Minutes of the CDI Advisory Board meeting on October 4, 2013 Ex-officio members present: Mr. Scott Betz (TBA) Dr. Christopher Brown Dr. James Moeser Dr. David Nelson Dr. Conley Winebarger Dr. Randy Mills (TBA) Termed members present: Ms. Natasha Gore Mr. Thomas Ingram Ms. Jean Irvin Mr. Jim Shepherd Dr. Daniel Yohannes Guests present: Mr. Herb Burns Mr. Algenon Cash Ms. Letitia Cornish Mr. Jim DeCristo Mr. David English Dr. Randy Mills Ms. Joan Roggenkamp Ex-officio members absent: Dr. Brenda Allen/Dr. Corey Walker (TBA) Mr. George Burnette Ms. Rachel Desmarais Dr. Gary Green Dr. Susan Pauly Dr. Donald Reaves Termed members absent: Dr. Matthew Gymer Dr. Kerry Link (stepping down) Ms. Wendy Mailey Dr. Nolo Martinez (resigning) CDI Staff present: Dr. Nick Hristov Ms. Laura Huff Mr. Richard Phillips Chris Brown convened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. and welcomed all in attendance. Those present introduced themselves. After establishing the presence of a quorum, Dr. Brown asked for questions or corrections to the minutes of the March 8, 2013, meeting. Tom Ingram noted that his title should be changed from Dr. to Mr. and then moved to approve the minutes with that one correction. Conley Winebarger seconded the motion, and all voted to accept the minutes as corrected. CDI is a multi-campus research center of the University of North Carolina system. UNC School of the Arts Winston-Salem State University Forsyth Tech Community College www.centerfordesigninnovation.org Suite 2105 Winston Tower, 301 North Main Street, Winston-Salem, NC 27101-4019 USA 36.09815 N/80.243839 W 01.336.727.4310
Scott Betz gave an overview of his background and described how he came to the area originally because of CDI. His CDI involvements evolved from meeting and class attendance to cross-disciplinary teaching and collaborations to now holding the interim director position. Mr. Betz held this experience out as a CDI story and as an example of the need for CDI to continue attracting folks who will stick around. He encouraged all Advisory Board members to maximize the CDI story and articulate it to other potential sticky people who might likewise be attracted to CDI. Mr. Betz then verbally presented the working draft of the annual report for the year ended June 30, 2013. He noted that the report highlights research activities, which are the backbone of the work of CDI. Given the importance of research to the CDI mission, this topical section was scheduled to be presented, in full, as a separate agenda item by CDI s design researcher, following the general report overview. (The full report will be emailed soon to advisory board members.) The small CDI staff continues to work in a limited space with limited budget to keep systems running and to achieve the goals of the center. The building is on target for completion at the end of fall semester 2014. CDI maintained its steady trend of increasing collaborative research activity - including meeting with collaborators, 3D printing and modeling, 3D motion capture and visualization, community outreach, national and international presentations, regional workshops, classes, tours, and increased communications activities. Although grant funding decreased from the previous year, research activity continued to increase. A short discussion ensued regarding the nature of some of the projects. Richard Phillips explained that the pressure sensors on the Bike Logger sit across the trails rather than attached to the individual bicycle. Nick Hristov cited a list of funding sources that awarded grants in support of the bat research. Advisory Board members commented on the great diversity of that research grant portfolio. Regarding the tour of CDI by a national maker group looking to relocate to the region, David Nelson mentioned that the distinguished guests were very impressed with what CDI is doing and continued talking about it after the tour. The mayor of Winston-Salem continues to point to CDI as a draw to folks in the high tech design community. Tom Ingram described the report as excellent. Jim Shepherd noted that CDI has been through tough economic times, and in spite of decreasing resources, is still here and poised to grow. Jean Irvin commented on how impressive it is that a core small group of four people can make collaborations work here in the community. (Listings of projects and metrics supporting the statements made in the annual report will be included as part of the final annual report, which upon completion, will be sent to all Advisory Board members.) Scott Betz gave an update on CDI s director search. Not a candidate himself, Mr. Betz is cochairing the search committee with Jim DeCristo. The search process timeline is set with a 2
target hire date of July 1, 2014. The job description is in review now and will go to HR for discussion and subsequent advertising. The committee hopes to interview candidates in the spring. Advisory Board members were referred to a draft job description in their folder. Chris Brown mentioned a conference call held with the provosts of the two institutions (UNCSA & WSSU) regarding a change in the reporting structure and directed attention to some specific wording in the final sentence at the bottom of paragraph two of the job description. Changing the direct reporting line from UNC-GA to the provosts, as suggested, will require a change to CDI s bylaws. Discussion ensued regarding the history of movement of centers away from reporting directly to UNC-GA to a more local level. To this date, CDI has remained answering to UNC-GA, but the time and desire of the local entities to embrace CDI may be right for change. David Nelson commented that the two provosts have no hesitation about whether the reporting structure could or should be local, but don t want to cut the tether to UNC-GA until proper reporting lines are in place, are clear to everybody, and with an appropriate model. Dr. Nelson stated that this is an opportune time to make the change before the director search is settled. Further discussion ensued regarding the financial and advocacy consequences of changing the reporting structure. CDI appropriations funnel through the two institutions already. UNC-GA is not a manager of that money. Jim DeCristo and Letitia Cornish explained that UNCSA provides administrative oversight and manages the operating budgets while WSSU provides access to faculty, tenure process, technology, infrastructure, capital funding, and large grant oversight. There are already operating agreements between all entities, so the change in reporting structure should not dilute or change the way finances are handled. Chris Brown and James Moeser related their knowledge of successful working models for other multi-campus centers. Dr. Brown offered to solicit feedback and procure a copy of a playbook that outlines ways UNC-G and NCA&T work together in their joint School of Nano-Science and Engineering. This model includes property management, operating issues, monthly meetings, etc. The land exists between campuses and is considered a millennial campus now. David Nelson emphasized the importance that should be given to how the center is programmed. Jim DeCristo affirmed that decisions would be made by the director in conjunction with both provosts. The director is already integrated into the provost s council and other leadership structures on both campuses. The proposed change would be a formality, clarifying and incorporating UNC-GA s expectations. Tom Ingram noted that authority for future appointments to the board would change from the president of UNC-GA to the two provosts. Jim Shepherd stated concern that, given its status in the start-up incubation period and the tough recent budget cuts, CDI might become a step-child to the new process. Chris Brown mentioned 3
that when centers are more owned by their local universities, where rubber meets the road, those centers can grow with expansion budget. David Nelson added that more faculty could be assigned to the center with additional funding (something GA could not do). James Moeser posited that legislature may be more kind to institutions than to UNC-GA as a whole. Letitia Cornish pledged the provost s support of the center because of the potential it has and the opportunities for experience afforded to faculty and students. Support is unwavering for the direction the center is taking. After lengthy discussion, and hearing agreement to the approach for changing the reporting structure as described, Chris Brown stated that this must be reflected in how we go forward with director search and dictates that we must change the bylaws. The concept having been introduced during this annual meeting, changes to the bylaws will be drafted, shared, and voted on electronically at a later, but not too distant time. Daniel Yohannes questioned the scope of the position related to fundraising and how CDI can become a better part of the processes that are in place. Jim DeCristo stated that CDI may do fundraising as any other university unit. Letitia Cornish emphasized that being able to clearly articulate fundraising needs should be explicit in the job description. To become an institutional priority at WSSU, requests to advancement or other resource units need to be vetted through the provost and need to be part of the strategic plan. Jean Irvin highlighted the sentiment that CDI s next director needs to be able to fully integrate CDI into the process on both campuses. Given the expectation that CDI raise external resources to become a sustainable entity, several members stated that entrepreneurial quality should be considered. The new director should know how to establish effective relationships with partner organizations, align visions and missions to build out the programs, and be able to get that onto paper. Chris Brown reminded Advisory Board members that they will receive, within the next few days, an email with suggested changes to the bylaws. After review the members will be asked to vote electronically. Upon passing vote, the changes will go to the UNC-GA president for approval. Then the new structure will be incorporated into the job description. The director search and bylaw agenda items ran into time allotted for research updates. Scott Betz acknowledged Nick Hristov and his work as CDI Design Researcher and tabled the research item for next meeting. One of the two candidates for termed advisory board nomination joined the group for lunch. Chris Brown introduced Algenon Cash and invited him to say a few words about himself. Mr. Cash summarized his vita and emphasized his role as managing director of a small boutique firm in Greensboro involved in real estate, banking, and investment. He is very active in the community and was asked by Carol Strohecker to become more involved in CDI. Beth Fordham-Meier was unable to attend, but had submitted a bio for consideration. 4
Jim Shepherd moved to approve the addition of Algenon Cash and Beth Fordham-Meier as nominees to the board. Jean Irvin seconded motion, which was then unanimously approved. Advisory Board members were also informed of the nomination of three ex-officio members that will be submitted, along with the two termed nominees, directly to UNC-GA president for appointment: Scott Betz, CDI Interim Director; Corey Walker, WSSU Dean, College of Arts and Sciences; Randy Mills, WSSU Interim VC for Finance and Administration. Several Advisory Board members commented on the good diversity mix coming together on the board. Chris Brown announced that Kerry Link has stepped down from his position as chair. The Advisory Board needs to elect both a chair and vice chair, two important key positions. The people in these positions need energy and drive to set the agenda, move meetings forward, and work closely with the future director. Daniel Yohannes and Natasha Gore were nominated for chair and vice chair respectively. At Mr. Yohannes s request, discussion ensued regarding CDI s value proposition in the community. Jean Irvin addressed the larger community view. In general, the community has been good at talking but not good at action. CDI brings together diverse skill sets that actually produce things that solve complex problems, enrich lives, and educate through doing. Students from separate institutions could take a CDI class together. How CDI does its work is key. There are equity and diversity in the way people work together here that are rarely seen in the community at large. Jim Shepherd focused on CDI s results-oriented outcomes. With strong design background, CDI is valued for its processes, building things, and getting things done. Again, it s more than talk. As the building comes on board, it will become obvious what CDI has done. This building will be the most energy efficient building across the system built within a tight budget. Chris Brown spoke from the university perspective. CDI s value comes from its work in research, its portfolio of funding agencies, industry, and connections. The interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary approach enables researchers to mix it up, creating something new. CDI is a nexus point for that process with multi-campus institutions engaging students and faculty in new ways of thinking. CDI s new place will enable faculty, students, and engineers working on artistic designs to run into each other and connect. Makers and designers will feel they need to be there to interact like a magnet for people who need to be close to innovation. Physical space matters. It s important that this building come out of the ground. David Nelson observed that CDI offers benefits that don t already exist in the Triad. Research projects, ideation, hands-on work with students and faculty all come together to make CDI the kind of place where companies want to be. Executives see all these things lying side by side. There is an array of research money coming in, and that could be larger. The art school wants to be in on it because of the creativity and innovation aspect. CDI is breaking down silos and making connections between medical students and art students. Concrete things will materialize 5
in the very near future along with new graduate programs with faculty assigned to CDI. There is value in how CDI educates students in ways that distinguish it internationally. Letitia Cornish acknowledged that within the life cycle of center, CDI is still very new. The impact may not be apparent immediately, but that s the nature of academic. Having many constituents requires lots of conversation. Within the 20-year plan of the city, CDI is almost ahead of the curve with regard to this part of town. Bringing together intellect, art, science, energy, and community is abstract right now. But tangible results, like the class collaboration between Nick Hristov and Scott Betz, are starting to be realized. With expressed excitement from the university and community members, Jean Irvin moved to nominate Daniel Yohannes as chair and Natasha Gore as vice chair of the advisory board. Conley Winebarger seconded the motion, which was then unanimously approved. Algenon Cash acknowledged the good sentiments and mentioned that folks in the business community are not aware of what CDI does. Folks want more specificity in what CDI is doing. CDI must take advantage of opportunities to generate awareness among the community. Scott Betz reviewed a document compiled by Carol Strohecker containing recommendations for going forward. The report contains items related to human resources, staffing, academic programs based at CDI, consortium additions, funding, building, and strategic planning. (The recommendations document full text version was emailed previously from Carol Strohecker to all advisory board members.) Chris Brown stated that new degree programs are not quick and easy, but doable. New graduate programs go through a process, and approval goes through Dr. Brown s office. Proposal considerations include: resources, demand, societal demand. CDI can be a catalyst for that. Letitia Cornish mentioned that CDI is great for liberal arts students and asked the following questions: How do we infuse what s already available? Can we rethread programs through the center? What can we redeploy? Where is the opportunity? Scott Betz emphasized CDI s resource and small staff problems. Requests for four new positions are crucial: Sr. Systems Architect, Design Researcher for RaPro, Design Researcher Electronic Sensing/Mobile Platforms, Operations Coordinator. CDI needs more state funds, FTE staff, and grants for post-docs. Richard Phillips and Laura Huff deserve raises. CDI also needs a revenue stream and ability to sell 3-D outputs and collect funds online. In response to concerns regarding the Umstead Act and revenue streams, David Nelson mentioned that a millennial campus is exempted from the Umstead Act and that UNCSA is considering a millennial campus. Scott Betz elaborated on the academic programs, citing for example, the architectural program with A&T and dynamic medical illustration and science communication programs. Pulling 6
together UNCSA, CDI, WSSU, Forsyth Tech, Nursing, and Wake Forest might help leverage existing resources in the community. CDI would offer the building, expertise, and collaborations. Most of the individual collaborators listed in Dr. Strohecker s recommendations for medical illustration are receptive to the project. Chris Brown suggests connecting with the NC State Dean College of Design. Jim Shepherd suggested contacting the UNC-C architectural program. Herb Burns recommended Forsyth electronics engineering students as collaborators on electronic pieces. They have technical expertise good for workforce development. Randy Mills recommended aggressively following up with A&T engineering school. Scott Betz explained that additional positions would offer specific knowledge and applications. Additional faculty would result in more research and new knowledge. Work at CDI is getting more exciting. With extra human resources, more programs could result. The CDI story is collaboration. It may not have volume like MIT or the Research Triangle, but CDI does have an awesome people collaborative. CDI will be known as a model site for radical collaboration. Scott Betz reported that there is positive momentum with the building project as CDI nears construction start phase. Furnishings, fixtures, and equipment for the building, however, continue to be underfunded. During the extended design and bidding processes, and with resulting budget issues, furnishings, fixture, equipment, and even program spaces are being cut and value-engineered. Jim DeCristo stated that there is not enough for equipment in budget. Jim Shepherd mentioned the intensive value engineering process through which a lot of things have come out. Scott Betz revisited the idea of forming committees that could continue the momentum between meetings. After some discussion regarding the need to move forward with programming, operations, sustainability, facilities and equipment, and the building opening issues, Chris Brown suggested that Mr. Betz work with Daniel Yohannes to develop 3-5 committees, each with a specific charge. These might include developing graduate programs, defining rights of CDI citizens (governance, how partnership works), intellectual property issues, funding scenarios, building opening activities (marketing, development, political), etc. Jim DeCristo suggested that the institutions might be able to pull together year-end money and lobby for programmatic FF&E. Items would need to be in hand and paid for before end of June. A group charged with identifying and refining priorities would need to start talking in January to make the year-end deadline. Herb Burns reiterated the necessity for a sustainability committee, which could be charged with determining how to monetize CDI through RaPo activities. Letitia Cornish mentioned that as this becomes a priority and gets more advocacy more can be done to help with sustainability. Scott Betz will work with Daniel Yohannes and Natasha Gore to define committees. Mr. Yohannes challenged the group to be engaged more than the twice a year meetings. Availing 7
itself of technology, the Advisory Board should be able to connect virtually and stay more connected through the upcoming months. Chris Brown suggested that Mr. Yohannes, as newly elected chair, pull the group together as suggested. The chair will set up a regularly recurring monthly teleconference (i.e. third Thursday), and the Advisory Board will continue to meet physically twice a year. Chris Brown wrapped up the meeting with a quick summary, noting the forward-looking excitement and affirmation of the right leadership. The next meeting will be electronic in which the advisory board will discuss and vote on changes to the bylaws. Jim DeCristo will draft the revisions; send them to David Nelson, Brenda Allen, and Chris Brown for review; then send out the approved draft to the advisory board. There being no further discussion, Chris Brown adjourned the meeting at 1:49 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Huff Executive Assistant Center for Design Innovation 336.727.4310 8