Peer Review of the NRC Steacie Institute for Molecular Sciences (NRC-SIMS)

Executive Summary

This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the peer review of the Steacie Institute for Molecular Sciences (SIMS).  Due to the breadth of science undertaken by SIMS researchers, the peer review employed a two-tiered approach using a group of Technical Reviewers that provided written comments based on a document review of materials provided by the Institute and an Institute Review Committee which convened in Ottawa over a 2-1/2 day period (23-26 May 2004) for a site visit. The Committee reviewed documentation, received presentations and toured SIMS' facilities. The international group of experts that comprised the Institute Review Committee were tasked with providing an evaluation of the Institute's quality and impact and use of resources including a summary of the comments from the Technical Reviewers; and key findings and recommendations including potential future opportunities for the Institute.

The overall findings of the Institute Review Committee are:

• SIMS is the flagship institute at the National Research Council (NRC) in the area of fundamental research. It has widely recognized world-class programs in several areas.
• In spite of the institute structure and funding, there is not significantly more collaboration than one would find in a typical university department, and in some ways, there is less unity of purpose and collegiality at SIMS.
• Much of the work at SIMS is ground-breaking and the scientific knowledge that is created is very significant, irrespective of whether the work has any direct technology impact.
• Most Programs appear to have done a good job of managing their regular financial resources, however, with a few exceptions, the Programs have not aggressively sought external funding.
• As a multi-disciplinary research institute, SIMS could benefit from incorporating a number of management approaches used at other successful comparable research organizations world-wide.

As a result of the above conclusions, the Institute Review Committee developed five recommendations designed to enable the Institute to sustain and improve its performance. The recommendations, and the Institute's response to them, are as follows:

1. The Institute work at reducing fragmentation within SIMS by developing a process where multi- or inter-disciplinary research projects are identified and stronger teams of researchers with a common focus work on important long-range scientific problems.
   
   Response:  Agreed. SIMS is fully committed to develop a process that will better enable the identification of multi/interdisciplinary projects around which stronger teams of researchers can be built, and resources can be focused to achieve important long-range scientific and technological impacts. This is central to our current planning process that will be completed by June 2005.
   
2. The Institute set up appropriate project structures and organizations so that multi- or inter-disciplinary research projects can take place.
   
   Response:  Agreed. SIMS recognizes that implementation of interdisciplinary, cross-Institute projects will require the introduction of new organizational structures. The management team of the institute was restructured as a first step, and various models that allow world-class competencies to be maintained while supporting a culture of large-scale interdisciplinary research projects are being explored. It is important that these new processes allow projects to be initiated and terminated based on clear, well understood criteria.
   
3. SIMS work to better coordinate its technology transfer activities with the aim of being able to articulate how its inventions and creations are impacting existing or future commercial technologies.
   
   Response:  Agreed. SIMS recognizes that a shift of Institute culture is needed towards one in which researchers recognize and articulate both the scientific importance and the potential (or actual) impact of their work.   SIMS will choose problems of national importance and establish the appropriate balance of fundamental science that must be understood and applied science that delivers a more easily measured impact. SIMS must build a communicative environment, in which research findings can be discussed, widely understood, and possibly transferred to other hands for exploitation in innovative ways. In addition, the SIMS business office will develop a strategic business plan in 2004-2005 that will incorporate best practices in IP management, strategic use of the SussexIndustry Partnership Facility and more effectively engage NRC's Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP).
   
4. The Institute consider developing a process for funding allocations that is more strategic with some appropriately determined level of internal funding set aside for competitive projects within SIMS with an emphasis on external matching funds.
   
   Response:  Agreed. SIMS is committed to meet the challenge of acquiring more external funding and introducing a competitive element for internal resource allocation, while ensuring that funds are channeled strategically.   Institute level staff will be proactive in identifying and communicating external funding opportunities and deadlines to staff and providing administrative/logistical support so the researchers are not unnecessarily burdened with the logistics of grant writing. There is a need for management to accommodate the time-scales of maintaining Institute core competencies at the cutting edge, responding to technology opportunities in partnership with emerging industries, or undertaking discovery-oriented programs whose impact horizon may be ill-defined at the outset.   To accomplish this, SIMS management intends to introduce a strong element of project based resource and performance management in FY2005-2006.
   
5. The Institute develop procedures for internal scientific control which combine strong elements of internal and external competition.
   
   Response:  Agreed. With the shift towards project-based management, SIMS will introduce a range of project control, evaluation and reporting elements.   Projects will need to be described and justified in competition for resources.   Evaluation of progress will be made to justify continuation of resources and projects will be managed against deliverables within fixed time frames. The project management process is viewed as a framework to enable the other recommendations of the Peer Review committee to be addressed, namely:   (1) identification of multidisciplinary projects and building of cross-Institute/NRC teams (2) communication of project goals, progress and achievements among staff, laying the groundwork for knowledge transfer and further impacts (3) building a culture of teamwork in securing funding from various sources, both from Institute-level internal allocations and with external partners. SIMS management recognizes that leading interdisciplinary research can only be carried out by teams that are able to maintain depth in their disciplines. An appropriate balance between discipline-based projects and interdisciplinary projects must be maintained. Excellence will be evaluated by periodic external peer review of groups and projects. SIMS management will work to convince researchers that well managed research projects are not inconsistent with excellent fundamental research.