Report September 2009: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:58, 18 September 2009

Status Report, ICP Project

He have created a glossary of research vocabulary that has a allowed us to better define the field.
We have developed a bibliography with literary reviews of the key articles.
- We have found that genetic diagnostic kits are probably best suited for this study
We are developing a better understanding of the intellectual property landscape and have established that a wide variety of protections are used including: patent, trade secrets, NDAs, Non-compete, non-solicitation, confidentiality agreements.
No open business models have emerged in the literature or through interviews.

How can the next phase of research further develop the quadrants already mapped?
What information should we aim to obtain through new research methods (e.g., interviews)?
How much should we focus on the largely defunct data production businesses in biotech?

Continue to investigate universities, non-profits, associations, and businesses relevant to the field
Deepen our understanding of how production and demand are controlled
Provide further documentation for the quadrants as we have identified them so far

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 === General Status ===
 *He have created a glossary of [[Diagnostic Kits/Glossary|research vocabulary]] that has a allowed us to better define the field.
-We have developed a [[Diagnostic_Kits#Bibliography|bibliography]] with literary reviews of the key articles.
+*We have developed a [[Diagnostic_Kits#Bibliography|bibliography]] with literary reviews of the key articles.
+**We have found that genetic diagnostic kits are probably best suited for this study
+*We are developing a better understanding of the intellectual property landscape and have established that a wide variety of protections are used including: patent, trade secrets, NDAs, Non-compete, non-solicitation, confidentiality agreements.
-* We have begun to investigate specific cases of commons-based and peer-produced resources in biotech, such as Harvard's onco-mouse
+*No open business models have emerged in the literature or through interviews.
-* We have made good progress examining specific cases of biotech narrative, data, and tool producers, coming up with detailed company profiles for the largest firms
-* We have completed a more detailed mapping of the narratives and tools industries within biotech
-* Have good idea of cost structure, competitive advantage, and attitudes towards openness and enclosure within the field
 === Work Completed ===