Leading Cyberinfrastructure Enterprise: Value Propositions, Stakeholders, and Measurement

“Cyberinfrastructure” or CI as used in this paper describes the digital infrastructure for scientific endeavor. It is at the heart of changing practices in science. The impact of CI spans energy, finance, health, humanities, information, environment, security, transportation, and other core aspects of the human condition. Many defining technologies and practices have roots in CI: the Internet, open source software, cloud computing and “big data” are but a few examples. The leadership of CI enterprises – the organizations that develop and support CI – know the value of CI, but have trouble communicating this value to others. Further, there are operational challenges around attracting, developing and retaining the workforce essential for success; serving an increasingly diverse array of customers and users; and operating in the context of a changing social contract with key sponsors and stakeholders.An NSF-funded workshop was held at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor on February 15-16, 2013. The workshop brought together CI enterprise leaders with organization scientists to discuss the value and operation of CI enterprise in the face of uncertain funding, ongoing change in technology and other factors, “benchmarking” with respect to peers, and similar concerns. Collaboration between CI enterprise leaders and organization scientists has potential, as in the study of the impact of organizational practices on innovation and knowledge creation. However, the interests of these two communities is seldom well aligned (Berente et al 2012). The workshop sought to explore what stakeholders from these communities need and want from collaboration. Improving understanding and communicating of CI’s value was the objective. This report explains what was learned from the workshop, and what might be done to help CI enterprise leaders.

[1]  R. Fisher,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving in , 1981 .

[2]  Tony Tinker,et al.  "The End of Business Schools?" More Than Meets the Eye , 2004 .

[3]  Christina T. Fong,et al.  The End of Business Schools? Less Success Than Meets the Eye , 2002 .

[4]  Jeff M. Bickerton,et al.  Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in , 2002 .

[5]  Jay A. Conger,et al.  Executive Education in the 21st Century , 2000 .

[6]  Stewart Clegg,et al.  Revising the Boundaries: Management Education and Learning in a Postpositivist World , 2003 .

[7]  Yevgeny Kuznetsov Diaspora Networks and the International Migration of Skills: How Countries Can Draw on their Talent Abroad , 2006 .

[8]  Florence Millerand,et al.  Infrastructure Time: Long-term Matters in Collaborative Development , 2010, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[9]  Nicholas Berente,et al.  Organizing for Digital Infrastructure Innovation: The Interplay of Initiated and Sustained Attention , 2012, 2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[10]  Thomas A. Finholt,et al.  The Long Now of Technology Infrastructure: Articulating Tensions in Development , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Jonathan Gosling,et al.  Educating Managers Beyond Borders , 2002 .

[12]  A. Smart,et al.  The Chinese Diaspora, Foreign Investment and Economic Development in China , 2004 .

[13]  Richard A. DeMillo Abelard to Apple: The Fate of American Colleges and Universities , 2011 .

[14]  F. Docquier,et al.  Brain drain and economic growth: theory and evidence , 2001 .

[15]  Jonathan P. Doh,et al.  Can Leadership Be Taught? Perspectives From Management Educators , 2003 .

[16]  Vincent Mangematin,et al.  Editor's introduction: building and deploying scientific and technical human capital , 2004 .

[17]  Paul Dourish,et al.  The human infrastructure of cyberinfrastructure , 2006, CSCW '06.

[18]  Waverly W. Ding,et al.  Divergent paths to commercial science: A comparison of scientists' founding and advising activities , 2011 .

[19]  M. Tushman,et al.  Research and Relevance: Implications of Pasteur'S Quadrant for Doctoral Programs and Faculty Development , 2007 .

[20]  Albert A. Vicere,et al.  Executive Education: Can Universities Deliver? , 1993 .

[21]  Monica Gaughan,et al.  Scientific and technical human capital: an alternative model for research evaluation , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[22]  Barbara L. Rau,et al.  The Research–Teaching Gap in Management , 2010 .

[23]  Adam M. Kleinbaum,et al.  Relevance and Rigor: Executive Education as a Lever in Shaping Practice and Research , 2007 .

[24]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations , 2007 .

[25]  Fiona E. Murray The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life , 2004 .

[26]  Philip T. Crotty,et al.  Executive education: yesterday and today, with a look at tomorrow , 1997 .

[27]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Organization theory and new ways of working in science , 2011, 2011 Atlanta Conference on Science and Innovation Policy.

[28]  Joseph Rubleske,et al.  Foregrounding the Cyberinfrastructure Center as Cyberinfrastructure Steward , 2011 .

[29]  G. E. Gorman,et al.  Abelard to Apple: The Fate of American Colleges and Universities , 2012 .

[30]  T. Davenport,et al.  Data scientist: the sexiest job of the 21st century. , 2012, Harvard business review.

[31]  Karen Ruhleder,et al.  Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..