STIC report echoes Innovation Study
The media has been awash in stories about yesterday’s STIC report. As I pointed out yesterday, others are also concluding that the report highlights the need for increased innovation by Canadian businesses.
In an analogy that is already a bit too accurate, the council stressed the need for the scientific community to become more like a circus. Heather Monroe-Blum, Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University, held up the Cirque du Soleil as an example of how a small Canadian company can innovate and become a world leader. The council is encouraging Canadian businesses to follow the Cirque’s lead and dare to innovate.
Tellingly, the STIC report follows on the heels of an unrelated report last week by the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) called “Innovation and Business Strategy: Why Canada Falls Short“. Though commentators haven’t drawn any links between the two reports, the two point out the same fundamental criticism of Canadian business and how commercializes research. An excerpt from their news release captures the report’s conclusions:
Building on decades of data from various national and international statistical agencies, the panel finds that Canada’s productivity has been falling further behind that of the U.S. and many other advanced countries for the past 25 years. The report presents statistical evidence, stretching back almost five decades, to show how lagging productivity growth has been due to subpar innovation.
This report, like the STIC report, concludes that the tax system is competitive and we produce sufficient graduates, but that too few companies pursue agressive strategies of innovation. The exceptions – Bombardier, RIM, Magna – are world-leaders and should serve as an example to others. The CCA report recommends that “proactive public policies” be pursued, and that direct funding of early-stage business R&D be provided by government. As David Crane at the Chronicle-Herald points out in his analysis, the most important goal is to change our business mindset to include innovation:
What this requires, more than anything else, is a political and business leadership that has a clear understanding of the challenges we face, and a strong commitment to bring about significant change. Unfortunately, that leadership to make us an innovative nation does not exist today, and that may be our biggest barrier to change.
Scientists concerned about funding for their basic research should be aware that the government’s science and technology strategy includes all components of the “Science, Technology, Innovation System” identified in the STIC report. When any part of that system is weak, then it is in the interests of the other parts to support efforts to improve it, lest the whole system be overhauled.
