Entrepreneurship, Secrecy, and Productivity: A Comparison of Clinical and Non-Clinical Life Sciences Faculty

This paper addresses research in the life sciences, responsible for significant national expenditures for scientific investigations funded by both the federal government and industry. Our investigation examines faculty members' involvement with industry in entrepreneurial ways that is, involved in translating their research into potentially marketable knowledge or products. First, this study examines whether there are differences in entrepreneurial behaviour between clinical and non-clinical faculty in the life sciences with industry relationships, and, second, to discover any linkage between entrepreneurship and secrecy or productivity in different ways for clinical and non-clinical faculty. The study is based on survey responses of a national sample of 4,000 clinical and non-clinical life sciences faculty in 49 U.S. research universities. The results show non-clinical faculty as more involved at the back end. The more entrepreneurial end of commercialization while clinical faculty are involved at the back end. The more entrepreneurial faculty (non-clinical) are more likely to be secretive about their research. Clinical faculty are less likely to have been denied access to research results or products. Entrepreneurial faculty are not less productive in their faculty roles. This investigation is preliminary in that it addresses one large area of academic research but excludes fields with longer historical relationships with industry.     

The role of people in information-sharing: perceptions from an analytic unit of a regional fusion center

Information sharing research has largely focused on capturing operational practices related to the exchange of information. A noticeable shortcoming of this developing literature is the lack of scholarly attention focused specifically on analytic personnel. The present study employs semi-structured interviews with 23 personnel that comprise the analytic unit within a regional fusion center located in a large metropolitan area in the United States. Findings indicate that there is significant ambiguity surrounding the organizational and geographic audiences to which intelligence products should be tailored. Moreover, it appears information sharing is sparse and reliant upon personal relationships between analysts and external organizations. Lastly, analysts do not receive feedback pertaining to the content and effectiveness of intelligence products created. These findings may be generalized to other analytical organizations whose primary goal is to gather, analyze and disseminate intelligence. Action steps for policymakers are provided.     

Human Rigghts: A Culture of Controversy

Many arguments in favour of constitutionally entrenched Bills of Rights are undermined by the inherently controversial nature of human rights with respect to their content, their form, and their valence. Even in the case of civil and political rights, the concretization of rights at the level of specificity required to decide particular cases must always be politically and morally controversial. There is no accepted moral or legal method that can be utilized to give the requisite objectivity to the value choices inherent in human rights jurisprudence. Positivization of human rights increases their utility but compromises their moral status. It follows that legitimate articulation of human rights requires ongoing democratic dialogue and decision-making. Although perceived as a stop-gap measure, the Human Rights Act 1998 could facilitate an enduring partnership between courts and parliaments, placing human rights more firmly on the political agenda and establishing a proper balance between the inputs of courts and parliaments which recognizes that the development of positivized human rights must be primarily located in electorally-based politics.