It’s Time for Universities to Get More Nimble

“Early to bed,

Early to rise,

Makes a man healthy,

Wealthy and wise.”

Attempting to motivate their children to go to bed at a reasonable time, parents have for generations invoked these three time-honored rewards. Probably least compelling was the promise of health. Health is the absence of something–sickness–and is only fully appreciated when we do not have it. Yet, when we are really sick, health becomes our paramount concern. Few of us would choose to be a wealthy, wise man or woman if the price was advanced Alzheimer’s disease, terminal cancer, or crippling arthritis.

In this context, we have a major problem as a society. Despite our amazingly advanced technologies in communication, space travel, transportation, etc., we do not have technologies to keep us healthy. We cannot cure cancer, or Alzheimer’s disease or arthritis. Worse, cures are not even on the horizon. Why is it that our capacity to innovate in biomedical sciences seems to lag so dramatically behind our innovation capacity in aircraft design, for example?

As scientists employed as directors of an institute for biomedical innovation, we have to look closely at the impediments to improving health, and explore solutions. We are convinced that much of the answer can be found in our research universities, but they need to be re-structured. They need to be innovative in how they manage their science, as well as in how they perform it. This is no small challenge. Universities are without peer in their ability to discover the fundamental principles of science, and are responsible for much of the innovation in our society. The creativity and nimbleness in their science is not unfortunately matched by an equal creativity and nimbleness in administration and management. Although service innovation is now widely seen as contributing to society needs and economic growth as effectively as science innovation, universities in general continue to operate using time-honored and unchallenged principles. This has to change.

[Editor’s Note: This post first appeared earlier today on the QB3 website. It is part of Reg Kelly’s plan to write an occasional series of mini-essays on connected themes, rather than commenting on the news of the day.]

Author: Regis Kelly

Regis Kelly is the director of the The California Institute for Quantitative Biosciences (QB3) at the University of California. QB3 is one of four California Institutes for Science and Innovation, created by the California Legislature to strengthen the academic foundation of its technology-based industries. QB3 is the only one of the four devoted exclusively to biology and to the life science industries. It is an innovation center made up of over 200 quantitative biologists at three northern California campuses (UC Berkeley, UC Santa Cruz & UC San Francisco) working at the interface of the physical and biological sciences and a team of professionals converting its discoveries into practical benefits for society. From 2000 to 2004, Dr. Kelly served as Executive Vice Chancellor at the University of California in San Francisco, where his major responsibility was the new Mission Bay campus. This campus, whose development over the next 10 years will double UCSF’s research space, is the center of a planned 300 acre public/private biomedical research park in San Francisco. From 1995 to 2000, Dr. Kelly served as Chair of the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at UCSF; from 1988 to 1995, he was the Director of UCSF’s Cell Biology Graduate Program; and from 1992 to 2000, he was the Director of the Hormone Research Institute at UCSF. He has published extensively in the areas of cell and neurobiology. Dr. Kelly received his undergraduate degree in Physics from the University of Edinburgh in Scotland in 1961 and his Ph.D. in Biophysics from the California Institute of Technology in 1967. Following a post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford, Dr. Kelly was an instructor in the Department of Neurobiology at Harvard. He has served as Chairman of the Bay Area Scientific Innovation Consortium (BASIC) and on the Boards of the Malaysian Biotechnology Industry Advisory Board, the Scleroderma Foundation, the Immune Tolerance Network, Bridge Pharmaceuticals, and the San Francisco Mayor’s Biotechnology Advisory Group, among others. He is also a General Partner of Mission Bay Capital venture fund.