If you are a knowledge management practitioner, or just interested in the subject, and you live within reasonable distance of London, David Gurteen will be running Knowledge Cafe Workshop, London, 2 May 2012

David is a pioneer in the use of Knowledge Cafes and other conversational tools in business and has been facilitating Knowledge Cafes and teaching people how to run them around the world for the last 10 years.

This Knowledge Cafe workshop is designed to help you:

• Understand the role and importance of conversation in organizations and in business
• Design and run Gurteen Knowledge Cafés and other forms of Cafe
• Solve specific business problems and challenges using Knowledge Cafes
• Use other conversational tools and techniques to address organizational and business issues

Location: Royal Society of Arts, London

Date: Wednesday 2 May 1, 09:30 – 16:30

Full Price: GBP 495 + VAT; Public Sector Price: GBP395 + VAT

If you cannot afford the price because you are a student or a charity for example but would like to participate then call David Gurteen on +44 7774 178 650

For more information & to register for the workshop see here: http://bit.ly/H8etxW

A key feature of the SmartLabs Exchange is an emphasis on interaction with a number of discussion and ‘think tank’ sessions scheduled in to the programme.  As an aid to initiate discussion and networking, each delegate had provided, in advance of the conference, a list of the three top projects/issues in their companies.  A rough categorisation of this list gives some sense of the priority of the most important issues companies are currently facing:

• Data issues (management, archiving, analysis) – 46 votes
• Integration – 32 votes
• Informatics tools (SDMS, LIMS, ELN) – 26 votes
• Culture (sharing, collaboration) – 21 votes
• Automation – 19 votes
• Productivity – 19 votes

It is clear from this brief survey, and from discussion sessions, that the ability to collect data is outpacing our ability to process, analyse and manage it.  Nevertheless, the demands for integrated automation and informatics tools continues to grow, although the functional convergence in commercial products in the LIMS/SDMS/LES/ELN area is causing some confusion.  There was a clear recognition amongst delegates that despite the plethora of technology solutions available to laboratories, one of the key criteria in achieving successful progress is the need to change some of the  underlying cultural and behavioural habits that are not so well tuned to technology our to the concepts of sharing and collaborating.  The prospect of introducing social tools into the mix to address some of these issues came under some scrutiny in a facilitated discussion session, a sign, perhaps, that laboratories may be starting to look more broadly for help in addressing ‘knowledge management’ concerns.

The more startling example of looking elsewhere for ideas came in a presentation by Stephen Rose of McLaren Applied Technologies, who described the data collection, data management and data visualisation processes used in Formula 1 motor racing to make real time tactical and strategic decisions.  Processes in the Life Sciences industry may run at a slower pace than formula 1 cars, but GSK are already partnering with McLaren to investigate data exploration possibilities based on the competencies that McLaren have developed.

The situation in academia is interesting; although the principles of the scientific method are the same for industry and academia, there are practical circumstances that can lead to differences in requirements.  In a very basic sense, the objective in industry is to utilise experimentation for the benefit of the organisation in the development of new or improved products or services.  In academia, the objective is to expand the knowledgebase of science, but being realistic, this is often for the benefit of the individual scientists or team (to secure further funding, enhance one’s reputation, improve employment prospects, etc.)  Increasing concerns within academia about (a) good record keeping (to facilitate further funding), (b) the value of intellectual property and (c) about exploiting collaborative opportunities with industry, may now lead to a greater requirement to utilise information technology to document and maintain records of laboratory experimentation.

The current take up of ELNs in academia is fragmented, and is comprised of relatively small teams of scientists, traditionally working in a more isolated fashion, and using a wide range of tools (home made, blogs, note-taking tools, and in some cases, commercial ELNs).  The decision to convert to an ELN is therefore often based on the requirements of a small team, or in some cases, of an individual.   Nevertheless, there seems to be a growing level of interest in the use of ELNs in academia, and here are a few links that make interesting reading.

An article by Jim Giles appeared in Nature in January: Going Paperless: The Digital Lab, which takes a broad view of creating a ‘digital’ lab, not necessarily restricted to academia, but the comments below the article emphasise a number of concerns about the transition from paper to electronic.  In a similar vein, an item by Tom Phillips (Imperial College, London), the Death of my Paper Lab Book?, also covers a number of specific concerns, and the commitment to start using a Wiki- based solution.  An example of  Mediawiki, and iPads, being used as a Lab Notebook appeared in an interview, posed on a University of Melbourne website, with Dr Shelley Wickham of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Medical School.  The use of a commercial ELN in Cambridge University’s Chemistry Department is being tracked on the cameln blog, but perhaps the most ambitious project is ‘Towards a National ELN’ a sub-project of the EPSRC funded Dial-a-Molecule programme in the UK.

• The Basics: What is An ELN?
• Establishing ELN User Requirements and Potential Benefits
• Dealing with ELN Business Requirements
• IT Considerations for an ELN Deployment
• Developing a Business Case for the Transition to an ELN
• Defining a Successful ELN Implementation Strategy

An Early Bird discount is available up to February 28^th.  Visit www.elnsmasterclass.com for more information, and where you can also download a free eBook, The ELN Global Forecast.

Alternatively contact me directly for more information.

An article by Rouget F (Ric) Henschel, published in Science Business provides a summary of the two reports.

SLAS2012 also offered a good opportunity indulge in some interesting conversations with vendors and other delegates during a tour of the 300+ booths and stands in the exhibition hall.

The theme of integration was quite evident amongst the various informatics vendors, which is good news, but inevitably there are strategic concerns about the different approaches being adopted.  Quite clearly the amount of merger and acquisition activity over the past two years has started to line up some single vendor approaches to satisfying laboratory informatics’ needs.  This does, however, fly in the face of the more traditional ‘best of breed’ approach that we typically find in laboratories.  It will be interesting to observe to what extent purchasing decisions will be influenced (a) by the demand for integration, and (b) by market forces, as these newly merged organisations gain momentum.  It may also raise questions about what the small, specialist vendors should do, if a new trend in laboratory integration evolves; align with a major player, go it alone, or wait to be bought?  It may be some while before there is any sign of change, but there is also the possibility that faster moving, emerging technologies may overtake commercial and proprietary interests.

The lack of integration standards is a well-established problem in the laboratory world, and there’s very little evidence of a universal solution emerging.  On-going efforts with AnIML and the Pistoia Alliance have yet to gain enough inertia to make a realistic difference, and it was interesting to come across another standards effort, SiLA (Standardization in Lab Automation) on display at a booth in the exhibition hall..  SiLA is attempting to introduce new interfaces and data management standards to facilitate the integration of lab automation systems.  The SilA Consortium is a non-profit organisation based in Switzerland.  It seems that one of the unfortunate consequences of a lack of industry standards is that there is the risk of too many disparate efforts to solve the problem that may leave us with too many standards.

The second viewpoint is that expressed by Colin Sandercock (Perkins Coie LLP) at the recent IQPC ELN conference in Barcelona.  This is a brief summary of the points that Colin raised:

(1) Interferences may continue in force for many years and involve inventions made after March 16 2013.

Some of the wording of the new act would potentially lead to interferences and interfering patent actions continuing for many years.  More specifically, preserving the right to an interference requires only that the application ‘contains or contained at any time’ a claim to an invention having an effective filing date that occurs before March 16, 2013, or a specific reference (under section 120, 121 0r 365(c) of title 35, United States Code) to any patent or application that contains or contained at any time such a claim.

(2) Derivation proceedings will replace interferences for certain types of inventorship disputes

Derivation requires proof of prior conception and communication to the competing inventor(s).  i.e. records may be critical in proving derivation or defending against a derivation claim.

(3) Proof of inventive activities may be needed to remove prior art under exception for joint research activities.

For more detail about the Leahy Smith America Invents Act :

America Invents Act of 2011

Leahy-Smith America Invents Act Implementation

Patent Reform’s ‘Brave New World’ (from Bio-IT World)