chuckstaben Uncategorized

Indemnification and risk in research contracts

Early in my presidency, we found ourselves unable to contract with a major regional industry because they would not accept indemnification of all risks.  Now, in many ways, that was far too conservative on their part, but also too demanding on our part. 

The research we were considering was basic research on semiconductor chip design.  I asked that General Counsel develop the worst possible risk scenario they could imagine.  The scenario was that a method we developed might be used, in part, to make a chip for a critical application like a self-driving car.  If such a chip failed, resulting in a traffic death, the claimant might argue that we were responsible for the failure.  I found this possibility so remote as to be laughable…I frankly was more worried that the company would never use our technology and seek help elsewhere!

Now, my attitude would be very different if were developing the formulation for an infant vitamin to be immediately put into a major market.  My point is that universities must, at times (if allowed by Boards and state laws) accept some risk.  And, while remaining careful about the nature of those risks…a president can use discretion and judgement and should do so to establish and sustain research relationships.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Intellectual property

The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 had a najor legal and psychological effect on universities with respect to intellectual property (IP).  Prior to that act, intellectual property that resulted from federal funding (NIH, DoD, NSF) often was the property of the government, but the Act moved ownership to the university.  Universities became much more aware of IP, and frankly, much more possessive.  Unfortunately, that possessiveness has, in many cases inhibited interactions between universities and industries that I believe can be mutually beneficial, much more so than owning IP that often has limited value.

There are several examples of universities with extremely valuable intellectual property:  Lyrica has earned Northwestern over $1.3B, Carnegie-Mellon’s disk drive noise reduction technology has earned $750M, Google earned Stanford $336M, and Gatorade has made the University of Florida over $280M, to name a few.  Blockbusters like these are the exception, however, not the rule.

AUTM’s (Association of University Technology Managers) latest report shows 7625 US patents issued to US universities in 2018 and over $2.9 billion in licensing income.  Nevertheless, the bulk of that licensing income came from a very small number of “blockbusters” like Lyrica and Gatorade.  Typically, only the top 20 or so licensing offices actually generate income in excess of costs and most patents generate no income at all.  The unfortunately naïve perception of many boards is the opposite…that the university has a great deal of valuable intellectual property and that we are letting it just walk out the door.

Though it is difficult to predict a blockbuster, and one should certainly try to protect discoveries that may yield them, I believe that the larger “pot of gold” and the greater societal impact is to have by less restrictive, less grabby IP policies.  Industries supported over $5 billion in sponsored research at US universities last year-almost twice the licensing income.  Additionally, engaging ones’ university with industry has payoffs in workforce development, engagement of professors with state-of-the-art industrial work and facilities, and often brings economic development capital.

So, what is a reasonable model?  I believe that for most research contracts with industry, an “agree to assign” or “first option” is reasonable.  Industries are much more likely to sign such contracts, allowing them to support your faculty and students and move projects forward.  Yes, you might lose some licensing revenue, but ensuring the success of a local industry will bring you a strong supporter.

As a practical matter, when I arrived at the University of Idaho, we were at a 5 year logjam in contracting with a local industry over restrictive IP attitudes.  After liberalizing our policy, we not only got a sizable grant, but the company endowed a chair ($2M), and engaged with us to now found a center to sponsor ongoing research, with a further $1.5M donation in support of the Center.

Bottom line…industry is usually better than universities at commercializing intellectual property-our strength is usually in basic research.  Consider liberalizing your IP policy in most cases, and I suspect you will see more industrial grants and greater interaction.  Remember, our job is to generate knowledge and to disseminate it-we spend money to generate knowledge…not generate knowledge to make money.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Coronavirus readiness

Predicting the path and impact of the coronavirus on US colleges is impossible today.  Nevertheless, the emergence of hotspots in South Korea, Iran, and Italy have moved the world closer to potential pandemic.  The US government is responding by asking for $2.5 billion for prevention and response and the CDC has just warned Americans that an outbreak is likely, without a prediction of place or time.  Though we are clearly not in an emergency state on US college campuses, it is time to recognize risk and to prepare.

Colleges have several risk factors for epidemics.  We often house large numbers of students together and feed them in communal dining halls.  Our classes, athletics events and other activities are large public gatherings.  And, as we enter March, many colleges will enjoy spring break, with associated travel offering the opportunity of contact with a wide population, often including international travel, by students and faculty, and a return to campus.

Clearly, it is not yet time to set up isolation awards in the gym and serve meals to students in their rooms, but what are the precautions and procedures we should consider now?

As a former president, I believe it is time to prepare for pandemic in at least the following ways. 

  • Within one’s executive group, raise awareness; though student affairs and public safety will likely be most immediately impacted, every part of the university may be involved in or affected by a coronavirus epidemic.
  • Auxiliary services like dining and housing need to be specifically considered.  Are plans in place for housing and feeding students under infectious conditions?  Is training available for staff?  What is the availability or acquisition path for protective gear?  How do these plans affect independent housing units like fraternities and sororities?
  • Student health and community health providers need to consider how they will monitor for coronavirus, whether test kits and capacity will be available if or when needed and what CDC guidelines are.  Cold and flu-like symptoms take on added significance-how will the common cold be distinguished from possible coronavirus operationally?
  • Develop pedagogic and technological plans to move instruction online.
  • Consider when, or under what circumstances, you will enact a travel ban and how that will relate to bans that the State Department or other government officials may apply.
  • Consider how a pandemic would affect current students studying abroad or researchers working abroad-will you try to repatriate them or protect them in place, and if so, how?
  • Arrange a preparatory meeting with local public health and safety officials (public health district, hospital administrators, police chief) to ensure that communication and roles are clear.
  • Consult with Board or system offices to understand how a response might be coordinated.
  • Prepare communications to faculty and staff, students, families and public as hold statements and ensure that distribution methods have been considered.  Consider positive, preventative communications regarding hygiene or awareness.
  • Your university may have special capacity to assist during an epidemic, particularly if you have an academic health center.  It’s likely that the Vice President for Health Affairs is receiving or will receive communications from the Centers for Disease Control and similar entities.  How can and should you engage specialized capacity-from patient care to research?

We all hope that the coronavirus is contained and that none of these preparedness steps are necessary…but I have found, each time we prepared our university for an emergency, that we were better prepared for the next, unexpected event-so preparation without panic is rarely pointless.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Dealing with email

Email has become a monster-in volume, in expectation of response, and in the potential for MIS-communication. I’ll present some facets of how I dealt with email, but I’d love to hear from others on this topic.

As a public university president, one must realize that ANY email may become public due to a public records request. So, if you don’t want to see it on the front page of the paper, don’t put it in email. Though state public record laws vary, I suggest that in most states, it is best practice to keep all incoming and outgoing email from the presidential accounts. And, I would avoid emails that indicate there is other, private information under discussion. While encouraging you to pick up the phone to call your Vice President…I discourage you from sending the VP an email saying “too sensitive for email, pick up the phone.” Two other points related to public records. In Idaho, and many other states, simply using a private email account, such as a gmail account, does not shelter relevant content from inquiry. In fact, this may open ALL your personal email to scrutiny. Second, some email is likely to be covered by attorney-client privilege. But, attorney-client privilege does not cover all correspondence with your attorney, and just cc’ing the attorney does not bring an email under privilege.

My staff suggested two email accounts-a personal one used for the bulk of my business as president and a president@university.edu address for web posting. My chief of staff monitored the president inbox. Especially when controversial decisions were made, this email inbox could contain some colorful inquiries. We responded to every inquiry…though some responses were “Thank you for your input”, which I admit was office code for “We hope never to hear from you again.”

I shared my personal email with my chief of staff, and those who worked closely with me knew this. I can imagine having three emails, one being completely private, but I preferred my CoS knew what I was doing and seeing. If another staff person had a concern about the CoS, they could always phone me. My CoS rarely replied directly to my email, though she would make requested appointments and monitor that I had responded. We found this system worked well, though I know it was a large burden for her.

One final hint…please don’t send emails at any hour of the day or night expecting immediate response. We all need our lives. If it is truly urgent, we would text, which was a much rarer form of communication.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

The Common Read

Many campuses use some form of common read, but I think that our campus and others have had various experiences with how useful and generally engaging the read has been.

I first encountered the Common Read at the University of South Dakota. The Read was limited to incoming Honors students, about 120-150 students. I find that limitation elitist, but the University did a great job engaging students. Early in the first semester, freshman Honors students were invited by the President to a dinner. Each table had a discussion leader-a faculty or staff member who had read the book and prepared for the discussion. A wonderful engagement of students, faculty, and staff in an intellectual community. I could only wish it were broader and even more sustained.

The University of Idaho did a wonderful job selecting books, and always brought the author to campus, usually in Fall. All students were expected to read the book, and faculty were urged to use the book in their first year seminars. Authors visited campus, engaging with faculty and students. Authors had a small dinner with the President, which my wife and I always found special, though perhaps a bit too exclusive. The day was capped by a public presentation. Most memorable was the presentation by Tara Westover of her book, “Educated”. A memoir set in Idaho and dealing with many issues, including what it means to become educated. The talk engaged the Moscow community, who filled the 600 seats in our ballroom…leaving about 400 spots on the floor for students who came minutes before the talk. A great evening, but I think we need to think of ways to make these occasions even more engaging-for faculty, staff, students, and community.

I’d love to hear experiences on other campuses-please comment!

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Honor scholarship across campus

Many universities are trying to enhance their research stature; usually this is measured by NSF-reported research expenditures. Unfortunately, a simple measure like this leaves many faculty members, particularly those in the arts, feeling left out.

My Vice President for Research and Economic Development, Janet Nelson, did a great job addressing this concern with two simple, complementary, and engaging programs. First, sponsor a mini grant program focused on arts and other disciplines unable to attract major extramural support. Though $5000 might buy only 1% of a major NMR, it could-for example-build the world’s only 5-string cello (now at the University of Idaho). Who amongst us science nerds realized that Bach had written suites for the 5-string cello that had not been heard for hundreds of years? Well, Miranda Wilson at the University of Idaho knew this…and now you CAN hear those pieces because she was the recipient of a mini grant.

And, where did the contemporary world first hear those pieces…at an interdisciplinary “Short and Sweet” research symposium. These symposia typically had 5-8 talks of about 5 minutes. Topics spanned the five string cello to fire science at the urban-wild interface. An afternoon symposium and light refreshment (yes, we did provide wine) drew a very interdisciplinary crowd-much more interested than most of our 1-hour, professional talks.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

University art…for those without traditional collections

Art enriches our lives and our campuses. Though most larger campuses have a museum, many people on campus won’t visit. The University of South Dakota used an unusual way to ensure that art was visible across campus: they collected masterworks from each graduating BFA and MFA student, and exhibited them in offices and classroom buildings across campus.

The USD approach served multiple purposes. The Art Department did not have room to store all of the art-but universities have a lot of office and classroom building spaces. Art was more visible across campus, and I think encouraged participation in organized gallery events, as well.

Some might be concerned about vandalism-I never saw it. I think that people respect art. Though I understand that the Mona Lisa may need more protection than a painting by Joe Smith, Class of ‘72…this never seemed to be a problem.

We did not adopt this at Idaho, just something that never quite made the list. But, we enjoyed exhibitions of student art in the Art and Architecture Building, and we also started a “President and Provost Collection” that we planned to hang in the Administration Building. I am not sure the new administration is as committed to that idea, but I think it remains a positive step in popularizing the arts on campus.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

International Students

Most research universities bring international graduate students to campus as part of the research effort and recruitment and engagement is typically through those programs.

Undergraduate international students bring cultural diversity to campus, but they are also a source of full-pay tuition. Some universities have very successful programs built on years of international engagement by faculty (Michigan State is one example) or international prominence (Ivy Leagues, Stanford). How can a moderately resourced university recruit international students?

I suggest two ways to consider boosting international enrollment for schools that cannot invest heavily in a broad-based international recruitment program. First, seek unique and impactful interactions that can be specific draws. These may center around a particular world-class program or a faculty member with strong ties to a university in another country. Second, consider a long term partnership with a pathways provider such as InToo or Navitas.

The University of Idaho investigated both possibilities and ultimately settled on Navitas. Navitas provides two related services as part of the partnership. The University of Idaho has benefitted from both.

First, they have a network of 300 recruitment agents in 20 worldwide offices that serve 120 countries. These agents represent many different universities; don’t expect exclusive access. But, you can expect a stream of students whom Navitas directs to your best programs or students who are a good fit for your university. This is just a zero-cost means of extending our reach with a recruitment arm that we could not possibly afford. Of course, effort is required every year on the part of the University and Navitas to ensure that your program is visible to the agents. And, there is a fuzzy line between how these agents recruit students and other agents that students may be working with in their home country.

Second, Navitas provides an on-campus pathways program for students whose English is not yet sufficient for direct study. Once these students are ready to study in the US, they may leave, but many will remain at your institution, having made ties and become familiar with it, perhaps even having taken a few classes already. The University of Idaho receives a small share of the tuition from the pathways program, but all tuition from students enrolled in our own courses.

Since engaging with Navitas, we have seen roughly a doubling of the undergraduate international students entering as freshmen with excellent diversity in terms of countries represented (an all-eggs-in-one-basket approach can be ruinous if reputational or immigration problems arise). Additionally, about ½ of the pathways students matriculate into the University.

Of course, getting the students into your university is just the first step. Ensuring that they are supported personally and culturally is important to sustained success. A good deal of that support will come from an international student office, which must be established and resourced. Without pandering to the students, a concierge model is quite important. Among the personal steps we have taken are engaging with student clubs and events like Africa night, Nepali night, etc. Our experience is that international students are very appreciative of presidential engagement with their culture. We have also participated in a friendship families program in which students are “fostered” by community members. Of course, none of these engagements can substitute for academic excellence and genuine support and value.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Engaging students

One of the unique and fun ways I engaged students while President (and before that, as Provost) was challenging the student body to a racquetball match. I offered free lunch to any student (and a few friends) who could beat me in racquetball. Though my game is not what it once was, I have lost to only one student in over 10 years of this standing challenge (he was a scholarship tennis athlete whose father has been the over-50 champion in Mexico!).

The challenge has been fun for me, and a bit of a legend on campus. You may have another sport in which you like to engage…I also have been bicycling with the cycling club, for example. These are ways to humanize you as a person, not just a president, in a healthy manner.

Of course, I also played faculty and staff…losing to both our campus recreation director and to one of our tennis coaches. Again, an engagement opportunity that is fun for everyone.

My wife would remind me, though, that one has to be careful not to be too cocky or boastful…and I may have erred there on occasion. Scheduling matches and contact was handled by the President’s Office…and I recall hearing that one student reported back that, “it was the most fun, absolute beat down” he had ever experienced.

chuckstaben Uncategorized

Indoor soccer…keep asking questions

The NCAA’s Only Indoor Soccer Field

You should probably read this just because the US is dominating women’s soccer, thanks to Title IX…but I think it is also a fun, out-of-the-box success story.

The University of Idaho had a very successful Women’s Soccer program as I began my presidency. As a reward for winning the regular season, the winning program got the privilege of hosting the end of the season tournament that determined who represented the Big Sky at the NCAA tournament. UI won the regular season twice, but in neither case could we host. Our field was torn up and soggy from rain and poor drainage. Of course, late fall in Idaho can be cold, rainy (snowy) and our field had been poorly constructed on a sloping site.

Reasonably, our fans and coach pressed me to upgrade the soccer field. Our preliminary estimate for an improved field was $1.5M and a two year project during which time we would need to find an alternate site. And, it would still be cold and rainy for championship season.

I asked our Athletic Director…could we play in our enclosed football dome? Initially, I was told that the turf wasn’t big enough. I persisted, asking how large an NCAA regulation field had to be (70×115 yards is the minimum). I was told there just wasn’t enough width, but the tale of the tape was that we had 72 yards! The next objection was that the NCAA prohibited indoor soccer, but a call to the NCAA indicated otherwise. No one had ever played an indoor NCAA soccer game.

So, the field fit in the Kibbie Dome. And, the football coach wanted new turf (which would also be a safer playing surface for everyone). The University of Idaho replaced our indoor turf at a cost of about $600,000 and became the NCAA’s only indoor soccer field.

Our first regular season game in the Dome was against arch-rival Boise State. That game attracted almost 4200 fans, setting a new season attendance record for soccer at UI (in one game!) and probably an all-time record for decibel level at a women’s soccer game at the University of Idaho. We tied Boise State in the final seconds, but lost in overtime.

The venue offers potential for video capture for practice and games as well as video display far beyond capabilities of most soccer facilities. The field is level and true, and every day in the Dome is windless and comfortable for players and fans. Keep asking questions, and a unique solution can emerge.