Developing Organizational Flexibility

VCAT

6-14-2017
Major Strategic Themes for NIST

COMMON DRIVERS

• NIST must address measurement 

needs in complex multivariable 

environments

– Biological measurements

– IoT

– AI

• Converging technologies require 

multidisciplinary teams

• Restricted funding environment

– Increased uncertainty

NEED

• NIST Needs to maintain 

organizational agility and flexibility

– Build and dismantle cross 

disciplinary teams

– Tap into existing expertise

– Develop new methods of 

delivering “trust in 

measurement” 
Institutional Characteristics

• NIST is primarily an intramural lab research 

organization

– Requires dedicated infrastructure and staff

• NIST’s organizational structure is relatively static

– Last major reorg took place in 2010 (22 years after 

the last major change)

– NIST’s organization remains largely discipline-based

• NIST labs have broad autonomy within respective 

scopes

– Must still maintain core activities (measurement 

traceability, etc.)

“(...) the Bureau’s hands-on 

experimental capability is the 

primary basis for its reputation and 

usefulness. The laboratory focus is 

also reinforced by the unique 

expertise and facilities required by 

the basic mission and by the 

Bureau’s role as an objective, 

independent third-party.”

Long-Range Plan of NBS, 1981
Methods NIST Uses to Increase Operational Flexibility

• Start up and directed funding 

• Cross organizational program 

management

• Grants-based Partnerships and 

Joint Institutes

– NIST Centers of Excellence

– JILA, JQI, JIMB

• Leveraging NIST Extramural 

Programs

– Manufacturing USA

Key Questions

• Address multidisciplinary 

problems in a discipline-based 

organization?

• Address rapidly emerging 

technologies?

• Deliver trust in complex systems?
Start-up and Directed Funding

Advantages

• Provides flexibility towards near-term NISTlevel priorities

• Enables creative bottom-up research

• Enables formations of unique teams outside 

of home organizations

Challenges

• Sometimes challenging to maintain 

momentum when projects transferred off 

centralized funding.

• Programs are often undersized compared to 

scope of the challenge

Example Efforts

• Strategic and Emerging Research 

Initiatives (SERI)

• Innovations in Measurement 

Science (IMS)

FY2018 Impact 

• NIST protected these programs in 

FY2018

– As funding environment tightens we 

will evaluate how funds are allocated
Cross Organizational Program Management

Advantages

• Bench-level collaboration across Labs works 

well at NIST

• Enables coalescence of effort around a 

major priority area

Challenges

• Base funding resides in labs, isn’t readily 

reprogrammed out of lab

• Challenges to PM increase the more 

organizational boundaries are crossed

• In some cases PMs control may be limited

– Impacts where funding goes

– Impacts scale of effort

Example Efforts

• Special Program Office (GHG 

Measurement Program, Forensics)

• Quantum Information Science Program 

(based in PML)

• Materials Genome Initiative Program 

(based in MML)

• NIST on a Chip (based in PML)

• Public Safety Communications (based in 

CTL)

• Smart Grid (based in EL)

FY2018 Impact 

• SPO resources eliminated
Grant-based Partnerships -- Centers of Excellence

Advantages :

• Close partnership and access to world-class 

expertise, data, access to facilities

• NIST can expand in new fields and minimize risk 

by not developing formal in-house capabilities 

• Visible focus on priority NIST efforts

• Builds critical mass necessary for impact

Challenges:

• Takes time to establish productive relationship

• Requires significant oversight, changing scientist 

to program manager 

• Limited control

FY2018 Impact 

• NIST proposes to eliminate funding for 1 

COE
Advantages:

• Provides access to expertise not otherwise 

available to NIST. 

• Ability to build long-term capabilities in 

technical areas with significant growth potential. 

• Provides a pipeline for future skilled workforce.

• Ability to work with academia and industry in a 

flexible and effective manner. 

Challenges:

• Loss of NIST culture at off-site centers; 

embedded staff may not feel connected to NIST. 

• Difficult to disengage from commitment. 

FY 2018 Impact

• Constrained resources will make it harder 

to establish new or expand existing 

partnerships

• Eliminates Hollings Marine Laboratory

Joint Institutes

JILA
Leveraging NIST Extramural Programs

Pros: 

• Large national networks –

thousands of stakeholders

• High visibility

• NIST labs can leverage 

Manufacturing Institutes 

opportunistically

Cons: 

• Harder to develop long term 

research partnerships – tend to 

be more transactional

Manufacturing Institutes

Corresponding 

technical 

programs in the 

NIST labs

Assisted in developing 

Funding Opportunities, 

vision, and/or reviewing 

applications

Advisory 

role within 

the 

institute

Active 

collaborations 

between institute 

and NIST Labs

AFFOA (Advanced Functional 

Fabrics of America) √ √ √ TBD

Advanced Robotics for 

Manufacturing (ARM) √ √ TBD TBD

AIM Photonics √ √ TBD TBD

America Makes √ √ √ √

BioFabUSA √ √ TBD TBD

DMDII √ √ √ √

IACMI √ √ √ √

LIFT √ √ √ √

NextFlex √ √ √ TBD

NIIMBL √ √ (NIST Lead) √ √

Power America √ √ √ √

RAPID (Rapid Advancement in 

Process Intensification 

Deployment)

√ √ TBD TBD

REMADE (Reducing EMbodied 

energy And Decreasing Emission 

in Materials Manufacturing)

TBD √ TBD TBD

Smart Manufacturing (Clean 

Energy Manufacturing 

Innovation Institute)

√ √ TBD TBD
Questions for the VCAT

How can NIST be more effective at 

• quickly and flexibly crossing organizational boundaries to meet areas 

of major and immediate national need?

• Working on areas at the convergence of several technical disciplines? 

– What has worked in your organization? 

– What are common pitfalls? 

– What are common warning signs of the organizational structure getting in the 

way of the mission?