Collaborative Research: Science Policy Research Report: Government Brokerage of Innovation Networks

联邦机构为美国的创新者提供至少两种不同的支持来源：第一，种子资金和咨询服务，而早期创业者几乎无法以具有竞争力的市场价格获得这些服务；第二，向合作网络中的潜在合作伙伴介绍。鉴于创新既需要合作也需要竞争，后一种贡献的重要性不亚于前者。但它们显然不那么为人所知，也不那么为人所知。这部分是因为联邦政府建立协作网络的努力往往发生在这个过程的早期，也就是创新进入市场并吸引公众之前--S的想象力；还有一个原因是，它们是非正式的，公职人员有动机淡化他们的非正式贡献--这些贡献往往无法衡量，他们的机构也不会给予回报--而强调他们的正式角色，比如为小公司和初创企业提供低成本的融资和咨询服务。然而，这种疏忽的意外后果是，联邦政府建立创新网络的努力很难记录在案，也很难复制。通过评估联邦政府S在网络建设中的作用的程度和重要性，这份研究报告考虑了新的任务、指标和激励措施的发展，这些任务、指标和激励措施将鼓励公职人员进行有益的经纪、私营部门同行的创新，以及整个国家的繁荣。该报告区分了两类经纪人：中间人，他们受雇在不相关的各方之间转让商品或服务，因此依赖于费用；催化剂，他们在不相关的各方之间免费建立互惠关系，因此依赖外部(例如政府)支持。它通过对国家科学基金会、国家卫生研究院、国家制造创新网络、国家标准和技术研究所、国防高级研究计划局和小企业创新研究计划等机构进行系统比较，来衡量催化剂经纪在联邦创新机构中的程度和重要性。IF提供了旨在促进催化剂经纪业务的政策建议，在有价值的地方，以低成本(或零成本)--包括改变联邦机构和项目的人员配备、规划和评估。

Federal agencies offer American innovators at least two different sources of support: first, seed money and consulting services that would be all but inaccessible to early stage entrepreneurs at competitive market prices; and second, introductions to potential partners in collaborative networks. Given that innovation demands collaboration as well as competition, the latter contributions are no less important than the former. But they are decidedly less well known and understood. This is partly because federal efforts to build collaborative networks tend to occur early in the process, before innovations come to market and capture the public?s imagination; and partly because they are informal, and public officials have an incentive to downplay their informal contributions?which tend to go unmeasured and unrewarded by their agencies?and highlight their formal roles, like offering small firms and start-ups low-cost finance and consulting services. The unintended consequence of this oversight, however, is that federal efforts to build innovation networks are hard to document and duplicate. By evaluating the extent and importance of the federal government?s role in network-building, this research report considers the development of new mandates, metrics, and incentives that will encourage beneficial brokerage by public officials, innovation by their private counterparts, and prosperity in the country as a whole. The report draws a distinction between two types of brokers: middlemen, who are paid to transfer goods or services between unrelated parties and thus depend on fees; and catalysts, who build mutually beneficial relationships between unrelated parties free of charge and thus depend on external (e.g., government) support. It gauges the extent and importance of catalyst brokerage in federal innovation institutions by means of a systematic comparison of the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, National Network for Manufacturing Innovation, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the Small Business Innovation Research program, among others. And if offers policy recommendations designed to foster catalyst brokerage, where valuable, at low (or no) cost--including changes to the staffing, programming, and evaluation of federal agencies and programs.