Betsega Bekele | Michael Centi | Jeff Gayhart Mingwei Li | Carlee

Betsega Bekele | Michael Centi | Jeff Gayhart Mingwei Li | Carlee Smith | Cassie Vergel

Table of Contents

¡ Who is Wheelhouse? …………………..………. Page 4

¡ Adding Value to Wheelhouse ………...….... Page 11

¡  Input Strategy ..……………………...……...…. Page 20

¡  Process Strategy ………..…………………..…. Page 28

¡ Output Strategy …………..…………..………. Page 33

¡ Measurement ……………...………….....……. Page 38

¡ Additional Recommendations ……….……. Page 51

2

Executive Summary The Wheelhouse Project is a social innovation incubator aiming to develop university research into viable products that garner Series A Funding. With a goal to match the performance of top research universities, with return on investment of 10-20% on federal money invested into university-based research, Wheelhouse strives to be the preferred destination for projects bridging the social and scientific sectors.

Our group was tasked with developing a dashboard measuring the effectiveness of Wheelhouse in meeting its goals. By consulting with Wheelhouse founder Roger Sweis, we identified the organization’s mission is to create high quality projects that are commercially viable, socially impactful, and scientifically innovative. This will be done through a focus on three strategies: input, process and output.

We asked questions to determine whether those strategies would meet the objective of Wheelhouse’s core value proposition, and then asked additional questions to assess how Wheelhouse was performing against those goals. Based on those key analytic and performance questions, we identified key performance indicators (KPIs) to measure Wheelhouse’s performance. We also created a rubric, to be used at the Input stage, which was a necessary measure for Wheelhouse to be effective. Roger Sweis created 7 stages of development which we plugged into the process strategy as an additional measure of progress. The KPIs are depicted graphically on a dashboard that has been created specifically for Wheelhouse.

In summary, the accompanying report, complete with rubric, dashboard and additional recommendations will provide the necessary framework for Wheelhouse to evaluate and measure their success as an organization.

NOTE: Throughout this report, the source for all background information on The Wheelhouse Project was Founder Roger Sweis

3

Who is Wheelhouse? Overview of the Organization / Mission & Goal / The Role of SBIR / Stakeholders /

4

The Wheelhouse Project

The Community

Wheelhouse

Scientists & Entrepreneurs

The Wheelhouse Project is a social innovation incubator based in Nashville, TN, launched in 2012, that aims to advance American social innovation. Wheelhouse was created to address the problem that less than 1% of innovations created by American researchers ever make it out of the university lab and into the hands of those who need it most. According to the Brookings Institute & The Association of Tech Transfer, Out of 30,000-60,000 Inventions: •  20,000 of those inventions are disclosed •  5000 are licensed •  Only 40-50 come to fruition & in turn

generate $1Million in revenue

5

The Wheelhouse Project

In other words, the U.S. invests $90 Billion per year in university research and that research generates a paltry $2.5 Billion in revenue, a return on investment of 2.77%. How can we unlock this hidden potential? All too often, promising scientific discoveries are left by the wayside at large research universities and fail to fulfill the full social economic potential due to numerous barriers that they face. The mission of The Wheelhouse Project is to help these promising scientific discoveries fulfill their social and economic potential. By providing a top-notch incubator for commercially viable, socially impactful, scientifically innovative ideas, The Wheelhouse Project believes it can match the performance of top research universities that see a return on investment of 10-20%. Using this ROI as the benchmark, Wheelhouse sees a market opportunity of $40-$100 Million.

6

Mission & Goal ¡ Wheelhouse’s primary mission is to be the

preferred destination for projects bridging the social and scientific sectors.

¡  For The Wheelhouse Project, success can be defined as a 10-20% increase in the ROI for government research monies invested into university research.

7

The Role of SBIR

¡  The overall Wheelhouse strategy encompasses the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) funding model. This model is a two phase grant process in which SBIR seeks to fund projects that are socially impactful, scientifically innovative, and commercially viable.

¡  Part of the journey for a project in Wheelhouse, from idea to Series A funding, includes application and approval of SBIR Phase 1 funding and application of Phase 2 funding.

8

Stakeholders

The Wheelhouse

Project

Wheelhouse Staff

Wheelhouse Board

Clients (Scientists &

Entrepreneurs)

Community Partners

Potential Funders

9

Value of Wheelhouse to Stakeholders ¡  Clients (Scientists & Entrepreneurs)

¡  Promotion and advancement of work ¡  Feedback on commercial viability of innovation ¡  Wheelhouse designates up to 100k to develop each company ¡  Advanced partnership opportunities

¡  Community Partners ¡  A way to increase effectiveness by pairing social need with

advanced science

¡  Potential Funders ¡  Top-caliber science that has been vetted through structured

development process

¡  Wheelhouse Board ¡  Foster entrepreneurship & strengthen Nashville small businesses

by attracting top scientists with potential market value

¡  Wheelhouse Staff ¡  Provide advanced applied learning ¡  Potential job opportunities with new start-ups

10

Adding Value to Wheelhouse Objective / Strategies / Value Creation Map / Value-Added from Strategies / Overview of Implementation of Strategies /

11

Objective Create high quality projects that are commercially viable, socially impactful, scientifically innovative.

This will be done through 3 strategies focused on:

Input Process Output

12

Strategies ¡  Input Strategy – Reducing uncertainty in the project

selection phase by assessing the quality of incoming projects based on commercial viability, social impact and scientific innovation

¡  Process Strategy – Cultivate top-caliber projects by providing oversight through Wheelhouse’s 7 stages of development

¡  Output Strategy – Produce quality projects with technical merit, feasibility and commercial potential leading to Series A funding

13

Value Creation Map The value creation map is a visual tool that maps the Wheelhouse process and how value is created. It allows Wheelhouse to keep better track of implemented strategies and initiatives by identifying drivers and key stakeholders.

The hierarchical model clearly shows how the proposed strategies are linked to the overall mission and objective of Wheelhouse.

14

Value Creation Map

O b j e c t i v e :

Create high quality projects that are commercially viable, socially impactful, scientifically innovative, through a focus on:

M i s s i o n :

Be the preferred destination for projects, bridging the social and scientific sectors

T h e W h e e l h o u s e P r o j e c t :

A non-profit dedicated to the advancement of social innovation

Input

Rubric

Wheelhouse (Board &

Staff) Clients Funders

Process

7 Stages

Staff Clients Board

Output

Series A Funding

Wheelhouse (Board &

Staff) Clients Funders

S t r a t e g i e s :

I m p l e m e n t a t i o n :

S t a k e h o l d e r s :

15

Through reducing uncertainty in the project selection phase by assessing the quality of incoming projects based on commercial viability, social impact and scientific innovation, Wheelhouse provides value to the following stakeholders:

Value-Added Explanation W

HEE

LHO

USE

The rubric is an assessment tool to determine what projects Wheelhouse accepts.

By having a rubric, it ensures that all projects are uniformly assessed, yet priority can be given to projects based on availability of resources.

This assessment process, in return, reduces uncertainty, makes the intake scalable, and allows for more objectivity in the initial process.

CLI

ENTS

The transparency of the rubric communicates to the clients on how exactly they are being assessed.

It is also a tool that provides an opportunity for actionable feedback from Wheelhouse to the clients, so that regardless of whether Wheelhouse decides to take them, clients will know what they need to work on.

FUN

DER

S

The rubric is based on what funders see as valuable.

The rubric is malleable in that as funder priorities and values change, the rubric can change to fit those needs.

16

By cultivating top-caliber projects via project oversight through the 7 stages of development, Wheelhouse provides value to the following stakeholders:

Value-Added Explanation ST

AFF

The 7 Stages makes it easy for Wheelhouse staff to keep track of where each individual project is.

It streamlines the process so that each project must complete the same necessary tasks.

It also allows for staff to plan resources and support services for the projects based on when each step is completed.

CLI

ENTS

The sequence is based on the necessary steps and elements of what projects need in order to complete Phase 1 of R&D and transfer to Phase 2.

It allows for oversight by the Wheelhouse staff and equips the client team with a roadmap to assist in communication with their project manager as they progress through each milestone.

BOA

RD

The 7 Stages provides the Board with tangible milestones to base their evaluation of each project.

By monitoring progress, the board can track what resources get allocated to whom.

It helps inform their decisions on when to push a project along or which projects need to be discontinued in the Wheelhouse process.

17

By producing quality projects with technical merit, feasibility and commercial potential leading to Series A funding, Wheelhouse provides values to the following stakeholders:

Value-Added Explanation W

HEE

LHO

USE

Continuously producing projects that receive Series A funding will increase Wheelhouse’s reputation.

Wheelhouse can also gain valuable revenue by receiving a portion of the project’s initial offering.

CLI

ENTS

Eligibility for Series A funding is an established end goal for a project’s success.

The clients are now equipped with the tools and funding needed to take their product and company to the next level.

FUN

DER

S

Series A funding serves as a benchmark for fundable, sustainable projects.

Projects that have reached this stage are socially innovative, socially impactful, and commercially sustainable.

18

Input

• Wheelhouse team gathers introductory information on project proposals • All incoming proposals are graded using the RUBRIC as a measure of project

potential • The grading of projects will be reflected on the DASHBOARD

Process

• All projects are taken through the 7 Stage Development Process with progress tracked on DASHBOARD

•  Initial Project Grading (from RUBRIC) will remain a significant gauge of priority (in terms of time and resources) as each project progresses through pipeline of 7 stages

Output

• A project “graduates” when all 7 stages are completed and it is ready to apply for Series A funding

• DASHBOARD will track successful completion of 7 stages and potential grants funding

Overview of Implementation

*Items in ORANGE were created by our group specifically for Wheelhouse

19

Input Strategy: Reducing uncertainty in the project selection phase by assessing the quality of incoming projects based on commercial viability, social impact and scientific innovation Rubric / Explanation of Rubric / KAQs and KPQs (or How do we measure this strategy’s implementation?) /

20

Strategy 1: Reducing Uncertainty in the Project Selection Phase


To assess the quality of incoming projects, we have implemented a rubric. The overarching goal is to reduce uncertainty in the selection process by using more objective criteria to rate and sort incoming projects. In the interest of scalability as Wheelhouse grows, this more objective selection process will allow staff to quickly identify high quality incoming projects. The rubric is based on the three tenets of Wheelhouse’s mission: scientific innovation, social impact, and commercial sustainability. While the rubric inserts objectivity into the input process, whether or not a submitted project is “accepted” into Wheelhouse for development will depend on the discretion of Wheelhouse founder Roger Sweis and his executive team.

21

Rubric


Quick Notes: 1. Highly cited; number of publications; reputation; awards/recognition 2. Is proposed theory of change meaningful, plausible, feasible, and measurable? 3. In USD ($) 4. Are a project’s products or services disruptive to the current competitive market?

WHEELHOUSE PROJECT: INCOMING PROJECT ASSESSMENT RUBRIC (2013)

SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION

Highly novel concept; Well- respected scientist1;

strongly demonstrated effectiveness

Novel concept; respected scientist; demonstrated

effectiveness

Mildly novel concept; respected scientist; limited

demonstration of effectiveness

Redundant science; unknown scientist; little/no

demonstrated effectiveness

SOCIAL IMPACT

Clear logic model2; significant added benefit to target population (size or scope); unmet need; high economic cost to

society3

Somewhat clear logic model; potential to add

significant benefit to target population (size or scope); mostly unaddressed need; relatively high economic

cost to society

Unclear logic model; lacking potential to add

benefit to target pop (size or scope); relatively unaddressed need;

moderate economic cost to society

No logic model; minimal benefit added to target

population (size or scope); mostly addressed need; low economic cost to

society

COMMERCIAL SUSTAINABILITY

High barriers to entry; substantial market size;

attractive value proposition4; strong mgmt.

team; demonstrated interest from funders

Relatively high barriers to entry; substantial market

size; moderately attractive value proposition;

proposed mgmt. team; some demonstrated interest from funders

Relatively high barriers to entry; moderate market

size; somewhat underdeveloped value

proposition; undeveloped mgmt. team; little/no

demonstrated interest from funders

High barriers to entry; small market size; lack of clear

value proposition; undeveloped mgmt.

team; no demonstrated interest.

33 17 27 22

Assessment Scale: Score each category from 17-33. If needed, use intermediate values not on scale (e.g. 24) to account for variation.

Grading Scale: A: 99-90 B: 89-80 C: 79-70 F: 69 & below

22


Perhaps the greatest value of the rubric is that it establishes a common definition and methodology of measurement for ambiguous terms that are otherwise open to a multitude of interpretations. Based on Wheelhouse’s pertinent needs and interests in terms of the kinds of projects they aim to work with, we have interpreted and established evaluation criteria for scientific innovation, social impact, and commercial sustainability as follows: Scientific Innovation is evaluated on: §  The novelty of the science, as determined by the uniqueness of the

particular idea/methods in the context of scientific literature. §  The professional caliber of the scientist, measured by the number and

impact of publications toward advancing science, the prevalence of citations in academic literature, and awards and recognition in his or her field.

§  The extent to which the idea has demonstrated effectiveness in the field through evidence-based research trials or implementation of similar ideas.


23

Social Impact is evaluated on:

¡  The clarity and strength of a project’s logic model (aka theory of change)1, determined by assessing factors such as meaningfulness (i.e., what is the proposed impact in terms of size of population reached or extent to which it will impact an individual’s life?), plausibility, (i.e., is the model truly logical?), feasibility (i.e., can the project reasonably be carried out?) and measurability (i.e., can planned action be verified?).

¡  The level of unmet need for target social problem based estimates of the size and scope of social issue and opportunity for impact.

¡  The economic cost of the targeted social issue based on researched cost studies or reports from research centers (e.g. Urban Institute) that estimate the social cost of particular issues.



1 A common evaluation technique, a logic model involves establishing the causal relationship between the elements of the program and intended social change. Fundamentally, the logic model examines how inputs (e.g. investments) lead to activities (e.g. programs) that produce outputs (e.g. clients served) which in turn create long-term social outcomes (e.g. results or changes)

24

Commercial sustainability is evaluated on:

¡  The height of entry barriers to the industry based on an analysis of such factors as scale economies, network effects, capital requirements, customer switching costs, access to distribution, and government regulations of a particular industry2.

¡  The market size of an industry based on market research reports (e.g. marketresearch.com) that calculate total sales of an industry along with identifying areas and trends for growth.

¡  The attractiveness of a project’s value proposition, based on an analysis of disruptive factors that allow it to reach a niche in the market. In relation to products and services these include, for instance: newness, performance, customization, price, design, accessibility, and convenience3.

¡  The strength of proposed management team determined by the level of relevant industry and business experience from those who will lead the project.

¡  The level of external interest in the project or topic area as demonstrated by such elements as funding dollars, partnerships, willingness-to-pay studies, or interest from identified donors.



2 Based on Michael Porter’s “The Five Competitive Forces that Shape Strategy” 3 Adapted from “Business Model Generation” by Alexander Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur

25

KPQ/KAQs for Input ¡  To what extent are we attracting high potential projects?

¡  Number of “A” projects / Submitted projects

Input Process Output 26

Reasoning for KAQs/KPQs It is important for Wheelhouse to determine if there is high potential projects for the following reasons:

Inputs affect output:

¡  Predictor of success: It is more difficult to achieve excellent outcomes without good inputs. Poor inputs are more likely lead to poor outputs unless significant resources are brought to the project.

¡  Resource allocation: Resources are limited and therefore we need to ensure that we are putting these resources toward projects that are going be able to produce quality outputs and results.

¡  Focus on project not just person: People can be replaced, but the projects cannot. Human capital can change or be altered, but the ideas stay. Given this, thorough screening is necessary to ensure WH is working with desirable projects.

¡  Establishment of reputation: We can use our inputs as a way to market our potential tech-transfer companies, and also a way to attract high potential employees.


Services Provided by Wheelhouse / 7 Stages of Development / KAQs and KPQs (or How do we measure this strategy’s implementation?) /

Process Strategy: Cultivate top-caliber projects by providing oversight through Wheelhouse’s 7 stages of development

28

Strategy 2: Providing oversight through project development

Wheelhouse has a 7 stage development process centered on providing the following services for all projects:

¡  Path to market strategy consulting

¡  Help building out support team and organizational functions

¡  Facilitate cross-sector partnerships and collaborations

¡  Fundraising guidance and support

¡  General project management


The Wheelhouse

Project

Small Business

Research Organization

Community Foundation

29


7 Stages of Development

7) Secure Phase 2 Funding / Graduate from Wheelhouse (3-6 months)

6) Phase I SBIR Project Executed / Phase II Submitted (6-12 months)

5) Cross-Sector Partnerships Established & Executed (3-4 months)

4) Phase I SBIR Applied & Accepted (3-6 months)

3) Team Build-out (1-2 months)

2) Path To Market (3-6 months)

1) Tech Transfer Office (upon acceptance of project)

Entire Process is estimated at 18-24 months

with some overlap

between stages

Ideal Beginning: Excited, reputable scientist

Ideal Outcome: Receive Series A Funding

30

KPQ/KAQs for Process ¡  To what extent do we have the human capital to effectively

manage project needs? ¡  Average cost per project

¡  Number of projects per employee

¡  How effectively are we supporting projects? ¡  Projected Project Time per Stage/ Actual Project Time per Stage

¡  Number of Projects in each stage, current quarter compared to previous quarter


Reasoning for KAQs/KPQs •  Efficiency: One of the key points of focus is making sure the

projects actually move through the 7 stages smoothly. Though projects often will not move through the stages in a uniform fashion, it is important we identify bottlenecks in the process, as these could speak to the following two categories.

•  Resource Allocation: Monitoring the speed at which projects move through the process will allow us to allocate resources where needed, ensuring projects are making progress and are on pace to graduate successfully in the expected time frame.

•  Potential Changes to Process: Evaluating the process over time will tell us whether or not we will need to make changes to our activities or general structure of how projects move through Wheelhouse. For instance, rather than working with projects on a one-off basis, a cohort model may be more efficient and effective.


Series A Funding / How Wheelhouse Benefits / KAQs and KPQs (or How do we measure this strategy’s implementation?) /

Output Strategy: Produce quality projects with technical merit, feasibility and commercial potential leading to Series A funding

33

Strategy 3: Produce quality projects that are eligible for Series A funding

The end goal for Wheelhouse projects is for projects to be eligible for Series A funding.

Possible Investors or Funding Sources:

¡  Entrepreneurship Center

¡  Other partnerships from Wheelhouse’s network of contacts:

¡  Angel Investment / Micro-financing (e.g. Tennessee Technology Development Corporation, Claritas Capital, Angel Capital Group)

¡  Social Purpose Vehicle Formation

¡  Crowd funding


Strategy 3: Produce quality projects that are eligible for Series A funding

How Wheelhouse benefits:

¡  Receive portion of grant funding for project

¡  Percentage of Series-A shares for sold idea

¡  Brokering royalty for referrals to network

Next Steps:

Once funding is applied for, the project enters Phase II of the SBIR process, a continuation of their R&D efforts initiated in Phase I. Wheelhouse will help transfer the project into Phase II.


KPQ/KAQs for Output ¡  How successful are the projects?

¡  Number of Wheelhouse graduated projects in the end / Number of accepted projects at the beginning

¡  What is the financial health of Wheelhouse? ¡  Wheelhouse’s Budget to Actual (Variance)

¡  Outstanding grant applications

¡  All potential outstanding grant income

¡  Expected income from grants


Reasoning for KAQs/KPQs How successful are the projects:

¡  Reputation: We believe successful projects will enhance our brand. The success of our projects is thus a leading indicator that indicates how well we will be able to obtain high quality applicants for incoming projects.

¡  Adaptive Learning: Our project results will tell us “what works,” and what may need to be changed in relation to our process. We believe this kind of evaluative information will provide necessary insight to help inform our future practice as to how we move projects through Wheelhouse.

¡  Expansion: If we achieve successful results with our projects, we are likely to be positioned in a more advantageous situation, financially and reputably, to add more resources and expand our services.

¡  Mission accountability: Since one of the core values of WH is to make an impact on society, successful projects that reach their target populations’ needs is critical to fulfilling our mission.

How well are we attracting funding:

¡  Reputation: The extent to which we are attracting funders is helpful for creating a kind of network effect. That is, as we attract funders, our reputation is enhance, allowing us to attract more funders.

¡  More/less projects: Funding is indicator to let us know our capacity in being able to accommodate more or fewer projects.

¡  Focus efforts on recruiting new resources: Having more funding or more funders will allow us not only to take on additional projects, but also to make decisions to recruit more human capital or invest in capital expenditures that will allow Wheelhouse to continue to be successful and grow.


Measurement Review of KAQs & KPQs / Key Performance Indicators / Dashboard / Explanations of Individual Graphs / Challenges to Implementation /

38

KAQs/KPQs

Input

• To what extent are we attracting high potential projects? • Number of “A” projects / Submitted projects

Process

• To what extent do we have the human capital to effectively manage project needs? • Average cost per project / Number of projects per employee

• How effectively are we supporting projects? • Projected Project Time per Stage / Actual Project Time per Stage • Number of Projects in each stage current quarter compared to previous quarter

Output

• How successful are the projects? • Number of Wheelhouse graduated projects in the end / Number of accepted projects at the

beginning

• What is the financial health of Wheelhouse? • Wheelhouse’s Budget to Actual (Variance) • Outstanding Grant Apps • All potential outstanding grant income • Expected income from grants

39

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) ¡  Ratio of submitted projects to number of “A” projects

¡  Average cost per project to number of projects per employee

¡  Projected project time per stage to actual project time per stage

¡  Number of projects in each stage, current quarter compared to previous quarter

¡  Number of Wheelhouse graduated projects to number of accepted projects

¡  Wheelhouse’s budget to actual (variance)

¡  Outstanding grant applications

¡  All potential outstanding grant income

¡  Expected income from grants

40

Dashboard ¡  Wheelhouse wants to become the premier destination for scientifically innovative and socially

impactful start-ups. In order to achieve this goal, Wheelhouse must focus on attracting high potential projects, supporting them with enough resources to effectively move them through the stages and graduate them from the process. The dashboard is arranged in such a way as to allow upper management to easily recognize if they are meeting these three goals.

¡  The upper and lower left side of the dashboard is dedicated to the inputs and outputs of Wheelhouse. The top to bottom flow of the high potential projects and graduation rate of projects graphs provide an effective overview of project quality coming into and exiting Wheelhouse. The high potential projects graph was purposely selected to be displayed in the upper left corner of the dashboard as we feel the information it conveys is of high importance and is a strong leading indicator of future success.

¡  The midsection of the dashboard, along with the upper right corner, are reserved for process metrics. The process graphs support one another by revealing the flow of projects into Wheelhouse and the movement of projects across the 7 stages, allowing management to anticipate the needs of both human capital and financial resources. In combination, the graphs measure the efficiency of moving projects through the Wheelhouse process and the timing of resources ensuring that they are applied at the right time and in the proper amount. The Stage Overview graph was selected to occupy a prominent space on the dashboard as it provides the most general information about our projects’ movement through the Wheelhouse process and important trends for resource allocation, and it is another leading indicator.

¡  The bottom right corner of the dashboard, including Resource Allocation, Budget vs. Actual and Grants, help management monitor resource allocation and financial health. The Resource Allocation graph helps Wheelhouse monitor the monthly financial resources per project. Budget vs. Actual is a key lagging indicator of financial health. Housed in the bottom right of the dashboard, the Grants Table is not directly linked to Wheelhouse’s goals of attracting high potential projects or their process, however, it is a valuable comparison to the Budget vs. Actual graph. The information conveyed is still important as grants make up a large portion of Wheelhouse’s income, especially as it is a start-up that is still attempting to attract a high volume of projects and hire staff.

NOTE: Dummy data was created for all graphs depicted on the dashboard.

41

0"

2"

4"

6"

8"

10"

1" 2" 3" 4" 5" 6" 7"

#"of"M

onths"

Stages"

Process"Efficiency"Avg."Actual"Time" Avg."Projected"Time"

0"

5"

10"

15"

20"

1" 2" 3" 4" 5" 6" 7"

#"of"Projects"

Stages"

Stage"Overview"Previous"Quarter" Current"Quarter"

3"

5"

7"

9"

11"

13"

$0.0"

$0.5"

$1.0"

$1.5"

$2.0"

M" J" J" A" S" O" N" D" J" F" M" A"

Projects/Employee"

Avg."Cost/Project"(Th

ousand

s)"

Months"

Resource"AllocaFon"Cost"Per"Project" Projects"Per"Employee"

0%"

5%"

10%"

15%"

20%"

25%"

0"10"20"30"40"50"60"70"80"

Q2" Q3" Q4" Q1" %"of"S

uccessful"Projects"

#"of"Projects"

Previous"Four"Quarters"

GraduaFon"Rate"of"Projects"Projects"Graduated" Total"Projects"Accepted"

50%"

70%"

90%"

110%"

130%"

150%"

M" J" J" A" S" O" N" D" J" F" M" A"

%"of"B

udget"

TTM"

Budget"v."Actual""Variance" Budget"

Total"#" Total"Applied" Exp."Amount"

10" 7.5"M" 1.5"M"

Grants"

Grant" Amount" Exp."Response"

Sanofi"Found." 2.5"M" 6/3/13"

HewleX"Found." 1"M"" 6/10/13"

Packard"Found." .5"M" 6/17/13"

0%"10%"20%"30%"40%"50%"60%"

0"10"20"30"40"50"60"

M" J" J" A" S" O" N" D" J" F" M" A"

%"of""A"

"Projects"

#"of"Projects"

TTM"

High"PotenFal"Projects"Total"ApplicaZons" #"of""A""Projects"%"of""A""Projects" 42

Individual Graph Explanation: High Potential Projects The high potential projects graph has an x-axis displaying the previous twelve months. The left y-axis is the number of project applications and the right y-axis is percentage of “A” applications based upon our project rubric. The light blue bars on the graph show how many applications Wheelhouse received in a given month. Although the data displayed currently shows no recognizable trend in application frequency, the potential exists to observe a meaningful trend. The dark blue bars measure the number of “A” applications with the grey line displaying the percentage of “A” projects.

The percentage of “A” projects has been increasing lately, demonstrating that Wheelhouse is doing a better job of attracting the high quality projects that it seeks. If management wanted to drill down further it could review charts from previous years to determine if there were any seasonal trends in applications, an overall increase in the number of applications from year to year, and a higher average number of “A” projects with an increased “A” percentage.

The number of applications received and the percentage of “A” projects are leading indicators that could predict future hiring and grant application decisions.

*Updated monthly

0%"

10%"

20%"

30%"

40%"

50%"

60%"

0"

10"

20"

30"

40"

50"

60"

M" J" J" A" S" O" N" D" J" F" M" A"

%"of""A"

"Projects"

#"of"Projects"

TTM"

High"PotenFal"Projects"

Total"ApplicaZons" #"of""A""Projects" %"of""A""Projects"


Individual Graph Explanation: Stage Overview The stage overview graph has an x-axis displaying the 7 stages associated with the Wheelhouse process. The y-axis is the number of projects Wheelhouse has in each stage. The light blue bars on the graph show the number of projects in that stage during the previous quarter. The dark blue bars measure the number of projects in that stage during the current quarter. Looking specifically at stage one, management would want to see the number of projects consistently increasing, compared to the previous quarter. This would signal that Wheelhouse is increasing the volume of projects it is accepting. This assumption would be confirmed by looking at the trend for the high potential projects graph in the upper left corner of the dashboard. However, management needs to look beyond stage one to confirm growth because the possibility exists that Wheelhouse may not be graduating projects effectively beyond the first stage, creating a bottleneck, and inflating the number of projects in stage one. By looking at stage two, this is not the case as the number of projects in stage two has also increased between quarters meaning that Wheelhouse is increasing the volume of projects moving on in the process. Both are positive trends for the company. The stage by stage analysis should be extended across all the seven stages and should be cross-referenced with the process efficiency graph to help identify any bottle necks in the Wheelhouse process.

0$2$4$6$8$10$12$14$16$18$

1$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5$ 6$ 7$

#"of"Projects"

Stages"

Stage"Overview"Previous$Quarter$ Current$Quarter$

On a more macro level, management can use the stage overview graph to see where the bulk of projects are within the overall process and use this information to allocate current resources or acquire more resources. The graph currently shows the bulk of projects concentrated in the first four stages, telling management that resources are mostly tied up with these projects. Management also knows its project success rate is increasing, while both the number of applications it is receiving and the percentage of “A” projects is going up. The projects in the first four stages will likely shift in the next 3 to 6 months to create a large volume of projects in the last three stages, so management must hire more people to manage the projects or risk slowing down their process.

*Updated quarterly


Individual Graph Explanation: Process Efficiency The process efficiency graph has an x-axis displaying the seven stages. The y-axis shows the number of months. The dark blue bars are the average actual time projects spend in the given stage and the diamond is the average projected time that each phase is expected to take. If the dark blue bar is higher than the diamond, then the average actual time is greater than the average projected time for that milestone. Bars that are significantly higher than the diamond are marked with a red diamond and bars that are significantly below the diamond are marked with a green diamond. Management should evaluate red and green diamonds to reconcile efficiency gaps. Red dots may require additional resources to speed up projects in a given phase or could result from an under-estimation of the time required to complete that stage. Green diamonds would signify overages in these two classifications. Management could allocate resources away from green diamonds to red diamonds in an attempt to bring actual results in line with expected project timelines. Looking at the stage overview graph, in conjunction with the process efficiency graph, would give management a more complete understanding of whether a shift in resource allocation across the stages would be possible.

0$1$2$3$4$5$6$7$8$9$10$

1$ 2$ 3$ 4$ 5$ 6$ 7$#"of"M

onths"

Stages"

Process"Efficiency"Avg.$Actual$Time$ Avg.$Projected$Time$

*Updated monthly


Individual Graph Explanation: Resource Allocation The resource allocation graph has an x-axis displaying the previous twelve months. The left y-axis is the average cost per project and the right y-axis is the number of accepted projects per employee. The blue bars on the graph show the average cost of a project in any given month. The yellow lines within the bars show the number of Wheelhouse projects each employee is working on. By itself, the average cost per project is an important metric to ensure project costs aren’t exceeding your operational budget. The yellow lines signify the capacity of your current human capital. Ideally, Wheelhouse should leverage a single employee to manage multiple projects. However, there is a limit to the number of projects an employee can effectively manage before their efficiency drops. Management needs to closely monitor the trend in the yellow line to maximize their human capital. If the yellow line is too low, you aren’t leveraging your employees enough; and if it is too high, you risk inefficiency and potential employee burnout. Management should determine what the ideal ratio is for Wheelhouse. The graph shows that the initial fixed costs of starting the business have been absorbed by increasing the number of projects with the current average cost per project trend slightly increasing most likely due to hiring new staff as the yellow line is trending lower.

3$4$5$6$7$8$9$10$11$12$13$

$0.0$

$0.5$

$1.0$

$1.5$

$2.0$

M$ J$ J$ A$ S$ O$ N$ D$ J$ F$ M$ A$

Projects/Employee"

Avg."Cost/Project"(Th

ousand

s)"

Months"

Resource"Alloca6on"Cost$Per$Project$ Projects$Per$Employee$

*Updated monthly


Individual Graph Explanation: Graduation Rate of Projects The graduation rate of projects graph has an x-axis displaying the previous four quarters. The left y-axis is the number of projects Wheelhouse has accepted on a cumulative basis and the right y-axis is percentage of projects that have successfully graduated from Wheelhouse. The light blue bars on the graph show the number of projects that graduated from Wheelhouse that quarter. The dark blue bars measure the number of accepted projects into Wheelhouse that quarter, while the grey line displays the percentage of projects to successfully graduate.

The percentage of graduating projects has been increasing lately. To determine whether the increase is because of operational efficiency or a higher volume of projects, management can look to the high potential projects graph to see if it is volume or the process efficiency graph to the right to determine if it is operational efficiency. Cumulative figures were chosen, due to management’s focus on absolute graduation over the actual quarter in which a project graduates. Management is most concerned if a project were to drop out of the Wheelhouse process, but less concerned if it takes a few extra months to graduate.

0%$

5%$

10%$

15%$

20%$

25%$

0$10$20$30$40$50$60$70$80$

Q2$ Q3$ Q4$ Q1$

%"of"S

uccessful"Projects"

#"of"Projects"

Previous"Four"Quarters"

Gradua6on"Rate"of"Projects"

Projects$Graduated$ Total$Projects$Accepted$ Success$Percentage$

*Updated quarterly


Individual Graph Explanation: Budget vs. Actual The budget vs. actual graph has an x-axis displaying the trailing twelve months. The y-axis is the percentage of actual expenses compared to the budgeted amount. The light blue straight line is the monthly budget and the dark blue line is the actual expenditures, compared to budget. It looks like operation costs have gone over budget more months than not; however it looks like Wheelhouse is bringing costs more into line over the last few months. It is understandable that early on Wheelhouse might be over budget due to the high fixed costs of starting a business (e.g. hiring employees, lack of projects to spread the costs). The budget vs. actual graph is especially effective when combined with the resource allocation graph and the grants table to identify which direction the average costs of projects are trending and how much grant revenue is likely in the near future.

50%$60%$70%$80%$90%$

100%$110%$120%$130%$140%$150%$

M$ J$ J$ A$ S$ O$ N$ D$ J$ F$ M$ A$

%"of"B

udget"

TTM"

Budget"v."Actual""

Variance$ Budget$

*Updated monthly


Individual Graph Explanation: Grants Table The grants table (from left to right, top row then bottom row) shows: the total number of outstanding grant applications, the total dollar amount for those outstanding grants, the estimated amount Wheelhouse expects to receive based upon probability of grant acceptance (in this case 20%), and the top three grants, based upon the dollar amount, with the name of the foundation and the expected decision date. The grants table provides management with quick information necessary to make budgeting, hiring, and other capital investment decisions.

Total$#$ Total$Applied$ Exp.$Amount$

10$ 7.5$M$ 1.5$M$

Grants"

Grant$ Amount$ Exp.$Response$

Sanofi$Found.$ 2.5$M$ 6/3/13$

Hewle[$Found.$ 1$M$$ 6/10/13$

Packard$Found.$ .5$M$ 6/17/13$

*Updated as grants are applied for


Challenges to Implementation The key to success for our operational dashboard is successful implementation and continued use. That being said, we foresee potential challenges to implementation and offer the following recommendations:

¡  One challenge is connecting the dashboard to daily operations at Wheelhouse. We encourage leadership to tie daily activities to the overall success of Wheelhouse by making the dashboard metrics transparent to all employees. When the whole organization understands how strategy is connected to performance and stakeholder value, understanding the need for a high level view of the health of the organization will become integral.

¡  Another challenge is staff limitations to maintain data input to the dashboard. With a small staff at Wheelhouse, every staff person is stretched for time and resources. We understand that even though the dashboard will provide significant value to the organization, maintaining the dashboard will be an additional demand on already limited time. We recommend that a staff member maintain responsibility for overseeing the dashboard and encouraging every staff member to input their data in a timely fashion to avoid data backup.

¡  Another challenge is staff turnover. We recommend a training manual or video for incoming staff members to fully understand the dashboard and its capabilities.

¡  We also foresee a challenge of implementation being its need to reflect current strategies for the organization. This dashboard is meant to be a living document and to be adjusted as needed. When and if strategies change, we recommend adjusting the dashboard as necessary.

50

Additional Recommendations Further opportunities for framing and measurement based on the 3 strategies of Input / Process / Output

51

Input: Data Capture ¡  Online Submission Form –

¡  Currently, projects can be submitted to Wheelhouse via multiple formats (in person, via email or paper copies)

¡  We recommend moving all project submissions to an online submission form

¡  This will allow for data to be input directly into a format that can be pulled into the dashboard

¡  The fields on the submission form need to include all the preferred elements needed for a project to be considered based on Roger’s discretion:

¡  Proposed management team

¡  Logic model

¡  Lead scientist or entrepreneur

¡  Proof of research

¡  Value proposition


Input: Project Pipeline ¡  Dashboard for Wheelhouse

Project Pipeline – ¡  Once projects are graded

via the rubric, the data can be used to illustrate the submitted projects per grade

¡  Within each grade level, there can be a drill-down to illustrate the project’s current status within each grading category, as well as any related subjects

¡  Industry

¡  Scientifically innovative

¡  Socially impactful

¡  Commercially viable

¡  Researchers


Input: People Placement ¡  Wheelhouse leadership takes great value in highly engaged individuals who are

committed to the development of new innovations. Roger has found that attracting people to work on social innovation projects is not difficult. Often projects come from the universities with an “army” of individuals who have previously worked on the project and are interested in continuing with its development. However, the need arises to identify the individuals who will add the greatest value to the project, based on their level of commitment and skill level.

¡  Putting the right people in the right box are key to Wheelhouse’s success. ¡  The big 5 personality traits (openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and

neuroticism) encompass the types of individuals that are best suited for a social incubator such as Wheelhouse.

¡  Skills assessments can evaluate particular abilities and experiences that would be useful to know when matching staff with potential projects.

¡  Examples of assessments that measure traits and skills are: Hogan Assessment, Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI), StrengthFinders, DISC and others.

¡  Our recommendation is for Wheelhouse to conduct a combination of personality and skill assessments for all potential volunteer and paid employees. By including similar wording and application of skills in employee performance reviews, Wheelhouse can continue to measure whether they have the right people on board to match with current and new projects.


Input: Additional Questions Additional exploratory KPQs & KAQs:

¡  What clients/scientists/projects have the most potential?

¡  To what extent are we attracting high potential projects?

¡  How well do we ID projects with potential?

¡  How does WH identify potential?


Process: Additional Dashboard ¡  Project Management Dashboard:

¡  Since project managers will be managing the day-to-day progress of their respective projects, we recommend that Wheelhouse develop a process-oriented dashboard to reflect the most relevant metrics for them.

¡  Possible metrics could cover:

¡  Comparison to other projects (based on stage progress)

¡  Project budget vs. actual (month-to-month)

¡  Resource allocation (including paid staff hours, volunteer hours and time)

¡  Project profile that includes significant developments, milestones achieved, and remaining stages to graduation


Process: Employee Surveys Wheelhouse can utilize an Employee Engagement Survey to identify current resource allocation and identify additional capacity needs or surpluses amongst current staff.

1.  What’s your title and role at Wheelhouse?

2.  On average, how many hours do you work per week?

3.  On average, how many hours a week do you spend on each project?

4.  On average, how many hours a week do you spend on the following tasks (meetings, on boarding new projects, office management, paperwork, accounting, travel, etc.)?

5.  When you compare your assigned role on the Wheelhouse team with the allocation of your time, to what extent do you feel that the expectations of your role are accurate?

6.  Are there any tasks that you would like to undertake that you are currently unable to? If so, what is the hindrance (i.e. not enough time, need training, lack of resources)?

7.  Do you have any specific goals for your role or for the projects you are working on at Wheelhouse?

8.  Fast forward to December 31st of this year. How would you define a successful year for Wheelhouse?


Process: Additional Questions

Additional exploratory KAQs & KPQs

¡  How are we developing ideas into commercially viable projects?

¡  What resources help develop projects (staff, building, etc)?

¡  How good is WH (&SBIR) process at identifying potential?

¡  How good is WH at moving projects through the SBIR process?

¡  How impactful is our process?

¡  How well is WH building a network

¡  How efficient is the operational management?

¡  Possible Metric: Number of Staff / Number of project

¡  Possible Metric: Money spent per project (limit of $100K per project)

¡  How efficiently are we supporting projects?

¡  Possible Metric: Number of Paid Staff Hours / Project


Output: Additional Questions

Additional Exploratory KPQs & KAQs:

¡  What makes a good/successful company?

¡  What kinds of ideas are getting SBIR funding?

¡  What makes an attractive start up to investors?

¡  To what extent does WH give a company a competitive advantage (place them in better standing as they enter EC)?

¡  To what extent does WH help get a project funded?

¡  To what extent are our projects making an impact?

¡  To what extent does the SBIR process predict community impact?

¡  How well are projects doing after Wheelhouse?

¡  How well are we attracting funding our projects?

¡  Possible metric: Total revenue generated for WH projects / # of graduated projects


60

Betsega Bekele | Michael Centi | Jeff Gayhart Mingwei Li | Carlee

Documents