tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/innovation-and-science-agenda-23209/articlesinnovation and science agenda – The Conversation2018-06-04T04:57:21Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/973212018-06-04T04:57:21Z2018-06-04T04:57:21ZRemember Turnbull’s 2015 ‘ideas boom’? We’re still only part way there<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221119/original/file-20180531-69517-i1g2ba.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Freelancing and hot-desking are already common in work places – and will continue to rise. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In 2015, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull <a href="https://www.innovation.gov.au/page/national-innovation-and-science-agenda-report">welcomed us to the “ideas boom”</a>, launching a National Innovation and Science Agenda to </p>
<blockquote>
<p>drive smart ideas that create business growth, local jobs and global success. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>In January 2018 the specially-created independent statutory board Innovation and Science Australia (<a href="https://industry.gov.au/Innovation-and-Science-Australia/about-us/Pages/default.aspx">ISA</a>) released its report <a href="https://industry.gov.au/innovation/InnovationPolicy/Pages/Government-Response-to-2030.aspx">Australia 2030: Prosperity through Innovation</a>. It’s a document that <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-clear-target-in-australias-2030-national-innovation-report-90938">has been described</a> not as a roadmap for action, but “more of a sketch with detours, dead ends, and red lights which should be green.”</p>
<p>The federal government’s <a href="https://industry.gov.au/innovation/InnovationPolicy/Documents/Government-Response-ISA-2030-Plan.pdf">May 2018 response</a> to this report adds further disappointment. The response fails to seize the opportunity to deliver a properly funded and connected education, research and innovation system.</p>
<p>Australia is left with a series of well-meaning but disparate programs that only get us part way to ensuing that Australia thrives in the global innovation race.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-clear-target-in-australias-2030-national-innovation-report-90938">No clear target in Australia's 2030 national innovation report</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Action is required</h2>
<p>Today, we sit at the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond/">dawn of the fourth industrial revolution</a> where virtual, physical and biological worlds are merging. <a href="https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/focus/cognitive-technologies.html">Sophisticated cognitive and automation technologies</a> will transform our world in ways difficult to imagine. These technologies are increasingly able to perform human tasks better, faster, and more cheaply. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=848&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=848&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=848&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1066&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1066&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/221481/original/file-20180604-177137-1qps7ym.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1066&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A snapshot of Australia’s STEM workforce <strong>CLICK ON IMAGE TO ZOOM</strong></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2016/03/report-australias-stem-workforce/">Office of the Chief Scientist</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But it is the emergence of vast, <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=3WhMtAEACAAJ">expanding digital platforms</a> and the ecosystems they support that will have a more profound impact on the future of work. Their <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=r-U2DwAAQBAJ">ever-increasing complexity and accelerating change</a> means constant disruption is the new business as usual. </p>
<p>If we are to respond to the changing nature of future work, we need to build a world-beating national innovation ecosystem, especially by equipping Australians with skills and experience relevant to 2030. As we transition into the digital economy, that means technical, digital and STEM skills are vital. (STEM refers to science, technology, engineering and maths.) </p>
<p><a href="http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4250.0.55.005%7E2010%E2%80%9311%7EMedia%20Release%7EQualifications%20paying%20off%20in%20science,%20technology,%20engineering%20and%20maths%20(Media%20Release)%7E1">Growth in STEM jobs</a> is 1.5 times that of non-STEM since 2005, yet we continue to produce non-STEM graduates at <a href="http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/Infographic.pdf">higher rates than those in STEM</a>. The performance of our kids at school – particularly in maths and science – <a href="https://theconversation.com/pisa-results-dont-look-good-but-before-we-panic-lets-look-at-what-we-can-learn-from-the-latest-test-69470">has declined against international benchmarks</a>. </p>
<p>Clearly, strategic intervention is needed: this is where ISA should come in. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/pisa-results-dont-look-good-but-before-we-panic-lets-look-at-what-we-can-learn-from-the-latest-test-69470">PISA results don’t look good, but before we panic let’s look at what we can learn from the latest test</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Nothing new on education</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://industry.gov.au/innovation/InnovationPolicy/Pages/Government-Response-to-2030.aspx">ISA report</a> recommendations on education cover: </p>
<ul>
<li>better training for teachers, particularly STEM teachers </li>
<li>preparing students for STEM degrees and jobs </li>
<li>improving student achievement in literacy and numeracy </li>
<li>interventions to reduce educational inequality</li>
<li>improving our vocational education and training (VET) system.</li>
</ul>
<p>Yet none of these education recommendations were directly supported by the government: only “in principle” or “noted” support was offered in the <a href="https://industry.gov.au/innovation/InnovationPolicy/Documents/Government-Response-ISA-2030-Plan.pdf">response document</a>. </p>
<p>While school education in Australia is the constitutional responsibility of the states and territories, the Australian government never shies away from using the funding carrot to leverage school policy outcomes for the betterment of the country.</p>
<p>For instance, full marks go to the federal government supporting STEM education through the Education Council’s <a href="http://www.educationcouncil.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/National%20STEM%20School%20Education%20Strategy.pdf">National STEM School Education Strategy 2016-2026</a>, and for funding several excellent STEM education projects and initiatives. So why not fund increased numbers and quality of STEM teachers?</p>
<p>Likewise, the urgent need to support the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector to help it drive innovation, automation and new technologies, and provide businesses with requisite skills training is absent. The <a href="https://www.education.gov.au/skilling-australians-fund">Skilling Australians Fund</a> – the government’s main VET policy instrument and a welcome apprenticeship initiative – does little to transition the existing workforce through VET.</p>
<h2>Funding for R&D is unclear</h2>
<p>Turning to research and development (R&D), the <a href="https://industry.gov.au/innovation/InnovationPolicy/Documents/Government-Response-ISA-2030-Plan.pdf">government supports</a> the <a href="https://industry.gov.au/Innovation-and-Science-Australia/Australia-2030/Pages/default.aspx">ISA recommendation</a> to enhance AI and machine learning capabilities – absolutely essential in the digital economy. However, there was no additional funding in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/infographic-budget-2018-at-a-glance-95649">2018 federal budget</a> beyond existing digital technologies program.</p>
<p>At face value, <a href="https://theconversation.com/infographic-budget-2018-at-a-glance-95649">the raft of funding commitments</a> in the budget for R&D looks promising. But are the funds in addition to existing commitments, or a re-labelling of existing funds?</p>
<p>A persistent <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1759-3441.12001">criticism from industry of government support</a> is the continual chopping and changing of policies and programs, both in name and content. </p>
<p>ISA recommended extending export support programs, which is sensible <a href="http://www.swinburne.edu.au/media/swinburneeduau/research/research-centres/cti/reports/Impact-of-the-Victorian-Trade-Missions-Program-2010-12-on-Export-Revenue-2017.pdf">given the solid evidence that they work</a>. However, in its response the government merely said they are supported in principle, with no further funds forthcoming. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-was-missing-in-australias-1-9-billion-infrastructure-announcement-96723">What was missing in Australia's $1.9 billion infrastructure announcement</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What about the future of work?</h2>
<p>Agile approaches, <a href="https://exponentialorgs.com/">exponential organisations</a>, freelance economy, and <a href="https://www.engineering.com/AdvancedManufacturing/ArticleID/16521/What-Is-Industry-40-Anyway.aspx">Industry 4.0</a> are rewriting the rules of how economic value is created. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://industry.gov.au/Innovation-and-Science-Australia/Australia-2030/Pages/default.aspx">ISA report</a> aims to provide comfort about how to create employment opportunities towards 2030, but it speaks more to the past than to the future. Knowledge work – a main focus of the report – will increasingly be performed <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digital-mckinsey/our-insights/where-machines-could-replace-humans-and-where-they-cant-yet">less by people and more by machines</a>, creating vast workforce transformation challenges for industry.</p>
<p>The closer we get to 2030, the less the ISA view of the future will be true. Emerging evidence already contraindicates this view. </p>
<p>For work done by people, data from the United States and Australia already show enormous growth of <a href="https://www.upwork.com/press/2017/10/17/freelancing-in-america-2017/">freelancers</a>, including operating from <a href="http://sbi.sydney.edu.au/wp-content/themes/sbi/Coworking-Spaces-Australia-2017.pdf">co-working spaces</a>. Modelling suggests this trend will continue.</p>
<p>In parallel, business are becoming more agile. ANZ <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/anz-bank-restructure-to-create-150-startups-20170906-gybxr8.html">is completely restructuring itself to look more like 150 start-ups</a>, and downsizing in the process. NAB <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/nab-reveals-6000-jobs-to-go-as-it-announces-66b-profit-20171102-gzd3tc.html">is sacking 6,000 staff</a> – including many knowledge workers – and replacing them with 2,000 technology specialists and digital workers. All large companies are expected to follow.</p>
<h2>Dissociating ‘work’ from ‘jobs’</h2>
<p>In the emerging freelance economy, work is increasingly being dissociated from jobs on digital platforms like <a href="http://www.upwork.com">Upwork</a>. And as more companies go agile, they will have fewer employees but have a larger workforce, leveraging the freelance economy through these platforms.</p>
<p>The upshot? People will increasingly need to create their own work opportunities rather than expect to get a traditional job.</p>
<p>Developing digital skills is essential, and the ISA report rightly focuses on them. But in the highly disruptive and dynamic environment of digital platforms, the core worker skill set will be competent risk taking. Diversity of experience combined with continuous learning are essential ingredients. </p>
<p>Alongside investments in teaching, we should be investing in opportunities where students – from secondary to tertiary education – can “learn-by-doing” in emerging futures of work.</p>
<p>It is for others to discuss the merits of whether these disruptive changes to the economy and employment should be allowed happen or not. But New York Times columnist Tom Friedman sums up <a href="https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/deloitte-review/issue-21/tom-friedman-interview-jobs-learning-future-of-work.html">the certainty of the approaching tech disruption perfectly</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Whatever can be done, will be done. The only question is, “Will it be done by you or to you?” but it will be done.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The inexorable and exponential rise of sophisticated technologies in the digital economy – the Australian economy – will impact all work and change all jobs. We need to be investing in this future for our children. </p>
<p>And we need the government to support and fund a well-integrated innovation ecosystem to incorporates education, research, industry and government.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/97321/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Beth Webster receives funding from the ARC and the Victorian Government. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sarah Maddison is a member of the ARC College of Experts.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sean Gallagher does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There are many disappointments in the government’s response to Innovation and Science Australia’s report ‘Australia 2030: Prosperity through Innovation’.Sean Gallagher, Director, Centre for the New Workforce, Swinburne University of TechnologyBeth Webster, Director, Centre for Transformative Innovation, Swinburne University of TechnologySarah Maddison, Pro-Vice Chancellor (Academic Innovation & Change), Professor of Astrophysics, Swinburne University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/710782017-01-12T19:27:23Z2017-01-12T19:27:23ZFive things to consider when designing a policy to measure research impact<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/152344/original/image-20170111-29019-qdkzu6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">What's the best way to measure research impact?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>This year will see the Australian government <a href="http://www.arc.gov.au/news-media/media-releases/2017-pilot-test-impact-business-engagement-researchers">pilot</a> new ways to measure the impact of university research. </p>
<p>As recommended by the <a href="https://theconversation.com/watt-report-suggests-financial-incentives-for-measuring-research-impact-51815">Watt Review</a>, the Engagement and Impact Assessment will encourage universities to ensure academic research produces wider economic and social benefits. </p>
<p>This fits into the <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-national-innovation-and-science-agenda-deliver-australia-a-world-class-national-innovation-system-52081">National Innovation and Science Agenda</a>, in which taxpayer funds are targeted at research that will have a beneficial future impact on society. </p>
<p>Education Minister <a href="https://ministers.education.gov.au/birmingham/2017-pilot-test-impact-business-engagement-researchers">Simon Birmingham said</a> the pilots will test</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“how to measure the value of research against things that mean something, rather than only allocating funding to researchers who spend their time trying to get published in journals”. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This move to measure the non-academic impact of research introduces many new challenges that were not previously relevant when evaluation focused solely on academic merit. <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2016.1254429">New research</a> highlights some of the key issues that need to be addressed when deciding how to measure impact.</p>
<h2>1. What should be the object of measurement?</h2>
<p>Research impact evaluations needs to trace out a connection between academic research and “real world” impact beyond the university campus. These connections are enormously diverse and specific to a given context. They are therefore best captured through case studies. </p>
<p>When analysing a case study the main issues are: what counts as impact, and what evidence is needed to prove it? When considering this, Australian policymakers can use recent <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2016.1237703">European examples</a> as a benchmark. </p>
<p>For instance, in the UK’s <a href="http://www.ref.ac.uk/">Research Excellence Framework</a> (REF) – which assesses the quality of academic research – the only impacts that can be counted are those directly flowing from academic research submitted to the same REF exercise. </p>
<p>To confirm the impact, the beneficiaries of research (such as policymakers and practitioners) are required to provide written evidence. This creates a narrow definition of impact because those that cannot be verified, or are not based on submitted research outputs, do not count. </p>
<p>This has been a cause of frustration for some UK researchers, but the high threshold does ensure the impacts are genuine and flow from high quality research.</p>
<h2>2. What should be the timeframe?</h2>
<p>There are unpredictable time lapses between academic work being undertaken and it having impact. Some research may be quickly absorbed and applied, whereas other impacts, particularly those from basic research, can take decades to emerge. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1258/jrsm.2011.110180">a study looking at time lags in health research</a> found the time lag from research to practice to be on average 17 years. It should be noted, though, that time lapses vary considerably by discipline.</p>
<p>Only in hindsight can the value of some research be fully appreciated. Research impact assessment exercises therefore need to be set to a particular timeframe. </p>
<p>Here, policymakers can learn from previous trials such as one conducted by <a href="https://www.go8.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/eia_trial_guidelines_final_mrb.pdf">Australian Technology Network and Group of Eight in 2012</a>. This exercise allowed impacts related to research that occurred during the previous 15 years.</p>
<h2>3. Who should be the assessors?</h2>
<p>It is a long established convention that academic excellence is decided by academic peers. Evaluations of research are typically undertaken by panels of academics. </p>
<p>However, if these evaluations are extended to include non-academic impact, does this mean there is now a need to include the views of end-users of research?
This may mean the voices of people outside of academia need to be involved in the evaluation of academic research. </p>
<p>In the 2014 UK REF, over 250 “<a href="http://www.ref.ac.uk/about/users/">research users</a>” (individuals from the private, public or charitable sectors) were recruited to take part in the evaluation process. However, their involvement was restricted to assessing the impact component of the exercise. </p>
<p>This option is an effective compromise between maintaining the principle of academic peer review of research quality while also including end-users in the assessment of impact.</p>
<h2>4. What about controversial impacts?</h2>
<p>In many instances the impact of academic research on the wider world is a positive one. But there are some impacts that are controversial - such as fracking, genetically modified crops, nanotechnologies in food, and stem cell research - and need to be carefully considered. </p>
<p>Such research may have considerable impact, but in ways that make it difficult to establish a consensus on how scientific progress impacts “the public good”. Research such as this can trigger societal tensions and ethical questions. </p>
<p>This means that impact evaluation needs to also consider non-economic factors, such as: quality of life, environmental change, and public health. Even though it is difficult placing dollar values on these things.</p>
<h2>5. When should impact evaluation occur?</h2>
<p>Impact evaluation can occur at various stages in the research process. For example, a funder may invite research proposals where the submissions are assessed based on their potential to produce an impact in the future. </p>
<p>An example of this is the European Research Council <a href="https://erc.europa.eu/proof-concept">Proof of Concept Grants</a>, where researchers who have already completed an ERC grant can bid for follow-on funding to turn their new knowledge into impacts.</p>
<p>Alternatively, impacts flowing from research can be assessed in a retrospective evaluation. This approach identifies impacts where they already exist and rewards the universities that have achieved them. </p>
<p>An example of this is the <a href="http://www.vsnu.nl/en_GB/sep-eng.html">Standard Evaluation Protocol</a> (SEP) used in the Netherlands, which assesses both the quality of research and its societal relevance.</p>
<p>A novel feature of the proposed Australian system is the assessment of both <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-measuring-research-we-must-remember-that-engagement-and-impact-are-not-the-same-thing-56745">engagement and impact</a>, as two distinctive things. This means there isn’t one international example to simply replicate. </p>
<p>Although Australia can learn from some aspects of evaluation in other counties, the Engagement and Impact Assessment pilot is a necessary stage to trial the proposed model as a whole. </p>
<p>The pilot - which will test the suitability of a wide range of indicators and methods of assessment for both research engagement and impact - means the assessment can be refined before a planned national rollout in 2018.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/71078/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Gunn receives funding from Worldwide Universities Network, the British Council (administering the Newton Fund), the UK Higher Education Academy, the United Kingdom Political Studies Association, the New Zealand Political Studies Association and the UK Quality Assurance Agency. Andrew Gunn concurrently holds visiting academic positions internationally.
</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Mintrom does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>This move to measure the impact of university research on society introduces many new challenges that were not previously relevant when evaluation focused solely on academic merit.Andrew Gunn, Researcher in Higher Education Policy, University of LeedsMichael Mintrom, Professor of Public Sector Management, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/519952015-12-08T07:19:25Z2015-12-08T07:19:25ZSome risks in Turnbull’s benign view of business failure<p>Malcolm Turnbull spruiks his lines like one of those optimistic entrepreneurs that he urges Australians to become. The positive tone of the message is the first step to eliciting a favourable response for the content.</p>
<p>Thus it was with Monday’s innovation statement and Turnbull’s news conference launching it.</p>
<p>Turnbull’s exhortation – that Australians should be more willing to take business risks and less fearful of failure – is an attempt to promote a major cultural change in the community. This drive to transform thinking is arguably of greater significance than the particular measures that were announced.</p>
<p>But the often-compelling nature of Turnbull’s presentation can discourage forensic examination of what he’s actually saying, and its implications.</p>
<p>He is a man who doesn’t blush at his own hyperbole – as in this Monday observation:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If you start a new venture, a new business and it goes well for a while and then, for whatever reason, it doesn’t succeed, you may have lost some money, your investors may have lost some money, but the overall economy massively benefits because you are wiser, your employees are wiser, your investors are wiser, everyone’s learnt something and the ecosystem benefits. That’s why cultural change is so important. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This cheery view of the benign nature of failure surely represents a very specific perspective.</p>
<p>It’s one appropriate to the deft person who can muster the resources and has the skills to bounce back – and good on those people. We do need more of them.</p>
<p>But to claim that a business failure is just a glitch replete with upsides and never mind the downsides ignores a whole lot of things.</p>
<p>While the “ecosystem” might be benefiting, the family who mortgaged the house to launch a business that has now gone kaput could be devastated. Some investors who put money into a start-up that could not live up to its big idea may have lost part of their retirement nest egg. The now “wiser” employees may be having trouble getting other jobs.</p>
<p>None of this is to deny that it’s vital for Australia to become more innovative, or that start-ups deserve fostering. Rather, it is to argue that the statement in the innovation policy that “we need to leave behind the fear of failure” overhypes and oversimplifies something that requires a more sophisticated approach.</p>
<p>The old adage “nothing ventured, nothing gained” is all about the need to take risks. But in start-ups and the like, it is also a matter of the nature and degree of risk, who is taking them, and what the consequences of failure will be. If the risk-taker is going to be financially or personally destroyed by a venture going wrong, it’s a risk better avoided. Only some will be able to endure the several failures now being extolled as a reasonable pathway to success.</p>
<p>A balanced view is required, but Turnbull’s rhetoric often has a balance bypass.</p>
<p>In his quest against the fear of failure, he has been influenced not just by his own experience of the business world, but apparently by talks he had recently with Israel’s chief scientist. The refrain is also a mantra of Bill Ferris, who will head the new Innovation and Science Australia that is replacing Innovation Australia.</p>
<p>The innovation statement has specific measures, involving reform of the insolvency laws, that are designed, if you like, to somewhat reduce for entrepreneurs the risk of taking risks.</p>
<p>The default bankruptcy period will be shortened from three years to one. A “safe harbour” will be brought in to protect directors from personal liability for insolvency trading, if they appoint a professional restructuring adviser to develop a plan to rescue a company in trouble. And, if a company is restructuring, there will be a ban on “ipso facto” contractual clauses that allow an agreement to be ended solely due to an insolvency event.</p>
<p>These changes might bring their own risks in a laxer attitude by directors, but Turnbull stresses that other obligations on directors would remain so protections would continue to be there.</p>
<p>Helped by the sheer force of his personality and messaging, Turnbull has pulled off his innovation policy, leaving Labor lamely pointing to the fact that it had plans out first in some of these areas.</p>
<p>It’s not just a matter of the government stealing ideas worth having. What else would an agile and innovative administration do? And it’s only partly that most attention inevitably focuses on what a government does, especially one with a new leader, rather than what an opposition says.</p>
<p>The real lesson is that Turnbull can bring together a policy and enthuse it with a special life that makes it attractive (even when it raises questions) while Shorten’s announcements are piecemeal, often sludgy and lack a narrative or a spruiker who can radiate confidence.</p>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/hubnq-5ac92e?from=yiiadmin" data-link="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/hubnq-5ac92e?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe>
<iframe id="audio_iframe" src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/w2g4j-5a9ba1?from=yiiadmin" data-link="http://www.podbean.com/media/player/w2g4j-5a9ba1?from=yiiadmin" height="100" width="100%" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" data-name="pb-iframe-player"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51995/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Malcolm Turnbull spruiks his lines like one of those optimistic entrepreneurs that he urges Australians to become.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.