A Comparative Study for the R&D supporting systems between Seoul National University and Arizona State University

Abstract

Since its establishment in 1946, Seoul National University has played an important role in education and research in Korea for more than 70 years as a leading national university. Especially, it is required to play a more important role in research and development (R&D) with the advent of the knowledge-based economy. This study tries to explore R&D supporting systems of Seoul National University (SNU) which incorporated on December 28, 2011. In Seoul National University, there are concerns about future changes such as decrease of government grant which are derived from the incorporation might lead decline in R&D performance. Since current R&D supporting systems of Seoul National University is the extension of past systems which had existed before the incorporation, it is important to suggest future directions of R&D supporting systems preparing for the future changes of the universitys R&D environment. With regard to this issue, SNU might adopt several lessons from prominent state universities in the U.S. about their structure of organization, policies & programs, research fund, technology licensing & commercialization, and regulations of R&D management. Arizona State University (ASU), which is located in Arizona State, is one of the best state universities in the U.S. Arizona State University has achieved remarkable growth in the research after it became R1 University in 1994. The purpose of this study is to provide helpful suggestions to improve R&D supporting systems of Seoul National University by investigating various aspects of those in Seoul National University and Arizona State University. This thesis found several lessons from the comparison of the R&D supporting systems of Seoul National University and those of Arizona State University. First, the role redistribution of ORA (Office of Research Affairs) and R&DB Foundation may be considered to develop more efficient R&D management process. For example, ORA can be specialized to manage overall funded research process and R&DB Foundation can be specialized IP (Intellectual Property) management. In addition, it might be better for ORA to expand its roles for improving the quality of researches by referring OKED at ASU cases. Second, the current R&D supporting programs and policies at SNU looks like too much focusing on direct financial supports to the researchers. These programs have a positive role to attract prominent scholars into the university. However, it might be just consumption rather than a long term investment. Instead, it might be better to develop various R&D management programs and strategies such as fostering entrepreneurship or relationship management as ASU has done. Third, SNU is required to be largely engaged in the research fund management process including proposal process not just being limited in connecting research fund organizations and researchers. It that sense, various activities to enhance quality of a researchers proposals is required at SNU just as ASU is doing, which can bring more chances for funding competitions. Forth, technology licensing and commercialization management requires professional supports and strategic approaches, which includes specialization of R&DB Foundation on IP management and deciding selective fields of R&D investment which can bring substantial profit. In addition, technology licensing and commercialization management requires university-industry collaboration, therefore, for better performance, university should provide supporting services and useful information for industry as well as faculty. This means universities should try to attract industry to make further cooperation and investment. Fifth, SNU is required to change its systems for perspective of users not for managers. For example, R&D regulations at SNU are required to be briefly and concisely refined for the perspective of the user. It includes endeavors for integration of regulations and guidelines and elimination of duplicated or unnecessary regulations. Last but not least, current indirect expenses collecting rates and royalty distribution rates at SNU can be good incentives to the researchers. However, those rates might be reconsidered for more investments of the facilities and infrastructure to improve R&D supporting environment of the university. I insist that investments to R&D infrastructure are more important than monetary incentives for fostering fundamental R&D capacity of the university.