Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
COVID-19 has raised the stakes for boards, argues Brunswick’s Paddy McGuinness, former UK Deputy National Security Adviser. We now live with COVID-19. Fewer business leaders are making the mistake of talking about “post-COVID” or “when this is over.” The better of them have factored in COVID-19 related constraints to their medium-term plans and are even thinking about how the world may change in the long-term. They are building capacity to take advantage of an early recovery within months, yet they are modeling and encouraging grit for current and indeed harder conditions to last much longer. In the past, when health emergencies—say the Spanish Flu pandemic of a century ago—subsided, there was a greater return to economic normality than had been expected during the crisis. Extreme events often heighten or even distort our perception of wider risks. That old journalistic cliché “one thing is certain, nothing will be the same again” is rarely true. But the pandemic has created the expectation that businesses will be resilient—that they will be able to respond to an event and recover to the state prior to the event, incorporating the lessons learned into business practice. Many business leaders feel they have not done too badly responding to a once-in-a-hundred-years event. Business Continuity Plans (BCPs), which were understandably sketchy for pandemics, were pulled out of second-line risk management and owned and improved in real-time by executive committees. The transition to remote working and, at least in Asia and some of Europe, the gradual return to offices again, has been managed. Services and even vital production have been maintained. Leaders have absorbed the personal and collective strain of this. Good reason then for some satisfaction as they delegate certain COVID-19 responses and focus on the economic tsunami that follows the pandemic. The public seems to largely agree with business leaders’ assessments. While many national and scientific leaders find themselves beset by “blamestorming,” corporate executives have been given more slack. They weren’t expected to have foreseen a pandemic. Their sometimes scrabbling responses are understood. However, behind this lucky pass lurks an expectation that businesses will now be more prepared for crises and foreseeable risks. Resilience cannot be relegated to BCPs and traditional risk-management structures. It is categorically a board issue—regulators, lawyers, politicians and the public say so. The reputations of individual board members and the collective are at stake. Think how fast leaders have been expected to respond to the issues raised by the Black Lives Matter movement. Alacrity will be required. The speed and scale of decisions in response to the pandemic leaves board committees playing catch up to assure themselves that risks have been managed. The move to working from home has been rapid, so too the digitization of the business. Some see these as new, streamlined ways of working, yet the negative consequences are not yet fully apparent. Working from home, for instance, is attractive to some employees as well as chief financial officers, who may relish the chance to reduce fixed costs. Concerns about the impact on the coherence of the business’s culture, its productivity and innovation, the security of data held at home, hardships for those in difficult home conditions, and, indeed, the needs of the younger demographic who seem to favor a return to the office, need to be given due consideration. It may be a case of “decide in haste, repent at leisure.” Resilience is categorically a board issue—regulators, lawyers, politicians and the public say so. The reputations of individual board members and the collective are at stake. Boards also need assurance that the business has regained its balance and can manage parallel or interrelated crises. In recent weeks we have been helping several clients respond to major cyber events unrelated to the COVID-19 outbreak. They have probably needed more external support than otherwise because their leadership capacity was inevitably denuded by pandemic response. And they have benefitted from us already knowing each other and having experience of how to work together in crisis. After the Great Financial Crash there was a heavy focus on balance-sheet resilience and having the requisite finance skills on boards. Business leaders are now beset by advice on the heightened obligation to be resilient in much a broader sense of the word. Regulators, lawyers and risk consultants are sharing checklists of factors for executive committees to take into account when managing risks and for boards to oversee. The challenge here is defining what changes your specific business needs and how to actually bring those about. Shareholders will be expecting a judicious move away from “just in time” systems to ones that can endure foreseeable risks. This isn’t just about potential legal liability or reputational risk. This is about setting your business culture for success. Undermanage risks and the business is wide open to damage from foreseeable shocks with all the loss of confidence and capability that follows. Overmanage and the business losses its competitive edge just when there is opportunity in the recovery. In order to track broader resilience, boards and their committees will need access to a wider set of skills and insight. Board membership emerges as an obvious area of focus. Yet each board will take more time and belonging to too many—“over boarding”—may well be unacceptable. Risk methodology and information flows will also have to be reviewed, alongside how to strengthen board members’ awareness and skills. Before the pandemic, chairs and CEOs were already wrestling with this for their difficult-to-price risks, such as data, technology risks and cyber. Individual experts on boards created siloed responsibility for what should have been a shared risk. A focus on process and method often led to a focus on the management, rather than genuine oversight of, risks. External advice didn’t always help (as we have learned from the plethora of competing advice around COVID-19). No single intervention will meet the new standard for resilience. Nor will simple prescription. A broader and more articulated approach is required if governance is to maintain stakeholder confidence and corporate reputation.
The tug between protecting privacy and building brand loyalty
The coronavirus pandemic has put much of normal life on hold, but it hasn’t stopped hackers. According to Securityboulevard.com, in the first quarter of 2020, more than 8.4 billion records from healthcare institutions, technology, software, social media, and meal delivery companies were exposed — a 273 percent increase from Q1 2019. While data breaches are costly to companies — a recent Ponemon Institute data breach report found that data breaches cost organizations an average of $7 million in the U.S. — their frequency is enough to cause some consumers to wonder if their private information is safe with their favorite brands. The increase in data breaches is concerning, noted Jesse Bockstedt, associate professor of information systems & operations management, but several studies have found that the out-of-pocket expense to consumers due to identity theft is less than $1,000. “Which isn’t zero, but it’s not like a few years ago when [identity theft] ruined your life and destroyed your credit,” Bockstedt said. As for the companies, he added, “It’s not a brand killer anymore.” Yet despite consumers’ growing unease, Goizueta faculty say the relationship between privacy and brand loyalty is a bit more intricate. While a data breach can nick a firm’s reputation, it’s the data that is purposely collected beyond the name and vital statistics that worry consumers more. Our experts found the following key points were necessary when it comes to finding the safe ground between privacy and brand loyalty. In fact, we have an expert from Goizueta who can explain each one: Building digital trust “Companies are increasingly worried that people will buy less from their brand if they’re perceived to be fast and loose with customer data,” said Daniel McCarthy, assistant professor of marketing. For instance, after political data-analytics firm Cambridge Analytica secretly collected data on roughly 87 million Facebook users, back-lash followed. In an effort to regain users’ trust, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg laid out a “privacy-focused vision” for Facebook, but those efforts were widely criticized as not going far enough. Advertising boycotts followed. Trust: the key to customer loyalty Minus regulatory guardrails, the differentiating factor is trust, explained Jagdish Sheth, the Charles H. Kellstadt Chair in Marketing. “Trust is built over time by doing what you promise to do and by company behavior that is considered appropriate or right,” Sheth said. Loyalty programs such as those with airlines, hospitality companies and grocery stores are founded on a relationship between a consumer and a brand. “Loyalty programs mean relationships, and in all relationships, trust and commitment are key,” he added. Let’s make a deal “Brands that are able to deliver a personalized experience in a privacy-friendly manner will have a competitive advantage,” explained David Schweidel, professor of marketing, in a recent “Goizueta Effect” podcast. “Putting a premium on privacy means forgoing the benefits that come from allowing organizations to collect data they use to deliver a better experience. From a commercial standpoint, the onus is on the marketers to make the case that the benefits outweigh privacy concerns.” We’ve attached a full article with even more advice and helpful information from our experts – but if you are looking to learn more or cover this topic, we can help. All of our faculty are available to speak with media, simply click on either expert’s icon now – to book an interview today.
Businesses must have a strategy for a messy tomorrow
John Kim is a Senior Lecturer in Organization & Management at the Goizueta Business School at Emory University. He is a management consultant with more than 20 years of experience working with executives to make difficult decisions and implement sustainable change. Recently, John published a piece that details a ‘Strategy for a messy tomorrow’ where he outlines how businesses must have a strategy development and implementation for an unpredictable business world. The piece is attached and a must read, especially in these turbulent and unpredictable economic times. In the article, he focuses on three key points: 1.Beware of False Choices “One thing we try to teach here at the business school is to be careful of false choices. Business is incredibly dynamic. Every industry is now a technology business, and the corporate playbook that evolved to protect profits is quite outdated.” Kim notes that Thomas Friedman poetically described this new normal in his 2005 book The World is Flat, and over the last 15 years, competition has only accelerated because of the explosion of two resources: cheap money and data. Kim notes that it’s a great environment to start or fund a business because interest rates have been low for the last 10+ years. There are dozens of new entrants in all industries, and all parts of the value chain, who are often well-funded, flexible, and are not weighed down by legacy business models and assets. The big winners are the customers who have increasing choice, lower prices, and great value capture. 2.The Challenging Environment From his corporate experience, Kim sees two significant challenges to strategy implementation. First, senior leaders turn over quickly. “It’s hard to have consistency of vision and leadership and implementation when there is such a movement in the C-suite with someone moving in and someone moving out every 5–6 months. So, it’s not a surprise that a lot of strategies either don’t follow through or there are too many cooks in the kitchen, and strategy gets a little bit muddled as a result.” Secondly, when the strategy does eventually make it to the ground-floor and needs to be executed, things have often moved on, and the market responses are rarely the ones you expect. Riffing on Peter Drucker’s famous quote on uncertainty, Kim explains to his students that, “Instead of trying to think of something brilliant to do tomorrow, why don’t you think of something very actionable today that prepares us for what we know will be a totally messy, crazy, unpredictable tomorrow.” 3.A Business Executive’s Response The business executive’s job is to not only set the direction, build a climate of trust, and create the energy for change—but also to be willing to test the assumptions and constraints around a given problem. Increasingly the answers will lie outside of a given industry, and thus require leaders to be broader in their horizon-scanning and more open to alternative paths forward. If you are interested in learning more about why business do indeed need a a strategy for a messy tomorrow – the let us help. John Kim is available to speak regarding this topic – simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today.
Cheap Energy Can Be a Bridging Fuel Needed to Get to the Endpoint of Renewable Energy Sooner
Far from banning fracking, the Biden/Harris ticket appears to be allowing it if not tacitly supporting it. This is not a contradictory stance to their aggressive renewable energy policy, according to Scott Jackson, a visiting professor of chemical and biological engineering at Villanova University's College of Engineering, who previously directed the microbial enhanced oil recovery program at DuPont Corporation. "Rather, it is recognition that cheap energy—especially natural gas produced as a result of fracking—can be a bridging fuel needed to get to the end point of renewable energy sooner," Jackson says. No one can dispute that the share of our energy coming from less efficient/more polluting coal has dropped dramatically despite the current administration’s attempts at supporting the coal industry. The reason is obvious—cleaner burning energy (less CO2 emissions) from gas fired turbine generators make more economic sense. Gas fired turbine generators are economical at a smaller scale and provides an energy source that can be rapidly turned on or off at any time. This helps to counterbalance the intermittency of renewable energy and, in some sense; this has allowed greater adoption of renewable energy. The cheapest energy source on the planet is land based wind power. The market has responded to this and now renewables make up 19 percent of our electricity. This percentage was thought to be impossible just a few years ago. Wind power energy payback time (time needed to recoup the energy invested) is measured in months and not years, and investors understand this. A much greater share of renewables (wind and solar) is very doable and makes economic sense. Jackson notes that development of cheap energy storage technology will help and must be implemented once economies of scale are achieved, however, a national power grid capable of moving energy from the wind- and sun-rich Midwest to the West Coast and East Coast will improve the reliability of renewables to the point where as much as 70% of our electricity can be sourced renewably—without new storage capacity (2018 study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory). Improvements in battery technologies and economy of scale are starting to drive down the costs of electric transportation and storage. Eventually, natural gas sourced power generation will not be competitive to renewables," notes Jackson. "Despite the current low price of gasoline, in part as a result of fracking used in oil fields, electric cars are far more economical to operate. Companies like BP, Exxon-Mobile and Shell recognize that they are energy companies and are pivoting to more renewable sources of energy. "Ultimately, our government has a responsibility to invest in the technologies of the future that make economic sense—as renewables do—and not support the more costly and outdated fossil fuel industry," says Jackson.
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- During the pandemic, the amount of screen time for many people working and learning from home as well as binge-watching TV has sharply increased. New research finds that wearing blue-light glasses just before sleeping can lead to a better night's sleep and contribute to a better day's work to follow. "We found that wearing blue-light-filtering glasses is an effective intervention to improve sleep, work engagement, task performance and organizational citizenship behavior, and reduced counterproductive work behavior," said Cristiano L. Guarana, assistant professor of management and entrepreneurship at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business. "Wearing blue-light-filtering glasses creates a form of physiologic darkness, thus improving both sleep quantity and quality." Most of the technology we commonly use -- such as computer screens, smartphones and tablets -- emits blue light, which past research has found can disrupt sleep. Workers have become more dependent on these devices, especially as we navigate remote work and school during the coronavirus pandemic. The media have recently reported on the benefits of blue-light glasses for those spending a lot of time in front of a computer screen. This new research extends understanding of the circadian rhythm, a natural, internal process that regulates the sleep-wake cycle and repeats roughly every 24 hours. "In general, the effects of wearing blue-light-filtering glasses were stronger for 'night owls' than for 'morning larks,' said Guarana, who previously has studied how lack of sleep affects business decisions, relationships and other behaviors in organizations. "Owls tend to have sleep periods later in the day, whereas larks tend to have sleep periods early in the day. "Although most of us can benefit from reducing our exposure to blue light, owl employees seem to benefit more because they encounter greater misalignments between their internal clock and the externally controlled work time. Our model highlights how and when wearing blue-light-filtering glasses can help employees to live and work better." The findings appear in the paper, "The Effects of Blue-Light Filtration on Sleep and Work Outcomes," published online by the Journal of Applied Psychology. Guarana is the corresponding author; his co-authors are Christopher Barnes and Wei Jee Ong of the University of Washington. The research found that daily engagement and performance of tasks may be related to more underlying biological processes such as the circadian process. "Our research pushes the chronotype literature to consider the relationship between the timing of circadian processes and employees' performance," the researchers wrote. A good night's sleep not only benefits workers; it also helps their employers' bottom lines. "This study provides evidence of a very cost-effective means of improving employee sleep and work outcomes, and the implied return on investment is gigantic," said Barnes, professor of management and the Evert McCabe Endowed Fellow at the University of Washington's Foster School of Business. "I personally do not know of any other interventions that would be that powerful at that low of a cost." Across two studies, researcher collected data from 63 company managers and 67 call center representatives at Brazil-based offices for a U.S. multinational financial firm and measured task performance from clients. Participants were randomly chosen to test glasses that filtered blue light or those that were placebo glasses. "Employees are often required to work early mornings, which may lead to a misalignment between their internal clock and the externally controlled work time," the researchers said, adding that their analyses showed a general pattern that blue-light filtration can have a cumulative effect on key performance variables, at least in the short term. "Blue-light exposure should also be of concern to organizations," Guarana said. "The ubiquity of the phenomenon suggests that control of blue-light exposure may be a viable first step for organizations to protect the circadian cycles of their employees from disruption." Researchers received no financial support or compensation for this research. The glasses were donated by the Austin, Texas-based company Swanwick.
Workplaces are changing – and with America adjusting and adapting to the new realities of COVID-19, how teams are managed and how leaders are portrayed is also in a state of evolution. Georgia Southern’s Steven Charlier was recently interviewed by the BBC – and was featured in an article that focused on the differences between leadership skills and how they come across in-person and on-line. “Fifteen years ago, Steven Charlier, chair of management at Georgia Southern University in the U.S., had a hunch that in-person charisma and leadership skills don’t translate virtually. “Before I became an academic, I worked for IBM for a number of years on a lot of virtual teams,” he says. “I had a boss who was a wonderful guy and great manager, and he drove me crazy trying to communicate. He was incredibly slow and unresponsive.” This seed of professional vexation has borne fruit, with new data showing that the confidence, intelligence and extroversion that have long propelled ambitious workers into the executive suite are not enough online, because they simply don’t translate into virtual leadership. Instead, workers who are organised, dependable and productive take the reins of virtual teams. Finally, doers lead the pack – at least remotely. Georgia Southern’s Charlier is not surprised to find a wide gulf between the behaviors of in-person and remote leaders. “In any leadership role, you’ve got to establish that trust. It’s trusting that the person is going to do things,and trusting that they’re telling the truth and being up front and honest. But how you go about doing that virtually is a little different – it’s a different skill set.” This is a fascinating topic and one that will be top of mind as America begins a new era of remote working. And if you are a journalist looking to follow up on this topic – then let our experts help. Steven Charlier is an expert in project management and virtual teams on project-based work and how technology influences how we work and lead within organizations. He’s available to speak with media about this very interesting topic – simply click on his icon to arrange an interview.
Paper ballots, risk-limiting audits can help defend elections and democracy, IU study finds
BLOOMINGTON, Ind. -- With just over two months before the 2020 election, three professors at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business offer a comprehensive review of how other nations are seeking to protect their democratic institutions and presents how a multifaceted, targeted approach is needed to achieve that goal in the U.S., where intelligence officials have warned that Russia and other rivals are again attempting to undermine our democracy. But these concerns over election security are not isolated to the United States and extend far beyond safeguarding insecure voting machines and questions about voting by mail. Based on an analysis of election reforms by Australia and European Union nations, they outline steps to address election infrastructure security -- such as requiring paper ballots and risk-limiting audits -- as well as deeper structural interventions to limit the spread of misinformation and combat digital repression. "In the United States, despite post-2016 funding, still more than two-thirds of U.S. counties report insufficient funding to replace outdated, vulnerable paperless voting machines; further help is needed," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics in the Kelley School, executive director of the Ostrom Workshop and chair of IU's Cybersecurity Program. "No nation, however powerful, or tech firm, regardless of its ambitions, is able to safeguard democracies against the full range of threats they face in 2020 and beyond. Only a multifaceted, polycentric approach that makes necessary changes up and down the stack will be up to the task." For example, Australia -- which has faced threats from China -- has taken a distinct approach to protect its democratic institutions, including reclassifying its political parties as "critical infrastructure." This is a step that the U.S. government has yet to take despite repeated breaches at both the Democratic and Republican national committees. Based on an analysis of election reforms by Australia and European Union nations, they outline steps to address election infrastructure security -- such as requiring paper ballots and risk-limiting audits -- as well as deeper structural interventions to limit the spread of misinformation and combat digital repression. "In the United States, despite post-2016 funding, still more than two-thirds of U.S. counties report insufficient funding to replace outdated, vulnerable paperless voting machines; further help is needed," said Scott Shackelford, associate professor of business law and ethics in the Kelley School, executive director of the Ostrom Workshop and chair of IU's Cybersecurity Program. "No nation, however powerful, or tech firm, regardless of its ambitions, is able to safeguard democracies against the full range of threats they face in 2020 and beyond. Only a multifaceted, polycentric approach that makes necessary changes up and down the stack will be up to the task." For example, Australia -- which has faced threats from China -- has taken a distinct approach to protect its democratic institutions, including reclassifying its political parties as "critical infrastructure." This is a step that the U.S. government has yet to take despite repeated breaches at both the Democratic and Republican national committees. The article, "Defending Democracy: Taking Stock of the Global Fight Against Digital Repression, Disinformation and Election Insecurity," has been accepted by Washington and Lee Law Review. Other authors are Anjanette "Angie" Raymond, associate professor of business law and ethics, and Abbey Stemler, assistant professor of business law and ethics, both at Kelley; and Cyanne Loyle, associate professor of political science at Pennsylvania State University and a global fellow at the Peace Research Institute Oslo. Aside from appropriating sufficient funds to replace outdated voting machines and tabulation systems, the researchers said that Congress should encourage states to refuse to fund voting machines with paperless ballots. The researchers also suggest requiring risk-limiting audits, which use statistical samples of paper ballots to verify official election results. Other suggested steps include: Congress requiring the National Institute of Standards and Technology to update their voting machine standards, which state and county election officials rely on when deciding which machines to purchase. Australia undertook such a measure. Creating a National Cybersecurity Safety Board to investigate cyberattacks on U.S. election infrastructure and issue post-elections reports to ensure that vulnerabilities are addressed. Working with universities to develop training for election officials nationwide to prepare them for an array of possible scenarios, and creating a cybersecurity guidebook for use by newly elected and appointed election officials. "With regards to disinformation in particular, the U.S. government could work with the EU to globalize the self-regulatory Code of Practice on Disinformation for social media firms and thus avoiding thorny First Amendment concerns," Raymond said. "It could also work to create new forums for international information sharing and more effective rapid alert and joint sanctions regimes. "The international community has the tools to act and hold accountable those actors that would threaten democratic institutions," added Stemler, who also is a faculty associate at Harvard University's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society. "Failing the political will to act, pressure from consumer groups and civil society will continue to mount on tech firms, in particular Facebook, which may be sufficient for them to voluntarily expand their efforts in the EU globally, the same way that more firms are beginning to comply with its General Data Protection Regulation globally, as opposed to designing new information systems for each jurisdiction."
VCU Engineering researchers are working to make clean energy easier and cheaper
Lane Carasik, Ph.D., assistant professor in VCU’s Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, is developing methods to make clean energy more cost-effective. He’s motivated by a simple principle. “The cheaper we make renewable and clean energy, the easier it is to implement it,” he said. With $100,000 in seed funding from the Jeffress Trust Awards Program, Carasik and his Fluids in Advanced Systems and Technology (FAST) research group are designing efficient, low-cost enhancements to equipment used in solar, nuclear and geothermal energy systems. Jeffress Trust awards support high-impact, one-year projects that integrate computational and quantitative scientific methodologies across a broad range of scientific disciplines. These energy systems use heat exchangers, which take energy from heat generation components and convert it to electricity. Heat exchangers usually comprise two working substances such as water, steam or air separated by tubes or plates. The FAST research group is optimizing a specialty insert that can be placed inside a heat exchanger’s tubes to improve performance. To visualize the insert’s form, imagine holding a piece of metal tape in both hands and gently twisting it. See the FAST Lab and examples of the heat transfer enhancements being designed there. “A liquid running through a tube is relatively undisrupted by the geometry of the tube or the shape of the fluid,” Carasik said. “But this twisted tape component spins the fluid. This increases turbulence, which increases heat transfer.” While “twisted tape” inserts are already in use in some advanced energy systems, the process of fabricating them has been limited by mechanical constraints. Typically, the inserts are placed inside a tube and tack welded at either end. But because of the metal’s limited tensile strength, these inserts can only be twisted a little before they break down and cause manufacturing defects. 3D printing, on the other hand, allows for a more complex — and effective — insert that can be used to characterize heat transfer performance. “With additive manufacturing, you can actually print tighter, ‘twistier’ versions of them,” Carasik said. “You can also add your own intentional defects to find out how to make the heat transfer better and improve the performance of the whole system.” Each geometric form the research group prints and tests starts with a world of calculations: thermal-hydraulics design calculations, solid geometry, material properties and more. From there, components are computer-designed, then printed in the Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering Innovation Lab. Finally, they are tested in the FAST research group’s Modular Separation Effects Testing Facility (MSEFT), a scaled testing loop that emulates the operating conditions experienced by these components. Undergraduates — even first-year students — participate in each step of the process, alongside Carasik, postdoctoral research associate Cody Wiggins, Ph.D., and doctoral student Arturo Cabral. “I really like getting students into research early on, Carasik said. “By the time they’re three years in, they’re working at a level I would expect from bachelor’s level engineers in industry.” Senior Meryem Murphy was curious about undergraduate research but had never really participated. “One day, I was arguing with Arturo about something and Dr. Carasik said, ‘If you’re like this all the time, you should work for the lab.’” She took him up on it and spent her junior year working on an MSEFT redesign and running an experiment to see if 3D-prototyped concepts can be replicated with test metals. Over the summer, Murphy interned with Atomic Alchemy, a medical radioisotope startup in Boise, Idaho. She said the position built on the hard, and soft, skills she gained in the lab. “Sometimes in class, you’re required to collaborate,” she said. “But in research, it’s just ‘what you do’ to get it done.” Rising sophomore Ryan McGuire is also looking forward to starting his second year in the lab. During his freshman year, McGuire helped develop a 3D printing technology to duplicate sequences of 3D-printed parts for the FAST research group. It’s called Retrospective Additive Manufacturing Sequencing — RAMS for short. McGuire said the thrill of solving problems in the lab has made him reassess his own goals. “When I was younger, I wanted to be [famous],” he said. “But now I no longer want to be famous. Research seems like more fun.” Upon hearing about McGuire’s change in priorities, Carasik said, “Researchers can be famous too, and for good reason.”
Environment-Friendly Compound Shows Promise for Solar Cell Use
A widespread transition to solar energy will depend heavily on reliable, safe, and affordable technology like batteries for energy storage and solar cells for energy conversion. Nikhil Koratkar, an endowed professor of mechanical, aerospace, and nuclear engineering at Rensselaer, has dedicated much of his research to exploring ways to make a wide-range of batteries more efficient, affordable, and safe. In research published in Advanced Functional Materials, Koratkar and a team of engineers, material scientists, and physicists demonstrated how a new material — a lead-free chalcogenide perovskite — that hadn’t previously been considered for use in solar cells could provide a safer and more effective option than others that are commonly considered. “The National Academy of Engineering has defined 14 grand challenges; one of those is to make harvesting energy from the sun cheaper and more widespread,” Koratkar said. "That’s the motivation of this work, to come up with new materials that could rival the efficiency of silicon, but bring down the cost of manufacturing solar cells, and that is the key to achieving this goal.” Koratkar is available to talk about this recent discovery, and his broader expertise and research in energy storage.
Canadian's Digital Behavioral Shifts in Relation to the The Coronavirus Pandemic
This article is part of a series of insights that reveal a Canadian perspective on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on consumer behavior and significant audience shifts across digital platforms. Things are moving fast. Following our last update regarding digital media consumption during the Coronavirus pandemic, this article will highlight some of the major category changes reflected as of the week March 16 - 22, 2020. Key Insights from Our Analysis Digital consumption continues to grow: the visits and minutes curve is not flattening Key content categories such as news, social media, and government are being driven by higher engagement: metrics include visits and duration More engagement with news sites: sites categorized as local, business/finance, and general news are main drivers Categories that focus on entertaining, kids, food, financial advice, and children’s education are also seeing growth: growth comes from increases in aggregate unique visitors, visits and minutes Automotive manufacturers, real estate, sports and travel entities have seen decreases: however, they are poised for major increases and a bounce back. Mobile platforms are driving growth: some differences between desktop and mobile engagement Canadian's total digital consumption continues to grow When we analyzed Canadian total digital media consumption to compare the percentage change between the week of March 16, 2020 and the first weeks of January 2020, February 2020, and March 2020, we found that overall digital engagement is not flattening. Even comparing the beginning of March against mid-March, we can see visitation, visits, and engagement continuing to grow. Looking at the total digital consumption trend over time, we can see growth in total minutes spent online while total visits have remained relatively flat. Media Consumption Growth by Category There are several content categories that we are seeing major growth in each of the time periods: These digital categories of news/information, social media, entertainment, government and games are showing continuous growth. The need for ongoing news and information updates, government information, flocking to social media to bring community together and message, and the need to be entertained with visitation and engagement on Entertainment and Games Entities. News and Information Category Insights To look at the news/information category a bit closer – it is amazing to see the category growth over the past few weeks of Canadians going to news entities to get updates. The hockey stick growth from the start of March 2020 is very evident. The news and information growth is being driven by local news, general news, and business/finance news. That being said – technology, politics, and weather are also seeing growth. Through these time periods, we are also seeing some other categories that are showing significant growth. Many of the categories are a result of many Canadians being home bound and isolated, and with families with kids having the kids at home. Platform Variance for Media Consumption One of the areas that we have been asked most about is whether we find any variances between desktop and mobile platforms. When reviewing the data, there is greater engagement with mobile platforms in the week of March 16 compared to other weeks. Amidst the global COVID-19 pandemic, we are seeing a significant increase in digital consumption amongst Canadian consumers. The data trends show Canadians are flocking online with significant growth in news entities, instant messaging, social media, government resources, entertainment, music destinations, video, and financial websites. What this means for marketers and advertisers is a significant opportunity to reach Canadians who are highly engaged and are looking for relevant and timely content. It comes down to delivering the right message, at the right time, in front of the right audience, in brand safe environments.
