Hi! I am Chithra Adams, and I serve as the Associate Vice President for Data Intelligence at VentureWell. VentureWell is a national nonprofit headquartered in Hadley, Massachusetts, that specializes in funding, training, and cultivating a pipeline of science and technology inventors, innovators, and entrepreneurs. Together with our partners, we are driven to solve the world’s biggest challenges and create positive social and environmental impact.
I am closing out this week about STEM Innovation and Entrepreneurship (I&E) evaluation by sharing three ways in which we can expand how we evaluate STEM I&E as it relates to inclusion and sustainability:
Hot Tips
- Consider a circular metrics framework to examine the impact of technological innovations on resources.
As the results of climate change are more frequent, not only is there an increasing number of innovations that directly address climate change (e.g., low or no carbon technologies) but there is also an increasing number of innovators who are actively trying to decrease the carbon footprint of their technologies. Often from a linear economic lens of examining sustainability, technology development is assessed from a ‘take-make-waste’ perspective which examines energy and material use. This approach also prioritizes economic growth over sustainability and resource conversation (Anastas, Zimmerman, McDonough, and Braungart. 2003). A circular economy perspective is ‘cradle to cradle strategy’ wherein the core assumption is every process creates a resource for a process and ideally, creates no waste in nature (Anastas, Zimmerman, McDonough, and Braungart. 2003). Examining from a circularity perspective requires examination of a set of indicators in a collective manner. The Conference of European Statisticians developed a conceptual framework with indicators that provide an organizational lens to view the circularity of technological innovation.
- Engage beneficiaries on developing mental models which identify enabling conditions, in addition to programmatic interventions.
The path to innovation and entrepreneurship requires technical and business knowledge as well as access to resources. In an extensive examination of patent records, researchers found that there were disparities in innovation rates by race, gender, and socio-economic status (Bell, Chetty, Jaravel, Petkova,Van Reenen. 2019). As evaluators, we have a unique opportunity to engage beneficiaries in the program design process by identifying the program activities that will introduce, train, and support people to become innovators, as well by identifying the enabling conditions like relationship and partnership building, advocacy, and infrastructure building that will create a nurturing environment for current and future innovators.
- Use evaluative thinking to help connect social and scientific innovation.
Scaling of scientific innovations happens in a socio-political context. Scaling scientific innovation in a responsible, thoughtful, and equitable manner requires social innovation. Evaluators often have to bridge connections between various fields and sectors. In doing STEM I&E evaluation, we often connect activities and programming from differing sectors such as workforce development, research and development, and policy/government to examine the collective impact of scaling scientific innovation. We use evaluative thinking to engage with beneficiaries, helping them make connections and see how the whole system works. Evaluative thinking comprises five components– critical thinking, practical thinking, contextual thinking, creative thinking, and reflective practice (Cole, 2023). Evaluative thinking can and is often practiced in community with others. Evaluators have the opportunity and expertise to engage partners to step beyond their expertise and to view the downstream and upstream environments that will be impacted by technological innovation. In these moments of engagement, evaluative thinking can help beneficiaries connect complementary social innovations with scaling scientific innovations.
References
- Anastas, P. T., Zimmerman, J. B., McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2003). Applying the principles of green engineering to cradle-to-cradle design. Environ. Sci. Technol, 37(23), 434A-441A.
- Bell, A., Chetty, R., Jaravel, X., Petkova, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2019). Who becomes an inventor in America? The importance of exposure to innovation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(2), 647-713.
- Cole, M. J. (2023). Evaluative thinking. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 23(2), 70-90.
- Morone, P. (2020). A paradigm shift in sustainability: from lines to circles. Acta Innovations, (36), 5-16.
- What Percentage of Startups Fail? Startup Failure Rate Statistics (2024). Accessed at https://whatsthebigdata.com/startup-failure-statistics/ on September 19 2024
Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.