The impact of skills and social networks on the South... Sabine Hellyer 27528414

The impact of skills and social networks on the South African biotechnology sector.
Sabine Hellyer
27528414
A research report submitted to the Gordon Institute of Business Science, University of
Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business
Administration.
13 November 2008
© University of Pretoria
Abstract
South Africa may expand their biotechnology industry through increased foreign direct
investment.
However, the main challenges facing South Africa are human capital development and
social networking
The objective of this report was to gain a better understanding of the value that
human capital development and social networks have on the biotechnology sector in
South Africa. Used correctly, this understanding could enhance the success rate of
foreign direct investment and provide a platform to increase South Africa’s
contribution as a serious global contender. The researcher’s objectives were to answer
research questions on skills and social networks.
Twenty eight respondents were interviewed via e-mail and face-to-face surveys, using
a structured questionnaire for the skills survey. For the social networking survey, the
same approach was adopted but only 8 responses were received.
Although the research only uncovered specific answers related to the research
questions, delving into the various sources on information improved the current
understanding of the role of skills and social networks in the biotechnology sector.
These additional findings relate to the importance of clusters, female participation in
the industry, collaboration efforts over geographically dispersed areas as well as which
skills are important now and which will become important in the future.
ii
Declaration
I declare that this research project is my own work. It is submitted in partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration at the Gordon
Institute of Business Science, University of Pretoria. It has not been submitted before
for any degree of examination in any other University. I further declare that I have
obtained the necessary authorization and consent to carry out this research.
Sabine Hellyer
13 November 2008
iii
Acknowledgements
•
My husband, David, for his support during the past two years.
•
My daughter, Savannah, for enriching our lives.
•
My family, friends and work colleagues for their understanding.
•
My company, for supporting my decision to do the MBA.
•
The participants for their time taken to complete the surveys.
•
Professor Michael Pepper and Dr Viresh Ramburan from BioSA for their
valuable insight and helpful suggestions.
•
My supervisor, Roy Page Shipp, for his encouragement, guiding comments
and constructive criticism.
iv
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT.............................................................................................................................................. II
DECLARATION ...................................................................................................................................... III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... IV
1
2
INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH PROBLEM ..................................................................................... 1
1.1
MOTIVATION FOR THE RESEARCH ........................................................................................................... 3
1.2
VALUE OF THE PROJECT ........................................................................................................................ 4
LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................................... 4
2.1
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................ 4
2.1.1
What is biotechnology?........................................................................................................ 4
2.1.2
Biotechnology Internationally .............................................................................................. 5
2.1.3
About South Africa ............................................................................................................... 5
2.1.4
Biotechnology in South Africa .............................................................................................. 6
2.1.5
Clusters and Social Networks ............................................................................................... 9
2.1.6
Skills ................................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.7
The Role of BioSA ............................................................................................................... 14
2.2
PROBLEM STATEMENT AND OBJECTIVES................................................................................................. 15
2.2.1
Problem Statement ............................................................................................................ 15
2.2.2
Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 15
3
RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................................................... 16
4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 20
4.1
RESEARCH DESIGN ............................................................................................................................ 20
4.2
POPULATION AND SAMPLING .............................................................................................................. 22
4.3
DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................................................ 23
4.4
INTERVIEW PROCESS.......................................................................................................................... 25
4.5
DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................ 25
v
4.6
5
6
LIMITATIONS.................................................................................................................................... 25
RESULTS ..................................................................................................................................... 27
5.1
RESULTS – SKILLS SURVEY .................................................................................................................. 27
5.2
RESULTS – SOCIAL NETWORKING IN ORGANISATIONS SURVEY ................................................................... 38
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ............................................................................................................ 45
6.1
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS - SKILLS SURVEY .............................................................................................. 45
6.2
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS – SOCIAL NETWORKING SURVEY ........................................................................ 53
7
CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 60
8
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 65
9
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 72
9.1
APPENDIX 1 – QUESTIONNAIRE – SKILLS SURVEY ................................................................................... 72
9.2
APPENDIX 2 – QUESTIONNAIRE – SOCIAL NETWORKING IN ORGANISATIONS ................................................ 80
9.3 APPENDIX 3 – INTERVIEWEE DATABASE ................................................................................................. 84
9.4
APPENDIX 4 – SOCIAL NETWORKING IN ORGANISATIONS - SUMMARY........................................................ 85
vi
List of Tables
Table 1: Demographics and Other Information.............................................................. 38
Table 2: Facilitation of networks .................................................................................... 40
Table 3: Exclusion from social networks......................................................................... 40
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: The generation of Biotechnology applied for each respondent. .................... 27
Figure 2: Number of techniques presently utilised per company. ................................. 28
Figure 3: Techniques presently utilised. ......................................................................... 29
Figure 4: Techniques for future use................................................................................ 29
Figure 5: Equipment presently utilised ......................................................................... 30
Figure 6: Equipment to be used in the future ................................................................ 30
Figure 7: Technologies that are important today and that will be in the future. .......... 31
Figure 8: Specialist skills that are important now and that require additional training. 32
Figure 9: Innovation and Entrepreneurship skills that are important now and in the
future. ............................................................................................................................. 33
Figure 10: Staff profile ................................................................................................... 34
Figure 11: Staff specialisation ......................................................................................... 35
Figure 12: Diversity of workforce ................................................................................... 39
Figure 13: Interaction with colleagues ........................................................................... 41
Figure 14: Medium of interaction ................................................................................... 42
Figure 15: Style of interaction......................................................................................... 42
Figure 16: Reasons for networking ................................................................................. 43
Figure 17: Proximity ....................................................................................................... 43
viii
1 Introduction to Research Problem
Internationally, biotechnology is seen as the next big economic wave following the climax in
the IT sector during the last century. Time Magazine (2000) reported that “….the
bioeconomy is the next one to be born, and of all economies past, present and future, it will
exert an impact that will make the info-economy look like the runt of the litter”. Freeman
and Soete (1997) suggest that the same way steam power and the railway and more
recently information and communication technologies have revolutionized society,
biotechnology will change the way we live and think about living organisms and society.
Health, poverty and knowledge gaps between the developed and developing countries of
the world are on the increase (Persaud, 2001 and Sachs, 2005). Modern biotechnology
could provide the answers to addressing these challenges (Singer and Daar, 2001).
Globalisation has meant that South Africa, like other countries, has adopted a stance where
both local and international ties are harnessed for the benefit of all. The strategic
importance of attracting, retaining and benefiting from foreign investment is acknowledged
by serious contenders in any industry.
“Foreign direct investment is generally considered a source of modern technology, in a
broad sense, including product, process and distribution expertise, as well as management
and marketing skills” (Blomstrom and Kokko, 1998, p 247). Driffield (2001) goes on to say
that technology transfer may occur directly or through spillovers. Importing capital,
advanced assets and proprietary technology from foreign firms may have a direct impact on
the average productivity level of the host economy.
According to the OLI paradigm (Ownership, Location and Internalisation), a firm will become
a multinational if it has an ownership advantage it wants to develop or exploit, if the host
1
State has a location advantage, and if it is more profitable to internalise the operation
(integration advantage). These three factors determine the type of activity, i.e. which
elements of the value chain will be located abroad, as well as the mode of entry (e.g. fully
owned subsidiary, joint venture, strategic alliance, greenfield investment, or acquisition).
Consequently, domestic firms can benefit from inward FDI (foreign direct investment), but a
proactive policy on the part of the domestic firms and government is required to actually
derive benefits from foreign MNEs (Multi National Enterprises) (Narula and Marin 2003).
Knowledge spillover from universities, the founder’s connection with his/her university
base, an entrepreneurial environment, the availability of scientific labour, the regulatory
atmosphere, the presence of venture capitalists and large pharmaceutical companies are all
important pre-conditions for success in biotechnology. (Hall and Bagchi-Sen, 2001).
Cloete, Nel and Theron (2006) state that their criteria are tax incentives, public funding and
the ease of IP processing.
The following factors have emerged as being important for both FDI and biotechnology in
Buckley, Devinney and Louviere’s (2007) research:
1. Investment assistance (loans, grants, rebates etc.)
2. The fact that the country is elected in democratic and free elections
3. Political stability
4. Currency value
5. Cost of production
6. Return on investment
7. Access to new resources
8. Exploitation of existing assets
9. Pre-emption of competition
10. The existence of established relations in the market
11. Avoidance of trade barriers
2
12. Market size
13. Market growth
14. Asset protection
15. Being in the same line of business
16. English-speaking
Krizner (2004) adds that timing and patience should be considered when trying to develop a
biotech cluster as the companies are research-intensive, but capital starved.
To enhance competitiveness, location and proximity are listed as being essential in high
technology (Omas and Melecki, 2002). The tendency of firms to cluster in a region is
observed in a variety of high tech sectors (e.g. Silicon Valley, Boston, Toronto, Oxfordshire
and Banagalore). Bagchesen and Scully (2003) believe that cluster-to-cluster networks at
national and international levels for the exchange of scientific knowledge and market
intelligence are becoming an important component in the organisation of innovation and
not only in biotechnology but in other high-tech industries as well. A common thread in the
success of clusters is the presence of networks among the various stakeholders involved in
the process of innovation. These networks facilitate information and knowledge exchange
(Powell, Koput, Bowie and Smith-Doerr, 2002).
1.1 Motivation for the research
The aim of this research was to explore what curriculum is important for skilled personnel to
emerge from South Africa’s tertiary education facilities and to establish what impact social
networks have on foreign direct investment decisions in the South African biotechnology
industry.
3
1.2 Value of the project
The study provided insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the biotechnology industry
in South Africa, the different role players involved and the international leadership potential
of the sector. Information from this survey may be used by various organisations for
economic or market analysis, to study industry performance, to assist policy formation, and,
by the academic community, for research purposes.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Introduction and Background
2.1.1 What is biotechnology?
The OECD (2001) defines biotechnology as the application of science and technology to
living organisms, as well as parts, products and models thereof, to alter living or non-living
materials for the production of knowledge, goods and services. In addition, biotechnology
can be divided into the following generations:
1st Generation biotechnology: involves the use of wild type or natural biological organisms
to produce a product, for example the use of yeast to make beer or wine.
2nd Generation biotechnology: refers to the production of specific products using a pure cell
or tissue culture of organisms that have been specifically selected, through random crossbreeding or similar techniques, for their superior production or expression abilities without
introducing foreign DNA.
3RD Generation biotechnology: involves manipulation of the genetic make-up of organisms
by introducing selected foreign (across the species barrier) DNA, through recombinant DNA
technology, to make them produce small molecules, compounds or proteins.
4
2.1.2 Biotechnology Internationally
Burrill and Company (2008) report that the biotechnology industry was 30 years old in 2006
and generated over $75 billion in revenue globally. There are 5000 companies worldwide
and 600 public organisations included in the sector. A strong pipeline exists with 350 biotech
drugs in late stage clinical trials. Over 100 products are in the market which exceeds $1
billion. Cures and preventions fall under the healthcare umbrella which could benefit
society, especially in the developing world, with the development of vaccines for critical
illnesses e.g.Hepatitis B, HIV, TB and Malaria. Agro biotech products are now grown on 200
million acres throughout the world. Industrial applications are largely driven by biofuels.
2.1.3 About South Africa
In 2007, a population of 47.9 million was recorded in South Africa (BioSA 2008). According
to the Global Competitiveness Report 2007 (WEF) South Africa ranked 46 out of 128
countries and is also the most socially, economically and infrastructurally developed country
on the African continent. An abundant supply of resources, well-developed financial, legal,
communications and transport sectors and the fact that it is the continent's largest energy
producer and consumer, all contribute to a GDP of $587.5 billion (18th), or $13,300 per
capita (56th). The South African rand (ZAR) is the world's most actively-traded emerging
market currency and was the best-performing currency against the United States dollar
between 2002 and 2005. The Johannesburg Stock Exchange ranks among the top twenty in
the world (BioSA 2008). Of interest is that South Africa has more than 20,000 different
plants and 10% of all the known species on earth. After Brazil and Indonesia, South Africa is
the most biodiverse country in the world (BioSA 2008).
5
2.1.4 Biotechnology in South Africa
South Africa has recognised the magnitude of the biotechnology industry and since the turn
of the century has received considerable focus and investment from government.
Biotechnology is seen as an area that can contribute to profitable economic growth that in
turn can give rise to small, medium and micro-enterprises (SMMEs). This can create
opportunities for employment at various levels of expertise thereby alleviating poverty.
Young scholars can be encouraged to enter the field of science and technology and enhance
their skills through international partnering for skills transfer. This could result in export
opportunities and increased foreign direct investment. Food security can be improved
through the development of genetically engineered crops and healthcare enhanced through
progress on vaccines and diagnostic treatments for threatening infectious diseases such as
tuberculosis, malaria and HIV/AIDS. In addition, bioremediation or waste usage processes
could reduce the impact on the environment (Cloete, Nel and Theron, 2006).
In 2001 the South African government adopted the National Biotechnology Strategy. The
objectives of the strategy are to develop companies, goods and services which address
South Africa’s needs, to improve the quality of life, boost economic growth and create the
necessary infrastructure to allow biotechnology development. (The National Biotechnology
Strategy of the Republic of South Africa, 2001). It “addresses human resource development,
funding, regulatory and legal issues and also endeavours to close the gap between research
activities and commercialization. To this end, private-public partnerships between domestic
and international stakeholders are being encouraged” (ibid).
Furthermore, the government initiated and supported the creation of biotechnology
regional innovation centres (BRICs) to act as nuclei for the development of biotechnology
and biotechnology platforms. From these, a range of businesses offering new products and
6
services can be developed. This initiative involves the strategic development of several
‘bioclusters’, rather that encouraging clusters to grow under their own impetus (Cloete et al,
2006).
The BRICs are located in different geographical areas within South Africa (Western Cape,
Gauteng and Kwa Zulu Natal i.e. Cape Biotech, BioPAD, LIFElab and PlantBio) and are
responsible for Human & Animal Health, Industrial and Plant Biotechnology (The National
Biotechnology Strategy of the Republic of South Africa (2001).
“The South African government has committed an initial R 750 million to these BRICs. In
addition a National Bioinformatics Network has been established to specifically address the
development of capacity and expertise in bioinformatics in South Africa. The National
Research Foundation is responsible for funding research education at higher-education
institutions and the Innovation Fund was established to promote technological innovation,
increased networking and cross-sectional collaboration, as well as providing seed and startup capital and human resource innovation. THRIP (The Technology and Human Resources
for Industry Programme) provides funding to innovative research programmes that involve
an industry partner. The aims of this programme are to increase the quality and number of
appropriately skilled people for the management of technology for industry and to promote
increased interaction between public researches and industry. GODISA provide nationwide
pilot centres and technology incubators. eGoliBIO and Acorn Technologies are two of the
incubators that focus on the biotechnology sector.
Their portfolios are comprised of
services that assist with the commercialization process of a product with the support of
business infrastructure and guidance, legal and financial advice” (Cloete et al, 2006, p 3).
7
International partnerships were also seen as a priority as this would encourage the internal
development of life science ventures (Cloete,T.E., Nel, L.H. and Theron, J. 2006).
Key points to emerge from the 2007 National Biotech Survey (BioSA 2008) are summarised
below:
•
116 biotech companies;
•
38 core biotech companies
•
78 use biotech as a key activity
•
25 % were created in the last 3 years
•
Majority (68%) of products are in agriculture
•
Major investment is in human health
•
65% of companies collaborate with international companies (M+P, R+D)
•
Investment is currently <1% of GDP;
•
By 2018 the objective is to achieve 2% of GDP
•
TIA (Technology Innovation Agency Bill): short-term focus = biotech; long term
focus = innovation in general
•
622 projects were being worked on
•
Since 1992, 2 new core biotech companies were set-up annually.
•
At least 3,500 people were employed in the sector
•
with an annual revenue of R 368 million.
South Africa has the potential to develop and establish a sustainable and globally
competitive biotechnology industry. In fact, SRI International (representing the World Bank)
has rated South Africa as one of the top five countries for biotechnology investment among
developing nations in 2001, and the country is becoming an increasingly popular choice for
investment and partnering for foreign firms and governments (Mulder and Henschel, 2003).
In addition, South Africa is classified as the only mega-country in the African Continent and
one of the 14 biotech mega-countries in the world (DST, 2007).
8
The Department of Science and Technology’s “Ten Year plan” (DST, 2007) has the vision
that South Africa should be “among the global top ten nations in the world in terms of the
pharmaceutical, neutraceutical, flavour, fragrance and biopesticide industries” by 2018.
With the above in mind, South Africa is an attractive destination for overseas investors. As
the biotechnology industry matures, a vibrant economy will develop in South Africa that will
positively affect the standard of living in the country and potentially the African continent
(Cloete et al, 2006).
2.1.5 Clusters and Social Networks
In comparing South Africa to other international biotechnology countries, (USA, Brazil, Cuba,
Finland, The Netherlands, Sweden, Israel, Australia and Singapore) experience with clusters
and the utilisation of social networks is recommended to yield optimal results in the
literature.
Social networks, also known as informal networks, can be described as a complex set of
personal or professional connections between individuals.
These connections form a
pattern which is discernable in communities, organisations, societies and nations (Putnam,
2000). Each network is established through a process of construction and continually
changes over time by adding, breaking, forming or deleting ties (Bidart, 2005). A personal
social network will have one person as a central point whereas group social networks
involve associations between a group of people. Networks can exist in many contexts of
which religion, civic groups and organisations are but a few (Putnam, 2000). Informal
networks, i.e. networks thriving on the unplanned interconnectedness of people, rely on
support of the members for each other and the reciprocity of specific support. For years the
social capital engendered by successful informal networks has been used to promote
9
effective collaboration within groups, to support junctures in networks and to ensure
integration within groups after strategic initiatives (Cross, R, Borgatti, S.P. and Parker, A.
2002).
Hall (2002) stated that dispersed co-workers can manage knowledge, find resources and
solve problems easier. He also expounds on research that was conducted using two
biotechnology firms.
It was found that utilising boundary-spanning social networks
increased both learning and flexibility in ways that would not have been possible within a
self-contained hierarchical organisation. Brandon (2007) notes that it is not always feasible
to meet face to face, and on line social networking helps build relationships that might not
have existed otherwise, especially among geographically spread workers. Busang (2008)
explains “the goals of each centre can be more effectively and more quickly reached
through collaboration (vs. competition) and through harnessing the capabilities of the
centres (Kopano, 2008).
Relationships are now regarded as enhancers or limiting factors in a company’s ability to be
adaptable (Beinhocker, 2006). Failure to engage in social network analysis would severely
curtail the ability of relevant firms to bolster those useful links or constrain those that may
do harm. In addition to a firm being able to learn directly about its own network, the exact
same analysis, run on competitors, provides incredibly useful information. On a global level,
information on the biotech environment could identify optimal areas for business-tobusiness intermediaries to fill (McCarthy, Pitt, Campbell, van der Merwe and Salehi-Sangeri,
2007).
In his study, Brandon (2007) identified 5 characteristics of social networking which will
support learning and maintain a competitive advantage:
10
1. Sharing is an attribute that allows users to dispense knowledge, resources and
content.
2. Relationships are the foundations of social networks.
3. Conversations support the social aspects of learning.
4. Identity within social networks is based on individuals’ choices.
5. Groups within social networks often are where the day-to-day work happens.
The power of sharing and networking is evident everywhere today. It has become part of
our learning strategy. By learning more about the tools of social networking, one can make
the leap and reap the reward (Hall, 2007).
2.1.6 Skills
Skills are understood to refer to both qualifications and experience. Scarce skills, in the
parlance of the Department of Labour and the Sectoral Education and Training Authorities
(SETA), refers to occupations in which there is “a scarcity of qualified and experienced
people, currently or anticipated in the future, either because such skilled people are not
available, or because they are available but do not meet employment criteria” (Foodbev
SETA, 2005,42).
This scarcity can arise due to either an absolute scarcity of these skills or a relative scarcity.
Absolute scarcity refers to suitably skilled people that are not available, for example in a
new or emerging occupation (e.g. biotechnology, information technology), a lack of
sufficient numbers of workers with specific skills, or insufficient numbers to satisfy
replacement demand (ibid,42). Relative scarcity, on the other hand, refers to a situation
where suitably skilled people exist, but do not meet other employment criteria, for example
they live in different geographical areas, or do not satisfy Black Economic Empowerment
criteria (ibid, 42).
11
Critical skills refer to specific skills within an occupation. In the SA context there are two
groups of critical skills: (1) generic skills, including problem solving and learning to learn;
language, literacy or numeracy skills; and working in teams; (2) particular occupational skills
required for performance within that occupation (ibid, 43). It is the latter form that
accounts for the problems that emerge when a firm experiences technological change or
reorganises production methods (ibid, 43). These definitions underpin the understanding of
skills shortages and must be kept in mind when diagnosing the nature of skills shortages
(Daniels, 2007).
A well-educated workforce is required in the biotechnology sector as the majority of biotech
positions require more than four years of tertiary education (Krizner, 2004). South Africa
needs to learn from overseas examples and try to emulate some of them to support their
initiative of becoming a world contender.
One of the several countries that have embraced biotechnology is Singapore. For them, an
area that is seen as essential to the growth of their life-science industry is manpower
development (Finegold, Wong and Cheah, 2003). Finegold et al (2003) also advise that
developing world class scientists and having them generate new research breakthroughs
takes decades; thus short, medium and long-term goals are necessary to build the required
skills. Attracting world renowned scientists form part of the short term objectives. This in
turn, will act as a magnet to other influential scientists. Due to the lack of talent, recruiting
experienced scientific and managerial leaders is necessary to head up start-up firms.
Sending top students overseas to premier science and technology institutions is included in
the medium–term strategy. The government pays towards the students’ education on
condition that they return to Singapore to complete their studies. The long-term initiative is
12
to work towards the development of universities and research institutes that are world class
in Singapore which will attract their target audience (ibid).
Finegold et al (2003) explain that the talent needs are not just at the laboratory level:
“experienced managers to develop products, manage clinical trials, and run companies;
knowledgeable life science investors who understand the unique requirements of this
sector; and life science IP specialists who know the intricacies of structuring licensing
agreements are all needed to build a successful cluster of biotechnology firms”
As mentioned, South Africa has the biggest and most sophisticated economy on the African
continent. In addition, it has the strongest higher education system. Several South African
universities have world class research, and feature in the top 1% of the world’s institutions
(captured in the United States’ Essential Science Indicators database) in nine of twenty two
scientific fields (A Place to Study).
The Department of Home Affairs in South Africa, the issuing authority for work permits,
business permits, life partner and spousal permits, retired permits and relatives’ permits has
recently announced a new permit allocation. This is designed to alleviate the skills shortages
that may be offered by immigrants hoping to move to South Africa. Professions included in
the extensive list are the chemical industry, pharmacology, biotechnology, astronomy and
food technology. It is important to note that Home Affairs will check if the future immigrant
has the required skills as well as five years of work experience before granting the quota
work permit (James, S; 2008).
It has been noted that South Africa will not always be able to duplicate overseas initiatives
but will be able to learn from them. Potential investors have realised that their current
capacities are fast approaching saturation point.
Resources are limited and exploring
13
alternatives have become essential in order for them to sustain their competitive advantage
(BioSA 2008). This puts South Africa in an ideal position to leverage the situation to her
advantage.
2.1.7 The Role of BioSA
BioSA was officially launched in October 2007 to support the National Biotechnology
Strategy of the Republic of South Africa. The body represents the private and public
biotechnology sectors, although its voting members are from the private sector. It was
formed to be a collaborative network and independent voice that actively supports and
represents emerging and existing biotechnology SMMEs, which in the final analysis are the
key drivers of the biotech economy. In this way, BioSA is committed to the growth of the
South African biotechnology industry in the global market (BioSA, 2008).
The buy-in from various stakeholders is paramount to the success of the initiative. The
South African government, young entrepreneurs, students and international networks are
essential components. Furthermore, intellectual property (IP), funding, regulatory, tax,
financial issues and bioethics are to be addressed.
BioSA acknowledge the strengths and weaknesses of the industry and have proposed the
following:
•
Collaboration efforts to ensure that learning from each other is a priority in
running the respective businesses.
•
Joint R&D and commercialization initiatives.
•
Attracting foreign investment and additional sources.
•
Understanding of and access to the global markets.
•
Capacity / skills development (e.g. interns shadow CEOs).
•
Facilitated access to overseas Intellectual Property (and SA IP when this becomes
attractive).
14
•
Develop a comprehensive database for effective dissemination of information.
•
Develop BioSA web site in order for it to be the first contact point for interested
parties and to market SMMEs.
•
Arrange workshops to address specific issues.
•
Conduct surveys and research.
The author of this research report volunteered to assist BioSA in conducting research to
partially fulfil their objectives and utilised their network and database to facilitate the
research process.
2.2 Problem statement and objectives
2.2.1 Problem Statement
At present, South Africa has an emerging biotech sector that would benefit from enhanced
coordination (BioSA 2008). The aim of this research will be to ascertain:
1. What skills are needed to drive curriculum development in tertiary education?
2. What impact do social networks and skilled personnel have on foreign investment
decisions in the sector?
2.2.2 Objectives
The objectives of the study are:
1. To identify the criteria required to enable South Africa to become a dominant player
in the biotechnology sphere.
2. To analyse the social networking and skills findings in order to develop a strategy
that will allow South Africa to compete on a global scale.
15
3 Research Questions
The primary research question posed by this study is “What skills are needed to drive
curriculum development in tertiary education?”
A secondary research question is “Do social networks have an impact on biotechnology
organisations and foreign direct investment decisions?”
The detailed questionnaires are included in Appendices 1 and 2.
The structured skills questionnaire, as shown in Appendix 1, is split into 6 sections:
•
Section A – Introduction.
•
Section B – Respondent Data
•
Section C – Techniques and Technologies
•
Section D – Staff Profile
•
Section E – New Appointments Planned
•
Section F – Work Integrated Learning
The respective sections are further divided into the following questions:
1. Which techniques does your organisation utilize and likely to utilize in the
future?
2. Which technologies are important now and will become important in the future?
3. Which specialist skills are important now and will become important in the
future?
4. Which innovation/entrepreneurship skills are important now and which will
become important in the future?
5. What qualification and specialisations are present in your organisation?
6. What new appointments are being planned in your organisation?
7. What qualification is being sought?
16
8. Is there a preferred institution for the candidate?
9. What skills are specifically being sought?
10. Do you differentiate between a degree and a diploma?
11. What value do you perceive the diploma qualification to have?
12. Would you company be willing to offer a nine month work integrated learning to
a biotechnology student?
13. What monthly stipend will you/your company be prepared to offer the student
involved with in-service training?
The “Social Networks in Organisations” survey (Appendix 2) followed the following format:
Section A – Demographic details
1. Age?
2. Gender?
3. Company name?
4. Highest level of education?
5. Race?
6. Nature of employment?
7. Years with current employer?
Section B – Other information
1. Do you intentionally target people that you want to build relationships with?
2. For professional contacts, would you rather network inside or outside the
organisation?
3. Diversity of workforce – please estimate the percentage of people in your
company falling in the following categories: % females; % white people; % people
over 40.
17
4. Does your company actively facilitate the formation of networks?
5. Do
you
feel
excluded
from
social
networks
because
of
your
age/gender/race/personality/skill level/experience/ I do not feel exluded/other?
Section C – Network characteristics
•
gender
•
race
•
age
•
education level
•
skill set
•
frequency
•
medium of interaction
•
style of interaction
•
planned or unplanned interaction
•
proximity to contact
•
position of contact in relation to position of respondent
•
function of contact in relation to function of respondent
•
department of contact in relation to department of respondent
•
length of time known contact
•
main reasons for interacting
•
feeling excluded from networks or not
•
deliberate networking or not
•
preference for networking inside or outside of organisation
The purpose of this study is to identify and refine the nature of informal networks
functioning in South African companies and abroad. Therefore, the secondary research
question “Do social networks have an impact on biotechnology organisations and foreign
direct investment decisions?” is further explored via questions 2a and 2b.
18
Research Question 2a: Do the social networks exhibit any patterns along the following
parameters?
•
gender
•
race
•
age
•
education level
•
skill set
•
frequency
•
medium of interaction
•
style of interaction
•
planned or unplanned interaction
•
proximity to contact
•
position of contact in relation to position of respondent
•
function of contact in relation to function of respondent
•
department of contact in relation to department of respondent
•
length of time known contact
•
main reasons for interacting
•
feeling excluded from networks or not
•
deliberate networking or not
•
preference for networking inside or outside of organisation
Research Question 2b: Do overseas networks play an important role in
collaboration efforts?
19
4 Research Methodology
Research is defined as “the systematic study of materials and sources in order to establish
facts and reach new conclusions.” (Compact Oxford Dictionary)
The objectives of this research proposal were to investigate what criteria are important,
specifically from a social networking and skills development perspective, for encouraging
foreign investment that would enable South Africa to become one of the global leaders in
the biotechnology sector.
The proposed research methodology was quantitative research design as per Welman and
Kruger (2005) where experimental, quasi-experimental and non-quasi experimental
research is covered.
Data were gathered using semi-structured in-depth questionnaires.
4.1 Research Design
Based on research methodology literature, the research design is a master plan specifying
the methods and procedures for collecting and analysing the needed information (Zigmund,
2003). The function of the research design is to ensure that the evidence obtained enables
one to answer the initial question as unambiguously as possible. It also means that one
must not simply look for evidence that supports one’s favourite theory: one should also look
for evidence that has the potential to disprove one’s preferred explanations: (What is
research design?).
The research methodology was a questionnaire. “Good questionnaire design is a key to
obtaining good survey results” (Zikmund, 2003, p 361). The research design chosen for this
proposal was primarily quantitative. “In quantitative research one’s aim is to determine the
20
relationship between one thing (an independent variable) and another (a dependent or
outcome variable) in a population” (Quantitative research).
Quantitative research is generally approached using scientific methods which include:
•
The generation of models, theories and hypotheses
•
The development of instruments and methods for measurement
•
Experimental control and manipulation of variables
•
Collection of empirical data
•
Modelling and analysis of data
•
Evaluation of results
(Quantitative research).
The research design involved semi-structured in-depth questionnaires. A semi-structured
questionnaire is a “combination of the individual in-depth interview and the standardized,
structured questionnaire. Characteristics of the semi-structured interviewing technique are:
•
It is situated between the individual in-depth interview and the quantitative
interview with a standardized questionnaire.
•
It contains closed-ended, multiple choice and scale type questions, but also a lot
of open-ended questions which, as in an in-depth interview, provide room for
the individual train of thought of the respondent and allow them to shape their
opinion.
•
Closed-ended, multiple choice and scale type questions are processed with the
usual statistical analyzing methods used by quantitative analysis, while the
results of the open-ended questions are processed in a qualitative way.”
(Semi-structured interview).
21
Face-to face interviews were used as part of the interviewing process. Welman & Kruger
(2001) highlight the disadvantages and advantages of using the face-to-face interview
method to collect data.
The disadvantages are:
•
High preparation, travelling and interview costs because of the time this takes
•
Interviewees may give responses that they think the interviewer wants to hear.
The advantages are:
•
The interviewer is in control of the interview process, so any misunderstandings
or vague responses can be cleared up. Consequently the responses obtained
are of a high quality and
•
The response rate is very good, often better than telephonic interviews and
postal surveys.
An alternative process would have been the use of focus groups, but owing to the differing
backgrounds of the interviewees with potentially opposing views, it was believed that focus
groups would not have been suitable to adequately address the research questions.
The respondents were assured that the information provided would be used for research
purposes only and to provide results to BioSA and the CPUT. Anonymity was guaranteed
unless permission is granted by the respondent to divulge details.
4.2 Population and Sampling
Population can be defined as individuals, groups, organisations, human products and events,
and the conditions to which that population is exposed (Welman and Kruger, 2005).
22
The population consisted of 65 individuals, male and female, of varying age and race who
are or were involved in the public and private biotechnology sectors. They included
members of the groups listed on the BioSA and Cape Biotech mailing lists.
The population was limited to individuals in Gauteng and the Western Cape.
This indicates a cross-sectional design (Welman and Kruger, 2005).
Sampling is required to construct a subset that is representative of the population under
review (Easterly-Smith, Thorpe and Lowe, 1991).
The sampling technique used was non-probability convenience sampling.
Zikmund (2003) defines non-probability sampling as a technique in which units of the
sample are selected on the basis of personal judgment or convenience.
Convenience sampling (also known as a haphazard or accidental sampling) is a sampling
procedure used to obtain those units of people most conveniently available (Zikmund 2003).
The researcher interviewed 28 individuals from the population for the “skills” survey and 8
for the “social networking in organisations” survey. The list of participants is shown in
Appendix 3.
4.3 Data Collection
The primary source of information was completed questionnaires which were mainly
conducted via e-mail and face-to-face. Telephonic and e-mail follow-ups occurred when the
response rate was poor.
The secondary sources of information involved researching the Department of Science and
Technology, the various Biotechnology Regional Innovation Centres (BRICs), Universities,
Technicons and Private Businesses. In addition, analysing and comparing international
23
biotech players was conducted. The medium used was the internet and attending the
Bio2Biz Conference that was held at the Sandton Convention Centre from 15-17 September
2008.
In using structured questionnaires Welman & Kruger (2001) mention that the interviewer is
limited to the questions and how they are asked as well as the order in which they appear
on the schedule. There is relatively little freedom to deviate from the schedule.
The data for the questionnaires was captured directly into an electronic (Microsoft Excel)
template after the interviews were conducted. Reasons for conducting the research were
explained verbally at the onset of the face-to-face interviews. In addition, an introductory
paragraph was included in the surveys that were sent out via e-mail.
The structured skills questionnaire, as shown in Appendix 1, was split into 6 sections:
•
Section A – Introduction.
•
Section B – Respondent Data
•
Section C – Techniques and Technologies
•
Section D – Staff Profile
•
Section E – New Appointments Planned
•
Section F – Work Integrated Learning
The structured social networking survey was divided into the following:
•
Introduction
•
Section A –Demographics
•
Section B – Other information
•
Section C – Network characteristics
The face-to-face interviews were held at the various respondents’ place of work.
24
4.4 Interview process
The researcher explained the purpose of the research and provided an outline of what data
would be required to the respondents via telephone, e-mail or face to face (depending on
the medium used). The questionnaire data was captured after all the completed surveys
were received on an Excel worksheet. The approximate time for each interview was 30 – 40
minutes.
4.5 Data Analysis
Data analysis is a body of methods that help to describe facts, detected patterns, develop
explanations, and test hypotheses. (Levine, J 1996, 1).
Nominal and ordinal data results were expected.
Results captured manually and electronically were updated on an Excel spreadsheet.
Various chart options and tables were used in Microsoft XP. Descriptive explanations were
provided for each question.
4.6 Limitations
The following limitations were taken into consideration:
•
Budgetary constraints prevented face to face interviews taking place across the
country.
•
Due to time constraints only a limited amount of the population was interviewed
during the specified period.
•
Only a limited number of questions were included in the questionnaire to keep it
interesting and realistic to answer within the 30 -40 minute time frame.
•
The sample was not fully representative of the population (only respondents in
the Gauteng and Western Cape regions were interviewed) and therefore one
may only generalise from these areas.
•
Data and interviewer bias may have been present. Effort was made to minimise
this risk.
25
•
Incorrect capturing of results could have incurred unwanted errors.
26
5 Results
5.1 Results – Skills Survey
1. Technology Information – What generation biotechnology is your company
involved in?
Figure 1: The generation of Biotechnology applied for each respondent.
•
15% of companies indicated they were involved in 1st generation biotechnology,
19% in 2nd generation biotechnology and 33% in 3rd generation biotechnology.
33% of interviewees did not answer this question. A possible explanation for
such a significant non-response rate is that the interviewees may not have been
able to distinguish between the different generations or that they were involved
in overlapping options.
2.a. Do you consider biotechnology central to your firm’s activities or status?
- 24 companies consider biotechnology as central to their firm’s activities and 3
not. 1 did not reply to this question.
2.b. Do you support or undertake and research activities?
-25 companies support/undertake research activities and 3 do not.
27
3.a. Techniques
The Compact Oxford Dictionary defines “technique” as “1. a way of carrying out a
particular task, especially the execution of an artistic work or a scientific procedure.
2. a procedure that is effective in achieving an aim. “
Figure 2: Number of techniques presently utilised per company.
Respondent 21 made use of the most techniques whereas respondents 3, 4 and 27
did not list any.
28
Figure 3: Techniques presently utilised.
3.a.1. Which of the following techniques does you organisation presently utilize?
– “Molecular Biology” was the predominant skill utilised by employed staff while
“FTIR” (Fourier Transform InfraRed) was least used.
Figure 4: Techniques for future use.
29
3.a.2. Which of the following techniques is your organisation likely to utilize in the
the future?
–
“Fermentation technology, Flow Cytometry, HPLC, Gas Chromotography,
Proteomics, Molecular Biology, Transcriptomics” and “Other” will be utilised in 36 years. “FTIR” reported no results for the future time span.
Figure 5: Equipment presently utilised
Figure 6: Equipment to be used in the future
30
3.a.3. and 3.a.4. What equipment does your organisation presently utilize and will
likely utilize in the next 3-6 years?
– Equipment for “Molecular Biology” techniques emerged as the forerunner for
instruments that are currently utilised and the same results were recorded for the
next 3-6 years. In addition, “Other” was also captured as important with 18%. What
was interesting is that the list did not include any overlapping items.
3.b. Technologies
The Compact oxford Dictionary describes “technology” as “1. the application of
scientific knowledge for practical purposes. 2. the branch of knowledge concerned
with applied sciences. “
Figure 7: Technologies that are important today and that will be in the future.
31
3.b.1. and 3.b.2. Which technologies are important today and will become
important in the next 3-6 years?
-“DNA/RNA, cloning, PCR, genetic engineering: skills linked to the manipulation
thereof” were identified as technologies that are important in their organisations
today and that will become important in the next 3-6 years. “Sub-cellular organisms:
gene therapy, viral vectors” were least important today while “mammalian cell and
tissue culture and the engineering thereof”, “plant cell and tissue culture”,
“environmental biotechnology: sanitation, safety and hygiene” and “Other” were at
the bottom of the list for technologies that would be important in the next 3-6 years.
4. Specialist skills
Figure 8: Specialist skills that are important now and that require additional training.
4.a.1. Which specialist skills are important now?
-ISO accreditations are the most important specialist skills in organisations today.
32
4.a.2. Which specialist skills require further training?
– “Clinical trials” followed by “ISO accreditations” and “CE Mark” are expected to
require further training in the future.
4.b. Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Figure 9: Innovation and Entrepreneurship skills that are important now and in the future.
4.b.1. Which innovation and entrepreneurship skills are important now?
- “Finance”, “Strategy” and “Legal” were identified as the most important skills now.
4.b.2. Which innovation and Entrepreneurship skills require further training?
- “Sales, marketing and communication” is an area that requires further training.
33
5. Staff Profile
Area of specialisation of staff members:
Figure 10: Staff profile
34
Figure 11: Staff specialisation
5.a. Research and Development Staff
Seventy nine staff members are involved in research and development and thirty
one are post graduates.
The main specialisation was “Other” i.e. not provided in the list.
5.b. Technical Support Staff
Technical and support staff comprised of thirty one, with “matric” being the main
qualification and “other” the predominant specialisation.
5.c. Regulatory and Clinical Affairs Staff
Among the eighteen regulatory and clinical affairs staff, fourteen had “degrees”.
“Other” was the main specialisation.
35
5.d. Management
“Postgraduate qualifications” dominated the management sector with twenty seven
out of forty three employees. Once again, “other” was the main specialisation (12)
with “Molecular Biology” a close second (11).
5.e. Other Staff Members
“Biochemistry” and “other” were the specialisations for last section where eleven
out of sixteen had a “matric” qualification.
6. New Appointments Planned
The following is a list of new appointments planned
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Technical Consultant: Wine
Business manager: Biocontrol
Quality manager
Studentships
Post docs
Business/Marketing Partner
Medical director
Investment manager
Research assistant
Technical assistant
Postdoc research scientist
Immunologist
Virologist
Marketing manager
Regulatory manager
Sales representatives
Production staff
There was no trend in the listing.
The main qualification sought was “any post-grad”.
The preferred institution was “traditional university”.
The main skills listed were the following:
36
•
Winemaking knowledge, oenology, viticulture
•
Business Management, microbiology, agriculture
•
Entomology and Quality
•
Negotiation
•
Finance
•
Biotechnology , IP management, research management
•
Molecular techniques
•
Surface plasmon resonance and phage
•
HIV Drug susceptability
•
Immunogen design
•
Medical products marketing and sales
•
Physical science
•
Material science, biophysics
6.b. Do you differentiate between a degree and a diploma qualification?
- The majority of respondents do differentiate between a degree and diploma.
6.c. Please explain
- Various explanations were provided as to why the one was preferred over the
other. A summary is that a “diploma is regarded as a lesser degree”.
6.d. What value do you perceive the Diploma qualification to have?
- Various replies were received as to the perception of the “Diploma”, but it is
generally seen as a “basic level of qualification”.
7. Work-integrated learning
7.a. Would your company be willing to offer a nine (9) month work-integrated
learning to a biotechnology student?
37
- Twenty companies advised that they would be willing to offer nine month workintegrated learning at their companies and four were not willing to participate. Four
did not complete this section of the questionnaire.
7.b. What monthly stipend (travel and living) will you/ your organisation be
prepared to offer the student with in-service training?
-The majority of interviewees (5) were prepared to offer a R 4000 monthly stipend.
5.2 Results – Social Networking in Organisations Survey
Section A
Table 1: Demographics and Other Information
Respondent Age Gender
1
39
f
2
m
3
46
f
4
34
m
5
37
m
6
36
m
7
39
f
8
m
Average
38.5
Inside or
Education
Nature of
Yrs current
Intentionally
outside
Level
Race employment with employer
target
Networking
Post Grad
W
Full Time
7
yes
both
Post Grad
B
Full Time
7
sometimes
Post Grad
W
Full Time
3
yes
outside
Post Grad
W
Full Time
2
yes
outside
Post Grad
W
Full Time
6
yes
outside
Matric
W
Full Time
<2
yes
outside
Matric
W
Full Time
0
yes
inside
Post Grad
I
Full Time
0
sometimes
inside
1. Age – The average age of the respondents was 38.5 years.
2. Gender – There was a response from 5 males and 3 females.
3. Company name – was excluded for anonymity sake.
4. Highest level of education – The majority of respondents (6) had a postgraduate
degree.
5. Race – White respondents dominated the survey with 6, followed by Indian and
Black, with 1 each.
6. Nature of Employment – All respondents were employed on a full time basis.
7. Years with current employer – The range extended from 17 months to 7 years.
38
Section B
1. Do you intentionally target people you want to build relationships with?
-
Seven responded that they “do intentionally target” people to build
relationships with and one replied “sometimes”.
2. For professional contacts, would you rather network inside or outside the
organisation?
- “Only outside” was the preference (4).
Figure 12: Diversity of workforce
2.a. % Females – more than 50% of staff were females
2.b. % white people – more than 50% of staff were white
2.c. % people over 40 – the majority of employees were under forty years of age.
39
3. Does your company actively facilitate the formation of networks?
Table 2: Facilitation of networks
Respondent Facilitation of networks
1
Active
2
Active
3
Some Facilitation
4
Active
5
Active
6
Some Facilitation
7
Active
8
0
– Five companies do “actively facilitate” the formation of networks and two do
“some facilitation”.
4. Do you feel excluded from social networks at work because of your
age/race/gender/personality/skill level/experience/I do not feel
excluded/other?
Table 3: Exclusion from social networks
Respondent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
–
Exclusion from social
networks
some exclusion
not excluded
not excluded
not excluded
not excluded
not excluded
not excluded
not excluded
only one respondent replied that “sometimes” exclusion was felt
whereas the difference “did not feel excluded”.
40
Section C
The survey required the interviewees to list five of their most important contacts.
The following results summarise the findings:
a. Gender – Twenty males and fifteen females were identified in the survey.
b. Race – Fourteen Blacks and twenty one Whites were referred to.
c. Approximate age of persons – The average age was 34.8 years.
d. Approximate education level of persons – Twenty were “lower”, nine
“similar” and six “higher” to the qualification level of the respective
respondents.
e. Similarity of this person’s skills set to yours
– Fourteen reported “not similar”
- Twelve “overlapping”
- Six “same”
f. How often do you interact with this person?
Figure 13: Interaction with colleagues
41
-
66 % responded that daily contact occurred, 16% made weekly contact, 8%
monthly and 10 % per annum.
g. What is your main medium of interaction with this person?
Figure 14: Medium of interaction
-
The main interaction is “unplanned face to face” (ad hoc), followed by
“e-mail”, “planned face to face”, “telephone” and finally “sms”.
h. Most frequent style of interaction?
Figure 15: Style of interaction
42
-
The most frequent style of interaction reported was “Informal at work” which
supports the ad-hoc meetings described above. “Formal after work” emerged
as the least frequent style.
i. Is your engagement with this person planned?
- Twenty eight responded “sometimes”, six “never” and one “always”.
j. What are your main reasons for networking with this person?
Figure 16: Reasons for networking
-
The main reason for networking with certain people is for “sound boarding
ideas” and the least reason, ”improving job security”.
k. What is your proximity to this person?
Figure 17: Proximity
43
-
48 % indicated that they were within 10m of each other.
-
Only 4 % replied that they dealt with contacts outside of the country.
l. What is the position of this person in the organisation?
- Eighteen responded that their colleagues were in a “lower” position to
theirs.
m. Is the person in the same type of function as you?
- an overwhelming response of “no” was received (26 vs 5).
n. Is the person in the same department as you?
- Nineteen “no’s” were received as opposed to twelve “yes’s”.
o. How long have you known this person?
- The median was three years.
44
6 Discussion of Results
6.1 Discussion of results - Skills Survey
The primary question was: “What skills are needed to drive curriculum development in
tertiary education?”
The findings report that the majority of companies are involved in 3rd generation
biotechnology and that biotechnology and research activities are central to their respective
companies.
It is noted that three companies reported that they do not utilize any techniques in their
organisations. An explanation for this is that their companies are not directly involved in
biotechnology, but offer ancillary services.
The techniques that are presently utilised by employed staff are “Molecular Biology”
followed by “Genomics”. What was interesting is that the techniques for the future
included 15% of “Other”. The techniques listed by the respondents did not overlap with any
of the options made available in the survey (i.e. a different name for the same technique)
and there were no duplications in their responses either. This indicates that there was no
oversight in the design of the questionnaire. “Fermentation technology, Flow Cytometry,
HPLC, Gas Chromotography, Proteomics, Molecular Biology” and “Transcriptomics” were
other areas that are expected to be important in the future. FTIR reported no results for the
future time span.
Equipment related to “Molecular Biology” emerged as the leader for equipment currently
used and expected to be required in the future. A significant increase in “Other” (from 11%
to 18%) needs to be highlighted as, once again, there were no overlapping areas. (The list
included microfluids, nanotechnology, biomedical engineering/product development,
45
clinical research, AA, ICP, LECO, gold conjugates, LC-MS, quality control, protein expression
and purification, peptide synthesis, surface plasmon resonance, circular dichroism and
isothermal titration calorimetry, clinical trial services/training, regulatory and development
strategies for getting a medical device/diagnostic or medicine to market).
The technology that is important now and in the future was “DNA/RNA, cloning, PCR,
genetic engineering: skills linked to the manipulation thereof”. This is in line with the
techniques that were recorded in the previous questions and the results obtained in the
National Biotechnology Audit 2007 (DST, 2007).
In terms of specialist skills, “ISO accreditation” was listed as important now while “CE Mark”
and “Clinical Trials” were disciplines that would require further training in the future. South
Africa is currently regarded as a favourable Clinical Trial destination due to the fact that
labour is cost effective, a diverse population and expertise are present, and the exchange
rate is favourable from most outsiders’ points of view (BioSA,2008).
It was concluded that a need exists for customised training and other courses as some
industry players currently provide in the South African sector. This could be rolled out on a
national basis as opposed to one region in the country.
The “Innovation and Entrepreneurship” skills that are seen as important now are “Finance,
Strategy” and “Legal”. For the future, “Sales, Marketing and Communication” were deemed
valuable.
“Employers continue to struggle to find employees with good technical skills and,
consequently, identify technical skills as a high training priority. In addition, good
communication skills are an important training need that may also be reflected in the
demand referenced for supervisory/management, customer service and sales training”
46
(Local Skills Shortage Assessment for the Greater Rochester Area Rochester Resource
Alliance).
“Skills specialisation” was dominated by “Other” in the various sectors (“Research and
Development, Technical Support, Regulatory and Clinical Affairs Staff, Management and
Other Staff members)
“Other” consisted of the following disciplines that were not provided in the list:
•
Finance
•
Marketing
•
Life science
•
Knowledge Management
•
Forensics
•
MBA
•
Human resources
•
Business Management
•
Quality Assurance and Administration
•
Tissue culture
•
Master practitioner
•
Psychology
•
Environmental Health
•
International relations
•
Labour law
•
Lab services
A trend was not exhibited in the new appointments planned, however, a “post grad” was
preferred as well as a “traditional university”. This supports the fact that the respondents
favoured a degree to a diploma as, according to the replies, a diploma is regarded as a
“basic qualification” or a “lesser qualification” to that of a degree.
47
One respondent reported that a diploma and degree have different NQF levels and thus the
degree is preferable to them.
It also emerged that it would be ideal for training programmes to be linked to the National
Qualifications Framework (NQF).
The introduction of “wet labs” for general use by interested parties was also recommended.
Distributors of equipment and consumables could sponsor the respective products free of
charge in leu of training or marketing opportunities on the respective product lines.
In line with what this research project uncovered, the MIHR reported in 2005, “Despite a
general skills shortage in the supply of scientists and qualified researcher managers,
biotechnology companies in South Africa show a relatively even distribution of employee
qualifications ranging from technical staff to post-graduates. As to be expected, research
groups are dominated by employees with at least a degree qualification. The reason for this
is that skills distribution between the private and public sector favours the former. Most
biotechnology groups in South Africa belong to the private sector and private R&D facilities
typically offer more attractive salary packages, state of the art facilities and equipment, and
better working conditions. South Africa’s economy is growing at a faster rate than there are
available skills to meet this growth. The bio-economy needs industry-relevant skills to create
a competitive environment that is able to deliver appropriate biotechnology goods and
services. To achieve this, South Africa has adopted a number of parallel strategies that
include incentives for skills development that look at recruitment, training and capacity
development; partnerships with industry; career guidance and youth mentorship; and funds
for bursaries and scholarships. Such programmes set out to achieve:
•
Faster transfer of skills to previously disadvantaged communities.
48
•
Address competency gaps caused by skills migration, brain drain and the
HIV/AIDS pandemic.
•
A decrease in unemployment through job creation.
•
More even demographic representation.
•
More rapid skills development to fulfil the needs of a growing economy.” (Pefile,
2005)
The majority of companies were prepared to offer work integrated learning to a student and
surprisingly, R 4000, per month (the highest option) was chosen.
Employers identified that they needed graduates to have better problem-solving skills, and
the majority of employers identified the lack of work experience as a major problem
(Daniels, 2007).
It was also mentioned that it would be ideal for interns to obtain supplementary funding
from the DST / BRICs/ Government.
The 2006 N.C. Skills Market Survey reports that “registered apprenticeship is the best way
for employers to ensure that workers are trained the way they want them.
Results also show that apprenticeship programs reduce turnover and improve productivity,
quality workmanship, recruitment, employee problem-solving, employee versatility and
skills of employees.
Paid internships are easier to arrange in large firms than in the smaller firms or universities.
Internships are difficult for small firms and universities to maintain, due to economic
pressures. But even if difficult, internships are valuable to firms, schools, and students“
(Berry, 2006).
For interest sake, “Africa have universities in nearly sufficient numbers – eighteen public
and private in Egypt and 36 in South Africa, according to the 2005 edition of the Unesco
49
Science Report. This is reflected in the dominance of these countries in tables of scientific
publications from AU states. Roughly half of all scientific output in the continent comes from
Egypt and South Africa; a quarter comes from Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria and Tunisia. The
remaining forty three countries in the AU are responsible for the final quarter of science
from the continent.
Indeed, compared to the rest of the world, AU countries as a whole have fallen behind in
scientific and technological development. From 1988 to 2001, the number of articles
published in scientific journals worldwide grew by 40 %, yet in Africa publication counts
actually declined by 12 % over this period in absolute terms. In 1988, AU countries
accounted for 1.26 % of all scientific publications, but by 2001 their collective share was
down to 0.76 %. Of the 10 larger countries, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa and
Zimbabwe all published fewer articles in 2001 than in 1988. Of the countries that showed an
increase — Cameroon, Ethiopia, Ghana, Tanzania and Uganda among them — none
published more than 100 articles annually at any time from 1988 to 2001. Add to this
curricula in need of modernisation, under-motivated staff, hierarchical management styles
and very limited R&D and the picture – and the urgency for change — becomes clear. At the
same time, much is changing in the broader university world in both developed and
developing countries. Indeed, it is these changes that represent an opportunity to reinvent
the university in Africa” (Juma and Serageldin, 2007).
The MIHR report to CIPIH provides the following background information which enables the
reader to put the research findings in perspective :
“South Africa is one of Africa’s fastest growing economies. This expansion is draining South
Africa’s skilled workforce. There are a number of concerns with respect to the country’s
50
ability to build skilled capacity at the rapid rate required, and to retain professionals. A big
weakness lies in its education system, where performance in science and maths is generally
poor. South Africa’s secondary education pupils scored significantly below the international
average in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). It is
discouraging to note that the 2003 TIMSS scores were hardly an improvement on the 1999
scores. Science and maths are required for the study of the biosciences and with such a low
rating the education system will struggle to meet the demands by the bioscience sector for
skilled individuals.
Statistics show that in the 10 years ending 1999 an estimated 10 000 South Africans
engaged in science and technology emigrated, mainly to developed countries. South
Africa’s brain drain is listed in the 2004 World Competitiveness Yearbook as one of the
country’s key challenges – it ranks 58th worldwide in terms of the rate at which
professionals are emigrating; 60th in the availability of skilled labour; and 50th in drawing
on foreign highly-skilled labour. Overall, this indicates that South Africa is in a weak position
as far as the availability of skilled labour is concerned. The major cost to the country is in
lost production and the export of human capital in the form of education, training and
experience. In addition to the export of human capital, emigration also results in the export
of real and financial assets. As a result, this dire situation has forced many employers to
leave posts unfilled, finance training programmes, and/or hire abroad.
In 2004, South Africa ranked 40th in the world in the technology index. Technology
is at the centre of economic growth and is generally seen as the most critical factor in
driving sustained high growth. The Global Competitiveness Report, which is responsible for
this ranking system, differentiates countries that are “core” and “noncore” innovators.
Countries that fall in the former category produce at least fifteen patents per million
51
population. South Africa’s patent rate is 2.5 patents per million population and is therefore
classified as a non-core innovator. This means it is highly dependent on technological
adoption from abroad as opposed to its economic growth being driven by its own capacity
to innovate. To get closer to the technological front, South Africa needs stronger political
commitment and administrative strength to ensure that technologies imported from abroad
are current, appropriate for the needs of the country, are transferred in a systematic
manner, and create real opportunities for growth and development” (Berry, 2006).
An Ernst and Young report by Gold says that the quality of technical and science skills is very
high in South Africa’s universities, he notes that there is a shortage of experience amongst
technical staff in terms of commercialising research. “Addressing this, internship
programmes are being introduced which we hope will provide exposure to the real business
environment,” he says.
As a nascent industry, biotechnology requires collaboration between government, the
private sector and academia if it is to develop into a viable and sustainable industry. Gold
says the Report has identified this as a key challenge in the South African industry. “Even
within different governmental departments there are often different mandates which may
initially be inconsistent with each other. As a result, this can create barriers to policy
implementation,” he explains.
However, Gold is confident that with ongoing communication and formal channels being
opened between departments, this issue is receiving attention. “The industry has also
expressed frustration in its efforts to partner with universities. These relate mainly to what
52
is seen as high levels of bureaucracy, as well as the inconsistencies in the allocation of
intellectual property rights,” he adds.
In terms of human capital – and in the context that South Africa is in the midst of a muchpublicised skills crunch – Gold points out that there is a shortage in the number of technical
people with the abilities and vision to set-up and run their own business. “The shortage is
exacerbated since most university graduates seek the safety of an academic or bigcorporate environment; what is required is the availability of courses to provide scientists
and lab technicians with the skills needed to open and run their own business to exploit
opportunities in the biotechnology sector,” he says, further stressing that experience in the
commercialisation process is necessary to develop concepts to marketable product.
“Intern- and mentorship programmes ( as advocated by BioSA) are also necessary to provide
an opportunity for others to learn from people who have such experience; gaps in technical
skills are opening up as the market moves from being research/supply driven to
commercial/demand driven. In effect the country may not have the necessary technical
skills for some of the areas where commercial opportunities are becoming available,” he
says (Kolia, 2007).
6.2 Discussion of Results – Social Networking Survey
The secondary research question: “Do social networks have an impact on biotechnology
organisations and foreign direct investment decisions?” was further divided into the
following:
Research Question 1: Do the social networks exhibit any patterns along the following
parameters?
53
•
gender - The majority of “most important contacts” identified were males (20) while
fifteen females were listed in the survey.
Concern with regards to the numbers of females in the biotechnology industry is
raised in the MIHR report:
“Unlike in more advanced developing countries, Women in many AU states make up
a relatively small number of the total population of scientists and engineers.
Changing this is both necessary and urgent. Human resource development strategies
must aim specifically to increase women’s enrolment in the biosciences and in
engineering at university level. R&D infrastructure could be improved to better meet
the needs of women, and feature conditions and services such as part-time work,
flexible hours, infant care support, extended maternity/child care leave. In addition,
funding schemes that provide incentives for girls to study science and engineering
need to be explored. There are other measures that can be used to strengthen the
participation of women in the sciences in Africa. A quota system can be used to
ensure women receive at least a proportion of opportunities offered by biosciences
networks, such as training scholarships, fellowships and research grants.
Mentoring arrangements, web-based outreach programmes, networks of women
scientists and indicators of the involvement of women in the sciences could play a
key role in strengthening the role of women in the life sciences in Africa”
(Pefile,2005).
•
race - Fourteen Blacks and twenty one Whites were referred to.
54
This could be as a result of South Africa’s previous legacy of affirmative action for
whites, but subsequently, reverse affirmation action is now taking place and should
be reflected in the figures in the years to come.
An interesting article relating to Black Economic Empowerment in NATURE
BIOTECHNOLOGY reported that “Difficulties have arisen because investment banks
and traditional industries are all bound by law to reach BEE goals. It’s not clear yet
whether this type of affirmative action is discouraging investors in biotech and other
sectors. A survey of foreign-owned multinational’s perception of BEE measures
published in early 2006 by Ernst & Young in Cape Town found that 35% of the
respondents felt them to have a negative impact on investment in South Africa, the
same proportion of people questioned felt it would be positive and the remainder
had a neutral view” (Louet, 2006).
•
age – the average age of the contacts was 34.8 years which is lower than the average
age of the interviewees (38.5 years). This result was expected as the respondents
were typically heads of organisations or departments and are thus usually older than
their colleagues.
•
education level – the majority of relationships (20) had a lower level of education to
that of the respondents. This could be due to the fact that most of the interviewees
were either business owners or heads of department.
•
skill set - Once again, the main response (14) was “not similar” . There were areas
where skills sets overlapped (12) and a few answers (6) indicated the “same”. An
explanation for this result is that the respondents were part of the management
55
team and would therefore have different skills to their contacts which are typically in
their employ.
•
frequency – 66% responded that daily contact occurred, 16% made weekly contact,
8% monthly and 10 % per annum.
•
medium of interaction - The main interaction is “unplanned face to face” (ad hoc),
followed by “e-mail”, “planned face to face”, “telephone” and finally “sms”.
•
style of interaction - The most frequent style of interaction reported was “informal
at work”. This is in line with the findings above. “Formal after work” emerged as the
least frequent style.
•
planned or unplanned interaction – Twenty eight responded “sometimes”, six
“never” and one “always.” This corresponds with the findings above.
•
proximity to contact - 48% indicated that they were within 10m of each other.
-Only 4% replied that they dealt with contacts outside of the
country.
•
position of contact in relation to position of respondent - Eighteen responded that
their colleagues were in a “lower” position to theirs. Once again, this highlights the
hierarchy in the organisations.
•
Function of contact in relation to function of respondent - an overwhelming
response of “no” was received (26 vs 5) i.e. that the contacts performed different
functions to the respondents of the questionnaires.
56
•
department of contact in relation to department of respondent – Nineteen “no’s”
were received as opposed to twelve “yes’s” i.e. they worked in different
departments.
•
length of time known contact - The median was three years. The longest
relationship was twenty years and the shortest just under one year. The average
being 4.39.
•
main reasons for interacting - The main reason for networking with certain people is
for “sound-boarding ideas” and the least reason,”improving job security”. This result
implies that the older group is communicating their thinking with the younger group,
probably to obtain their buy-in.
•
feeling excluded from networks or not – the majority of respondents do not feel
excluded from networks. This creates a healthy atmosphere as open communication
is apparent.
•
deliberate networking or not – deliberate networking is done to enhance
relationships.
•
preference for networking inside or outside of organisation – outside networking is
preferred. This initiative supports growth and development opportunities for
employees. A famous quote “it’s not what you know, it’s who you know” underpins
the importance of networking.
57
Research Question 2: Do overseas networks play an important role in collaboration
efforts?
Only 4% of respondents indicated that they had overseas contacts.
This response is
surprising as it has come to light after delving into the various literature that international
collaboration efforts are essential to development within the biotechnology sector.
“In both the informal and formal case, the marginal cost of transmitting new economic
knowledge, particularly tacit knowledge, across geographic space is non-trivial. This means,
as the studies by Audretsch and Feldman (1996) and Adam B. Jaffe et al (1993) imply that
geographic proximity matters when knowledge spillovers are informal. But an important
conclusion is that when knowledge is transmitted through formal ties between researchers
and firms, geographic proximity is not necessary, since face to face contact does not occur
by chance but instead is carefully planned” (Audretsch D.B. and Stephan P.E., 1996 Pg 651).
Regional economic integration in Africa should embody the building and accumulation of
capacities to harness and govern modern biotechnology. Regional economic integration
bodies are key institutional vehicles for mobilizing, sharing and using existing scientific and
technological capacities, including human and financial resources as well as physical
infrastructure for biotechnology R&D and innovation. The loci of action are primarily local
innovation areas which have core research and business institutions. International
partnerships in biotechnology are critical to the realization of Africa’s biotechnology
strategies and should be pursued aggressively.
The main recommendations include the need for individual countries in central, eastern,
western, northern and southern Africa to work together at the regional level to scale up the
development of biotechnology. A key vehicle is through “Regional Innovation Communities”
58
and “Local Innovation Areas”. These would include clusters of expertise, sharing knowledge,
creative ideas, personnel, and working on problems and projects collaboratively. Regional
Innovation Communities might include institutions that are already situated close together,
such as universities, science-based industry and science parks. But today, institutions do not
need to be in close proximity to work together (Louet, 2006).
For South Africa it would be advantageous to facilitate an environment where there was a
transfer of skills from foreign to local workers, but even if this did not happen, the
productivity gains associated with the employ of foreign skilled workers would help raise
the competitiveness of SA firms (Daniels, 2007).
Furthermore, Gold says that the Ernst & Young Report has found that the local
biotechnology sector tends to work within silos; “Some respondents feel there needs to be
more collaboration between different scientific disciplines, and with other industries. For
example, in the biofuels sector, there is an apparent synergy between the agriculture and
energy disciplines,” he notes. Support agencies are helping to bridge these gaps by creating
forums for people of different disciplines to network and discuss opportunities (Kolia,2006).
Examples of some of these support initiatives are BioSA, AfricaBio and Bio2Biz, to name but
a few.
59
7 Conclusion
The biotechnology industry faces several challenges. A range of solutions, involving
education, government, business, parents and students—working together to build a firstrate workforce, will be required.
Education and skills are critical to economic development. Without an educated and skilled
workforce, efforts to attract new industry will be hampered. In addition, threat of the brain
drain is ever present as well as SMMEs going out of business because they do not have the
resources to recruit, train and keep skilled workers.
Employers value work experience and employability skills. Job applicants with prior work
experience are more likely to have developed the right attitude, soft skills and behaviours
that employers say they want to see in people applying for their entry-level jobs.
Employers should take leadership in creating viable business-education partnerships
organized to improve employment-readiness of graduates and have agreed upon
benchmarks for accountability. As a minimum, partnerships should have employers assist in
developing work-relevant curriculums. They should contribute to the design and
establishment of programmes at tertiary level to correspond with the needs in the sector
and increase the use of student internships with industry. Validation of any new curricula to
certify that it meets immediate and anticipated needs should also be done. In addition,
educators and industry periodically should jointly review and update existing curriculum
content as well (Berry, 2006).
The acknowledgement that South Africa has pervasive skills shortages implies that closedeconomy solutions to the problem are necessary but not sufficient; firms must have the
option to import scarce skills and to do so quickly and efficiently.
For South Africa it would be advantageous to facilitate an environment where there was a
60
transfer of skills from foreign to local workers, but even if this did not happen, the
productivity gains associated with the employ of foreign skilled workers would help raise
the competitiveness of SA firms (Daniels, 2007).
For foreign entrepreneurs setting up companies in South Africa, the bureaucracy of the
South African administration can also be a significant impediment. Meanwhile, currency
fluctuation and ‘exchange control’—designed to counter currency speculation and prevent
money from leaving the country—are hurdles for companies considering entering the
export market.
On a positive note, South Africa is an attractive destination for some overseas investors as
jurisdiction for patents are concentrated more in China, Singapore and India.
Another recommendation from the survey results is to establish an incubator at the various
BRICs to include facilities for “wet lab” activities. Free of charge placement of equipment by
suppliers to the industry could be used as training and marketing opportunities. In return
for participation in the incubator, staff from firms could commit to help teach students and
offer student internships and mentoring as part of their compensation for use of the
incubator.
Glover, Hershey and King (2005) advise that workforce preparation is only one component
of a broader strategy needed to promote the development of the bioscience industry
cluster. Also necessary are efforts to improve the process for commercializing innovations
(especially from university researchers), to attract venture capital for early-stage financing,
and to provide an effective incubator/accelerator infrastructure that fosters the
development of start-up firms. The process of developing new biopharmaceutical products
is uncertain, time consuming, and expensive. Development of a new drug typically takes
61
between five and twelve years. Given the lengthy period required for product development
and approval, “patient” venture capital is especially important in this industry.
Bioscience in Virginia (2008) go on to say that bioscience investors are searching for a lowcost business climate that provides efficiency in laws, regulations, tax structure and policies,
enabling them to save time and money. Wage and payroll costs that are below the global
average are also important criteria.
On average, Ernst & Young estimates biotech companies get $300,000 at seed stage in
South Africa, compared with $1 million in Europe and ~$2 million in the US. South African
firms raising $1.4 million/$2.5 million compared with $5 million/$15 million in Europe and
$10 million/$20 million in the US, respectively. As yet, Africa is not on the map of US VC
funds with a foreign mandate, which predominantly focus on Brazil, India, Russia or China.
Meanwhile, non-specialist South African VC funds, when interested, tend to ask for an
unattractive 80% ownership of enterprises (Louet, 2006).
Food security, nutrition, healthcare and environmental sustainability are among Africa’s
biggest challenges.
Cooperation and collaboration is vital to progress in science and innovation. Indeed,
Regional Innovation Communities and Local Innovation Areas will need to develop strong
links with international partners (Juma and Serogeldin, 2007).
It is also important to continue to develop a bioscience network to increase the visibility of
the industry and to communicate industry needs to education and training providers.
(Glover et al,2005).
62
McCarthy et al (2007) advise that firms do have a choice in whether or not they choose to
recognise and exploit networks. However, failure to do so may reduce a firm’s competitive
advantage and unknowingly strengthen its rivals.
South Africa needs to: develop and expand national and regional human resources
development strategies that include: (1) a biotechnology curriculum that focuses on specific
areas and targets that offer high economic potential; (2) a consortium of clearly identified
and designated universities and research centres that develop and offer regional
biotechnology training courses for South Africa and the African continent; (3) a focus on
female education, training and recruitment in the sciences.
Future research could investigate how relationships between firms, customers and
suppliers impact on each other.
From the skills perspective, companies could be asked to identify particular skills constraints
and then quantify the expected productivity losses associated with the respective shortages.
In the end, solving the skills crisis is not the responsibility of a single institution but the
responsibility of all, which include schools, government, business and even parents and
students themselves. The success of the general education system must be stressed if the
skills shortages are to be alleviated in the medium- to long-term.
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held in Rio de Janeiro,
stated that biotechnology: “Promises to make a significant contribution in enabling the
development of, for example, better health care, enhanced food security through
sustainable agricultural practices, improved supplies of potable water, more efficient
63
industrial development processes for transforming raw materials, support for sustainable
methods of aforestation and reforestation, and detoxification of hazardous wastes.”
In conclusion, discoveries in biotechnology can significantly enhance our quality of life in
many areas, from the food we eat, to the medicines we use, to the environment in which
we live. This important research enables the development of new medicines and foods to
improve the lives of people around the globe (Bioscience in Virginia).
64
8 REFERENCES
Audretsch D.B. and Stephan P.E. (1996) Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of
Biotechnology. The American Economic Review Vol 86 No 3 Pg 651.
Beinhocker,E.D. (2006) The Adaptable Corporation. The McKinsey Quarterly. 2006 Number
2, 77-87.
Berry, C. (2006) The 2006 N.C. Skills Market Survey Reconnecting Public Education with
Economic Reality. N.C. Department of Labor.
Bidart, C. (2005) Introduction: The Dynamics of Personal Networks. Social Networks, 27
(2005) 283-287.
BioSA, (2008). Launch at The Innovation Hub, 22 February 2008. Professor Michael Pepper.
Bagchesen, S and Scully, J (2003) The Canadian Environment for Innovation and Business
Development in the Biotechnology Industry: A Firm Level Analysis. European Planning
Studies, Vol 12, No 7 ) October 2004.
Biodiversity in South Africa www.botany.uwc.ac.za (accessed on 25 May 2008).
Bioscience in Virginia (2008) Together, We’reWorking Wonders in Virginia.
Blomström, M. And Kokko, A. (1998) Multinational Organisation and Spillovers. Journal of
Economic Surveys, 12 (2), 247-277.
Buckley, P, Devinney, T and Louviere, J (2007) Do Managers behave the way theory
suggests? A choice-theoretic examination of foreign direct investment location decision
making. Journal of International Business Studies (2007) 38.
Burrill and Company (2008) http://burrillandco.com (accessed on 3 February 2008).
Busang, R (2008) Kopano Presentation at BioSA launch, 22 February 2008.
65
Brandon, H. (2007) Five Approaches to Collaborative Learning. Chief Learning Officer,
Jul2007, Vol. 6 Issue 7, p15-15.
Caves, R. (1971) International Corporations: The Industrial Economics of Foreign Investment.
Economica. 38 : 1-27.
Cloete, T.E., Nel, L.H. and Theron, J (2006) Biotechnology in South Africa. Trends in
Biotechnology 24 : 557-562 (accessed 19 February 2008).
Cross,R, Borgatti, S.P., Parker, A.
(2002) Making Invisible Work Visisble: Using Social
Network Analysis to Support Strategic Collaboration. California Management Review. Vol.
44(2) (Winter 2002), 25-46.
Cross, R. And Parker, A. (2004) The Hidden Power of Social Networks. Boston : Harvard
Business School Press.
Daniels, R.C. (2007) Skills shortages in South Africa : A literature review. School of
Economics: University of Cape Town.
DST eGoliBIO Biotech Survey (2003). Key Biotechnology Statistics for SA in 2003.
DST (2007) Innovation towards a knowledge-based economy – Ten year Plan for South Africa
2008-2018, Department of Science and Technology, Pretoria.
DST (2007) National Biotechnology Audit 2007 – Biotechnology Use and Development in
South Africa, Department of Science and Technology, Pretoria.
Daniels, R (2007) Skills shortage is South Africa: A literature review, DPRU working paper
07/1121, ISBN 978-1-920055-44-8.
Davis, S. and Meyer, C (May 2000) What will replace the tech economy?
http://www.time.com/time/reports/v21/work/mag_tech.html
66
Driffield, N. (2001) The impact of domestic productivity of inward investment in the UK.
Manchester School, 69 (1), 103-119.
Dunning, J.H. (2001) The Eclectic (OLI) Paradigm of International Production: Past, Present
and Future. International Journal of Economics and Business, Vol 8, No 2, 2001, pp.173-190.
Ernst & Young (2006) Beyond Borders : the global biotechnology report, 2006.
Finegold, D, Wong, P and Cheah, T (2003). Adapting a Foreign Direct Investment Strategy to
the Knowledge Economy: The Case of Singapore’s Emerging Biotechnology Cluster.
European Planning Studies, Vol 12, No 7 p937..
Easterly-Smith, M, Thorpe, R
and Lowe,A (1991) Management Research. 1st edition,
Britain:Redwood Books.
Food & Beverage SETA: “Sectoral Skills Plan:2005-2010”, Draft Document: October 2005,
Food & Beverage SETA, Pretoria.
Freeman,C and Soete, L (1997) The Economics of Industrial innovation, MIT Press,
Cambridge,MA.
Glover, R.W., Hershey,S. and King, C.T. (2005) Critical Skills Shortages Project: Addressing
Potential Skill Shortages in Biosciences and Biotechnology in Greater Austin.
Hall,B (2007) Five Ways to Use Social Networking for Learning. Chief Learning
Officer, 17.
67
Hugh, L and Bagghi-Sen, S (2002) A Study of R & D, innovation and Business Performance in
the Canadian Biotechnology industry. Technovation, 22, pp. 231-244.
James, S; South Africa releases fresh work permit quota’s; www.south-africaimmigration.com accessed 21 March 2008).
Juma,C. And Serageldin, I. (2007) Freedom to Innovate. Biotechnology in Africa’s
Development. Report of the High-Level African Panel on Modern Biotechnology.
Kolia, F (2006). South African Biotechnology Industry – A Sleeping Giant? Ernst and Young.
Kopano Presentation at BioSA launch, 22 February 2008.
Krizner, K. (2004) Collaborative Efforts Help Spur Growth in BIOTECH INDUSTRY. Expansion
Management, May2004, Vol. 19 Issue 5, p13-30.
Levine, J (2006) The Introduction to Data Analysis : The Results of Evidence,
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~mss/data%20analysis/Volume%20I%20pdf%20/006%20Intro%
20(What%20is%20the%20weal.pdf Accessed 31 May 2008-05-31.
Local Skills Shortage Assessment for the Greater Rochester Area Rochester Resource
Alliance, Inc.(July 2001).
Louet, S. (2006) Rainbow Biotechnology – South Africa’s Emerging Sector. Nature
Biotechnology, Vol 24 Number 11 November 2006
McCarthy, I.P, Pitt, l, Campbell,C, van der Merwe,R, and Salehi-Sangeri, E. (2007). Exploiting
the business opportunities in biotech connections: The power of social networks. Journal of
Commercial Technology. 3(4) 245-257.
68
Mulder, M. (2003) National Biotech Survey Results 2003. Full text available at:
http://www.pub.ac.za/resources/docs/eglibio_survey_2003.pdf
(accessed 2 February 2008).
Narula, R. And Marin, A. (2003) Foreign direct investment spillovers, absorptive capacities
and human economic development: Evidence from Argentina. ILO Working Paper no 96.
Omas, P and Malecki, E.J. (2002) The evolution of technologies in time and space: from
national and regional to spatial innovation systems, International Regional Science Review,
25.pp 102-131.
Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development. Biotechnology definitions: second
ad hoc meeting on biotechnology statistics. April 2001 www.oecd.org (accessed 2 February
2008).
Pefile, S. (2005) Innovation in Developing Countries to Meet Health Needs. Experiences of
China, Brazil, South Africa and India. MIHR report to CIPIH. WHO Ref. CIPIH Study 10d
(DGR).
Persaud, A.( 2001) The knowledge gap. Foreign Affairs, March/April, 107-117.
Powell, W.W, Koput, K.W,Bowie, J.L., Smith-Doerr, L (2002) The spatial clustering of science
and capital : accounting for biotech firm-venture capital relationships, Regional Studies,
36(3) pp. 291-305.
Putnam, R.D. (2000) Bowling Alone. New York : Simon and Schuster Paperbacks.
Quantitative research: http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0001/wghdesign.html (accessed 31
May 2008).
69
Quantitative research :http://www.answers.com/topic/quantitativeresearch?cat=technology (accessed 31 May 2008).
Ramburan, V.P. (2008). Personal Communication.
Research definition : Compact Oxford Dictionary
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/orexxsearch?view=ukaccessed: 7 November,
2008.
Sachs, J.(2005) The end of poverty: how can we make it happen in our life? London: Penguin
Books, 26-50.
Sample :http://score.kings.k12.ca.us/lessons/wwwstats/population.html accessed 31 May
2008.
Singer, P.A. and Daar, A.S. (2001) Harnessing genomics and biotechnology to improve global
health equity. Science, 294, 8-89.
Semi-structured interview :
http://www.szondaipsos.hu/en/modszereink/felig_strukt/feligstrukten accessed 31 May
2008.
South African Biotechnology Strategy (2001) A national biotechnology strategy for South
Africa. White paper at: www.dst.gov.za/programmes/biodiversity/biotechstrategy.pdf
(accessed 2 February 2008).
Welman, J.C. and Kruger, S.J. (2001) Research methodology. 2nd Edition. Southern Africa:
Oxford University Press.
What is research design? www.nyu.edu/classes/bkg/methods/005847ch1.pdf accessed 31
May 2008.
70
www.studysa.co.za A Place to Study International Education Association of South Africa.
http://www.studysa.co.za/contentpage.aspx?pageid=4148 (accessed 21 March 2008)
Zaaiman, S. (2008) The existence and form of social networks in organisation.
Zikmund, W. (2003) Business Research Methods. 7th ed. South-Western, a division of
Thomson Learning.
71
9 Appendices
9.1 Appendix 1 – Questionnaire – Skills Survey
INTRODUCTION
The accredited Biotechnology academic programme was officially launched at the Cape
Peninsula University of Technology in 2006.
The introduction of a biotechnology academic programme is congruent with the vision of CPUT to
be at the heart of technology education and innovation in Africa as Biotechnology is considered
the technology for the new global bio-economy.
At the first Advisory committee meeting of the Biotechnology programme (2007) it was
recommended that an industry needs analysis questionnaire on a national basis be devised to
determine how to drive curriculum development of the programme and provide industry with
information of the In-service training.
The process of identifying the skills needs in biotech sector is being driven by Cape Biotech
Trust, an instrument of the Department of Science and Technology, and is supported by BioSA,
the collaborative network and independent voice representing biotech SMME’s that is committed
to the growth of the biotech sector in the global market.
Your co-operation with the completion of the survey will thus be greatly appreciated as the information
obtained will aid in the continued training of highly qualified people, with comprehensive competencies,
catering to the rapidly expanding biotechnology industry.
72
Please provide the following information about you (as respondent) and your company.
RESPONDENT DETAILS
Name of person completing the form
Position within the organization
← data entry
E-mail
Telephone number
Fax number
COMPANY INFORMATION
Name of Company/Organization
Physical address
← data entry
Postal address
Website address
TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION
st
nd
1 /2
rd
/3 generation biotechnology
[1st generation technology is……etc.]
1st generation biotechnology (1st generation biotechnology involves the use of wild type or
natural biological organisms to produce a product, for example, the use of yeast to make beer or
wine)
2nd generation biotechnology (2nd generation biotechnology refers to the production of
specific products using a pure cell or tissue culture of organisms that have been specifically
selected, through random cross-breeding or similar techniques, for their superior production or
expression abilities without introducing foreign DNA.)
← check-boxes
3rd generation biotechnology (3rd generation biotechnology involves manipulation of the
genetic make-up of organisms, by introducing selected foreign (across the species barrier) DNA,
through recombinant DNA technology, to make them produce small molecules, compounds or
proteins.)
Support services (Support services for biotechnology include those activities that do not directly make
use of biotechnology activities but provide essential support to those groups that do, e.g. legal services,
business and financial support, equipment or reagent supplies, etc.)
Do you consider biotechnology central to your firm’s activities or status?
Yes
No
Do you support, or undertake, any research activities?
Yes
No
← check-boxes
73
Information is required on the techniques, technologies, specialist skills and
innovation/entrepreneurship skills you currently use or have, and those which you anticipate
you will need.
↓ check-boxes
TECHNIQUES
Which of the following techniques and equipment
does your organization utilize, and is likely to
utilize in the future?
Skills of employed staff
Presently
utilize
Will utilize in
3-6 years
Equipment
Presently
utilize
Will utilize in
3-6 years
Fermentation technology
Flow Cytometry
Epifluoresence Microscopy
Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy
Gas Chromatography
HPLC
Plant Tissue culture
Mutagenesis
Molecular biology techniques (PCR, blots, cloning)
Genomics (DNA Sequencing)
FTIR
MALDI TOF
Proteomics (2D gels, protein isolation)
Transcriptomics (microarrays)
Metabolomics
Other: (provide details)
→ data entry
TECHNOLOGIES
Indicate which technologies are important now, and which will become
important in the next 3-6 years
↓ check-boxes
Important in Will become
important in
your
organization next 3-6 yrs
today
DNA/RNA, cloning, PCR, genetic engineering: skills linked to manipulation thereof
Proteins and molecules-the functional blocks: skills linked to manipulation thereof
Mammalian cell and tissue culture and engineering thereof
Plant cell and tissue culture and engineering thereof
Process biotechnology: fermentation, bioprocesssing, bioremediation, biofiltrations
Sub cellular organisms: gene therapy, viral vectors
Bioinformatics
Nano-biotechnology
Environmental biotechnology: Sanitation, safety and hygiene
Other: (provide details)
→ data entry
74
SPECIALIST SKILLS
Indicate which specialist skills are important now, and which will become
important and require further training.
↓ check-boxes
Important in
your
organization
today
Require
further
training in
this area
ISO accreditations
HACCP
SABS approval
CE Mark
Clinical trials
IP, contracts management and law
Other: Provide detail
→ data entry
INNOVATION & ENTREPRENEURSHIP SKILLS
Indicate which innovation/entrepreneurship skills are important now, and
which will become important and require further training.
↓ check-boxes
Important in
your
organization
today
Require
further
training in
this area
Finance
Sales, Marketing, Communication
Entrepreneurship
Business Management
Strategy
HR
Legal
Project Management
Other: Provide detail
→ data entry
75
For each of the different areas listed below, please indicate the area of specialization of the staff you have.
↓ check boxes
↓ data entry
↓ data entry
↓ data entry
↓ data entry
R&D STAFF
Qualification
Number of
Specialisation
staff
Specialisation
Specialisation
Number of
Specialisation
staff
Specialisation
Specialisation
Number of
Specialisation
staff
Specialisation
Specialisation
Number of
Specialisation
staff
Specialisation
Specialisation
Number of
Specialisation
staff
Specialisation
Specialisation
None
Matric
Degree
Diploma
Postgrad
TECHNICAL SUPPORT STAFF
Qualification
None
Matric
Degree
Diploma
Postgrad
REGULATORY & CLINICAL AFFAIRS STAFF
Qualification
None
Matric
Degree
Diploma
Postgrad
MANAGEMENT
Qualification
None
Matric
Degree
Diploma
Postgrad
OTHER STAFF MEMBERS
Qualification
Matric
Degree
Diploma
Postgrad
76
For planned new appointments, please fill in the following.
NEW APPOINTMENTS BEING PLANNED
What position is to be filled
↑ data entry
Desired
qualification
Preferred Institution/s
What skills sought
specifically
↑ pull-down
menu
↑ pull-down menu
↑ data entry
Do you differentiate between a degree and a diploma qualification?
Yes
No
← checkbox
Please explain?
What value do you perceive the Diploma qualification to have?
77
Please indicate whether or not you are prepared to host
an intern for Work-Integrated Learning.
Would your company be willing to offer a nine (9) month workintegrated learning to a biotechnology student of CPUT?
WORK-INTEGRATED LEARNING
↓ check-box
Yes (9 months)
No
What monthly stipend (TRAVEL & LIVING) will you / your
organization be prepared to offer the student involved with inservice training?
WORK-INTEGRATED LEARNING
↓ check-box
R 3,000
R 3,500
R 4,000
78
specialisation
analytical chemistry
bacteriology
biochemistry
bioinformatics
biology
biomedical engineering
chemical engineering
chemistry
civil engineering
food science
genetics
mathematics
mechanical engineering
molecular biology
soil science
statistics
virology
zoology
medical biosciences
biotechnology
staffnumber
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GEN
ST
1
ND
2
RD
3
qualification
Institutions
degree
Traditional University preferred
diploma
University of Technology preferred
any post-grad UCT
SU
PU
CUT
UWC
WITS
TUT
NMU
RU
KZNU
UFN
Source: V. Ramburan
79
9.2 Appendix 2 – Questionnaire – Social Networking in Organisations
SOCIAL NETWORKS IN ORGANISATIONS
Dear Reader,
Thank you for taking the time to complete this brief questionnaire. We really appreciate it. We have set out
some information below to assist you in completing the survey.
Confidentiality
We assure you that the information contained herein will only be utilised for research purposes. We do not
require names and therefore your anonymity is ensured.
Purpose of the research
We are interested in gauging the informal network activity of individuals in South African organisations.
By that we are referring to the relationships people have with others in their work environment to gain access
to information, enhance their career prospects and meet their social needs among other things. These people
may or may not form part of the official hierarchy in the organisation. In other words you may interact with your
boss because of other reasons than work as well, or you might enjoy discussing your personal life with a
colleague over a cup of tea. You may not use all the contacts for the same reasons.
We are interested in the social networks you currently have in your organisation.
The format of the questionnaire is as follows:
Section A - Your demographic details
Section B - Other information
Section C - Your most important contacts
To answer the questions, kindly change font colour to red and save as your organisation name before
returning.
Thanking you again for your participation.
Regards
Sabine Hellyer
80
DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS
SECTION A
1/ age
Please tell us a bit about yourself.
Fill in OR circle the correct answer.
2/ gender
male
female
3/ company name
4/ highest level of education
less than matric
matric
tertiary qualification
post graduate
6/ nature of employment
5/ race
black
coloured
Indian
white
7/ years with current employer
full time
part time
OTHER INFORMATION
SECTION B
Please tell us a bit about your networking habits.
Please fill in OR circle the appropriate answer.
1/ do you intentionally target people that you want to build relationships with?
yes
no
sometimes
2/ for professional contacts, would you rather network inside or outside the organisation?
(indicate your preference on the scale below)
1
2
3
only outside
4
only inside
Please tell us a bit about your work environment.
If you work in a big company, please focus on your immediate department.
If you work in a small company, consider the whole company.
3/
Diversity of workforce
Please estimate the percentage of people in your company falling in the following categories:
% females
% white people
% people over 40
4/ does your company actively facilitate the formation of networks?
1
active facilitation
2
3
4
no facilitation at all
5/ do you feel excluded from social networks at work because of your
(you can circle more than one answer here)
age
gender
race
personality
skill level
experience
I do not feel excluded
other (please specify)
81
SECTION C
NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS
We now would like you to provide details of your 5 most important relationships in your company , i.e. the people you
most commonly interact with within your organisation. We have given an example of what the answers may look like.
We suggest that you complete one person before moving on to the next.
Please complete all 5 columns.
Please circle OR fill in the appropriate answer.
Example
AB
Initials of person being described
a gender of the person
f - female
m - male
b race group of the person
b - black
w - white
c approximate age of the person
(include coloured and Indian)
(estimate of age)
1
2
3
4
5
f
m
f
m
f
m
f
m
f
m
f
m
b
w
b
w
b
w
b
w
b
w
b
w
35
d approximate education level of person
A - lower than yours
B - similar to yours
C - higher than yours
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
e similarity of this person's skill set to yours?
A - more or less the same as yours
B - some overlapping areas with yours
C - not similar to yours at all
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
f how often do you interact with this person?
A - once a day
B - a few times a week
C - a few times a month
D - a few times a year
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
D
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
A
B
C
g what is your main medium of interaction with this person?
if you have more than one - please rank using the most important
one on top
A - unplanned face-to-face meetings
B - planned face-to-face meetings
C - telephone
D - e-mail
E - instant messaging
C
E
A
h please mark your style of interaction (most frequent on top)
i is your engagement with this person planned?
A - informal discussion during working hours
B - informal discussion after working hours
C - formal discussion during working hours
D - formal discussion after working hours
D
C
B
A
A - never
B - sometimes
C - always
A
B
C
NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS (Continued)
Example
1
2
3
4
5
j what are your main reasons for networking with this person?
tick appropriate reasons
career advancement
technical advice
friendship and support
mentorship
coalition building
to gain social acceptance
sound boarding ideas
improving job security
to gain access to outside networks
√
√
√
√
if you network for other reasons not mentioned above please indicate the reasons below
82
k what is your proximity to this person ?
A - works within 10 metres of you
B - same floor
C - different floor
D - different building
E - different city
F - different country
l what is the position of this person in the organisation?
A - higher than yours
B - equal to yours
C - lower than yours
D - not applicable
E - do not know
m is the person in the same type of function as you?
(secretary, management etc)
n is the person in the same department as you?
(marketing, accounting etc)
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
F
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
A
B
C
D
E
n
y - yes
n - no
y - yes
n - no
y
o how long have you known this person?
please state number of years
3
p which one of these 5 relationships is the most important to you?
(please tick the appropriate one within the double lines)
√
q why is he/she the most important?
(please use the block provided to explain)
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!
Source: S. Zaaiman
83
9.3
Appendix 3 – Interviewee Database
Respondent #
Description of Organisation
1
SMME
2
SMME
3
Agency
4
SMME
5
Government Institute
6
SMME
7
SMME
8
SMME
9
SMME
10
SMME
11
SMME
12
SMME
13
SMME
14
SMME
15
Government Institute
16
SMME
17
SMME
18
SMME
19
SMME
20
SMME/Government Institute
21
Government Institute
22
University 1
23
University 2
24
University 3
25
University 4
26
University 5
27
Government Institute
28
SMME
84
9.4 Appendix 4 – Social Networking in Organisations - Summary
m
w
41
LOWER
3
3
3
4
m
w
43
LOWER
1
1
1
4
1
f
w
35
LOWER
1
1
1
4
f
w
42
LOWER
1
1
1
4
f
b
42
LOWER
1
1
1
4
m
b
35
LOWER
2
1
1
f
w
41
LOWER
3
1
1
2
f
b
33
LOWER
3
1
1
m
b
36
LOWER
2
1
1
f
b
30
LOWER
3
1
1
f
w
30
SIMILAR
1
1
1
f
w
40
SIMILAR
1
1
1
3
f
w
25
LOWER
2.5
1
1
2
m
b
25
LOWER
2.5
1
1
2
m
b
25
LOWER
2.5
1
1
2
STYLE
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ENGAGEMENT
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
REASONS
10
10
10
10
10
2
3
4
7
3
4
7
1
3
4
7
1
2
3
4
7
9
1
3
4
7
9
1
2
4
5
7
10
1
2
4
5
7
10
1
2
4
5
7
10
1
2
4
5
7
10
PROXIMITY
POSITION
FUNCTION
DEPARTMENT
TIME
IMPORTANCE
1
1
N
N
6
1LL
1
3
N
Y
4
ALL
1
3
N
Y
4
ALL
1
3
N
Y
3
ALL
1
3
N
Y
3
ALL
1
1
n
n
3
x
1
2
y
y
2
1
2
y
n
1
1
1
2
3
n
y
9
x
2
3
n
y
5
2
3
n
y
2
2
3
n
y
3
RESPONDENT
GENDER
RACE
AGE
EDUCATION
Highest SKILL
INTERACT
MEDIUM
4
m
w
37
SIMILAR
2
1
2
1
3
4
1
3
2
4
2
m
w
34
SIMILAR
3
2
3
2
5
1
2
4
5
7
10
2
3
5
7
2
3
n
y
3
1
2
n
y
6
x
5
m
w
33
HIGHER
2
1
1
3
2
4
1
3
2
4
2
m
b
30
SIMILAR
2
2
1
2
3
4
1
3
2
4
2
m
w
28
SIMILAR
2
2
1
2
3
4
1
3
2
4
2
m
w
40
HIGHER
2
1
2
4
3
1
3
1
2
4
2
f
w
27
LOWER
3
2
4
1
2
3
1
4
2
2
2
3
5
7
9
2
3
5
7
2
3
5
7
2
3
4
5
7
9
3
5
7
10
4
4
n
n
4
4
4
n
n
3
x
4
4
n
n
2
4
4
n
n
2
1
1
y
n
9
x
f
w
43
HIGHER
2
2
1
3
4
2
1
3
2
4
2
f
w
40
HIGHER
2
2
2
1
3
4
1
3
2
4
2
3
5
3
4
7
9
6
2
n
y
20
X
4
3
n
n
9
x
1
2
2
6
m
b
23
LOWER
3
3
3
2
4
f
b
23
LOWER
3
4
1
2
4
f
w
50
HIGHER
3
1
1
4
2
f
b
39
HIGHER
3
1
1
3
4
7
m
w
39
LOWER
3
1
3
4
5
m
b
37
LOWER
3
1
5
3
4
m
b
23
LOWER
3
1
1
4
3
m
w
40
SIMILAR
2
1
1
4
8
m
w
35
SIMILAR
2
1
1
4
3
4
m
w
40
LOWER
3
3
4
2
1
3
3
4
3
4
1
3
2
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
3
1
1
1
3
2
1
5
1
2
3
2
3
4
5
7
9
1
2
3
4
2
5
1
2
3
2
3
4
7
2
5
7
10
3
3
n
n
4
3
3
n
n
4
3
3
n
n
3
3
3
n
n
3
1
3
y
n
2
1
2
3
1
2
4
5
7
8
9
4
1
y
n
2
x
2
3
5
10
1
2
3
2
3
4
7
1
3
n
n
3
1
3
n
n
8
1
3
n
n
1
m
b
35
SIMILAR
2
1
1
2
5
2
n
n
3
x
85

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project