tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post7333426549052690930..comments2024-03-27T00:26:31.343-07:00Comments on The Commercial Space Blog: The National Research Council Doesn't Fit Within the Current Innovation AgendaChuck Blackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-42978463607826224472016-04-13T13:23:32.545-07:002016-04-13T13:23:32.545-07:00Readers are encouraged to check out the link Chris...Readers are encouraged to check out the link Chris provided. Chuck Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-16772012318358278532016-04-13T11:23:38.865-07:002016-04-13T11:23:38.865-07:00Jennifer Veitch is a Principal Research Officer at...Jennifer Veitch is a Principal Research Officer at the NRC. On April 11th 2016, The Ottawa Citizen published an opinion piece that she wrote entitled “Why we still need the National Research Council”. Given that you seem to quote from The Ottawa Citizen perhaps you could provide your readership with a link to her interesting op-ed? Here is a link: http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/veitch-why-we-still-need-the-national-research-counci <br />Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01221774195498311273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-22352450665790005532016-04-13T07:26:57.121-07:002016-04-13T07:26:57.121-07:00Hey all,
Greetings from inside the (supposed) cru...Hey all,<br /><br />Greetings from inside the (supposed) crumbling walls of NRC. Interesting topic, but unfortunately it's just a lot of high level speculation. To clear a few items, we inside the NRC don't have much more information that everybody else. Yes, we got the emails mentioned in the press, but there's nothing new to report there. I doubt any employees outside the top ranks know anything worth adding.<br /><br />(Also note that the rights of scientists to talk to the press is with respect to the product of their/our work/science. We are certainly subject to ATIP as well, but also to general employment decorum in which it is inappropriate for employees of any organization to talk publicly about communications, rumours, speculation, etc., about their employer. Getting something better than pure speculation is partly what Communications Departments are generally for.)<br /><br />As far as morale and ongoing business, I don't see anything has changed. A lot of work is expanding; people are doing their jobs and enjoying it. There are lots of joggers out enjoying the (finally) nice weather on main campus. It's pretty much business as usual, including new work.<br /><br />As far as last Friday's Citizen column, it seems like an interesting question, but to me the content is superficial fluff. It went as deep as some generalized summary of political policy and a general reference that other government funded or operated research organizations exist in Canada. I don't see how any of that is relevant; seems like "all or nothing" kind of thinking, as if NRC either must do all of the government funded research or it is pointless. It's the incoherent small talk you might have in an elevator waiting for your floor, and leave wondering what the heck he was talking about. <br /><br />The re-branding article oddly had more depth but at a level of importance like finding a spelling error on the pens that you are about to hand out at your trade show booth. Branding can be important, but often involves iterations and testing ideas, and changing of direction. That really has little to do with how an organization is structured and more to do with reputation. <br /><br />At least the article here gets some substance and context with respect to Jenkins. But still, where's the beef? Sure, splitting up NRC is one possible model, but I don't see any mention of anybody in NRC or government even suggesting this is on the table. More speculation. <br /><br />An interesting discussion would look at the value proposition of NRC and of different models of delivery. Why is splitting it up better than other models. What economic analysis has suggested NRC may not be needed (a la Citizen suggestion), or is better off broken up? The Jenkins report was a beginning, not an end. There are many models in the world for national research and investment in innovation. I'm not aware that we have a clear direction on which one is appropriate regarding NRC or why, or even logistically how. For example, the NRC facilities are used across portfolios. A wind tunnel might be used for aerospace, ground transportation, or construction studies. If it's split up, would it go by facility or by portfolio? How would that same research matrix (portfolio vs facilities) work in that case? What organization would take each part? Lots of great discussion people could have. <br /><br />Much less interesting is who made what suggestion, what a generalized government policy might vaguely suggest, or what wild and wacky hypotheses we can generate from looking at an absent President, canceled T-shirts, or reading tea leaves. Without actual content, explanations, working plans, or analyses to discuss, it's mere numerology. It can be fun looking for patterns in the noise, but the only people who take it seriously tend to live in little wood shacks in the mountains.<br /><br />My 2 cents.<br />Chadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15486630706498864320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-70035558153225945502016-04-12T14:20:14.372-07:002016-04-12T14:20:14.372-07:00And those claims were made by news organizations w...And those claims were made by news organizations which referenced the facts of the budget and the facts from other areas as well, Chris.<br /><br />Don't forget that.<br /><br />As for me, I'm a political agnostic. When our present government starts acting differently from the last one, especially when it comes to funding for NRC or CSA, I'll be happy enough to report their activities. <br /><br />I'd even be willing to sit around a roaring fire with Justin Trudeau and belt out a hearty chorus of "Kumbaya."<br /><br />Here's hoping that all those NRC employees feel enough confidence in their new found freedom of speech to weigh in on this debate soon. <br /><br />You and I are speaking from the outside, Chris. I'd readily defer to a knowledgeable insider, just so long as the person would allow me to use a few quotes. Chuck Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-52158089843126575872016-04-12T13:55:18.625-07:002016-04-12T13:55:18.625-07:00The issue was never the messenger. The issue was j...The issue was never the messenger. The issue was just transparency. <br />It is worth noting that the current government has been in office for 5.5 months which it not a very long time. It was elected based on a platform that it is now implementing. There should be no surprises about its near term priorities in this post-election period. <br />Regarding the NRC, we need to allow time for the government to act.....everything in due course. The fact that a major reorganization of the NRC is on hold points to a government that wants to proceed with due care and deliberation. This is hardly lip service. <br />I agree that we should hear the story from the NRC employees perspective since the gag that was imposed on scientists by the last government has been finally been removed. Three cheers for basic freedom of speech.<br />You hit the nail on the head with your reference to news organizations making claims.<br />Regards<br />ChrisChrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01221774195498311273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-25693264096414785782016-04-12T12:43:12.301-07:002016-04-12T12:43:12.301-07:00If you'd prefer, I'll put my name on the a...If you'd prefer, I'll put my name on the article and then we can move on to the part where the focus is on the content and not on the messenger. <br /><br />As for whether or not the article supports the statement that the NRC does or does not fit into the current innovation agenda, I think the budget, referenced in the story, is a good indicator of whether or not the government supports the NRC as it currently stands.<br /><br />As quoted from the Ottawa Citizen article: <br /><br />"The recent federal budget, at a glance, illustrates the problem. Chirping happily about the “digital economy,” “world-class research, "continued leadership in space,” the “ingenuity of Canadian industry” and so on, the budget mentions the NRC only as a second-stringer. Instead, Budget 2016 rattles off extra funding for a host of taxpayer-funded, science-y agencies that are NOT the NRC. It also highlights the work of other organizations, such as Genome Canada, the Stem Cell Network, the Brain Canada Foundation, and the Perimeter Institute, for their sophisticated science. Even the Liberals’ beloved research on electric cars won’t flow through the NRC, but through Natural Resources Canada. It would seem no one knows what to do with this agency."<br /><br />Let's be honest here. Henry Stewart is not the only one making the case that the current Liberal government has provided only lip service to the NRC. <br /><br />This bandwagon started out in the Ottawa Citizen, and while the blog post added useful background materials, it's certainly not the only news organization making the claim.<br /><br />Hopefully we'll hear the rest of the story first hand as all those NRC employees line up to tell their side over the next little while. <br /><br />And why shouldn't they. <br /><br />The Liberals have re-established the right of scientists to talk with the press, without needing to get permissions from their political masters. <br /><br />We can all talk openly now.Chuck Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09506476753520146858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-31810838016074808652016-04-12T12:06:50.758-07:002016-04-12T12:06:50.758-07:00Hi Chuck
I agree with Leslie. The use of anonymous...Hi Chuck<br />I agree with Leslie. The use of anonymous authors is not appropriate. The article also does not support nor make the case for the premise stated in the headline which is "The National Research Council Doesn't Fit Within the Current Innovation Agenda". The NRC definitely has a role in any Innovation agenda. It is unfortunate that the NRC begins its second century with such a cloud over its head. The issue is its ability to recover from a decade of damage.<br />Regards<br />ChrisChrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01221774195498311273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6618880.post-53831791899317929472016-04-12T07:48:48.842-07:002016-04-12T07:48:48.842-07:00Hi Chuck,
I saw the below e-mail other day, then...Hi Chuck,<br /> <br />I saw the below e-mail other day, then read the blog this morning. If you are professional enough to have a “style guide”, how can you accept that people write under pseudonyms? Unless you’re Frank Magazine, I think it strains your blog’s credibility when you have anonymous people with axes to grind writing articles.<br /> <br />Secondly, that story by “Henry Stewart” seems relatively wrong-headed to me. <br /><br />I don’t know what’s happening at the NRC, but I imagine that the Harper-appointed president was plowing ahead with his agenda, without getting a read and buy-in from the new Trudeau government, so he was turfed. I gather they have appointed someone to start cleaning up the mess.<br /> <br />Cheers, Leslie.Leslie Swartmanhttps://twitter.com/LeslieSwartmannoreply@blogger.com