portfolio Level

Sutton CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2015 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 1 Internal Use Only

Intellectual Property. Rajkumar Lakshmanaswamy, PhD

Case Study Protocol NCPI Project 5.1

OCEAN SPACE CENTRE An evaluation of incentive effects

The Danish 3R Survey Knowledge, attitudes and experiences with the 3Rs among researchers involved in animal experiments in Denmark

ETCC First Quarter-2012 Meeting CPUC Update. Ayat Osman, Ph.D. March 29, 2012 PG&E PEC, San Francisco

Agricultural Data Verification Protocol for the Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership

MORGAN STATE UNIVERSITY PROCEDURES ON PATENTS AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER APPROVED BY THE PRESIDENT NOVEMBER 2, 2015

Chapter 6: Finding and Working with Professionals

Are large firms withdrawing from investing in science?

Phase 2 of 2009 General Rate Case Witness Qualifications

WIPO NATIONAL SEMINAR ON THE INNOVATION PROMOTION, TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND SUCCESSFUL TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER (STL)

Making a complaint or compliment

General Certificate of Education Design and Technology: Product Design 3D

Business Survey Report: EmX Evaluation

Manual Scoring Instructions for QOL-B Version 3.1

Annual Press Conference Bilfinger Berger SE, Mannheim March 21, 2012 Roland Koch, Chairman of the Executive Board

SAMPLE INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

Innovating together Collaborations between multi-national companies and academia in China

Service standard - replacement kitchens. Our promise to you.

Develop Your Marketing Plan for 2017

Business Plan Summary

Comfort and Load Control: It s Getting Hot in Here But is the Utility to Blame?

FEDERAL PATENT POLICIES COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS BY RALPH L. DAVIS PATENT MANAGER OFFICE OF PATENT MANAGEMENT PURDUE UNIVERSITY

Gemeinschaft ied der Helmholtz-G. Mitgl. IEA GHG Social Research Network Meeting, November 2-3, 2009, CIRED, Paris. methods.

knowledge Exchange EXCHANGE YOUR KNOWLEDGE J. MICHAEL HASENKAM - VICE DEAN COLLABORATION WITH SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED BUSINESSES - WHY AND HOW?

What We Heard Report Inspection Modernization: The Case for Change Consultation from June 1 to July 31, 2012

Science, Technology & Innovation Policy Review - the Asian experience. Yu Wing Yin University of Bielefeld

INSTRUCTION MANUAL Questionnaire on Research and Experimental Development (R&D) Statistics

From FP7 towards Horizon 2020 Workshop on " Research performance measurement and the impact of innovation in Europe" IPERF, Luxembourg, 31/10/2013

Loyola University Maryland Provisional Policies and Procedures for Intellectual Property, Copyrights, and Patents

Arie Rip (University of Twente)*

Greek engineers and libraries in the coming years: a (human) communication model

National Aviation Academy

Product Management of Research and Development Centers at Public Sector Universities in Pakistan

RCC Satisfaction Index Survey Results

Integration of MGDS Design into the Licensing Process' This paper presents an overview of how the Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS) design

Organizedby DepartmentofCivilEngineeringMar AthanasiusCollegeofEngineering, Kothamangalam, Ernakulam,Kerala

GZ.:BMWF-8.105/5-II/1/2010

This document is a preview generated by EVS

Research Specification: understanding consumer experience of first tier complaints

West Norfolk CCG. CCG 360 o stakeholder survey 2014 Main report. Version 1 Internal Use Only Version 7 Internal Use Only

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Addendum 3 to RFP July 28, 2017

GECC Assessment of TECH Technology in World Civilization

Asia s Fashion Jewellery & Accessories Fair March Visitor Survey Report

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessments. How to make suggestions, comments and complaints

Transcription:

Administrative Staff Questionnaire Each university/industry cooperative center represents a unique organizational design. In order to understand better the overall Center program, we would like to know about some of the incentives, structures, and decision processes, which operate in your center. Questions 1 to 4 deal with these dimensions of structure and process. 1. During the past year how did you allocate your time among the following functions (please give percentages of total time in each category)? Overall technical direction Management and administration of center Management of individual research projects Marketing of your center to potential industrial sponsors Administrative liaison with industrial sponsors Other university-related duties Other activities 100 % 2. During the past year approximately how many people at the University have requested information about specific activities or projects of the Center? 3a. Approximately what percentage of these information requests can be classified as technical in nature? 3b. Approximately what percentage concerns administrative or operational issues? 4. Approximately what are the total funds allocated to the Center this year? $ How much of these funds are from NSF? From Company sponsors?

Administrative Staff Questionnaire, 2 From the University? A primary concern of this assessment is the various results and benefits that have accrued to your university and to the companies from participation in the Center. Please be as objective as possible, since in the long run it will be to the Center s advantage to fully understand its strengths and limitations. The remainder of this questionnaire focuses on outcomes, results, and potential benefits. 5. During the past year how satisfied were you with the following features of the Center? Completely A great deal Not at all Technical quality of the research Communication between Center staff And industrial participants Center administrative practices Responsiveness of the Center To industry needs 6. In your view how satisfied was industry with the following features of the Center? Completely A great deal Not at all Technical quality of the research Communication between Center staff And industrial participants Center administrative practices Responsiveness of the Center To industry needs 7. How important to you are the following goals and outcomes of the Center? Extremely Considerably Not at All Important Important Important Important General expansion of knowledge

Administrative Staff Questionnaire, 3 In this technical area Enhancement of graduate Student technical training Enhancement of graduate Students understanding of industry Redirection of university research toward industrial problems Enhancement of quality of Industrial research Development of new Company research projects Development of patentable Products Development of commercialized Products 8. How likely is it that the university will realize tangible benefits in the following areas as a result of participation in this Center? Almost Certain Pretty Scarcely Improved knowledge base Better student recruitment Better student placement Better faculty recruitment

Administrative Staff Questionnaire, 4 Improved research projects in the university Increased funds for research from public sources Increased funds for research from private sources Increased university patent activity 9. To what extent is the research conducted at the Center different from research projects typically conducted by faculty associated with the Center? A Lot Some A Little Hardly Any Research topics and issues Research methods and procedures used Criteria and methods used to evaluate research projects Specifically, in what ways has the Center program affected the nature of faculty research? 10. In your opinion, has the Center had any effect on the following specific outcomes in sponsoring firms during the last year? No Moderate Significant Not Applicable Improvements in products and services Changes in warranty and complaints in

Administrative Staff Questionnaire, 5 view of improvements in products New products developed to related efforts Changes in cost of products to users (price changes or decreased product maintenance) Reduction of production costs Improvements in processes and methods of production Increased uniformity of products Improved product or design Improved capability to deal with government regulations Improved capability to cooperate with outside scientists 11. Please make any additional comments you wish. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! Results in an aggregated form will be made available to all respondents to this questionnaire