Comments on: Thinking about RaaS: Research-as-a-Service http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/ visualization, protein science, open science and freelancing science Fri, 14 May 2010 14:02:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: 3G Doctor « Microarray Blog http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-639 3G Doctor « Microarray Blog Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:47:56 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-639 [...] Also came across this intersting post by Paweł Szczęsny.  Thinking about RaaS: Research-as-a-Service [...] [...] Also came across this intersting post by Paweł Szczęsny.  Thinking about RaaS: Research-as-a-Service [...]

]]> By: Daymon Balser http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-637 Daymon Balser Fri, 16 Jan 2009 08:43:36 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-637 I'd have to agree that this service wouldn't be small for long. I’d have to agree that this service wouldn’t be small for long.

]]> By: Nir http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-571 Nir Sun, 16 Nov 2008 20:42:15 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-571 Hi, This idea actually worked for us very well. We are a bunch of scientists from the computational structural biology world, and we established the <a href="http://rosettadesigngroup.com" title="Rosetta Design Group" rel="nofollow">Rosetta Design Group</a>, which provides contracted modeling service and basic research for pharma and biotech companies. I get the feeling that more and more companies outsource these kinds of services these days. They realize that these are crucial steps in the process and should be performed by the people who know the field best. Hi, This idea actually worked for us very well. We are a bunch of scientists from the computational structural biology world, and we established the Rosetta Design Group, which provides contracted modeling service and basic research for pharma and biotech companies. I get the feeling that more and more companies outsource these kinds of services these days. They realize that these are crucial steps in the process and should be performed by the people who know the field best.

]]> By: Michael Nielsen » Biweekly links for 11/07/2008 http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-565 Michael Nielsen » Biweekly links for 11/07/2008 Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:58:38 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-565 [...] Thinking about RaaS: Research-as-a-Service « Freelancing science [...] [...] Thinking about RaaS: Research-as-a-Service « Freelancing science [...]

]]> By: Pawel Szczesny http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-560 Pawel Szczesny Tue, 04 Nov 2008 09:27:39 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-560 Scaling was one of the issue I thought about for some time and I see two possibilities. If you work close to the basic science, work on quick projects or focus on innovations (which is my main interest), RaaS approach doesn't scale well. Or even if it does, you wouldn't want to build a huge company with such approach. Growing big means increasing one's own leverage but at the same time it means loosing mobility I wrote about above. In such RaaS model, if you cannot respond quickly to the flow of scientific discoveries, you are heading out of the market. On the other hand, if your company aims at handling huge long-term projects, you may want to look how contract research organizations operate. They handle not only clinical trials (although it's their main focus). However, there's a chance that I'm wrong on both possibilities and the model that actually works will be very scalable. Market of research services changed a lot during last couple of years (compare RedMonk to old-type IT consulting company) and I have no idea yet what approach will work long-term. Scaling was one of the issue I thought about for some time and I see two possibilities. If you work close to the basic science, work on quick projects or focus on innovations (which is my main interest), RaaS approach doesn’t scale well. Or even if it does, you wouldn’t want to build a huge company with such approach. Growing big means increasing one’s own leverage but at the same time it means loosing mobility I wrote about above. In such RaaS model, if you cannot respond quickly to the flow of scientific discoveries, you are heading out of the market.

On the other hand, if your company aims at handling huge long-term projects, you may want to look how contract research organizations operate. They handle not only clinical trials (although it’s their main focus).

However, there’s a chance that I’m wrong on both possibilities and the model that actually works will be very scalable. Market of research services changed a lot during last couple of years (compare RedMonk to old-type IT consulting company) and I have no idea yet what approach will work long-term.

]]> By: Student http://freelancingscience.com/2008/11/03/thinking-about-raas-research-as-a-service/#comment-559 Student Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:10:38 +0000 http://freesci.wordpress.com/?p=223#comment-559 We already started a company based on the same idea of RaaS. It is not easy to handle many of options under not-for-profit category, but for sure it is a great point to start with. Most of your points are valid. My question for you is about growth and development. By getting involved in different steps of collaborations liability risks will increase which can easily put accepting major projects under question. As long as it stays small, it is fine, but that cannot stay for long either. what is your thoughts about next level? We already started a company based on the same idea of RaaS. It is not easy to handle many of options under not-for-profit category, but for sure it is a great point to start with. Most of your points are valid. My question for you is about growth and development. By getting involved in different steps of collaborations liability risks will increase which can easily put accepting major projects under question. As long as it stays small, it is fine, but that cannot stay for long either. what is your thoughts about next level?

]]>