How to Improve Innovation Funding: lessons from the MakeSense projectPosted: June 17th, 2016 | Author: Erica Hagen | Filed under: citizen feedback, Funding, Sensors | Leave a comment »
MakeSense was meant to test feedback loops from â€œcitizen-led sensor monitoring of environmental factorsâ€ in the Brazilian Amazon, providing structured, accurate and reliable data to compare against government measurements and news stories in the Amazon basin. The project centered around developing, manufacturing and field testing DustDuino sensors already prototyped by Internews, and developing a dedicated site to display the results atÂ OpenDustMap.
It may seem obvious that it was too ambitious to try to create a mass-produced hardware prototype with two types of connectivity, a documenting website, do actual community engagement and testing (in the Amazon) AND do further business development, all for $60,000, not to mention the coordination required. But, it is also true that typical funds available for innovation lend themselves to this kind of overreach.
Good practice would be to support innovators throughout the process, including (reasonable) investment in team process (while still requiring real-life testing and results), and opportunities for further fundraising based on â€œlessonsâ€ and redesign from a first phase. As well, an expectation that the team be reconfigured, perhaps losing some members and gaining others between stages, plus defining a clear leadership process.
Supportive and intensive incubation, with honest assessment built in through funding for evaluations such as the one we published for this project would go a long way toward better innovation results.
Funders should also require transparency and honest evaluation throughout. If a sponsored project or product cannot findÂ anyÂ problems or obstacles to share about publicly, theyâ€™re simply not being honest.Â Funders could go a long way toward making this kind of transparency the norm instead of the exception. In spite of an apparent â€œFail Fairâ€-influenced acculturation toward embracing failure and learning, the vast majority of projects still do not subject themselves to any public discussion that goes beyond salesmanship. This is often in fear of causing donors to abandon the project. Instead, donors could find ways to reward such honest self-evaluation and agile redirection.