7,613
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
==Unused research/paragraphs==
no edit summary
This page is where Tay is keeping her ideas for future projects so she does not lose track of it all.
==Project IdeasSpring 2017==Posts that look almost done:*[[Business Dynamism in High Tech (Blog Post)]]*[[Education Innovation Clusters]]*[[Houston SBA Loans (Blog Post)]]*[[Carried Interest Debate (Blog Post)]]*[[Innovation and the U.S. Military (Blog Post)]]*[[Patent Trolls (Blog Post)]]*[[Poaching and Entrepreneurship (Blog Post)]]*[[Regulatory Challenges for Innovation Policy (Blog Post)]]*[[Predicting Venture Capital (Blog Post)]]*[[Social Media Usage in Entrepreneurship (Blog Post)]]*[[Swedish Entrepreneurship (Blog Post)]]*[[Tackling Stagnation of Texas Entrepreneurship (Blog Post)]]*[[Theories of Entrepreneurship (Blog Post)]] I am hoping to help edit and refine these posts so we can eventually publish them! ===Blog Post ideas===*Crowdfunding*Social entrepreneurship*family-run small businesses: advantages and disadvantages?**could also explore businesses run from home http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1465750316679321 or https://smallbiztrends.com/2016/01/fun-home-based-business-ideas.html**http://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=73356**or self employment*Entrepreneur risk-taking*Young entrepreneurs*Personal life effects on firm success**http://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=75681*"Gazelle" companies**http://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=75683*Opportunity v Necessity in entrepreneurship**http://www.inderscience.com/info/inarticle.php?artid=73359*Interviews with alumni entrepreneurs- hook up with the alumni programs office? ==Fall 2016==
===General Ideas===
*Setting innovation precedents in the workplace
***Policy innovation—a change to policy thinking or behavioural intentions.
***Systemic innovation—a new or improved way for parts of the public sector to operate and interact with stakeholders
*Ask if you can edit Baker Institute transition documents- Kirsten Matthews, Neil Lane*Immigration*Post-doctoral students commercializing*For pictures: Wiki commons page, copy and paste the pieces already on the blog website; lots of typos and grammar issuesinformation in there
====Innovation in the Public Sector series====
*I’d like to do another piece, specifically on where the R&D budget for the public sector is being allocated. Is it going solely to STEM? Are policy innovation and other less-stereotypical types of innovation being encouraged?
*potential to do an article on the commercialization of innovation in the public sector- often, innovators within the government do not commercializa their product even though they could probably benefit from it
*There is a scientific aspect to this; when new policies or policy processes are made, you need to test their effectiveness
*When it comes to prioritizing innovation, the United States is near the top of the list. The US’s contributions constitute 29.8 percent of the world’s expenditures on Research and Development (R&D), trailing only behind China, which constitutes 35.7 percent. These two countries alone comprise almost two-thirds of the world’s R&D expenditures. However, when you look deeper into these statistics, you’ll see that 11.2% of all R&D expenditures in the U.S. are going to the public sector. This works out to 3.34% of the world’s expenditure on R&D being funneled specifically into U.S. government innovation. This is higher than Switzerland, Israel, and Bermuda’s contributions combined. When the more money is being spent on R&D for just the U.S. government than other countries are spending both publically and privately, the stakes become higher to ensure that our funds are being used efficiently and effectively.
*Government prioritization of innovation can lead to higher efficiency, lower costs, and higher civilian satisfaction with the government. If the U.S. government wishes to use its resources wisely, innovation promotion should be a top goal.
*The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a multilateral organization focused on stimulating the world economy, has conducted extensive research in the field of public sector innovation. Observing that many governments do not institutionalize innovation or utilize the many resources available to them for developing innovation efficiency, the OECD has placed priority on “developing analytical and measurement frameworks to understand and foster public-sector innovation”. When the OECD recognized that some countries may not be making their own efforts to encourage innovation, they partnered with the World bank to create the Innovation Policy Platform (IPP), an internet resource which provides top-tier information on best practices and strategies for encouraging innovation through policy. The OECD Observatory for Public Sector Innovation is also working on developing their own toolkit in hopes that it will revolutionize the innovation toolkit trend. It will draw from information from multiple governments, base guidance on the innovation cycle, incorporate lessons from practitioners, and filter for the most relevant information to aid users. However, some governments have displayed an emphasis on innovation through their own, individual efforts. For example, both Australia and the UK have “toolkits” for innovation within their public sectors, providing resources and strategies for public servants to find innovative solutions to issues.
* https://www.innovationpolicyplatform.org/about
* https://www.innovationpolicyplatform.org/content/statistics-ipp
Solutions and policy action
====Women research====
General ideas
*Immigration: PhD students who are graduating with STEM degrees- proportion of women?
*Compare to other countries and regions of the world, compare to other fields
*Public and private sector innovation and workforce issues
**Are women more in innovation in public v. private sector?
*Wages should equal average marginal productivity: is this the reason for the wage gap? (I sure hope not)
*Loyalty to firm
*Personality differences
**Risk aversion and decision outcomes
**Leadership styles
*There may be other reasons that women are less likely to be involved in start-up companies beyond their lack of training. Are women more risk adverse? Do they face discrimination when seeking credit? Do they prefer established companies with formalized benefit programs?, etc.
*https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/24/fact-sheet-equal-futures-partnership-and-united-states-commitments-expan Fact sheet released in 2012
What is being done by the US government to remedy this issue?
**These may include different choices men and women typically make in response to incentives in STEM education and STEM employment – for example, STEM career paths may be less accommodating to people cycling in and out of the workforce to raise a family – or it may be because there are relatively few female STEM role models. Perhaps strong gender stereotypes discourage women from pursuing STEM education and STEM jobs
*From a broader societal perspective, having more women in the workforce benefits families greatly. According to data from the Half the Sky movement for women and girls, women reinvest 90% of their income in their families and are more likely than men to spend their earnings on food, education, and healthcare. Strictly from an economic perspective, involving more women in the workforce also increases productivity within the economy, increasing GDP.
*That is why the public sector must be encouraged to think outside of the box and innovate better methods for approaching challenges.
*There are some countries, like the Democratic Republic of Congo, in which 100% of all R&D expenditures are publicly-funded.
*A part of the problem may stem from a misunderstanding of the issue among employees and employers in the innovation sector. Perceptions of gender inequality in the workplace show that although companies may say that gender diversity is important to their senior management, most employees do not feel as if it is a priority at their workplace. Gender diversity is reported to be important by 74 percent of companies, but only between one third and one half of employees report that they believe that their CEOs and managers actually prioritize gender diversity [X]. Additionally, there seems to be a disconnect in how men specifically approach this issue: according to studies by Lean In and McKinsey & Company, 70 percent of men say that they think gender diversity is important, but only 12 percent believe women have fewer opportunities. Along with this, men are less likely than women to believe that their organization must do more when it comes to closing gender gaps, and 13 percent of men believe that gender-diversity programs make it harder for them to advance due to the prioritization of women employees. In sectors like innovation, where the employee base is heavily male, this perception among men can have an effect on the motivation and opportunities for women to enter and stay involved within the fields of innovation.
*Representation and empowerment are two huge factors in whether or not women will feel encouraged to become more present within innovation sectors, but historically, there has been underrepresentation of women in most high-paying fields. Two questions now face us: why aren’t more women getting involved in innovation, and why aren’t innovation employers placing more emphasis on gender diversity?
*Some private firms have also taken initiative to try to remedy this issue. Recognizing that astoundingly small numbers of minorities were taking the AP Computer Science exam in high school, Facebook announced a $15 million donation to Code.org in July 2016. Code.org’s mission is to provide every student in the United States with access to computer science education.
*Many tech companies also have internal initiatives to promote gender diversity. Microsoft has a Women Employee Resource Group for women employees. Microsoft also participates in community outreach to girls through programs like their DigiGirlz day, where young girls are introduced to opportunities in the tech industry.
[[Tay Jacobe (Work Log)]] [[Taylor Jacobe]]
[[Category: internalWork Log]]
