growingthescholarly&( researchenterprisethrough ......• mingling – an opportunity to...

Growing  the  Scholarly  &  Research  Enterprise  through  

Speed  Networking  

2014  NORDP  Conference    

May  20,  2014    

Erica  Gambrell,  Coordinator  of  Research  Services  Angie  Sho:s,  Coordinator  of  Research  Support  

Brief  Overview  of  who  we  are:  •  RD  is  a  component  of  the  Office  for  Sponsored  Programs      •  Previously  worked  in  either  pre  or  post  award    •  Provide  services  (networking,  workshops,  etc.)  for  all  UA  faculty    •  Both  have  a  variety  of  assignments  in  conjuncOon  with  RD  acOviOes  

The  first  networking  session  –  geEng  approval:    •  “Speed  Networking”  was  originally  presented  at  a  VPR’s  monthly  ADR  

meeOng  •  Received  both  posiOve  and  negaOve  feedback    •  The  negaOve  comments  halted  the  discussion  •  It  appeared  the  possibility  of  providing  something  in  this  format  ended      

•  Serendipity  unexpectedly  intervened  during  a  meeOng  in  my  office  •  Hey  Joe  .  .  .  .  

•  By  partnering  with  an  Associate  Dean  for  Research  who  made  the  informal  request  to  the  VPR,  we  received  approval  to  coordinate  a  session  on  “Health  Related  Research”  and  the  OVPR  would  provide  lunch  for  the  faculty  

OrganizaGon  of  the  first  session:    •  Campus  wide  invitaOon  to  all  faculty  (list  serve  and  weekly  email  to  ADRs  

for  distribuOon)  •  November  30,  2012  –  unsure  if  the  demands  of  the  end  of    the  

semester  would  be  a  hindrance    

•  Scheduled  on  a  Friday  from  11:30-­‐2:30    •  Pre-­‐registraOon  and  the  compleOon  of  a  Profile  Sheet  was  required    •  ParOcipants  were  divided  into  4  groups,  with  one  half  “networking”  during  

the  Ome  alloaed  for  lunch.    (34  registered,  23  aaended)    •  Speed  Networking  sessions  (5  minute  pairings)  were  for  1.5  hours  

•  30  minute  follow-­‐up  Ome  with  coffee  and  cookies  

Outcome  of  the  first  session:    •  Received  immediate  posiOve  feedback  

•  Email  sent  to  the  VPR  at  5:15  pm  on  the  date  of  the  session:    “  .  .  .  the  speed  networking  session  was  the  most  valuable  faculty  development  exercise  that  I  have  seen  from  OSP  in  22  years  .  .  .  I  came  up  with  5-­‐6  contacts  that  I  will  definitely  follow  up  with  .  .  .  if  we  did  something  like  this  monthly  .  .  .”    

   •  Faculty  who  aaended  event  shared  with  their  colleagues  and  ADRs  how  the  session  was  

producOve  and  worthwhile  

•  A  post  session  survey  was  sent  to  the  parOcipants  and  had  a  very  high  response  rate    •  We  iniOated  the  VPR  sending  an  email  to  all  parOcipants  thanking  them  for  parOcipaOng  

and  encouraging  conOnued  collaboraOve  efforts  

•  The  overall  percepOon  of  RD  acOviOes  had  a  dramaOc  change  on  campus    •  Sessions  scheduled  for  the  following  semester  included  highly  respected  Senior  faculty  

who  enjoyed  the  somewhat  chaoOc  structure  and  “different”  experience  

Lessons  learned  from  the  first  session:    •  Providing  lunch  was  a  disincenOve  –  it  made  the  session  longer  and  faculty  wanted  

individual  pairings  with  all  aaendees    •  Sessions  on  Fridays  that  start  at  2:00  p.m.  are  well  aaended  

•  Fewer  faculty  are  late  because  a  student  stopped  by  unexpectedly  •  No  one  has  contacted  us  staOng  they  had  class  and  would  be  late  •  Even  on  football  home  game  weekends  the  aaendance  has  been  high    

•  Faculty  would  like  to  receive  the  profile  sheets  prior  to  the  session    •  Allowing  faculty  who  have  a  conflict  complete  a  Profile  Sheet  is  an  opportunity  to  build  

rapport  with  faculty  and  reinforce  that  RD  is  service  oriented      •  For  future  sessions,  we  increased  the  number  of  reminder  emails  encouraging  faculty  to  

let  us  know  if  they  have  a  last  minute  conflict  so  we  may  adjust  the  pairings  

Speed  Networking  Event  Structure:    •  Profile  sheets  completed  beforehand  including  headshot,  main  areas  of  

interest,  desired  collaboraOon  experOse  and  long-­‐term  goals  for  research    •  Networking  Packets  are  given  including  profile  sheets  and  a  contact  list  for  all  

parOcipants    •  Grouping  Researchers  from  different  disciplines  together  for  5-­‐7  minutes  in  

order  to  discuss  research  interests    •  Depending  on  number  of  parOcipants,  there  can  be  as  many  as  3  rotaOon  

rounds  

•  Allow  Ome  at  the  end  of  the  session  for  conOnued  discussions    •  CollaboraOon  cards  used  to  follow-­‐up  with  Researchers  ager  event  

Agenda 2:00 – 2:15 Welcome and Introductions 2:15 – 3:00 Round 1 Speed Networking in pairs. Each pair will have 5 minutes to discuss possible collaboration or recommendations of other UA faculty to contact. The Blue group (both 1 & 2) will sit on the outside and remain seated; the Red group (both 1 & 2) will sit on the inside and rotate to the next table. 3:00 – 3:10 Break and change of seating by group. Red group and Blue group will now move to the same line of tables, with similar numbers on the same side. Those with a “2” on their name tag will sit on the inside and those with a “1” will sit on the outside. 3:10 – 3:30 Round 2 Speed Networking in pairs. Those with a “2” on their name tag will move to the right at the end of 5 minute pairings. 3:30 - 3:45 Round 3 Change of seating by group. Pairings/grouping will continue. The four groups are determined by the same color and number on the name tag. For example, all Red 1 will sit together. 3:45 – 4:00 Round 4 Small groups or “catch-up” of pairings who did meet in Rounds 1-3 (i.e. someone was late or had a phone call, etc.) 4:00 - 4:30 Wrap up and final comments Coffee and free time for those who would like to stay and continue discussions.

Recent  VariaGons  to  Speed  Networking:    •  Interprofessional  Research  Socials  

–  Ager  hours  “mixer”  with  a  job  fair  atmosphere  –  A  select  group  of  Researchers  prepare  PowerPoint  presentaOons  

highlighOng  their  research  focus  –  Discussions  can  be  in  job  fair  or  round-­‐robin  format  –  Researchers  have  the  opportunity  to  brainstorm  new  projects  outside  of  

teaching  hours  

•  Networking  concept  has  branched  out  to  other  areas  on  campus:  –  Research  Partners  lunch  –  CAPS  –  Interprofessional  Breakfasts  

Any  QuesOons?      

Erica  Gambrell  egambrell@research.ua.edu  Angie  Shoas  ashoas@research.ua.edu  

Growing the Scholarly and Research Enterprise

through Speed-Networking

2014 NORDP Conference

Gretchen Kiser, PhD Director, Research Development Office for Gail Fisher, JD, MSS Manager, Research Development Office

May 20, 2014

Who Are We and What Do We Do?

•  We are the Research Development Office (RDO) at the University of California, San Francisco

–  Sit within the Office of Research

•  UCSF only offers graduate degrees in medicine and biomedical sciences

–  School of Dentistry –  School of Medicine –  School of Nursing –  School of Pharmacy

2

Who Are We and What Do We Do?

•  The RDO contains five programs: – Building Teams for Innovative

Research (BTIR) – Large Grant Development Program

(LGDP) –  Limited Submission Program (LSP) – Resource Allocation Program (RAP) – Special Strategic Projects (SSP)

3

Components of Speed-Networking

•  Setting the ‘theme’ •  Determining correct combination of

investigators in order to maximize potential for partnerships

•  Appropriate venue •  Properly configured event •  Incentive for investigators to

participate

4

Our Audience (and what we know going into it)

•  Scientists (sometimes socially awkward!)

•  Timing matters – Actual time of day – Length of event – NIH deadlines, clinic schedules, etc.

•  Incentive matters, too

5

6

What Are the Implications of What We Know?

•  Has to be highly structured – Mingling has to be orchestrated, but

look effortless

•  Has to be easy for them to fit it into their schedules – End of day, near end of the week

•  Needs to be effectively incentivized

7

Who Did/Do We Want to Attract?

•  Cross-section: – Disciplines/approaches – Schools/ORUs/div’s/depts – Faculty levels –  ‘Under-represented’ faculty groups

•  Senior faculty: – Lend gravitas – Mentoring – modeling good leadership

8

How Did We Get Them There? •  Listservs •  Department Chairs •  Research networking tool (UCSF

Profiles) - areas of expertise •  Other considerations

– With whom do we have good relationships?

– Who has been supportive of the RDO?

– Who “gets it”?

9

1  

2  

3  

4  

5  

6  

7  

14  

13  

12  

11  

10  

9  

8  

Podium  

Mingle  Area  

Physical Set-Up

Collaborator Cards

Collaborator Cards

And the Star of the Show…

Actual Event (2 hours) •  Pre-Mingle (20 minutes) •  Introduction (10 minutes)

–  Director, RDO • Rationale for the grouping • “Charge” to the group

–  Explanation of Process (by facilitator) • Rotations • Potential for seed-funding

•  Rotations (1 hour) –  4 minutes per dyad

•  Mingling / Follow-Up (30 minutes)

15

So They’ve Met Everyone, Now What?

•  Mingling – An opportunity to follow-up with those

found interesting – An opportunity to meet others from

the same “team” – Email introduction sent for matches

and set of short bios sent to all

•  Seed-funding Proposal – Submission – Proposal Review and NOGA

16

Challenges

•  Choosing a theme •  Deciding what combination of

investigators to invite in order to maximize potential partnerships

•  Time (to send invitations, of event and timeline)

•  Can expect one third of invitees to attend

•  How do you handle late arrivals?

17

What to Anticipate

•  People will be late •  People will cancel at the last minute •  People will not show up, even

though they rsvp’d and didn’t cancel

18

Strategies to Manage Surprises

•  Anticipate there will be bumps •  Make sure know how you might re-

distribute people to keep numbers equal on “both sides”, on the fly

•  Director of RDO can participate •  One person may just have a four-

minute period of relaxing, if not partnered

19

Remember..!

•  The hiccups are felt more deeply by us than by the participants, so don’t worry!

20

Metrics: what do we want to capture?

•  Short-term: – How many first-time introductions

were there? – How many potential collaborations? – How many proposals received? – How many proposals funded? – Through survey, faculty satisfaction

with event

21

Metrics: what do we want to capture?

•  Longer-term, through survey at 6mo, 1yr, 2yr: – Has communication persisted? – Have matches or awardees leveraged

the event and/or seed-funding to pursue outside funding?

–  If so, were funds awarded? –  If so, how much?

22

Special Thanks to…

•  Gail Fisher, JD, MSS, Manager Research Development Office •  RDO colleagues

– Erin Bank, PhD – Emy Volpe, JD

23

24

Gretchen Kiser, PhD Director, Research Development Office

gretchen.kiser@ucsf.edu 415. 502.1665

Gail Fisher, JD, MSS Manager, Research Development Office

gail.fisher@ucsf.edu 415. 502.1807