The benefit from millions of dollars of taxpayer-funded research subsidies may be heading straight offshore.

A boat building firm owned by Team Oracle's founder, American billionaire Larry Ellison, drug giant Bayer, Nasdaq-listed Fiserv and global software firm SAP are all recent recipients of research and development grants from Callaghan Innovation, the government agency charged with administering the money.

But the Government says it has no idea whether any of its investment is actually benefiting New Zealand.

Any company domiciled in New Zealand and spending at least $300,000 a year and at least 1.5 percent of its revenue on research and development in this country can claim up to $17.25 million in reimbursements over a three year period.

Callaghan Innovation has given out more than $140 million worth of grants over the last two years.

Labour Party spokesman on innovation, research and science, David Cunliffe, said he was not against foreign-owned companies receiving the subsidy but the Government should know whether it was money well spent.

"Nobody is asking the question or tracking the results 'Is it good for New Zealand?'. I believe that's something they'll give thought to in the future, but it's not in place yet and Callaghan's been going for nearly three years.

"It should have been something that was thought about before they started spending the taxpayer's money, not afterwards."

Mr Cunliffe said Callaghan Innovation admitted to MPs on the Science and Innovation Select Committee who visted the organisation last week that it had more work to do in that area.

Mining companies eligible

Green Party science spokesman Gareth Hughes believed Callaghan's funding criteria was too broad. That meant two mining companies, Chatham Rock Phosphate and Trans-Tasman Resources, were eligible for grants.

"It's hardly innovation just sucking up the seabed, as these two proposals were. The fact is neither of these two companies managed to get a consent, yet they were eligible for considerable sums of taxpayers' money."

"The Government really should be investing in true innovation for the coming century's economy, not just for drilling, mining and fracking," he said.

Mr Hughes also questioned why German pharmacutical company Bayer was eligible for funding.

The firm posted profits of 5.5 billion euros last year, but its New Zealand arm has filed four years of losses.

Bayer declined to be interviewed but in a statement said recent discussion about research funding had not been "fair and balanced".

Bayer said it was a good corporate citizen and it had invested more than $1 million in New Zealand charities, schools and community groups in recent years.

Better assessment years away

Callaghan Innovation chief executive Dr Mary Quin said the aim of research and development funding was to encourage more jobs and research to be carried out in New Zealand, irrespective of who owned the company, or the type of industry it worked in.

She said the organisation was trying to improve the way it measured the impact of its funding, but it could take up to 10 years to see results.

That was because it could take a long time for companies' research and development programmes to bear commercial fruit.

However, New Zealand Association of Scientists president Dr Nicola Gaston has warned that intellectual property created by foreign-owned firms using taxpayer money is being lost overseas.

Funding contracts state that all intellectual property created during the grant period is retained by the company.

"Intellectual property is one of the key things that you're trying to generate. It's really where all the value is in R&D," she said.

"If we want to be moving into the high tech, high value manufacturing industries and creating value for New Zealand from that then a model that explicitly denies any interest in keeping that IP in New Zealand is concerning.," she said.

Japanese-owned appliance manufacturer Rinnai is one the newest recipients of a Callaghan Growth Grant.

The company's head of design, Ben Hawkins, said the money would be used to employ two more engineers next year, and he had to report quarterly to Callaghan on how the money was benefiting the country.

Science and Innovation Minister Steven Joyce said he had no concerns if some intellectual property was lost offshore.

He said funding should be open to all companies willing to spend money on research and development in New Zealand, regardless of ownership or industry.

"The New Zealand government wants to incentivise R and D to take place. Much of it will be in New Zealand. Some of it won't be.

"But what we do know is as the research and development system grows, we get a lot more people, a lot more companies and some very high tech industries growing as a result of it," he said.

This article was sourced from Radio NZ

The Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies nonprofit sector legal almanac provides summaries of legal cases involving nonprofit organisations, or of relevance to the work of nonprofits, particularly from Australia, but also New Zealand, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States. It also summarises legislative changes that relate to nonprofit organisations in all Australian jurisdictions, and includes short articles on relevant topics: mergers of not for profit organisations; public ancillary funds; charitable housing; and dispute resolution.

Please find a copy of the Australian Nonprofit Sector Legal Almanac 2014 here.

Reprinted with permission. Copyright, ACPNS: Australian Centre for Philanthropy and Nonprofit Studies, April 2015, Brisbane, Australia.

It’s a tight market these days.  Everyone, from large organisations right through to small, Not-For-Profit associations are feeling the pinch and ensuring that your membership base doesn’t wither away is more important than ever before.  But how do you ensure that you attract and hold onto those precious members?

Every day we are inundated with adverts, emails, faxes, SMS and many other marketing communications. In fact, so many that most messages actually miss their target, even if they do add value and deliver what we are looking for.  Compare your own ‘inbox experience’ to the audience you are trying to engage with and you can safely say you’re just another voice in the crowd which is most likely being drowned out.

So how do you cut through the clutter and ensure your communications aren’t another casualty of the Monday morning inbox purge?

It comes down to choosing a communication partner who can work with you to determine the best communication method for your membership base.  That’s what it’s all about in the end.  Not how you want to send your message, but how your audience wants to receive it!

Do you really know what your members want from your association?  What is their idea of value for money when they pay their membership fees?  Is the value perceived or are there tangible services on offer?

We performed a survey of 5000 associations in 2013 and the key issue and challenge back then was that associations must provide value for money for their members and communicate relevant and timely information.  

Move along two years, the landscape for NFP’s has not changed.  It is all about engaging members via the channel that they choose and with the right information.  That is the path to membership base retention and ultimately growth.

But tools that offer multiple communication channels can be expensive, right?  Sophisticated CRM systems and web solutions often come with high price tags, making them out of reach for tight budgets.  And moving from a simple excel spreadsheet with basic contact information to an enterprise database system can be a leap to far for many NFP’s.  

Finding that solution that sits right in the middle, with the tools on hand to offer users a multi-channel approach to their communication and experts who will guide you towards better member engagement is the key to solving the problems of today’s NFP’s.

Look out for the next article which will demonstrate some real-world association examples – Associations who are creating insightful communications with their audiences. 

Want to know more?  Contact PRODOCOM on 1300 132 739 or visit http://www.prodocom.com.au/.  

PRODOCOM is a Digital Messaging Service Provider, including Mobile Applications, Email, SMS, Fax, Voice Casting, Web, Competitions and Surveys

Simon Wallace has been appointed the new Chief Executive of the New Zealand Aged Care Association (NZACA). Currently Policy & Insight Manager with the Tourism Industry Association New Zealand (TIA), Mr Wallace will take up his new role on 2 June.

"We are delighted to have recruited a Chief Executive from a membership organisation and who has such strong policy and lobbying skills," says NZACA Chairman Simon O'Dowd.

"Simon has headed up TIA's policy and insight activities for almost nine years, and more recently has helped lead development of the New Zealand tourism industry's long term growth strategy, Tourism 2025.

"His previous experience as a ministerial advisor in the health sector and his networks within government agencies and other business groups will also be very valuable in his work with NZACA."

Mr Wallace says he is excited to be taking on the role at a time when the aged care sector is experiencing strong growth. "I am keen to get out and meet NZACA members and engage with the wider sector to understand the opportunities and challenges that growth brings, such as investment, recruiting and retaining staff. I'll also be talking with members and the NZACA team to identify new ways to promote the great work people and businesses in this sector do."

He says immediate priorities will be getting up to speed quickly with some of the big issues facing NZACA members and focusing on the upcoming Annual Conference in Auckland, 8-10 September. Mr Wallace is replacing Martin Taylor, who has taken up a position in the Office of the Leader of the Opposition.

How well do you follow company policy for business travel?

Achieving travel policy compliance is more difficult than simply changing booking guidelines. Acquiring long term savings often requires changes in buying culture and regular enforcement of company policy. If traveller compliance isn’t measured effectively, improving your company’s travel performance and bottom line becomes much more difficult.

What’s the value of compliance?

Professionally designed travel policies deliver value through consolidation, use of preferred partners and increased time efficiencies. Regular non-compliance delivers a larger overall travel bill, reduces flexibility in itineraries and increases time spent on making travel arrangements.  

Companies can use a number of strategies to boost compliance such as policy consulting, traveller training and incentive based rewards for compliant behavior. Non-compliant bookings can impact your bottom line by:

Missing advance purchase savings - businesses can pay up to an average of 39 per cent more for airfares booked fewer than 21 days from their departure date.

Buying unrestricted airfares – travellers who purchase flexible fares knowing their plans are unlikely to change can increase airfare spending by up to 10 per cent.

Ignoring preferred suppliers – ignoring preferred suppliers can affect negotiated discounts and pricing that would otherwise deliver savings. 

Using mandated booking channels – booking outside mandated channels reduces spending visibility and increases the time spent on reconciling accounts.

How to counteract non-compliance

Companies that experience widespread non-compliance can take measures to counteract rogue bookings and lost savings. Travellers should be educated on policy requirements, savings and time efficiencies. Ultimately, a travel policy’s effectiveness directly corresponds to how seriously it is enforced. Employees should be regularly updated on policy changes or revised guidelines. Your Corporate Traveller Manager can assist in designing a strategy for enforcement that is tailored to your corporate culture.

AuSAE Members have access to an exclusive offer with Corporate Traveller. Click here for further information [Login Required]

The Good Governance Principles and Guidance for Not-for-Profit Organisations (Principles and Guidance) have been created by the Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) as part of our commitment to the not-for-profit (NFP) sector and its directors. Designed to assist boards in determining what constitutes good governance practice for their organisations and to achieve better outcomes through good governance.

AICD are committed to promoting world-leading performance of Australian boards and directors. The objective is to share with the NFP community some key principles that we believe are a useful starting point for NFP boards when considering what constitutes good governance practice (with regard to their particular circumstances).

The Principles and Guidance are an extension of our commitment to the NFP sector and demonstrate how we seek to support organisations and their directors to achieve better outcomes through good governance.

Access the document here.

This blog post is written by Amanda Kaiser from Smooth The Path and is sourced directly from her blog here.

We hold our place in conversations with filler words which act as a bridge between coherent thoughts. Most commonly these words are ah, um, er, and, so, you know. We slide in filler words to indicate to others that we’re still talking, hold on, we mean to say, I’m thinking and I’ll be right back with you. Filler words over the course of our lives become a habit and we hardly even know we are using them.

Unfortunately our unconscious use of filler words hurts our ability to make a point, to persuade and to influence.  This habit picks away at our credibility just a bit. Professional public speakers know this and they learn early to curb their use of filler words. Take a look at some of the best TED talks and you’ll see one or two, maybe no filler words. Count filler words in your average conference session and you may find 40 or 50. You’ll find that the speaker without filler words is more persuasive and more captivating.

If people use filler words in their communications do organisations use the equilivant of filler words in their marketing messaging? What little signals are associations unintentionally sending that make them less credible and trustworthy?

Abandoned social media channels hurt our credibility

In a frenzy many associations decide that we are going to do social media. So we open accounts on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Maybe also Instagram, Pinterest and Google+. We work really hard at consistently posting for a month or two and find that it is fairly unrewarding because nearly no one likes, retweets or +1’s our posts and fewer follow. Eventually these channels are abandoned or infrequently used. For members who care about Twitter or another channel, seeing social media lay fallow makes them wonder how credible the organisation is.

Fact-based marketing hurts our credibility

Fact-based marketing follows a 3 step formula. This is who we are. This is what we do. Now that you know who we are and what we do won’t you please purchase, join or attend? Most marketing is fact-based marketing. It doesn’t work because it doesn’t connect our member’s needs with our solutions. Members get the sense from our marketing that our focus is on the association’s bottom line and not them, this hurts our credibility.

Policies can hurt our credibility

Members want to see messaging about what they can do. Not a bunch of language about what they can’t do. Policies are developed to protect the association from its members and members know it. Policies can hurt our credibility.

Written by Tim Mullen originally appeared on LinkedIn Pulse

Leadership requires many different skills; from foresight to reactive thinking, from the ability to deal with a situation from a position of strength to performing under pressure. Being a good leader means you’re comfortable standing out in front, like the lead singer in a musical. You take pressure in your stride and your confidence helps to position you as an authority to those you work with and those you report to.

There’s a unique trait, however, that sets apart the great leaders from the good. It's harder to learn because for many leaders it feels un-natural. Something that makes them more uncomfortable and more likely to hastily exit stage left.

This isn’t something that's just relevant to leadership but more broadly in all parts of life. It makes you authentic, believable, loved, revered and everything else in between. It’s so powerful, in fact, that a study cited by Forbes has shown that these type of leaders are the best for business.

The best leaders are humble leaders

The trait I’m talking about is humility. Why does it make some leaders uncomfortable? Because for many in a leadership position there is an aversion to anything that might make them appear weak. I’m sure you’ve experienced leaders like this at some point - the ones who find it hard to admit to their team that they don’t have the answer, that would choose personal glory rather than praising an individual other than themselves.

However, as Deloitte so beautifully puts it, “Today, organizations live in the Glassdoor era. Every corporate decision is immediately publicly exposed and debated. Once-private issues are now posted online for every employee—and every potential employee—to read." So how long, then, can leaders afford not to be humble?

How humility gets you from good to great

I’ve worked with a number of great leaders over the years, each who have taught me some amazing things and helped shape where I am today. When I started to think about the greatest leaders I’ve ever been lucky enough to work for, the ones that stood out immediately were those that were humble. As I write this and think back about those experiences, I have seen the power that humility can have on teams:

1. Humble leaders inspire and empower

It's the fact they are willing to give you a go, that they take pride in having their managers single you out for the great work you've done. They're the first to admit when they know there's something they can't do but that you can. They don't go around playing the politician, jostling for position among their peers so they can be seen and recognised. They share openly and they embody a true sense of the word 'team'. They admit when things are difficult, but inspire in how they respond to overcoming those challenges. They show you that as hard as something might be, it can be done, and because they share that with you, you're not just inspired but empowered to help drive action yourself.

2. Humble leaders will listen to you, even if it’s something they may not want to hear

Feedback isn’t always nice. Especially when it's in the form of criticism. If someone in the team raises a fault in the way something has been done, the person responsible isn't automatically going to welcome it with open arms. When that person is a leader, it means that the spotlight very quickly shines bright in their eyes. Many will choose to hide as a result. The greatest leaders, however, recognise that feedback like this is so hugely necessary. They're humble enough to take it on the chin and openly acknowledge it - often in front of the team - and then seek input and consensus on how it can be fixed. These leaders don't just wait for something to happen. They're open to feedback, actively seeking input from their team on how things could be improved because they don't necessarily have all the answers. Then they act, publicly, to show that the feedback is translating into action.

3. Humble leaders command the utmost respect without acting tough

A quote we shared earlier this week was from Simon Sinek - "Great leaders don’t need to act tough. Their confidence and humility serve to underscore their toughness.” How true this is. The greatest leaders I have worked with have always held my respect; we could have a friendly chat, share a joke with each other, talk openly about business challenges, and even confide in each other if we were having a tough time with something outside work. But when an important deadline was looming and the pressure was on, the team immediately knew what had to be done. We didn't wait for instruction, we knew what was expected of us and got on with the job at hand. We were driven by the respect we had for our manager and the confidence they had in us that we would deliver. That manager never approached us with a firm voice, telling us how important something was to complete. Because of their leadership, we already knew.

Humility forms the core foundation of great leadership. Without it, you may be a good leader but chances are you’ll stay just that.

Written by Tim Mullen; can be viewed on the Jobvibe Blog here.

The peak body for Australian surgeons has created a new internal process to handle complains of sexism, harassment and discrimination following recent revelations of a toxic "boys' club" culture. In a statement released on Wednesday, the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS)  announced it had commissioned new research into the matter, including a survey and interviews with surgeons across Australia.

It will also look at industries and how they handle complaints and what they do to reduce cases of discrimination and harassment. The new complaints system has been put in place while the college's new independent group continues to investigate a flurry of allegations made by surgeons of being subjected to sexual harassment and bullying.

"We expect there will be a range of short- and long-term actions we will need to take to achieve cultural change," the RACS said. In March, neurosurgeon Caroline Tan revealed her career had been derailed after she spoke out about sexual assault she suffered from a colleague. She has demanded an inquiry into the treatment of whistleblowers to break a toxic culture of silence in Australian hospitals. The industry was rocked last month by allegations of widespread sexism, harassment and discrimination in Australian hospitals and that surgeons who complain to authorities are being persecuted.

In March, a leading Victorian surgeon resigned from The Alfred hospital after multiple allegations were made by at least seven junior surgeons of sexual harassment and poor surgical decision-making. The revelations come amid a furore around harassment in the health system prompted by a senior female Sydney surgeon, who recently said that trainees who reported sexual harassment could ruin their careers.

In response to the claims, the college set up an independent group charged with investigating the profession's culture and providing "fearless and comprehensive" advice. The RACS vowed to weed out any rogue surgeons and support those who make complaints.

This article is sourced directly from the Age website by Alana Schetzer; click here to view.

See the original Media Release and statements from RACS here.

By: Paula Gonzalez 

Engineers Australia needed to do two things: raise the visibility and credibility of the engineering profession in Australia and strengthen and grow its membership.

EA soon realized a new recruitment and retention campaign—called "strENGth"—was the way to get both done.

"Through strENGth, Engineers Australia seeks to remind members of the value a partnership with their professional body provides and empower, encourage, and support members to recruit their peers as members," says Noel Dos Santos, CAE, national manager of member growth. "Ensuring the strENGth message is front of mind is key to the success of this growth journey. strENGth gives voice to our value and relevance to harness the power of member referral."

Initial Elements of the Campaign

The strENGth campaign had two main objectives:

• Lead the way in creating a generation of chartered (i.e., certified) engineers.
  
• Grow EA's membership.
  

In order to accomplish these goals, EA knew it would need the buy-in and participation of key stakeholders, as well as a way to engage all members in the campaign. But the group also knew that to bring out true change it would need more than a member-get-a-member campaign.

EA began by test piloting its campaign in Victoria. It featured high-profile, local members (including the 2012 Young Australian of the Year) in videos calling on members to grow their profession and become leaders of the "Chartered Generation of Engineers."

"This cultural change drive challenged our members to embrace and celebrate their professionalism—their commitment to competency, currency, and ethics by becoming Chartered and broadcasting their Chartered Status … and empowers our young engineers to not wait to be told, but to be the creators of their profession," says Dos Santos.

EA also encouraged members to show their strENGth by

• wearing their membership pins
  
• including their membership in their email signature and business cards
  
• utilizing LinkedIn to show their membership status and spread the word
  
• introducing themselves as Chartered Engineers when meeting new people.
  

In addition to engaging the members in the campaign, EA also utilized a variety of marketing and communications channels, including social media, postcards, newsletters, articles, and a website.

Next Steps

After seeing success in Victoria, EA decided to take the strENGth campaign national.

This time, Engineers Australia featured senior Chartered leaders and CEOs of global organizations to act as official ambassadors of strENGth.

"These leaders stared down the barrel of a camera lens and shared their thoughts on what it means to be a member, and the importance of being Chartered, from both an individual and business perspective," says Dos Santos. "Our goal was for these ambassadors to inspire others to follow in their footsteps. The aim is for our members to tell this story."

The Results Are In

And tell it they did. Based on the strENGth campaign, Engineers Australia saw the following results:

• growth in new members, readmitting members, and renewing members
  
• more members working on becoming Chartered
  
• wide exposure of member videos, thanks to the ambassador organizations both sharing these videos and hosting them on their own websites, providing a collective reach of more than 300,000 customers
  
• an increase in members promoting their membership status in their email signatures and through social media platforms
  
• members wearing their member pin and proclaiming their membership status at industry meetings
  
• engagement of the profession's top leaders, who all accepted their invitation to be featured in the strENGth campaign within 24 hours
  
• becoming first-ever international recipient of the ASAE Gold Circle Award, in the member retention campaign category in 2014, as well as winning the President's Prize at Engineers Australia's 2013 National Excellence Awards, marking the first time in the award's history that a staff- and member-driven initiative has won the prize
  

According to Dos Santos, engaging the members and the profession's leaders was key to the campaign's success because it sparked many membership-related discussions within the engineering profession.

Paula Gonzalez is the director of member relations at the Produce Marketing Association. Email: pgonzalez@pma.com

Reprinted with permission. Copyright, ASAE: The Center for Association Leadership, April 2015, Washington, DC.