084 - Industry lead research with Steve Gwynne and Mike Spearpoint

WEBVTT

00:00:00.217 --> 00:00:00.898
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Hello everybody.

00:00:00.957 --> 00:00:04.717
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>My name is Wojciech Wegrzynski, I'm a professor of fire science at ITB in Poland.

00:00:04.717 --> 00:00:08.234
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I'm super happy to welcome you to another Fire Science Show episodes.

00:00:08.708 --> 00:00:11.438
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>We had the great streak of amazing episodes.

00:00:11.454 --> 00:00:16.943
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Lately, and I hope today does not break the streak because I am interviewing two.

00:00:17.423 --> 00:00:18.204
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Absolute star.

00:00:18.204 --> 00:00:19.524
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So fire science.

00:00:19.974 --> 00:00:23.774
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>That is professor Steve Gwynne from Movement strategies And Lund university.

00:00:24.333 --> 00:00:24.963
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And Dr.

00:00:24.963 --> 00:00:32.103
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Mike Spearpoint the research lead at OFR and I'm going to talk with them about the industry led research.

00:00:32.704 --> 00:00:39.064
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I'm going to tell you a little more about the episode in few moments, but I really can't wait to give you the big announcement of this year.

00:00:39.262 --> 00:00:40.363
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>The one that I was teasing.

00:00:40.433 --> 00:00:45.167
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>in the previous episode, So it finally happened for the year 2023.

00:00:45.167 --> 00:00:48.857
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>The Fire Science Show has partnered with OFR Consultants.

00:00:49.188 --> 00:00:51.527
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Who are now the diamond sponsor of the podcast.

00:00:51.783 --> 00:00:52.618
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>This is good news.

00:00:52.648 --> 00:00:59.698
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Not only for me, but for everyone, because with allow me to produce this podcast without any paywalls or limitations.

00:00:59.758 --> 00:01:06.778
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, in the high quality that you expect and with all creative freedom that I used to have.

00:01:07.018 --> 00:01:09.658
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So I guess it's a win-win for everyone.

00:01:09.908 --> 00:01:19.778
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I am also very happy that the partner of the podcast is actually OFR who is a company that has great set of core values that are very close to my.

00:01:19.855 --> 00:01:21.090
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Set of core values.

00:01:21.090 --> 00:01:27.210
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>OFR was built by fire safety and risk engineers for the purpose of doing fire safety and risk engineering.

00:01:27.210 --> 00:01:31.534
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So they're very focused in line with what we are talking about in the podcast.

00:01:32.013 --> 00:01:37.263
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It's also a company that does a lot of research, but that that's, you're going to learn from today's episode.

00:01:37.774 --> 00:01:47.548
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, with OFR we have a lot of things in common, and I am super happy to work with them to provide you this podcast as it was, or maybe even better for at least one long year.

00:01:47.608 --> 00:01:50.337
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So the show is not going anywhere.

00:01:50.596 --> 00:01:59.850
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, I don't want to ramble too much about the collaboration details and I will have a Q and a episode planned for later this week where I will be answering.

00:01:59.941 --> 00:02:09.390
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, the questions and coming and commenting the listener experience survey that went out in December, I've gathered a lot of feedback and I would love to comment on that.

00:02:09.600 --> 00:02:16.411
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And also it will give me a chance to talk about the  OFR partnership and how we, it will unravel for the podcast.

00:02:16.411 --> 00:02:18.031
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>What does it mean for the podcast?

00:02:18.031 --> 00:02:19.350
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>What does it mean for the listeners?

00:02:19.741 --> 00:02:22.621
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>If you would like to know that join the in the Q and a episode.

00:02:23.161 --> 00:02:26.281
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Now, back to the podcast episode, Mike Spearpoint and Steve Gwynne or sure.

00:02:26.311 --> 00:02:27.871
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Our legends of fire safety.

00:02:28.140 --> 00:02:31.320
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And they both come from very interesting backgrounds.

00:02:31.381 --> 00:02:33.061
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Both of them have been academics.

00:02:33.091 --> 00:02:38.491
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Both of them worked for governments or in some sort of government laboratory sense of point of their careers.

00:02:38.971 --> 00:02:42.631
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And now both of them are research leaders in large engineering companies.

00:02:42.631 --> 00:02:44.371
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And that's why I've invited them.

00:02:44.603 --> 00:02:49.489
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Because when you look at the finer science landscape, it is obvious that companies.

00:02:49.629 --> 00:02:54.039
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Do a lot of research, a lot of useful research, a lot of impactful research.

00:02:54.490 --> 00:02:59.800
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I would like to understand why, like, why are they investing in science usage?

00:02:59.800 --> 00:03:06.939
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>What are their KPIs, what they want to get back from that and how it actually works, how it differs from academia.

00:03:07.180 --> 00:03:11.469
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I think it's a very interesting thing to discuss, especially that the podcast is listened by.

00:03:11.483 --> 00:03:16.823
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>A lot of young people who struggle with their life decisions, whether go academia or whether go  industry.

00:03:16.902 --> 00:03:19.122
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I can tell you both roads are great.

00:03:19.332 --> 00:03:26.575
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I hope this podcast episode will, Show you that the differences in some aspects are maybe less than you would think of.

00:03:26.936 --> 00:03:29.545
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So add that was a very long intro.

00:03:29.695 --> 00:03:31.346
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So let's not prolong this anymore.

00:03:31.355 --> 00:03:33.876
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Let's spin the music and let's go with the episode.

00:03:57.740 --> 00:04:05.750
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>This podcast is brought to you in collaboration with OFR Consultants and multi award winning independent consultancy, dedicated to addressing fire safety challenges.

00:04:06.104 --> 00:04:08.385
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>OFR is the UKs leading fire risk consultancy.

00:04:08.656 --> 00:04:17.184
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It's globally established team has developed the reputation for preeminent fire engineering expertise with colleagues working across the world to help protect people, property and planet.

00:04:17.512 --> 00:04:20.720
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>In the UK, that includes the redevelopment of the Printworks building in Canada.

00:04:20.720 --> 00:04:20.990
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Water.

00:04:21.290 --> 00:04:31.430
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>One of the tallest residential buildings in Birmingham, as well as historic structures, like the Jenners Building in Edinburgh and the National Gallery National History Museum and the National Portrait Gallery in London.

00:04:31.879 --> 00:04:38.120
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Internationally it's work ranges from the Antarctic to the Atacama desert in Chile and the number of projects across Africa.

00:04:38.689 --> 00:04:44.360
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>In 2023, OFR will grow with its team and it's keen to hear from industry professionals who want to collaborate.

00:04:44.389 --> 00:04:46.100
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>On fire safety futures this year.

00:04:46.459 --> 00:04:48.949
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Get in touch at ofrconsultants.com.

00:04:49.399 --> 00:04:51.620
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And now back to the episode with Mike and Steve.

00:04:52.117 --> 00:04:52.958
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Hello everybody.

00:04:52.958 --> 00:04:54.718
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Welcome to the Fire Science Show.

00:04:54.937 --> 00:05:02.100
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I'm here today with two great experts, uh, first Professor Steve Gwynne from Movement Strategies and Lund University.

00:05:02.120 --> 00:05:02.819
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Hey Steve,

00:05:03.149 --> 00:05:04.060
<v Steve Gwynne>Hi, how's it going?

00:05:04.279 --> 00:05:05.100
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I'm going great.

00:05:05.100 --> 00:05:05.740
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Thank you Steve.

00:05:06.079 --> 00:05:09.379
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And Mike Spearpoint, head of research at of R.OFRHey, Mike.

00:05:10.326 --> 00:05:11.026
<v Mike Spearpoint>See you again.

00:05:11.151 --> 00:05:11.572
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yep.

00:05:11.572 --> 00:05:12.812
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Happy to have you.

00:05:13.271 --> 00:05:17.732
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>One of the most requested comebacks to the podcast by the audience.

00:05:17.732 --> 00:05:19.692
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, that's a heavy burden, Mike.

00:05:19.692 --> 00:05:29.351
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I ho I hope we can all carry that guys, uh, that's an interesting topic proposed for the today's session, which is industry led research.

00:05:29.932 --> 00:05:44.031
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, the point of this discussion is, I guess to understand the role industry has in building up fire research, maybe even fire science, from the email exchange before the episode and the little discussion we just had.

00:05:44.062 --> 00:05:54.312
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I guess it's, uh, nice to start with the fact that we have research science and development, which are three things, but maybe, uh, three different things.

00:05:54.401 --> 00:05:59.165
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So, maybe one of you would like to start where's the research in the grand scheme of science?

00:05:59.461 --> 00:05:59.812
<v Steve Gwynne>so.

00:05:59.812 --> 00:06:02.947
<v Steve Gwynne>I'll speak from the evacuation side of the equation, right?

00:06:02.947 --> 00:06:06.088
<v Steve Gwynne>The human behavior side of it, or you know, the people movement side of it.

00:06:06.225 --> 00:06:06.634
<v Steve Gwynne>I think.

00:06:07.276 --> 00:06:14.959
<v Steve Gwynne>because it's in, in comparison to our understanding and and practice of, of fire science, it's a, slightly, less mature field.

00:06:15.430 --> 00:06:25.442
<v Steve Gwynne>Oftentimes, the practice of it in, in industry requires more dedicated research because there's less boiler plate out there in order to do the thing in practice.

00:06:25.442 --> 00:06:35.463
<v Steve Gwynne>So you end up doing quite a lot of background work, even in those projects that are not dedicated research projects, but are, consultancy projects, but actually it involves new thinking.

00:06:35.742 --> 00:06:43.569
<v Steve Gwynne>So my, in my head research in that context has value beyond the specific consultancy project on which you are working.

00:06:43.807 --> 00:06:48.653
<v Steve Gwynne>And that may actually be a new method or actually going out and collecting new data.

00:06:48.702 --> 00:06:51.213
<v Steve Gwynne>It may be applying it in a novel way.

00:06:51.526 --> 00:07:08.298
<v Steve Gwynne>But that there's value beyond the lifetime of that project that might help others understand the problem or help someone within the company do the thing again, or indeed, more broadly may provide insights into how that should be done or might be done by other, in practice.

00:07:08.307 --> 00:07:11.992
<v Steve Gwynne>So mu much like all research, it's meant to advance the field.

00:07:11.992 --> 00:07:15.601
<v Steve Gwynne>That that field may be on multiple, different pastures, I

00:07:15.666 --> 00:07:22.086
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But does it mean that we're missing so many puzzles that it's necessity to do the work you're doing.

00:07:22.411 --> 00:07:28.651
<v Steve Gwynne>Well, I think, I think it's a slight misrepresentation, I think to ever think that, the field of knowledge is complete or stable.

00:07:28.961 --> 00:07:31.495
<v Steve Gwynne>and, and think of what happened in, the pandemic, right?

00:07:31.495 --> 00:07:36.406
<v Steve Gwynne>We thought we understood a lot of things and we certainly didn't, and we had to scramble to update that understanding.

00:07:36.637 --> 00:07:47.730
<v Steve Gwynne>I think that's very much true in an area such as, you know, human behavior and fire, which is very sensitive to changes in design to changes in technology to changes in demographics.

00:07:47.980 --> 00:07:55.744
<v Steve Gwynne>So you've got multiple different, uh, influences, very few of which are under your control, but you are subject to their impact.

00:07:55.744 --> 00:07:58.264
<v Steve Gwynne>And then you, you have to understand the response.

00:07:58.264 --> 00:08:00.279
<v Steve Gwynne>And this is, both true of research and practice.

00:08:00.279 --> 00:08:07.747
<v Steve Gwynne>There's a constant need to update your understanding, and that inevitably requires someone to go out, and do the updating.

00:08:07.747 --> 00:08:12.442
<v Steve Gwynne>And, and that could be a dedicated researcher or someone engaged in a research task.

00:08:12.781 --> 00:08:26.201
<v Steve Gwynne>But I'm not suggesting for one second that that doesn't also exist on the other side of the equation, but I think there's a bigger pile of, of of practical processes and, uh, that, that have been applied over a longer

00:08:26.451 --> 00:08:26.923
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah,

00:08:26.923 --> 00:08:29.803
<v Mike Spearpoint>So I think Steve brings up some, some interesting points there.

00:08:29.803 --> 00:08:37.043
<v Mike Spearpoint>And now I'm gonna dive into my amateur philosophy here, but you know, the idea of knowledge and what we know.

00:08:37.538 --> 00:08:41.453
<v Mike Spearpoint>And don't, I might drift off to what, what we might call the Donald Rumsfeld model.

00:08:41.716 --> 00:08:43.716
<v Mike Spearpoint>but we've got this sort of thing that Steve brings up here.

00:08:43.716 --> 00:08:48.756
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's kind of like there's an understanding of what we might call the fundamental mechanism of the universe.

00:08:48.756 --> 00:08:50.397
<v Mike Spearpoint>Chemistry, physics, or whatever.

00:08:50.397 --> 00:08:52.236
<v Mike Spearpoint>We, we know, we don't know everything about it.

00:08:52.570 --> 00:08:59.490
<v Mike Spearpoint>Maybe there's a possibility that one day we might know everything about it, and, but from my understanding, they're kind of fixed.

00:08:59.490 --> 00:09:00.049
<v Mike Spearpoint>Right?

00:09:00.179 --> 00:09:08.730
<v Mike Spearpoint>Whereas there's the sort of things that Steve's talking about, which we might call this, the research around society and society is changing, right?

00:09:08.740 --> 00:09:20.756
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, know, the way we we live now is different to previous generations and the way that people organize themselves, the way we have our sort of, um, acceptable levels of risk and all sorts of things.

00:09:20.756 --> 00:09:24.616
<v Mike Spearpoint>So there's a kind of ongoing researcher that's a of societal work.

00:09:24.917 --> 00:09:40.629
<v Mike Spearpoint>And, talk, I'm thinking about, for example, bringing up some research that myself and Steve, and you've had Anne Templeton on before, where Anne's part of that work has been looking at things like how much people trust current guidance in terms of fire safety.

00:09:40.690 --> 00:09:52.777
<v Mike Spearpoint>And that's a societal question cuz that, a moving target as people, are exposed to new events and their behavior change and family structures change and their demographics change.

00:09:52.937 --> 00:09:59.988
<v Mike Spearpoint>Those things are never kind of, fixed, in the same way that we might understand chemical reactions are sort of fixed.

00:10:00.179 --> 00:10:05.336
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, so there's kind of different types of research, in terms of those, those sort of, that spectrum.

00:10:05.769 --> 00:10:22.095
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>When Steve brought this, this topic, my immediate thought would that, that's interesting to talk industry led research because in fire science, I think, I look over the last years, the best papers I've read, a lot of them were industry led.

00:10:22.095 --> 00:10:31.654
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like the, it was literally coming from companies, so many interesting, uh, projects, developments that were carried by literally commercial companies.

00:10:32.075 --> 00:10:35.775
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I don't necessarily see a very.

00:10:36.441 --> 00:10:39.291
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Direct link between research and revenue.

00:10:39.291 --> 00:10:48.130
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>You know, for a commercial company, I would expect it's like when company does something, they will do it for revenue, uh, because it, it increases their commercial viability.

00:10:48.316 --> 00:11:02.971
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I see this not the case in, in a fire science and it really intrigues me because, you know, I'm coming from a cultural, uh, circle where the scientist is the one and, and at the top of the mountain, and they give you the knowledge and you are, very welcome to apply that.

00:11:03.630 --> 00:11:12.974
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But, having the idea that, a company, privately owned, company that is essence maybe driven by profit would do, uh, scientific fundamental research.

00:11:12.974 --> 00:11:15.604
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It, it's not something, uh, very obvious to me.

00:11:15.604 --> 00:11:22.964
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And yet in fire science, as I venture outside of my cultural circle, I see that a lot and it's model that that's really working.

00:11:23.243 --> 00:11:23.917
<v Steve Gwynne>I do think we.

00:11:24.471 --> 00:11:28.711
<v Steve Gwynne>Irrespective of where you are, you are working with a specific currency, right?

00:11:28.711 --> 00:11:38.611
<v Steve Gwynne>And in academia, that currency could be publications I'm simplifying, but, you know, and in industry, currency may be, involves several different, example.

00:11:38.611 --> 00:11:55.024
<v Steve Gwynne>So it could be publishing maybe a, another currency I'm certainly encouraged to publish, a is to make sure we, share insights provided to demonstrate competency and, and subject matter expertise and also to try and shape the area in which we work, right?

00:11:55.024 --> 00:12:02.195
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean it part of what we do actually in practices in some ways to influence the next generation of, of work.

00:12:02.245 --> 00:12:09.841
<v Steve Gwynne>Be that through, the research that we do or through, the, the practice that we do uh, you mentioned about, why, why would industry want to do it?

00:12:09.841 --> 00:12:19.297
<v Steve Gwynne>Well, I think what has evolved, evolved over the last 20, 30 years is that the idea that research is only done in one place, I think is, has, has evolved somewhat.

00:12:19.297 --> 00:12:38.530
<v Steve Gwynne>And I think what's, there is a natural home for it in academia because of the currency, because of the currency of publications and, student development and so on, um, industry, has access to different types of resources maybe that academia doesn't, know, it has an, access to ongoing real world problems

00:12:39.035 --> 00:12:39.525
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Okay.

00:12:39.730 --> 00:12:40.171
<v Steve Gwynne>to address.

00:12:40.780 --> 00:12:55.433
<v Steve Gwynne>So one of the classics at the moment, I guess is the access to large pots of what they call them, data reservoirs that companies collect that industry might interact with on a more regular basis that, The research in an academic environment might not have access to.

00:12:55.433 --> 00:12:59.221
<v Steve Gwynne>Now I'm not saying it shouldn't have access to it, I'm saying it's just less, less, direct.

00:12:59.722 --> 00:13:12.583
<v Steve Gwynne>and so that's why oftentimes an industrial partner is so welcoming to a, a research project because it ha it provides that bridge to the, the ongoing, application of, of expertise and practice.

00:13:12.985 --> 00:13:24.537
<v Steve Gwynne>I also think, and then I'll pass over, I do think that, and I'd say it's very unusual to have three people in a discussion that have or are working in government industry and, and academia, you know, or at some

00:13:24.697 --> 00:13:25.586
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>A mix of them

00:13:25.736 --> 00:13:26.216
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah.

00:13:26.216 --> 00:13:26.456
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah.

00:13:26.740 --> 00:13:29.990
<v Steve Gwynne>I think in my head, I see them moving at different speeds.

00:13:30.572 --> 00:13:37.956
<v Steve Gwynne>Typically, and I say I'm simplifying industry deals with the, the shorter term or can deal with the shorter term.

00:13:38.366 --> 00:13:43.777
<v Steve Gwynne>Then you have academia, which he's trying to say, what do we know about that, that thing.

00:13:43.777 --> 00:13:47.817
<v Steve Gwynne>And then government, which is how do we use that at the longer, in the longer frame timeframe.

00:13:48.471 --> 00:13:53.510
<v Steve Gwynne>it historically, academia was the one that was responsible for shaping the new knowledge.

00:13:54.030 --> 00:13:56.510
<v Steve Gwynne>I, I just think those lines are much more blurred now

00:13:56.912 --> 00:13:57.761
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Absolutely.

00:13:57.761 --> 00:13:59.522
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>They, they blurred a lot.

00:13:59.621 --> 00:14:14.125
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, when I see direct gain in this short term research that, that you've mentioned, like direct, answers for questions maybe, but also see a lot of fundamental research that may not lead to direct breakthrough, direct discovery.

00:14:14.466 --> 00:14:17.729
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Not, not something you can build commerce on for sure.

00:14:17.729 --> 00:14:25.842
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So, so it's also some sort of this higher motivation, which I would expect from academia, not from a company.

00:14:26.197 --> 00:14:32.061
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah, I just wanted to sort of take that thing that Steve talked about, the blurring of the lines and, how long that's been going.

00:14:32.191 --> 00:14:33.461
<v Mike Spearpoint>It, it might be hard.

00:14:34.120 --> 00:14:55.686
<v Mike Spearpoint>To judge and I, again, when we are kind of preparing for this discussion, but, we are kind of, sort of talked, touched on this, but in the end, when you look at, there's not this simple, delineation between industry research and academic research because, there's people who, industry who, interact with academia, they, Co supervised students and, and partner with universities.

00:14:55.686 --> 00:15:01.645
<v Mike Spearpoint>They might be, I mean, I know Steve's a professor at Lund University, so, so there's interaction that way.

00:15:01.785 --> 00:15:08.741
<v Mike Spearpoint>And of course there's interaction the other way that people in academia may be, contracted to provide advice to industry.

00:15:08.741 --> 00:15:10.261
<v Mike Spearpoint>So there's that, there's synergy there.

00:15:10.611 --> 00:15:19.599
<v Mike Spearpoint>Some academics will end up developing a product that might be span off by a university, and still have a, be a stakeholder in that product development.

00:15:19.769 --> 00:15:29.448
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, there's, there's this kind of, you know, some people think there's idea, there's just sort of academic research and industry research, but there's a much more melting pot of people who are interacting across.

00:15:29.932 --> 00:15:32.173
<v Mike Spearpoint>If you call it a boundary, but it isn't really a boundary.

00:15:32.173 --> 00:15:36.004
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's a, it's a continuum of, of those two, I suppose at two Extremes.

00:15:36.004 --> 00:15:40.203
<v Mike Spearpoint>We might think of one end industry research being very sort of utilitarian.

00:15:40.203 --> 00:15:43.323
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's solving a problem for today that needs to be solved.

00:15:43.384 --> 00:15:49.480
<v Mike Spearpoint>And the other end of the spectrum is kind of the academic side is, research is not there to, for any utility.

00:15:49.677 --> 00:15:56.846
<v Mike Spearpoint>uh, it doesn't matter whether it's useful or not, it's part of civilization is to, and human kind is to do these sort of thinking.

00:15:56.846 --> 00:15:58.407
<v Mike Spearpoint>And it doesn't matter what the value is.

00:15:58.407 --> 00:16:06.082
<v Mike Spearpoint>But again, I think there's, again, quite a wide continuum to solving tomorrow today's problem, to not solving a problem ever at all.

00:16:06.082 --> 00:16:07.230
<v Mike Spearpoint>somewhere in between.

00:16:07.230 --> 00:16:08.791
<v Mike Spearpoint>There's a, there's a lot of in between.

00:16:08.975 --> 00:16:23.902
<v Steve Gwynne>I do think, sorry, Cause I think it's an important point is if you think of fire safety or fire science or fire engineering, it's a, all of these things are, unless you're working at the extreme limits of fire science at one end, a pretty applied area.

00:16:24.331 --> 00:16:31.121
<v Steve Gwynne>Like where the journey between us in engineering is much shorter than it might be in some of the more of pure mathematics or,

00:16:31.971 --> 00:16:32.410
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Particle physics.

00:16:32.764 --> 00:16:33.331
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah, yeah.

00:16:33.380 --> 00:16:34.250
<v Steve Gwynne>Or whatever, you know.

00:16:34.250 --> 00:16:38.941
<v Steve Gwynne>Uh, and so that, distinction as Mike said is it's much grayer than it might otherwise be.

00:16:39.010 --> 00:16:43.048
<v Steve Gwynne>I also think as well, don't forget that many universities actively consult.

00:16:43.311 --> 00:16:52.011
<v Steve Gwynne>So there are many research departments that supplement their income through doing either model development, or supporting a consultancy or doing spin out.

00:16:52.292 --> 00:17:06.942
<v Steve Gwynne>so it's not just a, a land grab of industry trying to hoover up or grab, grab research, I can't think of a project where I've been in, been involved in where there was university's industry and government presence that would've benefited by only being one of those.

00:17:07.392 --> 00:17:24.317
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I would consider myself in this role as well as a research institute that does actively consult being underneath the government's wing, having a certified fire laboratory, having a consultancy practice, and being a scientist at the same time where I have to publish papers, do fundamental research.

00:17:24.950 --> 00:17:28.255
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I often also take this chance, to do selfish research.

00:17:28.255 --> 00:17:35.694
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I think I've said it many times on the, on the podcast that I, I try to research things that are very relevant to my practical work.

00:17:35.694 --> 00:17:41.891
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I highly appreciate actually the capability to have a real world, uh, problems at hand.

00:17:42.518 --> 00:17:57.773
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I see that, especially when reviewing papers, many, Researchers over deliver on the promise, like, this paper will serve either fire investigators in this way or this will change the way how we detect fires in buildings.

00:17:57.903 --> 00:17:59.294
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Oh boy.

00:17:59.304 --> 00:18:00.478
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>No, it will, it'll not.

00:18:00.484 --> 00:18:06.805
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I mean it's an interesting concept, but it's, it concepts, we have a lot solutions is that we lack you.

00:18:06.805 --> 00:18:15.548
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>You think this, having this exposure to real world problems is something that anchors this science to the realm of feasibility.

00:18:15.577 --> 00:18:16.067
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah.

00:18:16.248 --> 00:18:20.127
<v Steve Gwynne>I think, I think, well, first of all, humility's a great thing, right?

00:18:20.127 --> 00:18:26.763
<v Steve Gwynne>I think o overreaching is one of the more dangerous, traits that a researcher or a practitioner can have.

00:18:27.233 --> 00:18:30.834
<v Steve Gwynne>I think that the goal is often subtly different.

00:18:31.013 --> 00:18:38.769
<v Steve Gwynne>as someone whose role has been to try and develop a research capability and bring in researchers, the natural instinct of a researcher is to keep pushing.

00:18:39.479 --> 00:18:47.798
<v Steve Gwynne>To keep going in a certain direction until they've gone as far as they can, and within the lifetime of a project that may, they may not have that scope.

00:18:47.798 --> 00:18:49.980
<v Steve Gwynne>And that is a limiting factor in industry.

00:18:49.980 --> 00:18:53.285
<v Steve Gwynne>Whereas you have a clearer deliverable that has to be met.

00:18:53.704 --> 00:18:55.724
<v Steve Gwynne>Now, that doesn't mean you compromise the message.

00:18:56.174 --> 00:19:06.115
<v Steve Gwynne>It means you, target that particular problem, but then you may continue beyond it and publish the broader work or publish, you know, and, and produce something that's genuinely novel in the field.

00:19:06.307 --> 00:19:22.873
<v Steve Gwynne>But there's that twin track of doing what needs to be done for the thing in front of you so that it's good enough, and then answering the broader research question, which may require future or more broader thinking or future work, and then actually into a policy or, or regulatory structure, which is.

00:19:23.448 --> 00:19:27.008
<v Steve Gwynne>almost bringing it, reigning it back in and saying, well, okay, this is what we know is gonna happen.

00:19:27.008 --> 00:19:30.184
<v Steve Gwynne>Well, what can we really expect to influence on a broader scale?

00:19:30.184 --> 00:19:37.892
<v Steve Gwynne>So there's that sort of tug of war going on, I think, in terms of expectations and, I don't, but what you can't do is compromise the message.

00:19:38.571 --> 00:19:46.097
<v Steve Gwynne>You can't change your subject matter slash expert opinion to suit a particular client.

00:19:46.377 --> 00:19:53.484
<v Steve Gwynne>You just make sure that the message is understood in the context of the project, and it's suitable for the, the scenarios you're looking at.

00:19:53.484 --> 00:19:54.884
<v Steve Gwynne>I guess that's a slightly different question.

00:19:55.240 --> 00:19:55.720
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah.

00:19:56.150 --> 00:20:01.490
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Mike, is it any hard to, to, uh, keep this integrity I don't think so.

00:20:01.805 --> 00:20:02.515
<v Mike Spearpoint>no, I don't.

00:20:02.625 --> 00:20:03.755
<v Mike Spearpoint>I, I don't think so.

00:20:04.152 --> 00:20:08.636
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>it's important, but it's important to keep it, and if you want to keep it, you will keep it.

00:20:08.646 --> 00:20:09.876
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, and I

00:20:10.096 --> 00:20:11.346
<v Steve Gwynne>I think it's a personal thing, right?

00:20:11.346 --> 00:20:15.779
<v Steve Gwynne>It's as much as it's about hiring the right people and, and, and having oversight.

00:20:16.002 --> 00:20:19.462
<v Steve Gwynne>and also I think as well, like it goes back to that currency thing, right?

00:20:19.462 --> 00:20:22.383
<v Steve Gwynne>The currency of publications and the currency of quality of work.

00:20:22.607 --> 00:20:25.586
<v Steve Gwynne>the work is really scrutinized in a, in an industrial environment.

00:20:25.586 --> 00:20:27.507
<v Steve Gwynne>It's not just pushed out the door.

00:20:27.646 --> 00:20:33.930
<v Steve Gwynne>The reputation a, an engineering company that has a science background, and that is producing intelligence in one form or another.

00:20:34.259 --> 00:20:45.247
<v Steve Gwynne>If you, if you are caught, sort of, uh, um, cooking the books or taking shortcuts, that is a quick track to undermining your reputation and as, as corporates would call it, their branding.

00:20:45.247 --> 00:20:52.898
<v Steve Gwynne>Do you, I mean their brand, if, if, you don't wanna be caught doing that because those shortcuts cost you a lot of, A lot of money and potentially existence.

00:20:52.951 --> 00:21:14.375
<v Steve Gwynne>you, if you, if you can't be trusted and you don't have processes in place, just as academics institutions have pro those processes of oversight and ethics equivalent, we may call them different things, but we, we certainly have oversight and we certainly even refer to those type of ethics requirements as and when they're appropriate in, in, from, from other external organizations.

00:21:14.924 --> 00:21:22.248
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, as I was saying before we started the conversation, I mean, I happened to be doing a little talk on ethics last week at a university.

00:21:22.268 --> 00:21:33.795
<v Mike Spearpoint>But of course, all of us are engineers, and when you're a chartered engineer, you're all signing up to a, an ethical, framework through, in my case, the engineering council, and then through the Institute of Fire Engineers.

00:21:34.055 --> 00:21:50.238
<v Mike Spearpoint>so those, and those ethics, are, um, like Steve says, they're, they're similar or if not the same for academia, but and it all kind of stems you might say from your, personal, I mean, obviously you've got, you've got your employer, your industry, that, the ethical standards to meet there.

00:21:50.238 --> 00:21:52.365
<v Mike Spearpoint>But then of course there's, you, you've got your own ethical.

00:21:53.555 --> 00:21:53.634
<v Mike Spearpoint>Standard.

00:21:53.634 --> 00:22:04.125
<v Mike Spearpoint>And part of that discussion I was having last week was some of these things are, you know, some of these questions can get quite tricky in terms of what might be seen as right and wrong.

00:22:04.258 --> 00:22:08.347
<v Mike Spearpoint>and again, I dare not delve too much into my amateur philosophy.

00:22:08.347 --> 00:22:13.667
<v Mike Spearpoint>I've got a morality to read that's just, I've just bought, so, and I'll come back to that.

00:22:13.688 --> 00:22:17.147
<v Mike Spearpoint>And another one of called Ethics in Construction, which I need to read.

00:22:17.478 --> 00:22:19.815
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, uh, that's another day's reading or

00:22:19.974 --> 00:22:27.647
<v Steve Gwynne>do, I do think though, Mike, there is a, on a more basic level, if you what, whatever we do, right, whether it's in, in research, supporting a project or even a.

00:22:27.762 --> 00:22:37.163
<v Steve Gwynne>A dedicated research project in and of itself, the outcome that's gonna be produced is undoubtedly imperfect, partial, and potentially incorrect.

00:22:37.359 --> 00:22:38.160
<v Steve Gwynne>uh, at some point.

00:22:38.329 --> 00:22:44.630
<v Steve Gwynne>As, as assessed in the future, most if not all scientific understanding will be overthrown in some form or another.

00:22:44.970 --> 00:22:46.450
<v Steve Gwynne>especially in, in engineering.

00:22:46.450 --> 00:22:54.670
<v Steve Gwynne>And, and know, in in engineering research or practice, it will be supplanted by some better approach and some planted by more appropriate data.

00:22:55.027 --> 00:23:02.883
<v Steve Gwynne>So that humility that you need going in and the, the associated skepticism that you must have to question the validity of what you are doing.

00:23:02.883 --> 00:23:10.803
<v Steve Gwynne>And that validity can get into ethics and it can get into process and it can get into presentation and sharing as much of the background information as you can.

00:23:10.803 --> 00:23:12.002
<v Steve Gwynne>And that sort of transparency.

00:23:12.482 --> 00:23:22.462
<v Steve Gwynne>uh, and you mentioned it earlier, vo check about reviewing articles, you know, If you've got the, a sufficiently seasoned eye, you know, where people are not being sufficiently transparent.

00:23:22.942 --> 00:23:29.222
<v Steve Gwynne>you know, where people are not a masking something, because they're somewhat tentative about sharing a detail.

00:23:29.651 --> 00:23:37.007
<v Steve Gwynne>but I think it's just better to, to acknowledge right upfront, like this is, everything could have been done better if you'd have started it at the end of the project.

00:23:37.353 --> 00:23:37.772
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yes.

00:23:38.208 --> 00:23:57.865
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>when, conceptualizing this talk, I had this, immediate example of, of where the industry led research could go rogue and that that is a case when someone would be researching a feature of their product and by this research they discovered doesn't work like as, as expected.

00:23:58.204 --> 00:24:04.018
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, uh, I guess this would be a place for, for the most difficult, uh, choices to be done.

00:24:04.018 --> 00:24:10.295
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like do we stuff this into, uh, closet and, and, and, never, uh, surface this research.

00:24:10.295 --> 00:24:13.494
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But, uh, these, these things also have a history of, backfiring.

00:24:13.494 --> 00:24:16.041
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like what you said, Steve, about, the reputation gains.

00:24:16.041 --> 00:24:21.922
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I, I, for a long time, I, I thought this, this is an industry, this is a very specific industry problem.

00:24:21.922 --> 00:24:26.882
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But then I, came to realization, that, and, and now I'm going a metro philosophy.

00:24:26.882 --> 00:24:33.605
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Mike many researchers with, invest their lifetimes in their theories and they would be very defendant of the theory.

00:24:33.734 --> 00:24:34.057
<v Steve Gwynne>Yep.

00:24:34.153 --> 00:24:54.393
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Even when faced with the, uh, proof that it's different, like you, Steve said, it inevitably it will be superseded by something, better either a different concept, either a more precise, uh, definition, either by realization that there are more variables into the equation that completely change the outcome.

00:24:54.603 --> 00:24:57.393
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It it'll be superseded and, and the this supers precision.

00:24:57.393 --> 00:24:59.990
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, this, this process very difficult.

00:24:59.990 --> 00:25:10.450
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And here again, you may be a scientist in an ivory tower and find something that contradicts lifetime of your discovery, and you would be confronted with the exact same, as an industrial.

00:25:10.859 --> 00:25:17.250
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, for some reason I felt that industrial, it's, it's like more, uh, obvious or more easy.

00:25:17.250 --> 00:25:22.809
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But now, now, now I see academic would, would, uh, have the same problem, right?

00:25:23.423 --> 00:25:35.817
<v Steve Gwynne>unless you are, we, we is of this view of like, there was this, I dunno, like in the Victorian era in the uk there were these like gentlemen, scientists, self-funded who were working out of their shed in their garden and they just came up with these stunning findings.

00:25:35.817 --> 00:25:46.940
<v Steve Gwynne>Unless you are a modern equivalent to that or an absolute genius, you probably work in a department and you probably have to get funding and you probably, have to align the, broad path of your research with that.

00:25:47.549 --> 00:25:55.987
<v Steve Gwynne>So the idea that you have carp blanche over what you look at and how you look at it in academia is somewhat partial, I think is very,

00:25:56.082 --> 00:25:56.571
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah.

00:25:56.571 --> 00:25:58.211
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Do you do, do you actually do that?

00:25:58.261 --> 00:25:58.612
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Ah,

00:25:58.646 --> 00:25:59.136
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah.

00:25:59.416 --> 00:26:11.465
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean, I, very few people I think have complete independence In addition, I think there's a broader discussion and we go back to the currency of publication as as how much of Publica do people publish all their results?

00:26:12.036 --> 00:26:13.425
<v Steve Gwynne>So do you publish your failures?

00:26:13.425 --> 00:26:16.665
<v Steve Gwynne>Do you publish where p isn't significant or whatever it is, do you publish?

00:26:17.103 --> 00:26:30.863
<v Steve Gwynne>and that may be unbelievably important something doesn't work or that is it isn't important or, or that it a classic in fire that it was a near miss, that it wasn't an actual fire that, that that caused loss of life or huge damage.

00:26:31.215 --> 00:26:41.736
<v Steve Gwynne>And so it might not appear on the radar as much, but there might be enormous lessons that we might learn from that, potentially less significant or less dramatic or less complex incident.

00:26:42.105 --> 00:26:55.442
<v Steve Gwynne>so I do the idea that there's this area where there's a purity, and then there's this horrendously corrupt, Uh, so evil twin, uh, I think is again, a little bit complicated, uh, a little bit simplifying the distinction.

00:26:55.580 --> 00:26:59.385
<v Steve Gwynne>but again, I think it comes down to a lot of it comes down to transparency.

00:27:00.058 --> 00:27:08.939
<v Steve Gwynne>it, by the way, there's plenty of research in all across all of the, the various domains that, that, that isn't quickly published because of various restrictions.

00:27:08.939 --> 00:27:10.788
<v Steve Gwynne>And that can be in academia or in, industry.

00:27:10.788 --> 00:27:17.108
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean, obviously the goal is to publish as much as you can where especially where it's, you can generalize from the specific project.

00:27:17.259 --> 00:27:18.788
<v Steve Gwynne>I think that's the, the biggest value.

00:27:19.076 --> 00:27:31.242
<v Steve Gwynne>but then assuming that imperfection and assuming that it will be supplanted by something else, I think that's just good, humility and, And, and, and transparency is part of that process, I think cuz it allows you to be further scrutinized.

00:27:31.497 --> 00:27:35.673
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Talking about the currency, what is the value of publication for you?

00:27:35.982 --> 00:27:36.298
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like?

00:27:36.308 --> 00:27:48.115
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>for me it's, it's very simple as an academic, it's impact factor or it's, we have a points in Poland that are, there's a list of 50,000 journals and it has a sound of point value.

00:27:48.165 --> 00:27:54.333
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So, we, we joked that, did we, we gathered the points and we turned them into hotdogs in a petrol station from a cart.

00:27:54.863 --> 00:27:59.752
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>what's the vo like, like Mike, if you publish, as OFR  what, what are you looking for?

00:27:59.762 --> 00:28:02.512
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, are you, are you looking for impact factors?

00:28:02.512 --> 00:28:04.992
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Are you looking for another metric?

00:28:05.212 --> 00:28:09.673
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Are you looking for accessibility, reputation, press, prestige.

00:28:09.901 --> 00:28:16.671
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah, it's a good question and I, and, and again, there's been a bit, I happened to be on the editorial board of Journal of Fire Sciences.

00:28:16.959 --> 00:28:21.858
<v Mike Spearpoint>and there has been a few emails between the editors, which I, I've half drafted.

00:28:21.858 --> 00:28:24.715
<v Mike Spearpoint>Never sent it back, but this discussion went, has been gone on there.

00:28:25.096 --> 00:28:34.635
<v Mike Spearpoint>And certainly, like you're saying within academic in administration, and I don't necessarily mean the universities, but sometimes it's governments now there they, they want to come up with a ranking system.

00:28:34.885 --> 00:28:38.996
<v Mike Spearpoint>So you can compare one department or one university with another.

00:28:38.996 --> 00:28:47.236
<v Mike Spearpoint>And they, and somewhere we've decided, or has been decided that impact factors is somehow some kind of measure of quality and whatever.

00:28:47.236 --> 00:28:56.613
<v Mike Spearpoint>And, you know, and I think a lot of us recognize both in industry and in academia, that this has fairly limited, applicability.

00:28:56.633 --> 00:29:03.248
<v Mike Spearpoint>But it, it's, you know, it's nice to get A scoring system because you know, you can rank A, a above B and so on.

00:29:03.667 --> 00:29:15.183
<v Mike Spearpoint>And certainly then for, for industry, I mean, and I'm sure Steve would, have a similar feeling, but impact cause we don't have, not in industry, have that scoring system then impact factor on a journal.

00:29:15.673 --> 00:29:18.663
<v Mike Spearpoint>Doesn't matter, and I'm not sure it's ever mattered to me.

00:29:18.935 --> 00:29:21.013
<v Mike Spearpoint>the, the impact factor of, of a journal.

00:29:21.324 --> 00:29:29.817
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, for me, the choice of journal is partly, you know, there's a whole bunch of factors that you might weigh and it, and it might be the audience you expect it to go to.

00:29:30.028 --> 00:29:34.038
<v Mike Spearpoint>It will be the perceived, quality of that journal.

00:29:34.228 --> 00:29:37.780
<v Mike Spearpoint>and, it might be the speed of publication.

00:29:38.151 --> 00:29:42.010
<v Mike Spearpoint>It might be the fact that they might have, open access.

00:29:42.010 --> 00:30:00.137
<v Mike Spearpoint>So in some cases, you know, if you are, if you are working for an industry and they want that information, fairly quickly published, then an open access journal, might be, or, or an open access pathway in that journal might seem as more valuable, uh, than some of these other factors.

00:30:00.137 --> 00:30:08.500
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, again, from, in, from industry, the concept of impact factor for some people probably is not something they've ever, they've ever heard of and, and it bothers them.

00:30:08.691 --> 00:30:25.064
<v Mike Spearpoint>so the choice of journal has all of these sorts of elements that, that go into it that, maybe, maybe I can come up with a scoring system for, why choose a certain journal, dare I be back perverse to come up with a scoring system of why to choose a certain journal in a certain, situation.

00:30:25.064 --> 00:30:31.461
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'll put weightings on all these factors and tell, and give each, each journal, each, uh, paper a score on why I chose it.

00:30:31.461 --> 00:30:35.673
<v Mike Spearpoint>Well, that would be, and put it in a high impact factor journal, just, just to close the loop.

00:30:35.770 --> 00:30:39.973
<v Mike Spearpoint>so, so the choice, the choice is not, I, I don't think it's a simple one.

00:30:39.973 --> 00:30:43.213
<v Mike Spearpoint>And if someone said to me, why did I choose that paper to go in that journal?

00:30:43.503 --> 00:30:45.834
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, some days it, it is simple as that.

00:30:45.834 --> 00:30:50.433
<v Mike Spearpoint>As the, I've sent three papers to journal A and maybe it's time I sent it to journal B.

00:30:50.433 --> 00:30:57.585
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, it might be just sharing it around type of thing, which maybe some might look at and say, that's a really poor decision making might, but,

00:30:57.693 --> 00:31:07.317
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>if you, if you had to make a choice, like you, you, you are the research leader in your company, so I guess you have some say in, in where the people go or at at least you, you advise them.

00:31:07.528 --> 00:31:12.798
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>If you had in one hand, like let's say Fire Technology Fire Safety Journal on another hand.

00:31:13.528 --> 00:31:22.288
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>let's say some IEEE informatics conference, which may in the end have higher impact factor, but will not reach your fire audience.

00:31:22.288 --> 00:31:32.090
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Would it, it matters for you that, that you publish in a place where your industry reads not necessarily just the metrics that represents the, vehicle where you publish it, right?

00:31:32.385 --> 00:31:35.996
<v Steve Gwynne>I think that, I think that's changed though a lot with social media.

00:31:36.445 --> 00:31:43.252
<v Steve Gwynne>first of all, I mean, I think Mike and I both in pretty privileged positions in that we, I think, we're both encouraged to publish by, the companies.

00:31:43.252 --> 00:31:47.292
<v Steve Gwynne>And that's because they didn't hire researchers as lip service.

00:31:47.292 --> 00:31:50.292
<v Steve Gwynne>They actually wanted an ongoing research capability.

00:31:50.292 --> 00:31:52.413
<v Steve Gwynne>And then part of this is demonstrating that, right?

00:31:52.413 --> 00:31:58.653
<v Steve Gwynne>So there's value to the company in publishing because it shows they're actively engaged in this type of thing and this type of thinking.

00:31:58.653 --> 00:32:00.173
<v Steve Gwynne>And they have in-house capabilities.

00:32:00.771 --> 00:32:04.643
<v Steve Gwynne>in terms of where, This is the problem with those impacted factors, right?

00:32:04.643 --> 00:32:11.506
<v Steve Gwynne>Is is I I wonder how accurate they are now in a lot of ways, because how do they capture the actual reading of these documents, and the actual influence?

00:32:12.032 --> 00:32:16.327
<v Steve Gwynne>I've never paid, I've gotta be honest, a blind bit of notice to to impact factors.

00:32:16.432 --> 00:32:19.692
<v Steve Gwynne>I'm more interested in the authors that I'm publishing with.

00:32:19.762 --> 00:32:22.893
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean, I'm a very much a social butterfly when it comes to that.

00:32:22.893 --> 00:32:25.905
<v Steve Gwynne>I want to, I wanna collaborate so I like to be working.

00:32:25.935 --> 00:32:36.145
<v Steve Gwynne>I don't care wh where I'm in the author list, I don't, I'd rather as long as, as long as I'm contributing something and there's five or six people on the paper that, you know, I've got to learn something from, and that, that's great.

00:32:36.145 --> 00:32:44.682
<v Steve Gwynne>And then, the, the company benefits because they contributed to the work and their staff are seen to be contributing to it, and they've advanced the field.

00:32:45.222 --> 00:32:49.333
<v Steve Gwynne>And if you are in our game, there's great value in showing that you are.

00:32:50.131 --> 00:32:56.250
<v Steve Gwynne>you know, it's another way of gently nudging both the understanding of the field and the way that the thing is done, right?

00:32:56.250 --> 00:32:58.891
<v Steve Gwynne>So you are, you are advancing innovation in that way.

00:32:58.941 --> 00:33:01.010
<v Steve Gwynne>So I think there's personal preferences.

00:33:01.010 --> 00:33:04.861
<v Steve Gwynne>As I said, I look at the there's more than the, person you know, publishing it.

00:33:05.468 --> 00:33:13.523
<v Steve Gwynne>the, the organization, I think, uh, benefits from ha enhancing that reputation of, new thinking and, and knowledge generation.

00:33:13.703 --> 00:33:17.827
<v Steve Gwynne>and also that have those also, they, they, they have those connections as well.

00:33:17.998 --> 00:33:30.567
<v Steve Gwynne>So rather than the people, the authors, the institutions to which those authors belong, there's, I think there's increasing value in having building those bridges between, different organizations and, you know, showing that you've been active on those research project.

00:33:30.713 --> 00:33:36.713
<v Mike Spearpoint>I think the notion that there's journals the industry reads, and again, I think Steve's mentioned that with social media and.

00:33:37.148 --> 00:33:38.675
<v Mike Spearpoint>And also, the, the internet.

00:33:38.965 --> 00:33:42.159
<v Mike Spearpoint>Um, I, I was kind of looking at this just for this, uh, other discussion.

00:33:42.313 --> 00:33:49.482
<v Mike Spearpoint>I don't, I don't have a kind of reading list of journals like I'm, you know, might have done in the old days of what, what got printed and sent to me or whatever.

00:33:49.833 --> 00:33:55.353
<v Mike Spearpoint>it'd be really interesting to sit down and look at all of the journals that I've cited and what, where they come from.

00:33:55.373 --> 00:33:59.153
<v Mike Spearpoint>And some of 'em will come from the main, what you might call the mainstream fire science.

00:33:59.442 --> 00:34:03.169
<v Mike Spearpoint>So Fire Safety Journal and Fire Technology and those, fire materials.

00:34:03.298 --> 00:34:06.969
<v Mike Spearpoint>Uh, some will come from the built environment, so, you know, a wider that.

00:34:06.969 --> 00:34:16.568
<v Mike Spearpoint>But I've got papers, know, given I've, dabbled in, in too many subjects and maybe I'm, as you know, guilty as the, as the next person about, not sticking to my knitting.

00:34:16.639 --> 00:34:18.648
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, I've got, you know, I've looked at papers.

00:34:18.965 --> 00:34:26.822
<v Mike Spearpoint>the stuff on occupant loads ended up looking at papers on, retail re consumer research and the stuff I did on kitchen oil fires.

00:34:26.822 --> 00:34:32.536
<v Mike Spearpoint>I looked at papers to do how many people dispose of their kitchen oil down there sink type of thing.

00:34:32.545 --> 00:34:38.356
<v Mike Spearpoint>So these are all way outside of, fire science stuff because they just happened to be what I was looking at.

00:34:38.485 --> 00:34:53.199
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, so this notion that there's some journals that people read and others they don't, I think it has disappeared because the internet and Google Scholar, all that sort of things means you just, you just search and you, and you find where you find it and you make a judgment.

00:34:53.259 --> 00:35:04.652
<v Mike Spearpoint>And again, there's this idea about quality of the journal and that, and, you know, and I don't know, I think a, a reasonable researcher can look at a paper and make a decision about the quality of the paper.

00:35:04.652 --> 00:35:10.686
<v Mike Spearpoint>And so, and so kind of, let's say independent of where it was published, I'm being a bit careful about that.

00:35:10.686 --> 00:35:11.445
<v Mike Spearpoint>Cause maybe that's not.

00:35:12.137 --> 00:35:33.021
<v Steve Gwynne>I, I think Mike, I think, and the reason I've mentioned this is because it's come up recently in, in some work I've been doing is, if all you did was search academic journals, if you were doing some, a search for information you'd miss out, especially in our field, all of the work that NIST did, a lot of the reports that NRC did, you know, all of the government publications wouldn't necessarily appear on that.

00:35:33.021 --> 00:35:35.900
<v Steve Gwynne>There's lots of industry reports that wouldn't appear.

00:35:35.900 --> 00:35:49.478
<v Steve Gwynne>there's lots of, I mean, some of the blogs that are on LinkedIn now or some of the, the, the pieces are, Actually well referenced and well documented, and there's some, it's a way of getting content out there now quite quickly.

00:35:49.739 --> 00:35:56.068
<v Steve Gwynne>The problem with the journal publication process is c it can take a long time, look a really long

00:35:56.179 --> 00:35:56.338
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>true.

00:35:56.338 --> 00:35:56.539
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah.

00:35:56.648 --> 00:36:01.858
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Mike, Mike also mentioned that, that the speed of publication would be one of, of the factors.

00:36:02.333 --> 00:36:13.326
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I'm asking about this, um, way, like if I receive a research grant as an academic, I have to point out some milestones and, and some outcomes of this.

00:36:13.326 --> 00:36:34.969
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And these outcomes are usually, the easiest way to define it is I either trained a PhD student, I, I've promoted someone and, uh, that there's a growth of their career that's measurable by them obtaining PhD or I've published something which has a certain value of, like, these are simple, easy metrics like that are very measurable, very identifiable, very obvious.

00:36:34.969 --> 00:36:36.208
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like you have a publication.

00:36:36.208 --> 00:36:36.809
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It's a publication.

00:36:36.809 --> 00:36:39.088
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>There's no gray zone in that.

00:36:39.469 --> 00:36:41.248
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Did you make an impact on industry?

00:36:41.489 --> 00:36:41.608
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Hmm.

00:36:41.608 --> 00:36:42.889
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>That's, that's gray zone.

00:36:42.889 --> 00:36:51.835
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So I wonder like doing industrial led research, like what indicators would be there that, that you've actually achieved?

00:36:51.835 --> 00:36:55.996
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>That if, if paper on its own is not the achievement of, of it.

00:36:56.431 --> 00:37:02.860
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah, it's, it's an interesting one as I said before, not all, not all of any research is done can be published.

00:37:02.860 --> 00:37:06.780
<v Steve Gwynne>There's, there's always bits that are more sensitive or for, for various reasons, can't be published.

00:37:06.780 --> 00:37:11.300
<v Steve Gwynne>But assuming you can publish it, to me, the ultimate impact of industrial.

00:37:11.902 --> 00:37:19.813
<v Steve Gwynne>Again, industrial research beyond the lifetime of a project, is to get into the regulatory or guidance space, right?

00:37:19.813 --> 00:37:29.842
<v Steve Gwynne>Because that means that you've generated something that is sufficient to have an impact on the broader practice beyond your organization.

00:37:30.413 --> 00:37:33.806
<v Steve Gwynne>So gestures, it's, and it's absolutely pragmatic, right?

00:37:33.806 --> 00:37:35.005
<v Steve Gwynne>It's absolutely applied.

00:37:35.378 --> 00:37:43.128
<v Steve Gwynne>but it's, one line in the building code, can have a much bigger impact than 10 articles that no one reads, whereas someone's got to use that one line.

00:37:43.708 --> 00:37:48.228
<v Steve Gwynne>or providing a material base for the development of regulations.

00:37:48.239 --> 00:37:58.829
<v Steve Gwynne>So to me that, that's always, if you think of it as like you've got subject matter experts who are engaged in practice or, and, and or research.

00:37:59.744 --> 00:38:16.221
<v Steve Gwynne>And what they're all trying to do in one way or another is either do something to such a high level that they're noticed for doing it in a new way that's advanced the field of practice, or they're doing it in research where they've expanded the understanding, and or the area of knowledge that that then bleeds into the field of practice.

00:38:16.570 --> 00:38:22.110
<v Steve Gwynne>Eventually, someone is gonna develop a guide to, say, well, this is how you do that.

00:38:22.110 --> 00:38:25.373
<v Steve Gwynne>This is how it should be done based on that new, practice or new research.

00:38:25.594 --> 00:38:29.413
<v Steve Gwynne>And, and then eventually, of course, beyond that, it's okay, this is how it must be done.

00:38:29.710 --> 00:38:39.893
<v Steve Gwynne>So, to me that's the, a signal, that your novel work inside of your practice is having a broader influence beyond the day to day or beyond the life of a project.

00:38:40.434 --> 00:38:42.173
<v Steve Gwynne>And it's where you are shaping the space.

00:38:42.284 --> 00:38:45.621
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>you took it, the phrase outta my mouth, like shaping the environment.

00:38:45.621 --> 00:39:06.061
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like you really did change the landscape in which you, make business, Mike, for your company, you, you're sticking the same, I mean, you are in a very interesting position because I know  OFR  is carrying a lot of government, research like where the, the government is directly your consumer and, they, give you, they, they tell you what research to do.

00:39:06.297 --> 00:39:14.277
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah, so we've got some, government funded research and, and, and one of those projects that I'm doing jointly with Steve, it's one of the ones I mentioned.

00:39:14.623 --> 00:39:17.947
<v Mike Spearpoint>and so they've got certain, goals for, doing that research.

00:39:17.947 --> 00:39:38.606
<v Mike Spearpoint>And I, and I suppose when I worked, my, my first job, um, when I worked at Fire Research Station, BRE, I mean obviously there, that some of that money came from government, departments, I mean, know, I can think of one where, we were asked to look at a piece of um, there were two different, standards for smoke detectors, for commercial ones and for domestic.

00:39:38.606 --> 00:39:42.076
<v Mike Spearpoint>And part of the work was, should there be one standard for this?

00:39:42.076 --> 00:39:56.922
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, so it would've had an impact, on the types of, on the testing of those devices, which, which, you know, was sponsored as I remember, by a government department because obviously that had a, a societal impact on whether that standard be, be changed or not.

00:39:57.463 --> 00:40:09.643
<v Mike Spearpoint>But I mean, from a, shall I get on a personal point of view, I remember having a discussion not that long ago with one of my colleagues about how much my research that I've been involved with has had an impact.

00:40:09.902 --> 00:40:11.563
<v Mike Spearpoint>And I, and I kind of struggled.

00:40:11.626 --> 00:40:13.585
<v Mike Spearpoint>I dunno if it's had any impact at all.

00:40:14.523 --> 00:40:15.864
<v Mike Spearpoint>But what is that impact?

00:40:16.054 --> 00:40:24.797
<v Mike Spearpoint>Some, someone might say, well, if you could demonstrate that all your researchers as we might say sort of saved a life, then you kind of think it's all all worth it.

00:40:24.797 --> 00:40:32.344
<v Mike Spearpoint>But it's really hard Um, so it's really difficult cuz I, cuz I was saying to this colleague, I was saying, well, maybe sometimes I think, well, none, none of it's made any difference.

00:40:32.621 --> 00:40:35.188
<v Mike Spearpoint>but then, then this colleague sort of said, well, it may made a difference.

00:40:35.188 --> 00:40:41.307
<v Mike Spearpoint>It may have influence people to get into fire research or, or influenced and to get involved with something.

00:40:41.307 --> 00:40:47.581
<v Mike Spearpoint>And I go, well, yeah, it goes, I guess that's an impact in a way, that someone's read something of mine.

00:40:47.581 --> 00:40:51.021
<v Mike Spearpoint>I know you thought that was useful or it was a completely wrong way to do it.

00:40:51.021 --> 00:40:52.981
<v Mike Spearpoint>And the better way was to do it another way.

00:40:52.981 --> 00:40:57.231
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, as Steve said, some researchers might point to, a, a better method.

00:40:57.411 --> 00:40:58.951
<v Mike Spearpoint>And so that influences.

00:40:59.184 --> 00:41:02.739
<v Mike Spearpoint>kind of said someone don't do it Mike's way cause that's the rubbish way

00:41:03.018 --> 00:41:17.438
<v Steve Gwynne>I, I was, that's what I was gonna say is, is I've, I, I've had the other experience where I've just had someone randomly come up to me at a conference and start arguing with me, like on meeting me because of a paper that Mike and I worked on many years ago on, on model defaults.

00:41:17.778 --> 00:41:25.639
<v Steve Gwynne>And, and they were fairly furious at what we'd spoken And so it definitely influenced their next paper, cuz I think they were quite critical of what we'd written.

00:41:25.699 --> 00:41:28.536
<v Steve Gwynne>But, so, No, I, I, the thing is you don't know.

00:41:28.956 --> 00:41:30.452
<v Steve Gwynne>You don't know what the impact is.

00:41:30.452 --> 00:41:30.693
<v Steve Gwynne>Right.

00:41:30.693 --> 00:41:44.293
<v Steve Gwynne>And that's, I'm not, I'm not that prolific, but it's like you, you see, I've seen quotes from the most obscure paper that I ever wrote or whatever, and they're, they're holding it as like a bit of evidence that then used to contribute for their work.

00:41:44.293 --> 00:41:47.679
<v Steve Gwynne>And it's like, it was a Korean researcher and they spoke to me at a conference.

00:41:47.679 --> 00:41:55.278
<v Steve Gwynne>It was like that, that was really useful for me cuz it meant, I, not that it was anything profound, but it just meant they, that was a little stepping stone that led them to something else.

00:41:55.278 --> 00:41:57.278
<v Steve Gwynne>And I'd included stuff in my reference list.

00:41:57.278 --> 00:42:01.414
<v Steve Gwynne>See, you never know where it becomes useful, I would say.

00:42:01.414 --> 00:42:15.612
<v Steve Gwynne>going back to usefulness and, uh, I think the reason for doing stuff as well, oftentimes, again, again, I, I do think the assumption is slightly naive that, you know, if you are in one space, like an academic space, you have control over what you are doing.

00:42:15.612 --> 00:42:19.403
<v Steve Gwynne>You have much more purity In selecting what you look at.

00:42:20.063 --> 00:42:21.523
<v Steve Gwynne>And we all need funding.

00:42:21.523 --> 00:42:28.027
<v Steve Gwynne>And that funding comes from a body, and that body has decided that something is important and needs to be looked at.

00:42:28.027 --> 00:42:31.907
<v Steve Gwynne>And that is usually determined by a com combination of stakeholders.

00:42:32.211 --> 00:42:36.610
<v Steve Gwynne>government industry has advocacy groups, whatever it is.

00:42:36.710 --> 00:42:39.971
<v Steve Gwynne>And we were very much subject to that when I was in Gov working in government.

00:42:40.240 --> 00:42:46.371
<v Steve Gwynne>But to me, a classic example, maybe it's unique, but it makes the point is what happened during the pandemic, right?

00:42:47.130 --> 00:43:00.170
<v Steve Gwynne>Everyone suddenly had to turn left and do things in that, or not everyone, but many of us would, would said, okay, you're gonna stop looking at that thing and you're gonna turn left and work out why social distancing matters, or what impact that might have.

00:43:00.391 --> 00:43:02.371
<v Steve Gwynne>And so basically all of the machinery.

00:43:03.206 --> 00:43:12.485
<v Steve Gwynne>that was normally focused on these, this unbelievably complicated and addressing all these different topics, just went, everyone's gonna look in that direction because it's basically shut society down.

00:43:12.985 --> 00:43:28.199
<v Steve Gwynne>And so it was an example, the reason I mentioned it is cuz an example of the fact that we often, we are quite reactive to needs in that the either industry, has, has to address on a project by project basis or research addresses, know, given the funding that's available.

00:43:28.469 --> 00:43:36.766
<v Steve Gwynne>It's quite rare I think that someone genuinely stands up and says, I've got this idea that's so important, I want a dedicated bit of funding for it.

00:43:37.059 --> 00:43:44.806
<v Steve Gwynne>it's typically much more influenced by what's going on and it, or, or, you know, not necessarily at that moment, but over a period of time.

00:43:44.981 --> 00:43:54.204
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>if, if someone from inside your company came to you and said, Steve, I have this idea, it's not something we can immediately employ, but I think it's.

00:43:55.148 --> 00:43:56.628
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>it could be eventually important.

00:43:56.699 --> 00:43:57.309
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I don't know.

00:43:57.309 --> 00:43:58.989
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I need to research that.

00:43:59.050 --> 00:44:00.442
<v Steve Gwynne>They, they literally do that

00:44:00.503 --> 00:44:01.413
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>you, would you go for that?

00:44:01.413 --> 00:44:03.831
<v Steve Gwynne>literally, well that's literally an ongoing process.

00:44:03.831 --> 00:44:04.192
<v Steve Gwynne>Right.

00:44:04.192 --> 00:44:07.632
<v Steve Gwynne>So to me, there's different types of research projects.

00:44:07.632 --> 00:44:09.635
<v Steve Gwynne>There's like a research offer.

00:44:09.635 --> 00:44:14.253
<v Steve Gwynne>We do research for external entities and we deliver research outcome.

00:44:14.264 --> 00:44:15.853
<v Steve Gwynne>So that's, that's one type of project.

00:44:16.273 --> 00:44:30.304
<v Steve Gwynne>And then there's, there are relatively complex people, movement projects where we, it requires us to do research in order to facilitate those projects to be delivered for an external stadium or, an event or something like that.

00:44:30.652 --> 00:44:46.344
<v Steve Gwynne>But then there are other things that come up as part of that where an internal consultant, uh, might say, look, I'm, I've come up with these ideas that might be using a, developing a tool that's being developed in a new way or being used in a new way, or is giving insights in a new way.

00:44:46.344 --> 00:44:47.985
<v Steve Gwynne>And I don't, I'm not sure I've seen this before.

00:44:48.447 --> 00:44:58.773
<v Steve Gwynne>a, is it genuine research that we could enhance or develop as part of the company, or might it even be a value beyond that and the, and then we would take it outside if there's, if it warrants it.

00:44:58.773 --> 00:45:03.077
<v Steve Gwynne>So that sort of discussion is sort of, and I'm, I'm sure it's similar to Mike.

00:45:03.077 --> 00:45:04.516
<v Steve Gwynne>It is, is it is a sort of our bread and butter.

00:45:04.516 --> 00:45:06.396
<v Steve Gwynne>It's, is actually what it is.

00:45:06.396 --> 00:45:14.077
<v Steve Gwynne>And it, but, and by the way, and this is another misnomer before I by to shut up, I'm never, ever, ever the smartest person in the room.

00:45:14.344 --> 00:45:20.876
<v Steve Gwynne>The idea that because you've got a PhD inevitably means your IQ is higher than the consultants in the room.

00:45:21.246 --> 00:45:23.157
<v Steve Gwynne>It just means you've been doing something long enough.

00:45:23.916 --> 00:45:26.876
<v Steve Gwynne>to develop a, a sufficient insight into that one thing.

00:45:27.447 --> 00:45:31.166
<v Steve Gwynne>throw that out the window, you know, that, that you, again, it comes back to humility, right?

00:45:31.516 --> 00:45:36.447
<v Steve Gwynne>I've been shouted at enough of conferences by smarter people than me to know that I'm limited.

00:45:36.786 --> 00:45:51.135
<v Steve Gwynne>But the idea that consultant or practice or industry isn't just chock full of super smart, hard work and people, who are, you know, not always motivated purely by, by finance, uh, is, is just not not true.

00:45:51.722 --> 00:45:56.818
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, how would you rank the ability to pursue science at industry?

00:45:56.849 --> 00:45:59.668
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like, to what extent it's different from academia.

00:45:59.668 --> 00:46:05.242
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like you, you both have been, uh, previously employed in, in some sort of, uh, laboratories, academia.

00:46:05.481 --> 00:46:08.681
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Steve, you are now in l Mike, you were at Christchurch.

00:46:08.994 --> 00:46:18.931
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>is there an very, like, direct difference between how you did research as a researcher in the university versus how you do in your company?

00:46:19.402 --> 00:46:19.836
<v Mike Spearpoint>What?

00:46:19.836 --> 00:46:21.476
<v Mike Spearpoint>What do you mean by science?

00:46:21.896 --> 00:46:22.677
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'm not sure.

00:46:22.677 --> 00:46:23.396
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'm not sure.

00:46:23.626 --> 00:46:24.117
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah.

00:46:24.117 --> 00:46:25.143
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah, because yeah.

00:46:25.143 --> 00:46:27.264
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'm not sure whether I've ever done science

00:46:27.389 --> 00:46:34.117
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I'm, I'm using research in science almost, uh, a synonymous, it's, it's hard to even define what science is.

00:46:34.117 --> 00:46:42.373
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I guess that's the increase of the, knowledge of the humanity and, and everything that, that goes towards this, this

00:46:42.449 --> 00:46:48.059
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah, I think that's more research cuz you can do research without necessarily strictly following the scientific method, I'm guessing.

00:46:48.059 --> 00:46:53.659
<v Steve Gwynne>But I mean, I've, let's, let's not, this, not, let's not get into that cuz that is a, that is a, that's three other conversations.

00:46:54.028 --> 00:46:55.059
<v Steve Gwynne>Um, okay.

00:46:55.059 --> 00:46:55.458
<v Steve Gwynne>Sorry Mike.

00:46:55.458 --> 00:46:55.778
<v Steve Gwynne>Anyway.

00:46:55.778 --> 00:46:56.259
<v Steve Gwynne>You were, you were,

00:46:56.403 --> 00:47:02.327
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>But the capability of doing research as, as a researcher do you, do you see like any significant differences?

00:47:02.327 --> 00:47:03.487
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Like, uh, no.

00:47:03.686 --> 00:47:04.447
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It was easier.

00:47:04.456 --> 00:47:05.286
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It was hard.

00:47:06.074 --> 00:47:07.875
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'd it's different, right?

00:47:07.875 --> 00:47:09.875
<v Mike Spearpoint>So you've got different, you've got different drivers.

00:47:09.925 --> 00:47:16.398
<v Mike Spearpoint>So for example, you've got the driver of a university wanting publications and reputation and those sorts of things.

00:47:16.398 --> 00:47:23.719
<v Mike Spearpoint>And that, you know, that, Canterbury, They have the assessment system I, it's called now, but they're the, here in the uk I think it's the r a e thing.

00:47:23.719 --> 00:47:28.358
<v Mike Spearpoint>So you've got your scoring and of course there's a, a metric, a kpi, whatever.

00:47:28.648 --> 00:47:39.422
<v Mike Spearpoint>So you are, you are somewhat, driven by that um, obviously got students and you are driven by, their interests and their capabilities and that sort of thing.

00:47:39.422 --> 00:47:44.652
<v Mike Spearpoint>So sometimes, like, you're directed because of those, and you are, and there's resources as well.

00:47:44.652 --> 00:47:51.768
<v Mike Spearpoint>So I was very, very fortunate, to have laboratory facilities at the University of Canterbury, which have expanded since I left.

00:47:51.869 --> 00:47:57.648
<v Mike Spearpoint>But I had a, a couple of really good technicians who I could go and chat to and build a, build a widget.

00:47:57.648 --> 00:48:01.369
<v Mike Spearpoint>And we had a lab and we, and we could do things, which I, I can't do now.

00:48:01.369 --> 00:48:06.789
<v Mike Spearpoint>I've got no lab in that, so was it easier before, or, Uh, it's different.

00:48:06.789 --> 00:48:07.034
<v Mike Spearpoint>Canterbury.

00:48:07.034 --> 00:48:13.226
<v Mike Spearpoint>Now, when I was doing my masters at, at Maryland, the way of engaging technicians to build things was different.

00:48:13.226 --> 00:48:15.666
<v Mike Spearpoint>They had a, as I recall, a more central resource.

00:48:15.956 --> 00:48:29.416
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, so was, uh, slightly more complicated, one might say, to get something built there because you have to go to the central resource rather than having someone who you could just go and walk down the, to the lab and say, can you build me a so and so?

00:48:29.416 --> 00:48:33.976
<v Mike Spearpoint>And they'll go, yeah, I can world it like this, and I'll get it for you to dun for tomorrow if you need tomorrow.

00:48:33.976 --> 00:48:35.295
<v Mike Spearpoint>I go, well, next week's great.

00:48:35.826 --> 00:48:39.527
<v Mike Spearpoint>So, i I can't say what was easier or, or harder because it, it depends.

00:48:39.527 --> 00:48:40.688
<v Mike Spearpoint>It, it's, it's different.

00:48:41.063 --> 00:48:44.027
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah, but the differences can be quite subtle Right.

00:48:44.027 --> 00:48:45.907
<v Steve Gwynne>And very much sensitive to where you are.

00:48:45.936 --> 00:48:50.067
<v Steve Gwynne>I think some academic spaces could be extremely hierarchical.

00:48:50.445 --> 00:49:00.175
<v Steve Gwynne>and you were, your direction is governed by the, the group or the, the department or the, you know, the, the focus of the subject matter focus there.

00:49:00.175 --> 00:49:01.934
<v Steve Gwynne>And, and of course, availability of funding.

00:49:02.364 --> 00:49:05.994
<v Steve Gwynne>so in government it was more like someone comes in with a problem.

00:49:06.396 --> 00:49:15.755
<v Steve Gwynne>Someone from the public comes in with a problem that then determines whether your unit has to provide some evidence and generates some research to work out what's going on.

00:49:15.965 --> 00:49:18.155
<v Steve Gwynne>So that was quite reactive, I think.

00:49:18.155 --> 00:49:26.992
<v Steve Gwynne>But again, lots of resources, labs and access, access to lots of, of building facilities that we would never have had access to in industry.

00:49:26.992 --> 00:49:31.496
<v Steve Gwynne>I think the great resource we've got is just a lot of people that can do the thing.

00:49:31.650 --> 00:49:35.289
<v Steve Gwynne>So there's a lot of consultants, practitioners, who are not.

00:49:35.340 --> 00:49:37.289
<v Steve Gwynne>Um, this is by no means a criticism.

00:49:37.289 --> 00:49:42.753
<v Steve Gwynne>They're not, uh, new students coming through, but they're practiced in the field.

00:49:42.909 --> 00:49:54.690
<v Steve Gwynne>And so where the, where there's value to, for an old researcher that I include all Mike and myself in there is, is that they become unbelievably useful resources.

00:49:55.465 --> 00:50:04.244
<v Steve Gwynne>So they are and, and willing resources who know the f they know enough about practice to know what, how the data that you are collecting might be used.

00:50:04.628 --> 00:50:12.978
<v Steve Gwynne>And so of course you still have to have that research overview and you still have to have a structure and methodology that that can be attacked, academically and in peer review.

00:50:13.567 --> 00:50:17.775
<v Steve Gwynne>they have then become a huge resource in actually doing the research activity.

00:50:18.355 --> 00:50:20.867
<v Steve Gwynne>And so, I think that's what's astonished me.

00:50:20.867 --> 00:50:28.748
<v Steve Gwynne>And again, we, we were involved in the, the pandemic work and we deployed tens of people into the field, dozens of people into the field.

00:50:29.157 --> 00:50:33.407
<v Steve Gwynne>That would've been very tricky if it had just been a university doing it.

00:50:33.777 --> 00:50:36.967
<v Steve Gwynne>We just wouldn't have had the numbers of people capable of doing that.

00:50:37.657 --> 00:50:41.927
<v Steve Gwynne>So, you know, there are very few departments that large, you know, that you could just manifest.

00:50:42.132 --> 00:50:45.351
<v Steve Gwynne>10, 20 people to go into the field and do a, an observation.

00:50:45.400 --> 00:50:46.800
<v Steve Gwynne>So, I think it's complicated.

00:50:46.800 --> 00:50:50.001
<v Steve Gwynne>I don't think it's necessarily different in one particular way.

00:50:50.001 --> 00:50:57.471
<v Steve Gwynne>I think it's very much sensitive to the institution, the academic institution and the, industrial institution, the government space you're working in.

00:50:57.911 --> 00:51:05.038
<v Steve Gwynne>as I say, I think the main difference is often the speed of delivery, speed of turnaround, and the, the resources available, to do that.

00:51:05.280 --> 00:51:09.288
<v Steve Gwynne>but I dunno if that's constant between the three, uh, domains, if you like.

00:51:09.639 --> 00:51:23.530
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I think it's a very interesting discussion and it's clearly showing, like to anyone wondering if, If you go to to industry, you will be thrown on, on endless loop of similar commercial projects, endlessly.

00:51:23.530 --> 00:51:41.054
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>There, there there's also a pathway in industry where you can do interesting research, maybe, maybe the most interesting research and, and focus on the meaningful aspects of that research rather than, uh, struggling, on which journal to choose or which, impact factor metric you, you have to achieve.

00:51:41.054 --> 00:51:42.894
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>That's tr that's a trap in academia.

00:51:42.894 --> 00:52:00.545
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Sometimes people also they would, uh, ha have, this view that academia is ultimately good or, or a beautiful fantastic place where you do research, uh, enjoying yourself, smiling in the lab while there, there's like, there's a reason why 70% of postdocs have a depression and,

00:52:00.969 --> 00:52:03.815
<v Steve Gwynne>Well, it can be, not a very collegiate place, right?

00:52:03.815 --> 00:52:04.896
<v Steve Gwynne>Because it's very competitive.

00:52:04.896 --> 00:52:09.096
<v Steve Gwynne>The idea that academia's not competitive, I think is, there's long, long gone, I think.

00:52:09.096 --> 00:52:22.748
<v Steve Gwynne>But, I do think, the downside on a, if you are, if you are a careerist, if you're really interested in climbing the ladder, operating in more than one space can certainly mean that you don't focus on those metrics within a space that really matter.

00:52:23.208 --> 00:52:32.947
<v Steve Gwynne>And so, you know, if you wanna get on in certain universities, then you have to hit certain publications and you have to cl you know, you have to really focus in on, on those things.

00:52:33.208 --> 00:52:39.307
<v Steve Gwynne>And being more of a generalist in terms of the domains in which you work means you just don't focus on that.

00:52:39.307 --> 00:52:46.387
<v Steve Gwynne>You're, you are looking at multiple impacts across domains and so you are never gonna be as successful necessarily

00:52:47.179 --> 00:52:47.889
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>by this metric.

00:52:48.210 --> 00:52:48.307
<v Steve Gwynne>yeah.

00:52:48.307 --> 00:52:48.827
<v Steve Gwynne>By each metric.

00:52:48.827 --> 00:52:49.188
<v Steve Gwynne>That's right.

00:52:49.188 --> 00:52:54.427
<v Steve Gwynne>You are, you are, you are, you've got like a, a seven out of 10 across three different metrics rather than a 10 out of 10 on one.

00:52:55.007 --> 00:53:00.454
<v Steve Gwynne>And so you have to be able to swallow that a little bit that, that the people will race past you in one.

00:53:01.159 --> 00:53:11.960
<v Steve Gwynne>you know, there were people that were colleagues of mine that have just gone way beyond me in out the academic scale or indeed way beyond me in the, in the industrial hierarchy.

00:53:12.371 --> 00:53:13.721
<v Steve Gwynne>Um, that's just how it is.

00:53:14.360 --> 00:53:16.201
<v Steve Gwynne>that's just, that's just the nature of it.

00:53:16.201 --> 00:53:28.585
<v Steve Gwynne>And they, they were better than me anyway, but that's not the point if I was equivalent to them, I wouldn't have gone so far if, because of the part, the, the, the more complicated path of, of being one thing inside another thing.

00:53:28.938 --> 00:53:34.141
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>From my, my side, I wanted to do this episodes to see how the.

00:53:34.766 --> 00:53:38.885
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Other ladder looks like I, I know how the ladder of career in academia looks like.

00:53:38.885 --> 00:53:42.166
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I think I understand how the research is, is done in here.

00:53:42.226 --> 00:53:48.885
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And then I see people from this other ladder, from industry making true impact making research that's, that's groundbreaking.

00:53:49.436 --> 00:54:00.552
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I wanted to, to understand why they would be making it and, why it is, very attractive for industry to put own money on the table and, and do research.

00:54:00.552 --> 00:54:04.932
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, and I also think it's fundamental for the growth of this discipline for multiple reasons.

00:54:05.112 --> 00:54:10.092
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>one, the, the funding to shaping the environment and, and knowing the problems.

00:54:10.452 --> 00:54:19.894
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Three, having access to this, what you just said, Steve, the, Amount of people, the, the tools, being able to focus in your efforts, and change your, goals as you grow.

00:54:19.965 --> 00:54:26.454
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I guess you also have bigger, uh, ability to do that when you are driving your own research.

00:54:26.784 --> 00:54:30.014
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So yeah, it's, it's, it is, it's been a very interesting discussion,

00:54:30.159 --> 00:54:35.760
<v Steve Gwynne>I'm, I'm constantly embarrassed by how good and how hardworking my colleagues are.

00:54:35.864 --> 00:54:37.269
<v Steve Gwynne>like there's no sense of.

00:54:37.760 --> 00:54:43.240
<v Steve Gwynne>I'll come up with something, I'll in a discussion and I'll say, oh, this tool would be useful or this bit of work.

00:54:43.581 --> 00:54:49.894
<v Steve Gwynne>And one of my colleagues will have done it because it's, they're in industrial part, consultants.

00:54:49.894 --> 00:54:52.335
<v Steve Gwynne>So they, and they'll have done it because it's something of interest.

00:54:52.335 --> 00:54:59.757
<v Steve Gwynne>And the idea that and, you know, this is in an engineering environment of course, but they're, they're, they, they're interested in the thing.

00:54:59.907 --> 00:55:00.958
<v Steve Gwynne>They want to do it.

00:55:00.958 --> 00:55:05.438
<v Steve Gwynne>It's not just about getting on and some sort of rat race style.

00:55:05.568 --> 00:55:14.844
<v Steve Gwynne>Uh, I think they actually want to, they're as interested in the topic as I am, and they just happen to be 28 and able to work all of the current tools that are available.

00:55:14.905 --> 00:55:17.045
<v Steve Gwynne>I'm willing to dive in and do the thing.

00:55:17.344 --> 00:55:22.844
<v Steve Gwynne>And so, yeah, I'm, I'm, I have to be careful what I say because it will be, someone will pick it up and run with it.

00:55:22.844 --> 00:55:25.965
<v Steve Gwynne>So I, I it's, it's the opposite problem.

00:55:25.965 --> 00:55:26.445
<v Steve Gwynne>Yeah, exactly.

00:55:26.505 --> 00:55:31.476
<v Mike Spearpoint>I think, yeah, I think it's interesting that it's very DES census sort of again, this sort of U utilitarianism that people.

00:55:31.791 --> 00:55:37.360
<v Mike Spearpoint>People do it because they, cuz they're told to it and they're paid to do it and that's the only reason they do it.

00:55:37.360 --> 00:55:38.800
<v Mike Spearpoint>But people do all sorts of things.

00:55:39.038 --> 00:55:52.320
<v Mike Spearpoint>look at all the stuff that people work in open source software and, and they do it as a hobby and they do it as, because people are are interested in it and sometimes they do it because it in intellectually engages them and they're interested and and all those things.

00:55:52.320 --> 00:55:59.197
<v Mike Spearpoint>And, some might say, why do I do research and why do, and for me it's, part of it is to do with that intellectual engagement.

00:55:59.257 --> 00:56:04.737
<v Mike Spearpoint>And I think Steve's already talked about the fact that you can work with other people and, share that research pathway.

00:56:04.887 --> 00:56:18.561
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, do doing it songs by yourself is not, is not that interesting cuz it's just when you've got someone else to bounce ideas off and, and discuss it and they'll, you know, they'll challenge you and whatever that in itself can be a reason, to do it.

00:56:18.561 --> 00:56:24.635
<v Mike Spearpoint>Because it, Engages something in you that that, that you want to engage in.

00:56:24.875 --> 00:56:26.945
<v Mike Spearpoint>and no, I'm not gonna get into it.

00:56:26.945 --> 00:56:34.307
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, why, why one does fire research and, is it just the process of research rather than the particular topic?

00:56:34.358 --> 00:56:37.038
<v Mike Spearpoint>and for some people it might be the topic of is of interest.

00:56:37.038 --> 00:56:44.521
<v Mike Spearpoint>Some people it's just the, the intellectual engagement in something, irrespective of what the, the, the topic is.

00:56:44.572 --> 00:56:47.521
<v Mike Spearpoint>So I think there's all sorts of things that, that, that people.

00:56:48.153 --> 00:56:52.864
<v Mike Spearpoint>Do things and yeah, they need to, you know, earn money and, and pay a bill.

00:56:53.134 --> 00:56:58.230
<v Mike Spearpoint>I, I, you know, I expect some people do it because they want to, be seen to be an expert in something.

00:56:58.230 --> 00:57:01.581
<v Mike Spearpoint>They, they get something out of that as a measure of their, uh, success.

00:57:01.581 --> 00:57:04.900
<v Mike Spearpoint>And people like to have measures of success and some people's measures of success.

00:57:04.900 --> 00:57:11.061
<v Mike Spearpoint>And you see it for you, maybe for, for billionaires now it's just the fact that they, I dunno, I'm not a billionaire.

00:57:11.061 --> 00:57:16.900
<v Mike Spearpoint>I never will be, but maybe they don't, they don't earn money to, to, to, as a way of, so they can buy more stuff.

00:57:16.900 --> 00:57:18.021
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's a scoring system.

00:57:18.679 --> 00:57:22.597
<v Mike Spearpoint>they can measure their success against another billionaire.

00:57:22.936 --> 00:57:29.757
<v Mike Spearpoint>and maybe, you know, some people in, in research do it for publishing papers as a measure of their success.

00:57:30.284 --> 00:57:30.815
<v Mike Spearpoint>a metric.

00:57:31.231 --> 00:57:37.909
<v Mike Spearpoint>I spec, you know, humans are, is an element of, of metric, you know, we do it, we know sport, you know, it's a measure of metric.

00:57:38.039 --> 00:57:40.748
<v Mike Spearpoint>Uh, is, is that, is my team better than your team?

00:57:40.748 --> 00:57:42.949
<v Mike Spearpoint>Can I run faster than someone else?

00:57:43.018 --> 00:57:44.708
<v Mike Spearpoint>What, what's the utility of it?

00:57:44.708 --> 00:57:48.436
<v Mike Spearpoint>Well, the utility is, There's a human competition in us.

00:57:48.436 --> 00:57:50.637
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, it's survival of the fittest net.

00:57:50.967 --> 00:57:53.077
<v Mike Spearpoint>Um, those sorts of things that drive us.

00:57:53.561 --> 00:57:56.251
<v Steve Gwynne>I don't, I don't think that it's not a, a neutral process.

00:57:56.251 --> 00:58:00.391
<v Steve Gwynne>Like, you know, publishing and sharing and being, it's uncomfortable, right?

00:58:00.391 --> 00:58:02.231
<v Steve Gwynne>Because you are being scrutinized.

00:58:02.556 --> 00:58:04.148
<v Steve Gwynne>and so it's not trivial.

00:58:04.257 --> 00:58:07.684
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean, I, one thing, I, I enjoy the process of working with people on papers.

00:58:07.684 --> 00:58:08.764
<v Steve Gwynne>I really enjoy it.

00:58:08.860 --> 00:58:15.065
<v Steve Gwynne>uh, but within the topics in which I have something to contribute, you know, I'm not, uh, it's not just a let's solve a challenge.

00:58:15.065 --> 00:58:17.184
<v Steve Gwynne>That's not that, or that's, it's the challenge of it.

00:58:17.184 --> 00:58:19.264
<v Steve Gwynne>It's not like a word or exercise to me.

00:58:19.414 --> 00:58:22.385
<v Steve Gwynne>I wanna do something that produces something of use.

00:58:22.721 --> 00:58:23.965
<v Steve Gwynne>But, it's uncomfortable.

00:58:24.150 --> 00:58:35.161
<v Steve Gwynne>P publishing for me is uncomfortable because at the end of it, someone's gonna read it and they might really disagree and they might find something that they can tell you and say, well, you should have done it this way.

00:58:35.161 --> 00:58:36.840
<v Steve Gwynne>And then you think, oh, blind me.

00:58:36.840 --> 00:58:37.721
<v Steve Gwynne>I should have done it that way.

00:58:37.960 --> 00:58:38.788
<v Steve Gwynne>, they were, they're right.

00:58:38.934 --> 00:58:41.420
<v Steve Gwynne>so, so, It's not a trivial exercise.

00:58:41.420 --> 00:58:46.251
<v Steve Gwynne>It's not a, it's not a trivial thing in of a marketing exercise for your own, pursuit.

00:58:46.681 --> 00:58:53.061
<v Steve Gwynne>I think it can be very, know, tough and, and, uh, so yeah, I mean, but I do agree with Mike in that, you know, that people have different motivations.

00:58:53.061 --> 00:59:01.554
<v Steve Gwynne>I think, the easiest one is just to, adage of doing no harm is definitely a good starting place, but, um, I'm trying, not trying to, and that, but that's non-trivial.

00:59:01.554 --> 00:59:04.074
<v Steve Gwynne>I mean, cuz you don't know how your work's gonna be used,

00:59:04.449 --> 00:59:04.938
<v Mike Spearpoint>Yeah.

00:59:04.994 --> 00:59:09.056
<v Steve Gwynne>work can be flipped over and, and, the phrasing can be used or in a different way or something.

00:59:10.112 --> 00:59:10.751
<v Mike Spearpoint>I've seen that.

00:59:10.755 --> 00:59:12.994
<v Mike Spearpoint>Like saying you dunno how it's, how it's gonna be used.

00:59:13.565 --> 00:59:14.175
<v Mike Spearpoint>A lot of time.

00:59:14.349 --> 00:59:15.349
<v Mike Spearpoint>you don't find out.

00:59:15.469 --> 00:59:16.708
<v Mike Spearpoint>Again, it was useful.

00:59:16.739 --> 00:59:24.101
<v Mike Spearpoint>I mean, you can find out when people have, can go to your, your Google Scholar and see how many citations you've got, and you get account.

00:59:24.101 --> 00:59:32.309
<v Mike Spearpoint>What you don't know is whether, unless you go and read the paper, they're citation, although most of'em don't, might say, work by Spearpoint citation is a load of rubbish.

00:59:32.309 --> 00:59:33.429
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, you don't, you don't get.

00:59:33.509 --> 00:59:33.949
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>a citation.

00:59:34.494 --> 00:59:38.333
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's a citation, but, but you dunno where it gets used elsewhere.

00:59:38.474 --> 00:59:52.954
<v Mike Spearpoint>And, and I do remember at least one time when, one of my students at Canterbury had done a, a thesis or something and, and it goes and we, we published those as PDFs and then I got an email maybe a year later from a, from a consultancy company, it said, oh, that's a really nice thesis.

00:59:53.193 --> 00:59:54.434
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's been really useful.

00:59:54.434 --> 00:59:59.153
<v Mike Spearpoint>And it's nice just to get the sense that, that someone actually found it useful.

00:59:59.153 --> 01:00:07.139
<v Mike Spearpoint>Now, I wouldn't have found out had I not got the email, but someone took the time to at least sort of recognize that there was some value in that.

01:00:07.139 --> 01:00:08.179
<v Mike Spearpoint>And you know, that's kind of.

01:00:08.458 --> 01:00:11.148
<v Mike Spearpoint>Nice because it is scary, scary publishing.

01:00:11.148 --> 01:00:11.789
<v Mike Spearpoint>I agree with Steve.

01:00:11.789 --> 01:00:12.228
<v Mike Spearpoint>It's scary.

01:00:12.228 --> 01:00:15.985
<v Mike Spearpoint>I'm scared because it will show how, how incompetent I am at something.

01:00:15.985 --> 01:00:17.344
<v Mike Spearpoint>I've made mistakes or whatever.

01:00:17.344 --> 01:00:19.065
<v Mike Spearpoint>Because you are, we're all limited.

01:00:19.065 --> 01:00:21.981
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, we're all limited by our, capability to do something.

01:00:21.981 --> 01:00:27.601
<v Mike Spearpoint>In other words, you know, I can read a paper or read something and go, I just don't understand it cause I'm just not clever enough.

01:00:27.942 --> 01:00:36.722
<v Mike Spearpoint>and there's only so many hours in the day to, to, you know, there's always that feeling of, I should have read more papers, I should have read, I should have dived into this more and dug into it.

01:00:36.722 --> 01:00:37.838
<v Mike Spearpoint>But, you can't do it.

01:00:37.858 --> 01:00:39.998
<v Mike Spearpoint>And you always think, well, maybe I missed something.

01:00:39.998 --> 01:00:44.181
<v Mike Spearpoint>You know, maybe I've, turned over all these stones, but I just didn't turn over the right one.

01:00:44.181 --> 01:00:48.902
<v Mike Spearpoint>And had I only spent another day and had I only spent a bit longer, I would've found something.

01:00:48.902 --> 01:00:50.661
<v Mike Spearpoint>The , oh, wait a minute.

01:00:50.992 --> 01:00:56.262
<v Mike Spearpoint>Oh, that's really, and someone else will send me an email and go, didn't you read the paper by Soandso?

01:00:56.262 --> 01:00:57.942
<v Mike Spearpoint>And, and I go, no, I didn't.

01:00:58.052 --> 01:00:59.181
<v Mike Spearpoint>I just didn't know it was there.

01:00:59.181 --> 01:01:00.021
<v Mike Spearpoint>I didn't look right.

01:01:00.402 --> 01:01:01.782
<v Steve Gwynne>But that's so healthy, right.

01:01:01.782 --> 01:01:03.021
<v Steve Gwynne>That that doubt is healthy.

01:01:03.496 --> 01:01:25.657
<v Steve Gwynne>because if you don't have that doubt, then you can get into a lot of trouble because you, you think you've got the answer and almost certainly you A there isn't a, an answer and b, you probably haven't got it So if there was, um, but one, one thing, bringing it back to the, industrial element, I think, which is, goes to what Mike's saying there, which is you often don't know in a purely research setting.

01:01:25.657 --> 01:01:28.376
<v Steve Gwynne>While we, we, you know, and again, I don't think we operate in that realm.

01:01:28.376 --> 01:01:33.934
<v Steve Gwynne>You really don't know what the impact of a piece of work might be in a lot of the work that we do in industry.

01:01:33.934 --> 01:01:40.817
<v Steve Gwynne>I think the, the horizon's nearer so you have a chance of affecting something almost within the life cycle of a project.

01:01:41.291 --> 01:01:52.461
<v Steve Gwynne>unless you're doing more traditional research from with, within industry, which we definitely do as well, but sometimes you see the positives and negatives of your work right in front of you and, that's a different sensation.

01:01:52.461 --> 01:02:02.902
<v Steve Gwynne>You, you know, you answer that, that doubt that Mike's talking about there, which is what would the impact of your, knowledge, what would the impact of your findings on this thing that's being built or this thing?

01:02:03.132 --> 01:02:09.161
<v Steve Gwynne>I did some work years ago on the Statue of Liberty, and it was very much that, you know, what, what, is it gonna reopen or not?

01:02:09.161 --> 01:02:16.461
<v Steve Gwynne>Is it gonna, it, you know, you often, you often work on projects and there's there's a modification to a building and you think, I hope that that works.

01:02:16.692 --> 01:02:24.132
<v Steve Gwynne>I hope that  that, you know, I hope that that that bit of a research that we did in support of this engineering project was, the best that we could have done.

01:02:24.617 --> 01:02:26.626
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Okay, guys, I, I need to stop you there.

01:02:27.172 --> 01:02:31.101
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I can imagine you can go for like, another five hours of that

01:02:31.476 --> 01:02:33.429
<v Steve Gwynne>this is every meeting with me and Mike.

01:02:33.469 --> 01:02:41.304
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>it, it has been super interesting conversation, uh, with, industry experts, who are researchers who claim to not do science, but they actually do science.

01:02:41.454 --> 01:02:42.985
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Mike, you, you are doing science.

01:02:43.434 --> 01:02:46.784
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Um, I'm sorry, I'm, I'm sorry.

01:02:46.965 --> 01:02:47.545
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>You are.

01:02:47.731 --> 01:02:54.958
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>guys, thank you very much for, for this, I hope it was interesting, uh, to, to, to people, to researchers.

01:02:54.958 --> 01:02:58.358
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I, I hope it was interesting to the, to the society.

01:02:58.668 --> 01:03:01.514
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I guess people are either gonna hate or love this episode.

01:03:01.565 --> 01:03:03.275
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, we'll, we'll, we'll see.

01:03:03.302 --> 01:03:06.597
<v Mike Spearpoint>Well, ironically, we might may or never find out because

01:03:06.762 --> 01:03:07.442
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>we might not

01:03:08.387 --> 01:03:13.956
<v Mike Spearpoint>that was awful, but maybe they send me, can send me an email that says I, I listened to it and it awful.

01:03:13.956 --> 01:03:15.117
<v Mike Spearpoint>At least I know it was awful.

01:03:15.117 --> 01:03:15.356
<v Mike Spearpoint>Then

01:03:16.481 --> 01:03:16.972
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Okay.

01:03:16.972 --> 01:03:20.572
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>If you, if you founded this episode, awful, please send an email to Mike.

01:03:20.572 --> 01:03:22.612
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>In other case, send it to me or Steve

01:03:22.836 --> 01:03:23.467
<v Mike Spearpoint>it was good.

01:03:23.597 --> 01:03:23.836
<v Steve Gwynne>you go.

01:03:23.867 --> 01:03:25.117
<v Steve Gwynne>I only, I only wanna hear

01:03:25.402 --> 01:03:29.132
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Yeah, same here, Okay guys, thank you.

01:03:29.132 --> 01:03:37.338
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Thank you so much for being here with me and, have a, have a great year 2023, because I assume it just started

01:03:37.543 --> 01:03:38.434
<v Steve Gwynne>Take care, everyone.

01:03:38.440 --> 01:03:39.056
<v Mike Spearpoint>Thank you.

01:03:39.056 --> 01:03:39.643
<v Mike Spearpoint>Cheers.

01:03:40.139 --> 01:03:41.699
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And the suits and I thank you for listening.

01:03:42.119 --> 01:03:51.449
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I hope we didn't bore you down with our amateur philosophy thinking stuff but I was very happy to be engaged in such a discussion with Mike and Steve.

01:03:51.588 --> 01:03:53.298
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>who are industry legends?

01:03:53.298 --> 01:03:57.184
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It was pure pleasure to, to hear their thoughts about why.

01:03:57.235 --> 01:04:02.382
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>We do research and how we do research and how this one do research in academia.

01:04:02.382 --> 01:04:04.422
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>How one does do research in industry?

01:04:04.811 --> 01:04:06.041
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Very intriguing.

01:04:06.041 --> 01:04:08.211
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, I think the differences are.

01:04:08.661 --> 01:04:11.422
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Much smaller than I've expected them to be.

01:04:11.422 --> 01:04:16.791
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I don't think we found a single massive discrepancy in how would you run?

01:04:17.032 --> 01:04:20.061
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Uh, researcher in one party or another.

01:04:20.572 --> 01:04:21.621
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>We didn't touch that much.

01:04:21.831 --> 01:04:32.978
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Utilitarian aspects of research as in product development And all R and D um, research happening around, but maybe that's a subject for another discussion.

01:04:33.728 --> 01:04:37.599
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Anyway, thank you very much for listening to this podcast episode.

01:04:37.599 --> 01:04:39.309
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I really hope you've enjoyed it.

01:04:39.338 --> 01:04:43.329
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Thanks a lot to OFR, for sponsoring the show.

01:04:43.358 --> 01:04:44.079
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Once again.

01:04:44.378 --> 01:04:49.028
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Super happy to have OFR as the diamond sponsor of the Fire Science Show.

01:04:49.449 --> 01:04:53.498
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And then the collaboration that's gonna last for at least one year.

01:04:54.039 --> 01:04:56.349
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>At that makes me very, very happy.

01:04:56.757 --> 01:04:58.137
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And that was before today.

01:04:58.527 --> 01:05:03.268
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>It's not the end of the podcast in this week because there's an upcoming Q and A episode.

01:05:03.688 --> 01:05:11.320
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>I think it should air on Friday if I miss it, it maybe Monday, but I'll do anything I can to have it published on Friday.

01:05:11.561 --> 01:05:16.751
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So you'll learn a lot about the listener experience servi and my observations from that.

01:05:16.800 --> 01:05:17.431
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And I will.

01:05:17.820 --> 01:05:19.621
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Tell you what you're thinking about the podcast.

01:05:19.621 --> 01:05:24.030
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So that's very exciting and they will also share more details about the.

01:05:24.076 --> 01:05:26.577
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>OFR Collaboration and how it's gonna.

01:05:26.757 --> 01:05:29.427
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Affect the podcast and everything I'm doing in here.

01:05:29.637 --> 01:05:34.407
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So, uh, if you're interested in the podcast itself, You're very welcome to join me.

01:05:34.407 --> 01:05:41.038
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And if you're interested just in the great discussions with, leaders of the industry, you're very welcome.

01:05:41.038 --> 01:05:43.677
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>next wednesday, when I'm having Dr.

01:05:43.677 --> 01:05:47.427
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Adam Barowy from UL FSRI to talk about battery fires again.

01:05:47.938 --> 01:05:48.538
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So cool.

01:05:48.777 --> 01:05:50.757
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Really happy to do the subject again.

01:05:50.757 --> 01:05:52.257
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And it was a great conversation.

01:05:52.527 --> 01:05:54.208
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Cannot wait to publish that one.

01:05:54.568 --> 01:05:56.577
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>So thanks for being here with me.

01:05:56.608 --> 01:05:59.757
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>See again on Friday, Monday or Wednesday.

01:06:00.177 --> 01:06:01.378
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>And, yeah, have a good week.

01:06:01.438 --> 01:06:01.768
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Cheers.

01:06:01.797 --> 01:06:02.097
<v Wojciech Węgrzyński>Bye.