There are references you didn't screenshot in that solicitation that explain more about the topic. https://www.sbir.gov/sbirsearch/detail/1254391 …
-
-
I agree there's a lot wrong with SBIR: too many wired, Phase 1 $ too low, paperwork overhead too high, sponsors don't know their own needs
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
But I think you're mischaracterizing the problem. As a SBIR participant, it's *very* hard to understand how anyone gets rich off this.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @dguido @EmilyGorcenski
There seem to be a bunch of companies who have figured out how to scale this. They pay contractors and just run through lots of these.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @matthew_d_green @EmilyGorcenski
SBIR review considers past commercialization efforts in future proposals to try and discourage that. It should definitely get stricter.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dguido @matthew_d_green
You wanna keep mansplaining the field I spent a decade in or....
3 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski @matthew_d_green
For the companies I know that receive SBIR $, they're a godsend that lets them attempt products from research, my company included.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Sorry, I can't see how someone with that much experience hasn't also stumbled on some success stories too!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @dguido
Emily G Retweeted Emily G
I acknowledged their existence in-thread:https://twitter.com/EmilyGorcenski/status/878707856870080512 …
Emily G added,
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @EmilyGorcenski @dguido
Perhaps the issue with "you can't see" is "you're unwilling to treat critical views as valid."
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
Do you have any recommendations or is the point simply, "we should burn down SBIR and increase our IT spend"? Because that's how it sounds.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.