As mentioned in a previous editorial in K2Nytt, the new organizational chart on K2 has been approved by the Institute Council. A new extended management team is part of the reorganization. The extended management team consists of 7 research group leaders and a representative from Stavanger, in addition to the department management. The 7 research group leaders have now been chosen: Emmet
Mc Cormack, Hematology; Eva Gerdts, Cardio; Henning Lygre, Pharmacology / Pharmacy; Per Eystein Lønning, Oncology; Pål Njølstad, Pediatrics; Vidar Steen, Genetics and Harald Wiker, Infection / Microbiology. In the choice of research group leaders to the extended management team, we have tried to let as many subjects as possible be represented. In addition, we have avoided subjects which are already represented in the management group (lung, endo, immunology, gyn / obs). I want to emphasize that there is no disallowance of those not selected. Each of the seven research group leaders will be in the extended management team for 2 years. The team meets once a month. In the extended management team the institute management wants to discuss ongoing matters. Examples are strategy, budget and finances, equipment priorities, educational issues, positions, lab areas and organization of application processes. The 7 research group leaders do not represent anyone but themselves. All the department’s 21 research group leaders will, like earlier, have a direct line to the department management and they will receive the minutes of meetings. The first meeting of the management team was held on Tuesday this week

Per

A core facility is a collection of scientific equipment and highly qualified technical staff made widely available to the research community. The three current core facilities at the Department of Clinical Science: Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Genomics Core Facility and Metabolomics Core Facility, cover important common functions by MOF and UiB as well as regionally and nationally. They are available to all academic users on the same favorable terms and for commercial users of the University’s conditions for contract research.

The department administers the Faculty’s policy regarding sharing of costs and co-authorship when faculty core facilities are used. This policy means that all higher education researchers in Norway, health trusts included, gain access on equal terms, including the same price. More on this see: http://www.uib.no/mofa/67221/kostnadsdeling-og-medforfatterskap (in Norwegian).

The economy of all core facilities will be partially secured through user fees, and through operating models which address the need for reinvestment and equipment renewal.

To ensure that the core facilities are able to provide the best possible service to the communities it is a goal that they are tightly integrated with scientists who are leaders in their fields. Use of core facilities should thus be a more attractive option than buying your own equipment and pay own technical staff, both cost-wise and methodical. Experience has shown that core facilities are the best way to give researchers in Norway access to an updated and maintained instrument park, and to the methodological knowledge they do not have themselves and equipment and staff they could not afford.

The way the core facilities at MOF are operated is based on experiences from the NRC FUGE initiative. The core facilities are operated and financed by the Department / MOF in cooperation with the University of Bergen, Helse Bergen, Helse Vest, the Faculty of Science, Bergen Research Foundation, NRC, and individual groups of researchers.

Important to remember – If the use of a core facility forms part of the basis for a scientific publication the core facility should be mentioned in the acknowledgment section of the publication, for example: “Parts of the work was carried out at the NAME OF CORE FACILITY and was thus supported by the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry at the University of Bergen and its partners “.

Two great new additions to be especially mentioned are: CyTOF – Mass cytometry with single-cell proteomic opportunities – for Flow (equipment has been delivered and is being tested), and NRC infrastructure funds for equipment for complete human genome sequencing to Genomics.

Roland

The new curriculum in medicine has already been introduced. The first class started this fall, before most clinical departments were ready to wind up their summer vacation.
K2 is primarily responsible for three semesters;
5th semester with pathology, pharmacology, medical biochemistry, preclinical course and circulation / respiration (“Medicine”)
9th semester with gynecology / obstetrics, pediatrics and genetics
12th semester with integrated clinical training and ending with a practical exam

New in this curriculum is that in addition to the medical sciences, “academic pillar” is also emphasized and placed as independent entities on the curriculum. What does that mean?
The objectives can be summarized as providing the student with knowledge of medical science and research, research and ethics, skills in evaluating medical literature, dissemination of scientific results and how to perform statistical analysis. In other words: topics the scientists at K2 know a lot about and that it is nice to communicate and pass on to the younger generation! Teaching in academic subjects is scattered throughout many semesters and “belong” not only to the institute which is responsible for just that specific semester.

I do not know who holds specific expertise in the various academic subjects or how you personally want to contribute, but I hope to find good teachers to the various topics when we get them elaborated from the study planning committee. We don’t want IGS to have a monopoly on research teaching, do we?

This week the first part of this autumn’s teaching day for K1 / K2 was held, the final part will be on October 14th, welcome!

Jone

The administration at K2, in consultation with the HSE Committee, wants to conduct a survey of the psychosocial work environment at the department. An email will be sent to all asking you to answer two questions: What is good about the psychosocial environment and what is bad. The questions are standard questions used in such investigations. It is emphasized that the answers are anonymous. Nor is it possible to find out who has and has not responded to the survey. The psychosocial environment at our workplace is important. I would therefore urge everyone to respond. The more who answer, the more representative the survey will be for the actual situation. The results of the survey will be presented at the HSE-seminar on December 2nd. The survey will form the basis for looking at the strengths and challenges of the psychosocial work environment in K2. It is important for all of us.

Per

The university management has recently conducted an internal audit concerning side tasks and roles in business. Three departments at UiB have been reviewed, including K2. In our department 70 employees were selected. Their registered external work was compared with information in Proff Forvalt, that is engaged in credit and financial information for the business community. Of the 70 persons 20 were registered in Proff Forvalt with roles that were not registered as external work at UiB. Examples that were not registered was the proprietor of sole proprietorships (n = 8), roles in business life like director of a condominium, housing cooperative or sports club (n = 8), duty in a corporation (n = 5).

The university management and faculty administration take lack of registration of external work seriously. It is the employee’s responsibility to register their external activities. K2 is one of the largest departments at UiB and are highlighted in many contexts. We want it to be in a positive slant, and must keep order in our own accounting, including the external work.

Wednesday an e-mail was sent out to everyone telling you to check your external activities and register whatever might be missing. In the e-mail it is indicated what should be registered. If you have questions or have problems registering, please contact as indicated in the e-mail.

I expect everyone to do this now!

Per

This Tuesday the Institute Council approved a new organization for K2. The old organization of K2 had one axis for teaching, divided into 8 areas and one axis for research, divided in 21 research groups. The purpose of this division was to ensure teaching would be equated with research. The eight managers with responsibility for education have constituted the extended management team at K2.

A disadvantage of this arrangement is that it has been 8 + 21 groups, a total of 29 groups who reported directly to the department management. The control span for the K2 head was large. In addition there was an artificial distinction between research and teaching with two separate axes. In reality, it is the researchers who teach.

It has therefore been desirable to have a new organization of K2 with a smaller span of control for the management, and with research and teaching seen as a whole. In the new curriculum in medicine there will be semester boards that are responsible for the education in each semester. These semester boards will overlap with the function of today’s education managers.

In the new organization of K2, the current education managers will be abandoned. 7 of the 21 research group leaders will constitute the extended management team. The advantage of the new organization is that it is simpler, the department management will have a more manageable span of control and the differentiation between teaching and research is reduced.

I will take this opportunity to thank the education managers for the job they have done. The new organization is not to express dissatisfaction with their efforts, but is the result of experience with the old model and not least that semester boards will be established in the new curriculum for medicine.

Per

This statement came from an otherwise sober-minded fellow professor when I discussed the impending EUU seminar (or teaching days for academic staff at K1 and K2). The wording in K2Nytt 34 was: “The teaching days are mandatory for teachers in main positions.”

Research (gaining new knowledge) is of course highly rated in our university environment and merits are measured with publication points, annual PhD degrees and research awards. But knowledge must be communicated (taught) and the university as the highest level educational institution has a particular responsibility to provide updated scientific but also educational excellence in teaching! We know that we value expertise, but what about teaching methods? Have we (you …) something to learn?

On the first day (October 1st PM 9-12) of the upcoming seminar (program, registration), a review of the new curriculum for medicine is presented. The first group of students has already started this fall and early on they will attend clinical department rounds, so we will meet them soon. The teaching program will be redistributed within and between semesters, what does that mean for your teaching? Clinical procedures / skills training, how do we train and evaluate this? Decentralized teaching (at Haugesund, Førde and SUS), who is responsible for what?

Today’s students are technological competent and continuously online. Can we utilize that to improve our teaching? On the second day (October 14th) the three other universities will present their experience with E-learning. Canvas is the new E-learning system to be used at UiB and Inspera is our new digital examination platform.

To counter allergia obligatoria, we end with this reformulated call to all with teaching commitments: COME AND BE INSPIRED!

Jone Trovik

I hope you all had a nice summer, and that you have had the chance to recharge your batteries and are ready for new achievements this autumn.
The department has a new administration manager, Julie Stavnes. She used to work in the oil industry, and will be able to see the department administration with fresh eyes. A detailed presentation of her can be found elsewhere in this issue.
Eva Gerdts has resigned as program coordinator after putting in a huge effort over several years, and is replaced by Jone Trovik from the gyn / obs environment.

This autumn there are several important issues for the department. The current strategic plan for K2 expires this year. We need to evaluate to what extent we have reached the goals we set and, not least, prepare a new one. The K2 organization will be adjusted.
The implementation of the new curriculum in medicine is to be implemented.
The focus on applications for external projects must be encouraged.
And not least the tight economy is a theme.I report that K2’s economy is improving. I will come backk to these and other matters later.
Per

Summer is approaching and this is the last K2Nytt before the holiday. It has been a hectic half-year. When it comes to research, it should be mentioned that K2 since 2014 is the department at UiB with most EU applications, the number is 24, out of which 5 have been granted, one of them a coordinator project, the only one at UiB. We are still awaiting results on 11 of the applications. This shows that EU applications are worthwhile.

When it comes to teaching, the work on the new curriculum in medicine has been central. There is still much work to be done. It should also be noted that the pharmacy study has worked towards beginning an education in galenic pharmacy, which will start this fall.

Economically things are tight, but we keep to the budget and there is a realistic plan to pay down our debt of approximately NOK 3 million within a few years.

Various important issues this fall are a new organization of K2, work on a new strategy for the department, and not least the new curriculum in addition to focusing on external funding. But now it’s a well-deserved vacation around the corner. Thank you all for your efforts, and have a Great Summer!

Per

This year “the teaching day” (undervisningsdagen) will be held in cooperation with K1. It will be arranged over two half days instead of one. The first session is planned before lunch October 1st and the second October 14th (same time). The reason for the two-day-seminar is that we have to coordinate it both in K1 and K2’s schedule. On October 14th participators from the other medical schools in Norway will hold lectures about E-learning experiences. Digital exam is about to be introduced and it will be interesting to learn about how other institutions have tackled this. Another Teaching day focus is the new Medical school curriculum and how it will affect all the lecturers at the institute. One of several key topics in the new plan is students’ skill requirements and how to enforce them. This means several important areas need to be discussed and agreed upon. A big Thanks to the K2 teaching day committee Harald Wiker and Torbjørn Jonung. They have planned an interesting and relevant program.

Participation is mandatory for teachers and lecturers. Please put the two dates in your calendar right away!

During my period at K2 I have yet to come across a colleague who is not great and dedicated, either they have been research fellows, post doctorates, scientists, technicians, administrative staff or professors.

There is a staggering amount of competence at our institute. The infrastructure is good, and eventually all the different departments will be able to move into new sites.

With the good conditions, it has been truly inspiring to see the first results of K2´s new structure. One of the measuring parameters especially interesting to me is the increase in applicants. In the planning process we thought we were ambitious in our estimates of contributors to increase by 30 %. The most recent calculations show an increase of 45%. This is a clear sign of the difference all of you make every day -you made it happen! You are a force to be reckoned with, in a competitive international arena.

It’s sad then, when the focus is on contribution margins, when we should be celebrating our results which are science and research led. Contribution margins are governed by politicians, and an important component of the financing of our institute. However, the decisions are led by politicians, while the institute management can focus on influencing (politicians), and argue in favour of full finance packets, in those arenas available to us.

Within the field of teaching K2 has shown its credentials, winning multiple prices and awards, we have dedicated teachers strategically placed in the new semester board, these are important premise providers of future education within the field of medicine.

Talk each other up! You’re only as good as the company you keep, therefore cheer your colleagues on. I find that the best reward is rather accolades from a colleague, than an acquaintance. Motivate each other, work is so much more fun smiling. If it doesn’t quite go to plan, make sure you have each others backs. The support you can give a colleague is invaluable for the work environment.
It’s a fact. All scientists have been rejected at some point, it helps up and coming scientist if you share your experience, help them along by not giving up.

A hope I know I share with many of you, is to recruit more women scientists. The female share is embarrassingly low, so here’s my cry of hope for the future: get more of those brilliant women here!

I wish you all the best of luck with all your exciting projects, the new study schedule within farmacy and medicine the coming years. It’s been a great joy to be a part of K2. New (and greener) pastures await me at the institute of Biology. I do hope we can find projects to work for both institutes in the future. You are all welcome to visit me at Marineholmen.

Enjoy your weekend,
Kindly,
Synnøve

This is a continuation of the editorial from last week focusing on the new TDI-model (full costs model for all activities). The model consists of both indirect costs and Research Infra-structure Resources (RIR) implemented by UiB and which the institutes now build up their project budgets from.

It is nice that we have received written comments from enthusiastic scientists at our institute.  Two of these are now published as commentaries in this K2 news (after approval and wish by the scientists).   

We also want to emphasize that the TDI model is something presented by the The Norwegian Association of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) in close collaboration by the RCN, NTNU and all other universities in Norway.  The faculties have implemented this model for all project plannings from 01.01.2015.  So we have to live with this for the near future.  

It will be interesting to take part in the coming report from the project ”Forskningsbevilgninger og gavemidler”  Nr. 2014/02.  This report will hopefully soon be available and will certainly represent an overall policy and provide guidelines with basis in rules and regulations. 

Roland

Overhead – Indirect costs
The Devil is known by many names, and so are these concepts that scientists often don’t like, but still have to deal with. Why do I
adress this in an editorial in K2Nytt? Well, because this is a very
significant part of the department’s finances, that we are so utterly
dependent on.
But what do these terms mean? The University of Bergen has implemented the TDI model (total direct and indirect costs) that we are now budgeting for projects based on. This model consists of both indirect costs (overhead) and direct costs like research infrastructure. As of today, the indirect costs of a scientific FTE is 413.000 NOK and for a technical / administrative FTE it is 114.000 NOK. The indirect costs are the costs of infrastructure such as offices and common areas, services like the library, IT, administrative and financial management, safety, training, legal assistance, documentation and so forth. The direct costs are another component of the total cost model (TDI). This is composed of investment and depreciation of instruments, service contracts, general laboratory costs, including rent and technical support – called the research infra-structure resource cost (RIR). The Department of Clinical Science has calculated the RIR-cost for 2015 to be 95.000 NOK per FTE. The RIR-cost include technical support to get laboratories ready, laboratory costs like gloves, gas, pipette tips, etc. – the common infrastructure costs. The Department of Clinical Science is currently the department with the largest portfolio of externally financed projects on MOF. The NFR and EU/H2020 projects are exemplary in the way that they contribute overhead funds that cover the costs the department incurs to be able to operate the project. But what happens when indirect costs are not part of the grant for the projects? Who must then pay? Well, then it will be the Department in collaboration with the Faculty that takes the costs. In this way the Department’s economy is continuously weakened whenever a project with zero overhead is accepted. What can we do about this? Do we have to refuse projects that do not include overhead? How long will it take to get a new “culture” – changing the attitudes of contributors? How do we achieve it? These questions concern us all together!

Roland

The Strategy Seminar last week was informative and useful. Vice Dean for Research at Karolinska Institutet (KI) Hans-Gustaf Ljunggren gave an engaging talk about KI’s research strategy. Their starting point was to acknowledge that KI did not excel in medical research to the degree that KI thought themselves. Systematic bibliographic analyses of publication activity revealed that they had a strong position in Europe, but several universities with which they liked to be compared to, did better. KI defined as its goal to become as good as University of Oxford with regards to “impact” of publications. To reach this goal they decided to publish fewer, but better articles – in other words, more articles that bring significant new knowledge to the field and therefore reach the most prestigious journals. KI viewed their PhD-programs’ demand for 3-4 articles as an obstacle – “it is better to publish one high-impact article than 3-4 articles of lesser importance”. KI has now removed the demand for a minimum number of articles in PhD-theses. Furthermore, KI wishes to recruit active research leaders and now work very actively with recruitment of such persons. A “starting package” often is in the order of 10 million per year for 3-5 years. Such a package is often composed of both university- and external funding, but it should be noted that KI is in charge of the strategy and the evaluation of candidates. At the same time KI has a keen eye also on the groups who perform badly, and take action. Sometimes such groups merged with stronger groups, other times they are dismantled.

 ViceRector Anne Lise Fimreite talked about UiB’s strategy process. UiB aims to build up strong research clusters. One of these is called Health, and will focus on research related to health services (Samhandlingsreformen). The strategy document will soon be out on hearing, which gives you a chance to submit your views.

 Finally the Pharmaceutical Industry informed of their interest in increased interaction with academic institutions; they wish to establish a pilot center for such collaboration in Bergen. It will be exciting to learn more about this in the near future.

 Finally there was a workshop and discussion on the department’s organization. I expected both criticism and creative suggestions for changes, but it appeared that most people were satisfied with today’s organization. The discussion was rather tame, but one conclusion emerged – if K2 is to improve we have to collaborate better; everyone must contribute to do the work.

 Eystein Husebye

 Head of Department

Publishing in scientific journals has for long used to be pretty straightforward. The researcher submitted manuscripts with their latest work, which was evaluated by experts in the field, type-set, printed and sold to libraries, universities and interested individuals – and this was quite profitable for some publishers.

This is not the case any longer. The ways scientific data and information is shared has changed dramatically in the digital age. Increasingly, publishers are competing by offering additional services that help the authors and readers through media organizations and science blogs. However, journals charge exorbitant fees to subscribe or download papers, restricting this to those who can afford them.

To partly solve this, free electronic scientific publishing also called “Open Access Publishing” has emerged. This grants full access to anyone, for any purpose, but transfers the publication costs to the authors or their organization. Nothing is free! However, currently UiB offers support to cover “Open Access Article Processing Charges”

A side-effect of the open access model is a malignant proliferation in junk publishers with the sole objective of making money without any regards for scientific quality. In year 2011 there were 18 identified predatory publishers, which increased to 693 in 2015. The list is updated through the year on the blog Scholarly Open Access, http://scholarlyoa.com. Take a look at this list when your mailbox is swamped by the numerous offers for publishing!

Happy New Year!

Roland Jonsson

PS. Do not forget to verify that all your works from 2014 have been added to Cristin. Check this via https://www.cristin.no/as/WebObjects/cristin.woa/8/wa/registrering?la=no. Log in by choosing institution “University of Bergen”, and then use your regular user name and password.

It is always exciting and nerve racking to wait for the results of the various grant applications every fall. This year we first learned that 2 groups received funding from the NovoNordisk Foundation. Shortly afterward a ERA-Net (Mellgren) and Marie Curie project (Johansson) was awarded to K2-researchers. Thereafter K2-researchers received large grants from The Norwegian Cancer Society. The Stian Knappskog was awarded one of the prestigious BFS-grants. This week K2-researchers have received large grants from The regional Health Authorities and NFR. The latter was divided amon 2 FRIPRO projects (Gjertsen, Njølstad), a mobility grant (Reksten), and a Young Investigator Grant (Bryceson). Altogether the NFR grants are worth 27 million NOK over 3 years. Finally, K2 captured 2 of the 3 PHD-grants announced from UiB.

Congratulations to all of you who have received grants. I also wantt to take the opportunity to thank all those who have helped writing these Grants. Thanks to Corina Guder and Sumathi Subramaniam for helping with grant applications, to Siv Eggereide and her team for putting together budgets and to Synnøve Myhre who has organized and overseen the work

To those of you that did not receive grants – send an improved application next year. To those of you who did not apply – do so next time!

Remember that NFR and EU grants come with overhead and are obtained in fierce competition on national and international competitors. This is very important for the K2’s economy – it now looks somewhat less bleas than last week. Next week we can worry about the budget, but this week I prefer to have a content smile

Have a peaceful weekend

Eystein

Head of Institute