Accelerating Implementation of Transportation Research Results (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

5 such as NCHRP Report 382: Facilitating the Implementation of Research Findings: A Summary Report (1996); NCHRP Synthesis 355: Transportation Technology Transfer: Suc- cesses, Challenges, and Needs (2005); NCHRP Synthesis 150: Technology Transfer in Selected Highway Agencies (1989), and as far back as NCHRP Synthesis 23: Getting Research Findings into Practice (1974). These and other efforts show avenues for success; yet can these techniques, methods, and processes be enhanced or augmented to accel- erate the implementation process? A variety of public-sector agencies, in addition to those in transportation, are charged with applying research results to practice. The Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-502) made technology transfer of research results by fed- eral laboratories a responsibility of the labs and chartered the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer— highlighting the need and responsibility of labs to integrate the products of federal research into the U.S. economy. Labo- ratories from the U.S. Departments of Defense, Energy, and Agriculture, the National Institutes of Health, and the many others in the consortium subscribe to the mission of linking laboratory technology and expertise with use in the market- place (Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Trans- fer 2011). In addition, nonprofit and academic partnership organizations such as the National Implementation Research Network include implementation of research findings as a core mission element. Likewise, many private-sector compa- nies are dependent on the research and development and cus- tomer use (application to practice) of products that generate profit, literally enabling the companies’ existences. The mission of the National Implementation Research Network (NIRN) is to contribute to the best practices and science of implementation, organization change, and system reinvention to improve outcomes across the spectrum of human services. (NIRN 2014) Considering this activity in other domains, are there suc- cessful techniques, methods, and systems for implementa- tion that could be used in the public-sector transportation community? Also, are there practices in these domains that might enable a more effective implementation process that realizes the benefits of research more rapidly? The expec- tation is that there are implementation strategies that could CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND SCOPE Better-faster-safer-with-less-impact-to-the-traveling-pub- lic—the oft-heard expression is putting significant pressure on highway professionals whether they are facility owners, researchers, or industry entrepreneurs. How to be more effec- tive and efficient with current resources perhaps has never been more of a challenge and an opportunity. It is certain that the sta- tus quo will not serve our nation well and will not sufficiently address current and future highway transportation needs. It is also certain that innovations in the highway industry have pro- vided remarkable solutions that vigorously respond to the bet- ter, faster, safer, and greener unwritten mandate (Harder 2010). HIGH VALUE RESEARCH: Cross-median crashes are 3 times more likely to cause fatalities than any other freeway accident, according to research conducted through the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). As a result of these findings, the agency pioneered the use of cable median barriers to prevent a car from entering opposing traffic lanes. From 1999 to 2005, NCDOT estimates that more than 95 cross-median crashes were prevented using this new technology, saving more than 145 lives. (AASHTO 2009) Yet there is a choice that confronts the highway community, in particular facility owners throughout the nation: either buy one’s way out of current problems (mostly impractical) or find a better way to accomplish the work to be done through inno- vative processes, methods, technologies, and products—that is, through applying the results of research. Indeed, research results are the primary source of the successful innovations adopted by the highway community. Implementing research results such as cable median barriers is just one example that proves the value and necessity of getting innovations into practice. In this current “better-faster” environment, the question arises, how can the transportation community accelerate the implementation of research findings to realize more benefits more expeditiously? This question is not new, but it has new urgency. AASHTO studies show successful processes for imple- mentation of research results in the transportation context,

6 DEFINITIONS A number of terms commonly used within the transportation community deal with implementation. This report will use those terms in the course of discussion, and may also refer to terms in other industry domains that have equivalent or simi- lar meanings. A number of the terms familiar to transporta- tion research managers are provided in NCHRP Synthesis 355: Transportation Technology Transfer: Successes, Challenges, and Needs (2005). For the purposes of this report, definitions from NCHRP Synthesis 355 are included herein. These are followed by additional definitions used in other industries. Definitions from NCHRP Synthesis 355 Deployment: The systematic process of distributing an innovation for use. This term implies a relatively broad use, rather than demonstration or incidental use of the innova- tion. A technology can be considered deployed when it is used multiple times within an organizational or group con- text, such as use resulting from a newly written specification. Education and training: The processes encompassing a variety of instructional methods to cause learning. For the most part, when using the terms “education” and “training,” this document implies formal or organized instructional opportunities for learning. Knowledge transfer: The diverse activities causing the flow of knowledge from one person, group, or organization to another. Such knowledge transfer can be a systematic pro- cess to identify, capture, and share tacit knowledge to enable it to become explicit knowledge. Implementation of research results: Used in highway transportation and particularly by the research community to describe the various activities required to put an outcome of a research project into widespread use. Often this term is used synonymously with technology transfer by those in research. The activities can span the entire duration of the research project and extend until the research result is adopted, for example, as part of a standard operating pro- cedure. Implementation activities may be demonstrations, training, technical assistance, provision of needed resources, or any activity that fosters use of the research result. Innovation: A procedure, product, or method that is new to the adopting organization. The item may be a result of research or may be a new application of an existing improvement that has been used in another context or other organization. Technology: A term used very broadly to include prac- tices, products, processes, techniques, and tools. Technology transfer: The activities leading to the adop- tion of a new-to-the-user product or procedure by any user be transferred to transportation applications to assist in accelerating current implementation activities. At this time, however, there has been no concerted effort to find out what successful practices being applied in other disciplines and industries might enable the transportation community to accelerate the application of its research results into trans- portation practice. This synthesis examines implementation practices used primarily by public-sector agencies with a primary focus not on transportation and then a variety of nonprofit, academic, and private-sector organizations. The goal of the study is to identify successful practices that have potential for use in the transportation sector, and when used help accelerate practical application of research results. The likelihood of these identified practices speeding up implementation pro- cesses in transportation is based on, among a number of factors, the success they have had in their existing contexts and the degree to which they can streamline or enhance current transportation processes. Speeding up implementa- tion of research results may also be accomplished by adding more practices to the transportation professional’s avail- able options, whether these practices are new to the trans- portation context or focus additional attention to current, but underused, practices. Having additional options to get results used may enable implementation to occur success- fully where efforts in the past have languished. These types of options have been considered in the identification of the strategies presented. Although there have been many successes in implement- ing important research results—both products and pro- cesses—in transportation applications, there is room for improvement in every aspect of implementation. The time it takes to realize benefits can be measured in multiples of years; the processes are considered by many as lacking in transparency and thus thwart replicability; and the skills to get the research results into widespread practice frequently must be accompanied by a healthy dose of perseverance. Improvements in the procedures, the types and availability of resources including expertise, the innovation culture, the organizational leadership, and more can make a difference. Accelerating the use of research results enables research to be more relevant to transportation practice. In summary, adding to and fine tuning the implementa- tion practices already in use by others so that benefits accrue more rapidly is a primary means to create more responsive transportation research programs. Furthermore, enhancing research implementation practices, in particular accelerating them, will increase the relevance of research and continue to promote research as the provider of solutions to the most pressing transportation problems.

7 or group of users. “New to the user” means any improve- ment over existing technologies or processes and not only a recent invention or research result. Technology transfer includes research results implementation and product or pro- cess deployment. Activities leading to the adoption of inno- vations can be knowledge transfer, training and education, demonstrations and showcases, communications and mar- keting efforts, technical assistance, and more (Wallace et al. 1988, pp. 2–3; Schmitt et al. 1985, p. 1). In addition, technol- ogy transfer in this transportation context also includes the complex process of change, a comprehensive achievement dealing with cultural as well as technical issues. Other Definitions Technology transition. The U.S. Department of Defense’s pri- mary term to describe the movement of research and develop- ment to the use of technology in military applications. The process can occur between a government R&D organization for use in a specific system, or an industry can enable use of technology in a government application (U.S. DoD 2003, p. 1-1). Technology transition is a comprehensive and broad term used for all processes, including technology transfer. Technology insertion. The Department of Defense’s term for the cycle of a product from program ideas and design to the user evaluation of the product. Research to Practice (RintoP). The term often used in the medical community to represent the full process of adoption of research results into clinical settings. Many of the mean- ings for this term are directly similar to the common use of the word “implementation” in the highway research community. Implementation research. A term used in the behavioral health community to describe the efforts at closing the gap between science and service by improving the science and prac- tice of implementation in relation to evidence-based programs and practices (National Implementation Research Network). Innovation implementation. Innovation implementation is the transition period during which targeted organizational members ideally become increasingly skillful, consistent, and committed in their use of an innovation. Implementa- tion is the critical gateway between the decision to adopt the innovation and the routine use of the innovation (Klein and Sorra 1996, p. 1057). Implementation strategy: The report uses this term to describe any of the myriad techniques, methods, processes, and tools used to do the work of implementation. Strate- gies may include planning tools, information development and provision, coaching, technical assistance, training and education, demonstrations, networking and fostering of partnerships and collaborations, capital development, and much more. Dissemination of research: Terminology used by certain segments of the health and human services community with a meaning similar to the use of “implementation of research findings” in the highway community. The reference to dis- semination focuses on “disburse throughout” the user context. The Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer (FLC) occupies an important position as a leader and a resource for federal agencies regarding technology transfer. The FLC website describes the organization as “the nationwide network of federal laboratories that pro- vides the forum to develop strategies and opportunities for linking laboratory mission technologies and expertise with the marketplace.” FLC defines the technology transfer it accomplishes as “the process by which existing knowledge, facilities, or capabilities developed under federal research and development (R&D) funding are utilized to fulfill public and private needs.” Additionally, it defines technol- ogy transfer in a general context as “the process by which technology or knowledge developed in one place or for one purpose is applied and used in another” (FLC 2008). The FLC definition of technology transfer is sufficiently broad to encompass the activities described in the transportation community as “implementation of research results.” In their definition and for the purposes of this synthesis when dis- cussing FLC-based processes, technology transfer is treated as an overarching term that includes the variety of activities leading to sharing and use. The previous definitions are in concert with the defini- tions that Everett M. Rogers uses in his classic work, Diffu- sion of Innovations (Rogers 2003) and others on the nature of technology transfer (Rogers 2002): • Adoption—a decision to use an innovation (Rogers 2003, p. 417). • Implementation—putting an innovation to use (Rogers 2003, p. 417). • Technology transfer—a communications process through which the results of scientific research are put into use; often including implementation activities (Rogers 2003, p. 323). It is easy to understand the often confusing meanings when references to implementing, adopting, disseminat- ing, transferring technology, and more abound. Each has an aspect of the core element, use of the innovation. Implementation Process Flow In Diffusion of Innovations Rogers provides a process flow for innovation that shows implementation actions as an orga- nization moves from identifying a problem to finding the solution to incorporating that solution as standard operating procedure. Rogers’s findings are accepted as best practice and serve as a foundation for many who have examined the

8 topic of innovation implementation. This synthesis addresses opportunities that transportation practitioners and organiza- tions have to accelerate the implementation processes, as shown in Table 1. Rogers describes implementation as “con- sisting of all of the events, actions, and decisions involved in putting an innovation to use” (Rogers 2003, p. 421). LITERATURE REVIEW AND DATA SOURCES A comprehensive literature review of U.S. and some inter- national sources was conducted to establish background information on the range of practices that have been, and are now being, pursued regarding implementing research results within the private sector, academia, and public-sector agen- cies. Because of the differences in terminology used by vari- ous domains, the literature review cast a broad net to examine concepts associated with implementation of research results, but that use different labels. Key terms such as application to practice, technology deployment, innovation diffusion, technology transfer (in context used by federal laboratories or, for example, the U.S. Department of Agriculture), tech- nology commercialization, and technology transition (as used within the U.S. Department of Defense), were used. A number of resources were accessed, including the Transportation Research International Documentation data- base and business, government, management, science, tech- nology, medicine, and social sciences databases, including ProQuest® and EBSCOHost® services. Online access to journals through the Industrial Research Institute, Wiley’s journal services, Harvard Business Review, and others were used. A substantial amount of literature and information was accessible through the World Wide Web. Manuals of prac- tice, regulations, research reports, program descriptions, project discussions, and more are provided on websites of organizations and agencies promoting use of their respec- tive innovations or technologies. Because the web is easily accessible, many organizations are including detailed infor- mation whereas just a few years ago, this information would have been available only through a visit to the organization or a comprehensive interview. There is abundant and, perhaps better termed, over- whelming amounts of information available on the World Wide Web regarding technology commercialization and the activities leading to the realization of profits from the use of technology. Many of the activities and practices in the pri- vate sector do not have direct use in the public sector; how- ever, there are overarching principles that can be tailored to the public sector processes and thus some of these types or literature sources were valuable. Owing to the vast amounts of relevant information writ- ten on the many facets of implementation, the study report includes some websites and a bibliography providing sources for further investigation and reading. Further reading on the topic of technology transfer and implementation in general can be found in the literature review prepared in conjunction with NCHRP Project 20-93, Development of a Guide for Transportation Technology Transfer (Hood et al. 2012). The document can be down- loaded from the NCHRP project web page at http://apps.trb. org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=3185. Interviews of representatives from nontransportation government entities, academia, and the private sector were conducted in the course of this synthesis effort. This method of communication with research managers and implemen- tation experts was a substantially more productive means to gather informative and relevant responses than a survey TABLE 1 FIVE STAGES OF THE INNOVATION PROCESS IN ORGANIZATIONS THE INNOVATION PROCESS IN AN ORGANZATION Decision I. INITIATION II. IMPLEMENTATION #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 AGENDA-SETTING MATCHING REDEFINING/ RESTRUCTURING CLARIFYING ROUTINIZING General organizational problems that may create a perceived need for innovation. Finding a problem from the organization’s agenda with an innovation. The innovation is modified and re-invented to fit the organization and organiza- tional structures are altered. The relationship between the organization and the innovation is defined more clearly. The innovation becomes an ongoing element in the orga- nization’s activities, and loses its identity. Source: Rogers 2003.

9 instrument, which is the typical means of data gathering used for such synthesis studies. Early on in the planning for the information and data gathering it was also determined that those who possess the desired information were indi- viduals within agencies that may not have similar titles or similarly defined responsibilities, making the distribution of a survey very difficult. Furthermore, giving more validity to interviewing in this effort, many of the individuals possessing the most relevant information are very relationship oriented and particularly willing to talk and discuss the issues. Candidate organizations for interviews were determined through a literature search, panel contact recommendations, and networking. The original plan for conducting interviews was two-tiered. The initial tier was to be a screening call to determine general information regarding implementa- tion processes at the organization and to identify the cor- rect person to discuss the processes at a detailed level, the second-tier interview. This initial call was not usually necessary. Organization websites, for example, that of The National Implementation Research Network, or the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service, which also includes online access to the National Agricultural Library, are so well populated with informa- tion that some interviews would only have been asking for what was available online. Furthermore, people associated with implementation tasks are often very willing to make themselves known. Commercialization offices, technology transfer managers at the federal laboratories, and others were relatively easy to identify through contact information given on websites. One unanticipated change in the interview process was the lack of access to private-sector implementation, new product development, commercialization, and other related process information from company representatives. Activi- ties in the private sector dealing with what in this study is being broadly termed implementation often occur at the later stages of product development. Therefore the processes were considered proprietary or trade secrets and not pub- licly discussed. However, the Industrial Research Institute’s Research—Technology Management journal and others such as the MIT Sloan Management Review provide articles using more generalized descriptions of processes and successes in the private sector. The interview protocols developed for the project are included in Appendix A. REPORT ORGANIZATION Chapter one of the synthesis gives an introduction to the topic of acceleration of implementation of research results and describes the scope of the project. The chapter also includes discussion of the primary information sources used and the extensive literature search that produced a wide variety of details about implementation efforts. Findings from the literature were augmented by information received through interviews with research scientists and individuals involved with implementation responsibilities. Chapters two through five present the factors and strategies of implemen- tation currently in practice by others outside of the transpor- tation community and identify the applicability for use in transportation. • Chapter two provides a discussion on the factors that affect the timing and ease of implementation of research results. • Chapter three gives a variety of case examples and descriptions that illustrate strategies and practices seen as contributing to accelerating implementation within various public-sector, private-sector, and academic organizations. • Chapter four discusses the perceived degree of ease to replicate and transfer the practices and strategies found to have potential to accelerate implementation of research results in transportation applications. • Chapter five summarizes the key findings of the synthe- sis project, including observations on how the material in the report can be used to accelerate implementation practices used within the transportation community.