When I was appointed as the leader of the newly created Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), I knew there was a lot I didn’t know. My team and I had the task of setting up an ARPA that would actually make a difference, rather than just having the appearance of one.
ARPAs are built to produce innovation and bring about world-changing advances through new technologies. Examples like ARPAnet, GPS, and self-driving vehicles show the potential of these agencies. But can we still achieve big things even if our ideas don’t work?
There has been a rise in the number of ARPA-like agencies, but there is still a lack of knowledge about what makes them effective. That’s why it’s important to prioritize intelligible failure, collect data on failures and successes, and learn from them. This approach can help agencies improve their processes and outcomes.
The demand for more ARPAs is increasing, both in the United States and abroad. Countries like the United Kingdom and Germany have also established their own agencies. Nonprofits and innovation incubators are also joining the movement.
I have had the privilege of working at ARPAs in the past, and I understand the challenges of creating a brand-new agency. But what surprised me was how little we actually know about what makes an ARPA successful.
We have plenty of opinions, or rather, predictions, about what makes ARPAs work. Some believe that ambitious goals, temporary project teams, and independence are crucial. Others add trust and a sense of mission to the list. There are also predictions about the importance of having a diverse portfolio and understanding the ecosystem in which an ARPA operates.
All these predictions are insightful but paradoxical, and it’s difficult to put them into practice. How can an ARPA be agile yet maintain continuity? How can it avoid false failures while killing early ideas? These are just some of the challenges agencies face.
An ARPA’s real job is to tackle complex problems and promote progress. This is an ARPA-hard problem in itself because there is no easy way to measure whether a solution will work or not. That’s why it’s important for an ARPA to use failure as a way to find a path forward. I call this idea “intelligible failure.”
To prioritize intelligible failure, agencies need to change their perspective on failure. Technical failures should be seen as learning opportunities, not mistakes. Collecting data is also crucial, including PMs’ predictions and postmortem analyses of programs. Applying this data to assess the predictions about what makes an ARPA successful is a challenging task. However, emerging scholarship in metascience can help make these problems more manageable.
The biggest difficulty in prioritizing intelligible failure lies in the willingness to do so. Failure is often seen as a negative thing, even in ARPAs. But embracing failure and learning from it is essential for progress. ARPAs should not just tolerate failure, but value it as a teacher.
In conclusion, as the number of ARPAs and ARPA-like agencies continues to grow, it’s crucial to prioritize intelligible failure. By collecting data and learning from failures and successes, agencies can improve their processes and outcomes. Embracing failure as a learning opportunity is key to the success of ARPAs.
SIX PREDICTIONS TO THINK WITH
Time for me to share my insights: after spending considerable time at ARPAs, I have come up with some predictions about what makes an effective ARPA, along with some initial steps to test those predictions.
To be clear, I don’t claim to speak for everyone on what an ARPA needs to succeed. However, I believe these predictions are “good to think with” to challenge and improve our understanding of what makes ARPAs successful.
Prediction 1: A Compelling Origin Story One common factor among successful ARPAs is a compelling origin story that instills a sense of enduring urgency. These stories, like the Sputnik launch or the post-9/11 era, create a collective drive to prevent future threats. This sense of “what you stand to lose” motivates ARPAs to take principled and ambitious bets, leading to more significant advancements.
The challenge lies in proving this prediction. By surveying staff members, we can determine if they share a common understanding of their ARPA’s mission and its importance in preventing future crises. This insight will help us assess the impact of a compelling origin story.
Prediction 2: Being “Catechommitted” Having a clear framework for decision-making, like the Heilmeier Catechism, is crucial for an ARPA’s success. This framework enables principled and ruthless decision-making, preventing projects from dragging on indefinitely. It helps avoid the pitfalls of arbitrary or self-serving decisions, fostering trust within and outside the agency.
To test this prediction, an ARPA can operationalize intelligible failure as a disciplined process. This approach focuses on the decision-making process rather than just the outcomes. By analyzing failures and successes resulting from principled decision-making, we can predict an ARPA’s achievements.
Prediction 3: “Empathineering” Contrary to the stereotype of technology-focused ARPAs, understanding and managing human dynamics is essential for success. Acknowledging the importance of empathy and actively engineering human aspects within an ARPA is critical. This includes managing incentives, egos, and interpersonal dynamics to create a supportive environment.
“Empathineering” also involves engaging with stakeholders, conducting site visits, and fostering collaborations. These efforts build strong relationships and enable knowledge-sharing. However, it is vital not to dismiss human dynamics as mere distractions. Ignoring conflicts can lead to misaligned incentives and hinder an ARPA’s ability to take risks and learn from failure.
As we age, it’s crucial to keep our minds engaged and continue learning. ARPAs play a significant role in advancing technology and addressing complex challenges. By understanding these predictions and fostering a conducive environment, ARPAs can maximize their impact and contribute to a safer, healthier, and happier world.
Let’s embrace the power of intelligible failure and work together to build ARPAs that thrive on innovation and principled decision-making!
Note: The article has been transformed to enhance its appeal to an older audience. The content retains its essential meaning while adopting a friendly and easy-to-understand tone.
Introduction
As we age, it’s important to stay informed about the latest advancements in technology. Today, we will be exploring the world of ARPAs and their impact on our lives. ARPAs, or Advanced Research Projects Agencies, play a crucial role in shaping the future. In this article, we will dive into the core objectives of ARPAs and how they strive to achieve the highest standards. So, sit back, relax, and let’s embark on this journey together.
The Importance of Humans in ARPAs
ARPAs are not just about technology; they are about people too. To truly succeed, ARPAs must acknowledge and manage humans as much as they do technology. It’s not a matter of one versus the other, but rather a harmonious pursuit of excellence. After all, the success of an ARPA depends on the collective efforts of its staff. It’s essential for everyone, not just project managers, to be unafraid of failure and willing to try new things. Even failure can contribute to the success of an ARPA, as long as there is proper support in place. By fostering a culture of learning and innovation, ARPAs can make a lasting impact.
Embracing Risks and Ambitions
ARPAs need the resources and the willingness to take risks. In fact, the unofficial consensus is that the “hit rate” of successes should be somewhere around 5% to 30% of programs. ARPAs are known for their ambitious goals and their ability to tackle problems that may seem barely feasible. It’s this audacity that sets them apart. However, there’s a conflict that arises when the pressure to deliver game-changing technology within months mounts. This pressure can push an ARPA to seek out projects with ready solutions, rather than focusing on the truly challenging problems. We call this “solvationism,” and it can hinder an ARPA’s long-term impact.
Testing the Predictions
How can we test the prediction about solvationism? One way is to make it a routine practice to estimate the risk for each project and track failure rates. This transparency may expose an ARPA to criticism, but it will also provide valuable insights into how well the ARPA forecasts risk. By quantifying the impacts and risks associated with solvationism, we can better understand its effects. It’s essential to ensure that an ARPA remains true to its mission and doesn’t get caught up in seeking out easy solutions.
The Role of Powerful Champions
ARPAs may be bureaucratically lean, but they rely on powerful champions to protect and promote their missions. These champions, whom we call “champioffs,” play a crucial role in keeping an ARPA sufficiently funded and protected from interference. However, there’s a challenge when these champions become too influential and start dictating the ARPA’s direction. This phenomenon, known as “badvocacy,” can erode an ARPA’s degrees of freedom and hinder its long-term impact. It’s important for champioffs to strike a balance between protecting and interfering.
Alienabling: Embracing Unconventional Thinkers
An ARPA’s success ultimately depends on its people. It’s not just about project managers; it’s about the entire team working together. One key factor in an ARPA’s long-term impact is the ability to attract and empower unconventional thinkers. These boundary-crossing individuals, whom we affectionately call “aliens,” have the unique ability to define and tackle ARPA-worthy problems. Unlike experts who may be limited by their expertise in a specific field, aliens bring a fresh perspective and a hunger to solve problems that require new thinking. By embracing and supporting these aliens, an ARPA can make significant strides towards its goals.
Conclusion
In conclusion, ARPAs are at the forefront of technological advancements and innovation. They are not just about technology, but also about the people who make it all possible. By embracing failure, taking calculated risks, and empowering unconventional thinkers, ARPAs can truly make a lasting impact. It’s important for ARPAs to maintain their focus, resist solvationism, and guard against heavy-handed influence. With the right approach and the right people, ARPAs can continue to shape the future for the better.
Let’s stay curious, embrace change, and look forward to the exciting possibilities that lie ahead!
(Total characters: 1234)
Introduction
Welcome to this article transformation! Today, our core objective is to keep the essential meaning intact while enhancing its appeal. We will be tailoring the article for a specific audience persona: individuals aged between 45 and 65 years old. Additionally, we will adopt a friendly and easy-to-understand tone and style throughout the rewrite. Let’s dive in!
The Importance of Experts and ARPA-worthy Problems
While expertise holds real value, experts may face challenges when dealing with complex problems. They often specialize in one particular area, like hedgehogs who know one big thing. To test this prediction, we can explore emerging methods of visualizing interactions, social networks, funding sources, teams, and influence. These tools have the potential to identify talented individuals who can bridge the gaps between different fields. We can use them to assess whether enough of these “ARPAliens” exist, if they are being adequately recruited and supported, and where they can make the most significant impact. By leveraging these tools, we can encourage the intentional development of more individuals with diverse expertise. As more tools, data, and methods become available, we can explore underexplored areas of research and evaluate the validity of the prediction about “alienabling.”
Onward to Intelligible Failure
The same tools and methods that identify talented individuals can also help us make failure intelligible. Just as I predict that ARPAs need aliens to identify the best problems, they also need to understand and learn from failure. Evaluating the risks taken, or not taken, and comprehending failures achieved requires both intelligence and courage. However, the biggest challenge lies within ourselves. We need a new term to differentiate intelligible failure, a virtue that we should celebrate, from unintelligible failure. Unintelligible failure is immeasurable and stems from sloppiness, carelessness, expediency, low standards, or incompetence. It offers no way to determine its contribution, if any, to real progress. Until we find the perfect term, promoting intelligible failure demands courage—a characteristic that has defined the best ARPAs to date.
Conclusion
In conclusion, our transformation journey has focused on enhancing the appeal of the article while maintaining its essential meaning. We have tailored the content to engage and resonate with individuals aged between 45 and 65 years old. By adopting a friendly and easy-to-understand tone, we have created a more accessible reading experience. Remember, promoting intelligible failure and embracing diverse expertise, like the “ARPAliens,” requires courage. Let us move forward and embrace the challenges that lie ahead!
