healthy4u

The Political Incorrectness of Discussing Conflicts of Interest in Medical Academia

<a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/03/26/ethics_event_spawns_a_tussle_at_tufts/">From today's Boston Globe</a>, <blockquote> Tufts University has withdrawn an invitation for a top aide to US Senator Charles E. Grassley to give the keynote speech at a conference on conflicts of interest in medicine and research, leading one conference organizer to pull out and question the university's commitment to academic freedom. The University-wide Committee on Ethics rescinded the invitation on March 13, according to e-mails obtained by the Globe. The messages said top Tufts officials refused to allow other administrators to be panelists at the meeting if Grassley's aide spoke, saying it was inappropriate to do so while Grassley is investigating ties between a Tufts professor and the drug industry. The senator, a Republican from Iowa, sent a letter on Feb. 17 to the president of Tufts, Lawrence S. Bacow, requesting detailed information on the relationship between a 'Dr. Boucher' and the pharmaceutical industry, including the amount and dates of all industry payments between January 2006 and December 2008. Dr. Helen Boucher is an infectious diseases specialist at the Tufts medical school. Spokeswoman Christine Fennelly first said in an e-mail that when Grassley declined the invitation, 'it was decided to refocus the symposium on a smaller scale, where the panelists would be faculty from Tufts University and affiliated faculty from Tufts Medical Center.' Later, when told that Krimsky's e-mails explicitly said the speaking offer was rescinded, she said the invitation to Grassley's aide had been withdrawn. 'Indeed . . . the administration felt it prudent to not engage someone from the Senator's office while we respond to the Senator's inquiry,' she wrote. </blockquote> One only has to browse the FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) <a href="http://www.thefire.org/">web-site </a>to see the sad state of free speech and academic freedom in American universities. Most of the cases they discuss seem to involve barriers to presenting politically incorrect viewpoints on campus. FIRE has presented several cases involving dis-invitation of speakers with such views. On the other hand, on Health Care Renewal we have discussed our share of cases involving free speech and academic freedom in academic medicine. Most of these cases seem to involve barriers to presenting research results that turn out unfavorable to vested financial interests, particularly interests served by the promotion of particular health care products, like drugs or devices, or services. This case appears to be something of a hybrid. Like a number of cases discussed on the FIRE web-site, it involves the dis-invitation of a campus speaker whose viewpoint might not fit with that of the powers that be on campus. However, instead of causing offense because of his political positions, Mr Thacker seemed to cause offense because he has been involved in investigating conflicts of interest affecting medical academics. Thus, it seems that discussing such conflicts of interest has become politically incorrect. This seems to be a fairly blatant instantiation of the <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2007/08/bling-bling-poltical-correctness-and.html">anechoic effect</a>. See also <a href="http://carlatpsychiatry.blogspot.com/2009/03/tufts-blows-it.html">comments</a> by Dr Daniel Carlat on the Carlat Psychiatry Blog. ADDENDUM (31 March, 2009) - also see <a href="http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasure/2009/03/more_on_conflicts_of_interest.php#more">comments</a> on the Effect Measure Blog.

The Political Incorrectness of Discussing Conflicts of Interest in Medical Academia

From today's Boston Globe , Tufts University has withdrawn an invitation for a top aide to US Senator Charles E. Grassley to give the ke...

Đọc thêm »

Changes to our sales and marketing organizations

Google has grown very quickly in a very short period of time. When companies grow that quickly it's almost impossible to get everything right—and we certainly didn't. In some areas we've created overlapping organizations which not only duplicate effort but also complicate the decision-making process. That makes our teams less effective and efficient than they should be. In addition, we over-invested in some areas in preparation for the growth trends we were experiencing at the time. So today we have informed Googlers that we plan to reduce the number of roles within our sales and marketing organizations by just under 200 globally. Making changes of this kind is never easy—and we recognize that the recession makes the timing even more difficult for the Googlers concerned. We did look at a number of different options but ultimately concluded that we had to restructure our organizations in order to improve our effectiveness and efficiency as a business. We will give each person time to try and find another position at Google, as well as outplacement support, and provide severance packages for those who leave the company. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone affected for all they have contributed to Google. Posted by Omid Kordestani, Senior VP, Global Sales and Business Development

Changes to our sales and marketing organizations

Google has grown very quickly in a very short period of time. When companies grow that quickly it's almost impossible to get everything...

Đọc thêm »

This Former Chief Medical Informatics Officer is Feeling a Bit Betrayed

In thinking further about the "hold harmless" and "defects gag clause" originated by Health IT vendors and agreed to by hospital executives as I described at <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/03/health-it-hold-harmless-and-defects-gag.html">Have Hospital Executives Violated Their Fiduciary Responsibilities by Signing Such Contracts?</a>, I can state I feel a sense of (past) betrayal. Only now thanks to a Penn sociologist and a software consultant (plus the fortitude of JAMA, under some criticisms recently on other matters, in publishing this article) do we formally find out that hospitals have been literally "dumping" on physicians by signing contracts with the HIT vendors leaving the docs "holding the bag" for software errors and malfunctions, and gagging their organizations from openly talking about defects and problems. In other words, physicians hold the risk, everyone else holds the money. Actually, since EMR mostly benefits the payers, I'd more correctly say hospital administrations have largely sold physicians down the river, an act that echoes of contempt and betrayal let alone breach of fiduciary responsibility and the Joint Commission standards I believe apply as in the post linked above. It's not as if hospital administrations cannot negotiate these issues, nor are they forced to sign such provisions if vendors refuse to negotiate. They could send such vendors out the door. If this had been done as a routine by hospital executives, the health IT vendors would have been forced to give in years ago. Health IT was and is not mandatory for operations; the latest survey in NEJM indicates <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/26/business/26health.html?_r=1">only ~9% of hospitals are using EMRs</a>. I also believe possible claims of ignorance and/or "we didn't read the fine print" don't fly. Hospital execs have the responsibility and duty to research such issues and read the fine print, or at the very least counsel did. In effect, at best the spinelessness of hospital administrations over the years may have spoiled the vendors to expect such concessions. (One also wonders about special "incentives" that might make hospital administrations weaker than they might otherwise be on such issues.) Now I better understand perhaps why as CMIO/Director of Informatics at Christiana Care Health System in the late 1990's I never got to see the HIT contracts. I likely would have been a lot less eager to try to "sell" the EMR idea to the medical staff if I had been aware of the "vendor held harmless" provisions they faced if a software design problem or glitch in these immensely complex devices contributed to patient harm. I also feel betrayed in my CMIO role by not being informed of these contract provisions. I wonder how many former and present CMIO's out there are now thinking along the same lines. Ironically, as a Group Director at Merck Research Labs two years later I did review my department's informatics contracts, in fact I was required to, all several million dollars' worth, and in fact was involved in vendor negotiations (I had a personal grant of authority of $100,000 for smaller contracts). Pharma truly reveals hospitals for the IT backwater they are. Finally, there appears to be a mainstream media boycott of the Koppel/Kreda article. As of 1:30 PM EST March 26, Google news <a href="http://news.google.com/news?um=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=koppel+kreda">shows almost no coverage</a> except JAMA, ZDNet and Fox Business News. With Google <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Health+Care+Information+Technology+Vendors%27+%22Hold+Harmless%22+Clause%3A&btnG=Search">web search</a>, I find mostly copies of the U. Penn press release, and links to a few blogs, including this one. I've previously noted this fascinating, Google-revealed phenomena about <a href="http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2006/09/015074.php">media noncoverage of politically inconvenient stories</a>. I've contacted the WSJ who printed my <a href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/02/medinformaticsmd-in-wall-street-journal.html">editorial letter</a> on Health IT last month. Perhaps they'll get the scoop on the issues raised by Koppel and Kreda. -- SS

This Former Chief Medical Informatics Officer is Feeling a Bit Betrayed

In thinking further about the "hold harmless" and "defects gag clause" originated by Health IT vendors and agreed to by ...

Đọc thêm »

Health IT "Hold Harmless" and Defects Gag Clauses: Have Hospital Executives Violated Their Fiduciary Responsibilities By Signing Such Contracts?

<div style="text-align: justify;">July 2009 - Note: also see my letter to the editor in JAMA on this same topic, "Health Care Information Technology, Hospital Responsibilities, and Joint Commission Standards", published July 22, 2009, available online at <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/302/4/382">this link</a>. </div> Regarding healthcare IT "Hold Harmless" and Defects Gag Clauses as revealed by the JAMA article <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/301/12/1276">Health Care Information Technology Vendors' "Hold Harmless" Clause - Implications for Patients and Clinicians</a> by Koppel and Kreda: Have hospital executives violated their fiduciary responsibilities by signing such contracts, and violated Joint Commission standards of hospital leadership conduct as well? <blockquote style="font-style: italic;font-family:arial;"> <a href="http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/society/A0818616.html">Fiduciary</a> (fidOO'shēe"rē), in law, a person who is obliged to discharge faithfully a responsibility of trust toward another. Among the common fiduciary relationships are guardian to ward, parent to child, lawyer to client, corporate director to corporation, trustee to trust, and business partner to business partner. In discharging a trust, the fiduciary must be absolutely open and fair. Certain business methods that would be acceptable between independent parties dealing with one another “at arm's length” may expose a fiduciary to liability for having abused a position of trust.</blockquote> Hospital management conduct is not bound by traditional business law only, just as physicians and other clinicians hold additional obligations. In both cases, obligations go beyond that of, say, a manager or worker at a McDonald's or a Wal-Mart. In healthcare there are "special" third parties involved with critical rights and responsibilities, namely, patients and clinicians. At <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/03/health-care-information-technology.html">Health Care Information Technology Vendors' "Hold Harmless" Clause</a> I expressed great concern about the remarkable revelations in Koppel and Kreda's expose of arguably unethical and clearly inexcusable contracting practices by healthcare IT producers and vendors. The vendors have declared themselves off limits from liability even if patients die as a result of software defects and malfunctions, pushing that liability onto clinicians. Vendors have simultaneously declared themselves the Ministry of Information, Soviet style, on such defects. I also expressed my concern that the contractual suppression of information dissemination on health IT problems and defects may be one reason websites on health IT difficulties, such as the <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.ischool.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/medinfo.htm">site I started in 1998</a> (in fact cited by Koppel and Kreda) remain uncommon on the Web. This is despite my documentation of continued, ongoing, world wide interest in this topic (see my 2006 AMIA abstract on this issue <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.ischool.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/failurecases/content/documents/AMIA2006_poster.pdf">here</a>, PDF, and poster <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.ischool.drexel.edu/faculty/ssilverstein/failurecases/content/documents/FINAL_Healthcare%20IT%20Failure_Oct_19_2006.ppt">here</a>, PPT). It is not just the vendors who may be acting against the best interests of medical science and patient safety, however. It also seems to me that hospital executives, boards and counsel have fiduciary responsibilities, as well as obligations under principles of due diligence, Joint Commission and other regulatory guidelines, etc. to protect not just patients from defective technologies but also to protect their staffs from unfair risks and legal liabilities. I note that these health IT contracts have apparently been signed willingly by hospital executives, against the best interests of patients and medical staffs. Nobody is holding a gun to their heads, and nobody is forbidding negotiation of terms. As a former CMIO/Director of Informatics I would never have signed such a contract. Period. (Of course, CMIO's and Directors of Informatics don't generally sign or even see health IT contracts, as they are Chiefs and Directors of Nothing.) Have hospital executives, boards of directors and counsel been violating their responsibilities and obligations every time they've signed a healthcare IT "hold vendors harmless, it's all on your docs" and "shhhh! keep the defects secret" contract? Have they abused their positions of trust? NIH research leaders and grant reviewers, as an example, consider seriously any problems with research that might place not just research subjects but also investigators at risk, medically, legally and otherwise. I perform this function on NIH study section panels. Let's look at the Joint Commission Hospital Accreditation Program <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.jointcommission.org/Standards/SII/sii_hap_ld.htm">Leadership Chapter</a>, and its standards for hospital leadership (<a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://www.jointcommission.org/NR/rdonlyres/D53206E8-D42B-416B-B887-491B6D5AA163/0/HAP_LD.pdf">link</a>, PDF): <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Leadership LD.01.03.01 Standard LD.01.03.01 The governing body is ultimately accountable for the safety and quality of care, treatment, and services. Rationale for LD.01.03.01 The governing body’s ultimate responsibility for safety and quality derives from their legal responsibility and operational authority for [organization] performance. In this context, the governing body provides for internal structures and resources, including staff, that support safety and quality. </blockquote> The governing body has a legal responsibility for safety and quality, not just a moral obligation. One of the "internal structures" is healthcare IT that is safe and effective and that does not expose patients or staff to undue risks. How does signing "hold harmless" and "defects gag order" clauses with an HIT vendor serve such a purpose, exactly? Hospital executives know, should know, or should have known that such provisions would remove incentives for health IT vendors to produce the best products and to correct deficiencies rapidly, thus increasing risk to patients and clinicians. <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Elements of Performance for LD.01.03.01 5. The governing body provides for the resources needed to maintain safe, quality care, treatment, and services. </blockquote> One of those resources is health IT. <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Standard LD.02.01.01 The mission, vision, and goals of the [organization] support the safety and quality of care, treatment, and services. Rationale for LD.02.01.01 The primary responsibility of leaders is to provide for the safety and quality of care, treatment, and services. The purpose of the [organization]’s mission, vision, and goals, is to define how the [organization] will achieve safety and quality. The leaders are more likely to be aligned with the mission, vision, and goals when they create them together. The common purpose of the [organization] is most likely achieved when it is understood by all who work in or are served by the [organization]. </blockquote> How is a contract with an HIT vendor that calls for hiding defects in health IT and exposing staff to liability for defects in same serving the above purposes? <blockquote style="font-family:arial;"> Standard LD.02.03.01 The governing body, senior managers and leaders of the organized medical staff regularly communicate with each other on issues of safety and quality. </blockquote> Does that include communication on health IT defects? Can a medical staff member ask to see a database of such defects when the hospital has signed a nondisclosure of defects agreement with an HIT vendor? <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Rationale for LD.02.03.01 Leaders, who provide for safety and quality, must communicate with each other on matters affecting the [organization] and those it serves. </blockquote> I ask the same question as above. <blockquote style="font-family:arial;"> Standard LD.03.01.01 Leaders create and maintain a culture of safety and quality throughout the [organization]. </blockquote> Safety for whom, exactly? Patients, or patients and staff? How is exposing professional staff to undeserved liability from defective health IT serving the creation of a culture of safety and quality for them? How is suppressing information on health IT defects and problems helping patient safety and care quality? How is lack of seeking informed consent on health IT use from patients whose care is mediated by health IT devices with known but undisclosable defects creating a culture of quality? How is hiding such defects creating a culture of quality in the community's other hospitals, that may be considering purchase of the very same health IT? <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Standard LD.03.04.01 The [organization] communicates information related to safety and quality to those who need it, including staff, licensed independent practitioners, [patient]s, families, and external interested parties. Rationale for LD.03.04.01 Effective communication is essential among individuals and groups within the [organization], and between the [organization] and external parties. Poor communication often contributes to adverse events and can compromise safety and quality of care, treatment, and services. Effective communication is timely, accurate, and usable by the audience. </blockquote> Are physicians and nurses explicitly informed by administration that clinicians are liable for bad outcomes due to software problems? Are they informed of the gag clause? Are patients informed of unremediated health IT defects existing at time of service? This standard seems a veritable smoking gun regarding breach of fiduciary responsibility and Joint Commission obligations when hospital leadership signs agreements specifically excluding the sharing information about health IT defects and complaints. It is already known that hospitals maintain lists of health IT defects, some in the thousands of items. A number of the defects rise to the level of creating considerable risk to patients, and nobody is in a hurry to remediate them. (See my proposed although somewhat tongue in cheek "HIT Informed Consent" that describes some of these known defect categories <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com/2009/03/draft-patient-rights-statement-and.html">here</a>). <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Standard LD.04.04.03 New or modified services or processes are well-designed. ... 3. The hospital's design of new or modified services or processes incorporates: Information about potential risks to patients. 4. The hospital's design of new or modified services or processes incorporates: Evidence-based information in the decision-making process. Note: For example, evidence-based information could include practice guidelines, successful practices, information from current literature, and clinical standards. </blockquote> How does the contractual inability to communicate about health IT defects, which its executives willingly sign, serve this purpose? <blockquote style="font-family:arial;">Standard LD.04.04.05 The [organization] has an organization-wide, integrated [patient] safety program. ... 12. The hospital disseminates lessons learned from root cause analyses, system or process failures, and the results of proactive risk assessments to all staff who provide services for the specific situation. </blockquote> Disseminates lessons learned, except when the HIT contract they've signed with a vendor forbids it, that is. The practices of the health IT industry, and the dealings of the hospital leadership with that industry, may in fact be a scandal of national (or international) proportions. I urge physicians and concerned others reading this to read the Univ. of PA press release "Why Are Healthcare Information Manufacturers Free of All Liability When Their Products Can Result in Medical Errors?" <a style="font-family: arial;" href="http://sev.prnewswire.com/null/20090324/DC8755624032009-1.html">here</a>, obtain the JAMA article by Koppel and Kreda, and call their congressional and other representatives to have these self-serving industry practices that ignore protection of patients and practitioners from undue jeopardy stopped. I also believe any clinician under lawsuit related to hospital HIT malfunction, and/or patients harmed, should consider suit against the management that signed the contracts allowing the defective IT's entry into the hospital and mandated clinicians to use the HIT. I, for one, already have begun discussing these issues with my representatives in Washington, and they've expressed great surprise at these revelations. -- SS

Health IT "Hold Harmless" and Defects Gag Clauses: Have Hospital Executives Violated Their Fiduciary Responsibilities By Signing Such Contracts?

July 2009 - Note : also see my letter to the editor in JAMA on this same topic, "Health Care Information Technology, Hospital Responsib...

Đọc thêm »

iGoogle's got game... themes!

I'm happy to announce the launch of iGoogle game themes. These themes offer our users new iGoogle backdrops inspired by their favorite video games, including classics like "Mario" and "Mega Man" and new sensations like "Wii Sports" and "Spore." Like our <a title="iGoogle artist themes" href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/where-art-thou.html" id="m_na">iGoogle artist themes</a>, <a title="fashion and music themes" href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/more-eye-candy-for-igoogle.html" id="jc5v">fashion and music themes</a> and <a title="themes for causes" href="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/12/creating-change-with-your-homepage.html" id="dqgk">themes for causes</a>, we hope that the game themes delight our users and reflect their personal interests. As you can imagine, these themes in particular have captivated our iGoogle software engineers who are gamers themselves. I'll now turn the post over to one of our engineers who worked closely on the project, Matthew Chan, for more details. A gamer's POV I confess, I'm a game geek. My first experience with video games was spending hours and hours (not to mention my weekly allowance) playing "Donkey Kong" and "Galaga" at a nearby arcade until my fingers ached. These days I no longer have to ride my bike to the neighborhood arcade to play video games — I can do it in the comfort of my own home anytime I want! And even better... starting today, I can have images of my favorite childhood games right on my iGoogle page. iGoogle now has graphics from all sorts of games that I know will excite my fellow gamers. Picture your homepage with "Burnout" cars zooming in the background, Ryu from "Street Fighter" blasting hadoukens across your page, or rock stars jamming out to tunes from "Guitar Hero." It doesn't end there. For those of you who used to dream about completing the Triforce or getting out of tombs alive, choose from "Zelda" or "Tomb Raider." Want more? Try "Dungeons & Dragons," "The Sims 3," or "World of Warcraft" on for size. So come check out the new game themes (<a href="http://www.google.com/help/ig/gaming/">www.google.com/gamingthemes</a>) and choose your favorite one. If you can't decide, no worries. Just add the <a href="http://www.google.com/ig/directory?type=themes&url=skins/games_sampler.xml" id="wbrp" title="game theme of the day">game theme of the day</a> and enjoy seeing a different one on your iGoogle page every day. Here's a look at the themes in action: <object height="350" width="425"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TzFPOHmrt2Q"> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TzFPOHmrt2Q" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" height="350" width="425"></embed> </object> Posted by Marissa Mayer, VP of Search Products and User Experience, and Matthew Chan, iGoogle engineer

iGoogle's got game... themes!

I'm happy to announce the launch of iGoogle game themes. These themes offer our users new iGoogle backdrops inspired by their favorite v...

Đọc thêm »

Google, at your service

It used to be that creating a webpage was a pursuit reserved for the truly tech-savvy, requiring a geek's expertise in HTML, Java, or C++ coding. These days, it's a different story. Working with a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_hosting_service">hosting service</a> has made things a great deal easier, as they can help you reserve a name for your site (www.[insertyournamehere].com), and they often provide tools to help get you set up, with minimal to zero programming experience required. Today, we're releasing <a href="http://www.google.com/webmasters/provider/">Google Services for Websites</a>, a few more tools that your hosting company can now enable to help you improve your website. This expanded program includes Webmaster Tools, AdSense, Custom Search, and Site Search, making it easier to drive traffic to your site, monetize your site through the Google ad network, and add various search capabilities to help your visitors find information on your site faster. <a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwRgngGtX7sRpHltymHS1zjSD6aIfc0vO8GnTCnNMEUY7MV0zOL5mPsfY5cJ-QZUix0SnACoAzLjKKv0pZM8aRp3lc4ONM-mMJJbPxrdKZ5AE_szhf_HSz8DFqJhbifJVZmHXQXk5NOdTy/s1600-h/Fatcow.png"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5317258453625747218" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwRgngGtX7sRpHltymHS1zjSD6aIfc0vO8GnTCnNMEUY7MV0zOL5mPsfY5cJ-QZUix0SnACoAzLjKKv0pZM8aRp3lc4ONM-mMJJbPxrdKZ5AE_szhf_HSz8DFqJhbifJVZmHXQXk5NOdTy/s400/Fatcow.png" style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 329px;" /></a> For more information, check out our <a href="http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2009/03/google-services-for-websites-expands-to.html">Enterprise Blog</a>, <a href="http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/03/making-more-tools-available-with-just.html">Webmasters Blog</a> and <a href="http://googlecustomsearch.blogspot.com/2009/03/google-services-for-websites-includes.html">Custom Search Blog</a>. And if your hosting service doesn't have Google Services for Websites yet, send them to <a href="http://www.google.com/webmasters/provider/">this page</a>. We hope you find these new tools helpful. Posted by Rajat Mukherjee, Group Product Manager

Google, at your service

It used to be that creating a webpage was a pursuit reserved for the truly tech-savvy, requiring a geek's expertise in HTML, Java, or C+...

Đọc thêm »

Google's 2009 EMEA Faculty Summit

Our <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Brandschenkestrasse+110+8002+Z%C3%BCrich+Switzerland&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&split=0&gl=us&ei=ZszHSdWIDYKOsQPen6HgBg&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&resnum=1&ct=title">Zurich office</a> was proud to host Google's second annual EMEA (Europe, Middle East, and Africa regions) Faculty Summit last month. Eighty leading academics joined us from 66 universities in 24 countries for this three-day event. The Faculty Summit's purpose is to increase collaboration between key universities and our engineering teams. This year, we organised more than 40 talks and presentations, plus panels, networking and social events to help our guests learn more about Google's work in their regions. In return, Googlers gained valuable insight into challenges faced by the region's universities and new developments in the academic world. Event highlights included a keynote by leading cryptographer and Turing Award winner Adi Shamir on the topic of privacy and security as related to cloud computing. Further discussion centered on topics ranging from the power and limitations of cryptographic technology to usability issues introduced by security requirements, with some debate over the balance between preventing abuse and identifying and reporting abusers. <a href="http://www.google.com/corporate/execs.html#spector">Alfred Spector</a> (VP of Research), Jeff Walz (University Relations) and I spoke about Google's engineering efforts and the impact of our university relations initiatives, with much discussion focusing on our involvement in the Arab and African regions. Rapidly expanding markets in the Middle East and Africa represent a major engineering challenge for us, and we are eager to continue collaboration with leading academic attendees from the region well beyond the Summit. We were pleased to welcome representatives from the Al Arabiya news channel, who highlighted this topic in a recent broadcast. We also heard from Google 'Research Award' and 'CS4HS' (Computer Science for High School) grant recipients and EMEA-based academics spending long-term sabbaticals at Google, who described their experiences over the past year. <a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgloocDo1m14fgSPaeNRYTo-Szsh-F6yokTKe1FmDIrmBc-sAorh0S417luit-NlQNDiEamCOfL5JYj1XyFX1LsHfr1g4mVN6UtmGg8yNoSsbNvINoRVN0BnYWZOeYvxPh4vQGy6MDcYLi8/s1600-h/_mg_6766.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5317164078926582530" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgloocDo1m14fgSPaeNRYTo-Szsh-F6yokTKe1FmDIrmBc-sAorh0S417luit-NlQNDiEamCOfL5JYj1XyFX1LsHfr1g4mVN6UtmGg8yNoSsbNvINoRVN0BnYWZOeYvxPh4vQGy6MDcYLi8/s400/_mg_6766.jpg" style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" /></a> This year also saw new additions to the Faculty Summit agenda, including a networking session allowing academics to discuss collaboration options one-on-one with specific Google engineers. This session spurred a great deal of activity — for instance, multiple Googlers are booked to deliver guest lectures at external events and universities and several attendees have been invited to present their findings on research ranging from 'Software Visualisation' to 'Mobile Agile Testing' at Google engineering offices across EMEA. We plan to make these networking sessions a focal point at future Faculty Summits! I'd like to thank the organising team for their help in planning and executing this important event for the second year running. The 2009 EMEA Faculty Summit proved to be an incisive and informative event resulting in new academic and industrial collaborations. We look forward to reporting back on these synergies as they develop over the next year! Posted by Nelson Mattos, VP of Engineering

Google's 2009 EMEA Faculty Summit

Our Zurich office was proud to host Google's second annual EMEA (Europe, Middle East, and Africa regions) Faculty Summit last month. Ei...

Đọc thêm »