What is Bridge8?

Bridge8 is a foresight, industry development and science communications consultancy based in Australia. We offer insights into emerging technologies and how they interact with social, economic and environmental factors in the creation of possible futures.

This blog is an output from our research practices. We look for weak signals & trends that may affect those we work with – manufacturing, mining, biomedicine, water, energy, agriculture & wine. We’re interested in how emerging technologies like nano, bio & info technologies may influence future possibilities. And how social & environmental needs may reveal more long-term, sustainable practices. Finally we’re interested in how we learn, through education & communication, to put creative and innovative approaches into practice. Contact us to know more.

Filed under: Innovation

Super Human Advances in Innovation and Design

Sarah M: Hi, my name is Sarah Morgan and I am excited because this my first blog for Bridge8!  I have worked within the nanotechnology space over the last four years through my roles at NanoVic and NVA, and I have a keen interest in innovation and education.  Most recently, I teamed up with Leah Heiss (Lecturer at RMIT) to write a paper which was presented at the Super Human Revolution of the Species Symposium, and was held in Melbourne on the 23rd and 24th of November 2009.  The paper investigated the role of innovation through design, particularly focused around the development of novel medical technologies, and asked the question “How early should design factor into the technology development process?”.  Two design models were highlighted, and two NanoVic case studies were presented.

Firstly, the “design partnership model” was explored, in which an external team is employed to work with the existing technology.  The case study was based around the development of a portable pulmonary delivery device for the inhalation of insulin.  The research was being undertaken by Monash University (Micro/Nanophysics Research Laboratory) in collaboration with NanoVic, the design work was funded by Design Victoria, and  Charlwood Design was contracted to design and manufacture the prototype.  The final inhaler prototype encompassed all aspects of the product, including sterility issues, ergonomic limitations, technological constraints and user requirements.  The overall look and feel of the product was a playful feel, rather than that of a medical device, making it more user friendly for both children and adults alike.

Secondly, “the residency model” was investigated, in which an artist/designer is embedded within a scientific organisation.  This case study was based on Leah’s personal experience as an artist in residence for 12 months at NanoVic (program funded by Arts Victoria and the Australian Network for Art and Technology (ANAT), for the design of jewellery as personal medical devices for drug delivery.  The outcome was the manufacture of a beautiful neckpiece and rings which administer drugs (such as insulin) through the skin via a transdermal patch, to replace the use of needles. (Bridge8 has blogged about Leah’s work before – see here and here).

Both case studies were successful and satisfying for the scientists and the designers, and although each design approach was different,  there was also conformity in both cases, leading to the following conclusions: 1. that early interaction between the designers and the technology is extremely beneficial to the overall development of the product; 2. trust and open communication is required between the researchers and the designers, and this is the key to a successful outcome.

As a scientist, I thoroughly enjoy working with designers as they bring a fresh and exciting perspective to the project, and in the process, develop visually attractive devices for the purpose of the end-user.  When developing a new technology, the science is crucial, particularly when you are developing a medical device that people like you and I may use everyday.  However, once the science has been established and validated, it is also important to produce a commercially viable product.  By working closely with a designer, it brings along a fresh pair of eyes, a fresh perspective, and an amazing amount of imagination that ultimately leads to a novel technology that also has the “wow factor” that everyone is looking for.

Filed under: Biomedicine, Creativity, Design, Events, Innovation, Nanotechnology , Art, Industrial Biotechnology, Innovation, Nanomaterials, nanotech, nanovic, research

AccessNano: Training the Trainers

Jenna: Long time readers of this blog will know that Bridge8 has been involved in the development of AccessNano, an innovative nanotechnology secondary school resource funded by the Australian Office of Nanotechnology (AON) and produced by Bridge8 Pty Ltd in collaboration with Mrs Francesca Calati and Dr Amanda Clarke. AccessNano was launched on November 28^th 2008 by the Honourable Julia Gillard, Minister for Education.

In the first half of this year a Teacher Professional Development (TPD) pilot programme was run with the aim of increasing uptake and improving ease of implementation of AccessNano by teachers and schools.

To extend on the TPD programme, and to further develop the uptake of AccessNano, a second programme called ‘Train the Trainer’ is being run. This programme is for people interested in developing nanotechnology TPD and contributing to the development of AccessNano in the future.

The ‘Train the Trainer’ workshop will be held Jan 18^th to 19^th 2010 at La Trobe University.  It will be run by Dr Francesca Calati and supported by Bridge8, DIISR and La Trobe University.

Each attendee will receive free meals and accommodation and have his/her travel costs refunded upon provision of receipts. Attendees of this workshop will also commit to providing their own AccessNano TPD in their local area, and will receive the knowledge, skills and materials to do so.

By committing to this workshop you are helping to spread the word about AccessNano. Positions in this workshop are very limited so to secure your position in ‘Train the Trainer’ please reply to feedback@accessnano.org, with ‘AccessNano TPD’ in the title. Also include your contact details including school address, and a tentative date of when you would hold your own TPD.

Filed under: AccessNano, Leadership, Learning , AccessNano, education, nanotech, public nano

Calling early career professionals in clean technologies

Kristin: Are you under 30 and pursing a career in science, technology or engineering related to cleantech and the renewable energies sector?

Bridge8 and Australian CleanTech are conducting a nationwide search for university graduates, technicians and young professionals working in wind, solar, biofuels as well as other cleantechnology and clean energy applications. We are looking for a range of disciplines and professions. We want to share your stories in trade journals and schools’ resources to inform skills development and general science communications about this sector. The best submissions showing how your career path is making a difference for the future will be announced in early February.

To enter, please email your application to info@bridge8.com.au by 31st December 2009, with the subject title ‘Cleantech Careers Search’ and including your name, title, organisation and contact details. We’d like your application to address the following questions:

• What did you study?
• What has been your career progression?
• What are your career aspirations?
• Describe the tasks and responsibilities of your current job in the clean energy sector. What impacts might this have on the wider community?
• What is the most challenging part of your job?
• What is the most rewarding part of your job?
• Why is the study of science, technology or engineering relevant for your role?
• What career advice would give to school students interested in a similar career?

Further information on the conditions and outcomes of the Cleantech Careers Search can be obtained by emailing us.

Filed under: Cleantech, Creativity, Energy, Environment, Futures, Leadership, Learning, Opportunities, People , careers, Cleantech, Futures, Innovation, public science

AZoNano: Yeah Sure, Prove It!

Kristin: Every month I receive a newsletter from the AZoNano.com, a website collating, publishing and promoting the best of the world’s nanotechnology innovation. In this month’s newsletter, I really enjoyed the following article on consumer product claims and their editor Andy Choi has given us permission to reproduce it here:

Nanothoughts – Nanotech Super Products – Yeah Sure, Prove It!

I bumped into some nanotechnology at the shops the other day. I was in need of a new dish brush for washing the dishes and was quite open minded about what I was going to purchase. Unlike Apple iPods, Coca-Cola and Levi’s 501s I find the dish brush market isn’t strong on brand loyalty. My only prerequisite to making a purchase was that, if possible, I wanted a locally made brush. Alas, that wasn’t to be. Although the last time I bought a dish brush I could buy a locally produced one, all that is currently on offer are ‘Made in China’ and globally ubiquitous. The supermarket has been going through some brand consolidation of late and I also only had one brand to choose from.

From the brushes I liked the look of, it came down to two brushes. The first was an ordinary generic looking dish brush. The second, at double the price, had the same style cleaning head but with a fancy, schmancy padded, ergonomic handle with a nanotech boost from antibacterial silver ions in the bristles. I’ve read the data. I know how nano silver can kill the nasties that undoubtedly populate my dirty washing – particularly the stained old chopping board. Don’t get me started about the chopping board. The problem is, I really don’t care. I wash the dishes in hot water and let them air dry in a bright sunny spot. I’m confident they are clean and non-toxic when put back in the cupboard. I can’t see the germs but I’m confident I’ve washed them away to the best of my abilities. On the other hand I also can’t see the nanosilver in the brush bristles. I had no part in making the brush so how do I know they are actually in there? I can’t test for it. Even if they are present, when I do the washing up, how do I know if my premium priced nanosilver bristles have destroyed any more pathogens than were eradicated with hot soapy water? I am also not scared of occasionally ingesting an occasional nasty bug. I’m fit, I’m healthy and in the words of Friedrich Nietzsche “that which does not kill us makes us stronger”. If I was buying a shirt that used nanotechnology to make it stainproof, I’d be readily able to test the effectiveness of the product and would likely be willing to pay a premium for it. As for the antibacterial properties of nanosilver, why would I pay extra for something that I have no way of knowing if it is even present in the product, let alone if it actually works better than my current product. Forget scare campaigns about getting nanotech products off shop shelves before they destroy the world. Unless manufacturers can prove the products actually are worth the additional expense, they’ll disappear from the shelves because no-one will buy them.

Yes, I bought the old style, dull, generic brush and my dishes haven’t given me food poisoning. It’s my cooking that’ll do that!

Filed under: Nanomaterials, Nanotechnology , Nanomaterials, nanotech, public nano

Mining Innovation: Does Size Matter?

Kate: One of the potential challenges to maintaining Australia’s capacity for mining innovation is predicted to be the increasing dominance of large, conglomerated, multinational organisations.

Historically, the mining industry had a number of medium sized organisations that could drive rapid and diverse innovation, however the rationalisation in the industry means that the policies and objectives of the large players may increasingly narrow the focus on future mining innovation. Head of Innovation and Technology at Rio Tinto John McGagh, recently spoke about Rio Tinto’s Innovation Strategy being implemented through a closed innovation model, whereby research and development is done by Rio Tinto and selected partners with innovations retained exclusively. This Closed Innovation Model is very different to the traditionally more open innovation models in the sector where typically university research projects are funded by a large number of mining industry sponsors through an intermediary such as AMIRA. This Open Innovation Model allowed any innovative mining solutions to be taken up fairly rapidly across the sector. The early adopters have an advantage of several years but any significant advantage is usually short lived.  With closed innovation, companies can lower their mining cost curve (a competitive advantage) preferentially over their competitors until the competitors obtain the innovative solution themselves. One potential downside of such a strategy is the risk associated with the typically high staff turnover within the mining industry. Time will tell. An overview of the implications of closed and open innovation models for industry more broadly is provided by the Australian Institute for Commercialisation here.

Another challenge arising from the global reach of multinational mining companies is the ability for Australia to maintain flows of benefits from innovation to Australian companies and institutions. Any successful innovation produced in Australia will be quickly transferred to the other global operations of a given international company. In this environment niche technology innovation (such as the technology developed by GroundProbe) may be important, as long as first mover advantages are significant. Agility may be the key for smaller companies operating within a market dominated by large players. In the worlds of Rupert Murdoch, in a rapidly changing world “Big will not beat small anymore. It will be the fast beating the slow.” (IBM Global CEO Study 2006)

Small innovative companies and research groups are going to have to develop evolving strategies to deal with the challenges of operating in an industry dominated by large multinational players. It will be the role of the Australian mining industry, universities, research centres and government to develop coherent policies to maximise the potential of competitive advantage from innovation in Australia.




Filed under: Innovation, Mining, commercialisation , Closed Innovation, commercialisation, Development, groundprobe, Innovation, Mining, Open Innovation, research, Rio Tinto