SKA Pre-construction Phase Workshop CSIRO Marsfield 4 October 2011 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SKA Pre-construction Phase Workshop CSIRO Marsfield – 4 October 2011 Topic: What would industry like to see from Australia-New Zealand engagement in the PEP? John Humphreys Chair, ASKAIC

INTEL ALCATEL-LUCENT Affiliate NZSKAIC

Suggested Topics - CSIRO ¡ How should the proto-consortia best engage with industry? - perhaps the question should be “ how the WPC (proto-consortia) – which includes the research institutions & industry ” can be established & effectively deliver WP ’ s? ” – the former question implies a separation between the ‘ proto- consortia ’ & industry ¡ Key issues which need attention/Perspectives ¡ An example of ‘ good engagement ’ (industry case studies to follow on “ industrial experience of working in an international research collaboration ” )

Revisiting ISKAF 2011 - Banff Presentation: “ The SKA System ” - Peter Dewdney Introduction to 2 day Engineering/Industry Event

Expected Management Structure (P.Dewdney) SKA Organisation Board/Council SPO Director SKA Project Office (SPO) Work Package Work Package Work Package Contractor Contractor Contractor Each WPC will be a consortium of astronomical institutions & industry Probably (i) a single lead institution with a significant organisational structure; (ii) WPC ’ s are likely to be large; (iii) Risk carried by the WPC? Defining “ below the line of the WPC ’ s ” ?

Industry Issues/Perspectives Procurement/Industry Engagement Concern with WP5 but understand that the ‘ ball ’ will • be passed shortly (JH – ‘ missed opportunity ’ ) Preference for ‘ outcome-focussed ’ specifications to • encourage innovation/flexibility in meeting performance requirements– not prescriptive in terms of solutions except where there is a clear need - can result in significant cost savings (refer: Ian Tuohy, BAE Systems et al) How to effectively develop sustainable collaborative • research/industry arrangements? – foster spin-offs!

Industry Issues/Perspectives • Compatibility of the ‘best value for money’ procurement principle with the need to award work to founding nations under a (broad) ‘juste retour’ approach? - ‘best value for money’ disadvantages founding nations whose labour rates are higher than other nations that receive government subsidies. ( Refer: Noel Wainwright – Lockheed Martin Australia)

Defining Work Packages ¡ How will the packages be ‘ systems engineered ’ to better couple the science requirements, engineering capabilities & cost? Could logical groupings be as follows? 1. Sensor Group – antenna, sensors, etc 2. Data, Compute, Networking, monitoring/control group 3. Logistics Group – power, trenching, field works (ref: Peter Elford Cisco) ¡ If logical groupings between WP ’ s occur (as suggested) – what implications does this have for a global ‘ juste-retour ’ approach?

Summary of Industry Opportunities SKA Signal Path (P.Dewdney ISKAF 2011)

Our Collective Challenge ¡ How do we develop “ A Cooperative Mindset ” rather than collaborate from a purely technology perspective/or from a ‘ what ’ s in it for us ’ ? Viewpoint - a Cooperative Mindset is a term emerging out of the need for transport interoperability/open standards – Europe

Does Australia have a “ cooperative mindset ” ? ¡ Culturally - our focus is on “ individualism ” rather than “ collectivism ” which is the hallmark of some European & Asian societies

Cooperative Mindset/Collaboration – What is our record? ¡ Surprisingly poor! – an overriding policy need in Australia is to stimulate clusters, consortia-building, & project-specific alliances ¡ Individualism needs to evolve to collectivism Refer: OECD Science, Technology & Industry Outlook, 2007 - provided by Dr Chris Nicol, CTO Embedded Systems, NICTA

Comments on Australian Collaboration Results Firms (SMEs & larger Lowest number (as a % of all ¡ ¡ organisations) collaborating firms) of 26 OECD countries in innovation activities by size Number of Aust. innovative Only 9% of innovative firms ¡ ¡ firms collaborating with an external partner as part of the innovation process Lowest (as a % of all firms) ¡ Firms collaborating in ¡ of the 26 countries - 2 nd innovation with higher lowest is Greece education institutions – Firms collaborating in ¡ 2 nd lowest (as a % of all innovation with government ¡ institutions firms) – lowest is Greece Reference: OECD 2002-2004 figures

This all points to The urgent need to rapidly develop robust, sustainable collaborative frameworks in Australia which bridge cultural gaps & extend beyond the rhetoric SKA can be an exemplar in this regard

Memorandum of Understanding ¡ Australasian SKA lndustry Consortium (ASKAIC) ¡ Affiliate – NZ SKA Industry Consortium ¡ United Kingdom SKA Industry Cluster (SKAUKIC) ¡ Italian SKA Industry Consortium (currently NASTRO consortium) ¡ Canadian SKA lndustry Consortium (emerging) ¡ The Netherlands SKA Industry Consortium - Maximising global industry input into Work Package planning in the SKA Pre-Construction Phase - Promoting an enhanced level of cooperation between industry & science

Positioning Australasian Industry 9 Signatories at Govt/Funding Agency Level ¡ Australia ¡ New Zealand ¡ United Kingdom ¡ The Netherlands ¡ Italy ¡ China ¡ France ¡ Germany ¡ South Africa ¡ observers/aspiring (Canada, India,Japan,Korea) (5 countries and one observer are already encompassed within the MOU)

Industry Support for Process ¡ The Founding Board agreed to include an industry advisory group into SKA Board structure in its members ’ agreement. ¡ Australasia is in a good position to adopt a lead industry role in crossing international boundaries - via MOU signed in Banff ¡ Industry MOU between all Founding Board members? – understand capabilities, develop trust between countries ¡ ASKAIC in a good position to catalyse this – given its multinational spread across founding countries

What are the current tasks? ¡ Finalise Work Package Definition – adopt ‘ total systems approach ’ ¡ Confirm the ANZ ‘ prime/s ’ – institutional bidders, or even industry organisation?. How do they accelerate the level of trust necessary for effective consortia delivery, possibly across stakeholder countries? ¡ Confirm consortia models, IP arrangements etc. & what happens ‘ below the organisational line of the WPC ’ s? ’ ¡ Ensure compatibility with approaches of Founding Countries/Founding Board

Final Questions ¡ What examples demonstrate the outcomes of research/industry partnerships, both from the perspectives of ANZ & international stakeholders? - development of a case study register ¡ Are such partnerships driving innovation & fostering new approaches to procurement & industry engagement? – what are our examples? ¡ How effectively have we leveraged the ASKAP/SKA investment - by government, research institutions & industry?

Where Are We Heading? What Road-Map are we Following? Credit: SKA: the road to the Centre of the Universe John Goldsmith, ICRAR/Curtin PhD Student

Thank you Contact Details: John Humphreys Chair ASKAIC Managing Director Global Innovation Centre Pty Ltd www.askaic.com Email: johnh@globalinnovation.com.au Tel: +61 7 5474 5164 Mobile: 0419 870 009