First of all, what are animalcules? This was the term used by Anton van Leeewenhoek (1632 – 17223) to describe what he saw under his crude lenses of the day. In much the same way, I wish to examine the two job titles in a little more detail in academic context. This context relates to job titles in a University of Technology which has a unit such as the Agrifood Technology Station. This is an interesting situation which had a arisen during decisions on making a new appointment in either of the three Stations at CPUT, the other two being the TS in Clothing & Textiles and the AMTL Adaptronics TS.

For the uninitiated, the Technology Stations are DST funded vehicles to service the technology innovation and other needs in the SMME sector per the industry serviced by each Station. The question had arisen: Do the Stations require a Researcher or do they require a Technologist? You may at this point want to aver that a rose is a rose no matter by which name you call it! But, hold that thought right there.

A little more context: CPUT as an institution does use the word “Researcher” and has appointed persons with this job title. On the other hand, “Technologist” is less used and not necessarily a preferred term. In both instances, there is no fixed job description for the titles and they are used flexibly based on the need by the appropriate unit or department. And to muddy the waters even further, the term “Technician” is widely used at CPUT. This will be touched on later as well. However, in my mind, the first term is generally reminiscent of academic research of a nature that involves long-term studies leading to the publication of peer reviewed outputs in appropriate journals. This, as much academics know that it is not always true, is further reminiscent of research conducted in the chase for outputs and subsidy. This may be perceived, and sometimes in fact is, with less concern for the application of the knowledge or where the outputs are on the Technology Readiness Level (TRL)¹ as an indicator of closeness to commercialization (see footnote to this blog). The TRL is probably something closer to the outputs of a Technologist. And that is where the difference between the two essentially ends i.e. purely a contextual and perceptual one. What does the public see when we use either of those two terms? And what would we like them to see?

Let’s look at formal definitions for these two terms and then also mix in the Technician. All three have slightly varying definitions but generally are defined closely over a range of references. In the interests of brevity, and hopefully objectively, I chose as follows:

• A Researcher is someone who conducts research i.e. an organized and systematic investigation into something. Scientists are often described as researchers. This is also loosely translated as the person who sees a big picture, sometimes in an abstractor theoretical form and who then designs hypotheses which is tested in the laboratory.
• A Technologist is deemed to be the person who takes the outcomes from the big picture above and applies it in the practical domain, this requiring a lot of intimate detail and knowledge regarding the research area as well.
• A Technician is a person whose job relates to the practical use of machines or science in industry, medicine, etc. (someone who has mastered the basic techniques or skills in the field of expertise).

There is also much acknowledgement of the fact that the two titles need each other and, in a few cases, one person could be described by both names. More importantly for me though is the distinctive character of the Technologist i.e. the hands-on, practical, applications approach rather high up on the TRL (close to commercialization). This is one of the key outputs of a University of Technology and it is also one of the key mandates of Technology Stations. This is explained by the diagram below which shows where we are in the innovation value chain (represented by the TIA block):

At the end of the day though, a rose by any other name smells just as sweet. But, if you are in the Rose Garden in Durbanville, you would very often need to know your Genus from your Species!

Larry Dolley

¹A simple description of Technology Readiness Levels

A recent advert had come to my notice from a company in Cape Town wishing to employ a Food Technology graduate with the scope of the job seemingly way beyond the somewhat meagre salary range on offer and the requirement of 5 years of experience required. In this case, to rub salt into the wound, the post is a short-term contract. This is not the first time I have seen such from companies although, in my experience, it is not the norm. It may be that other job seekers have more experience with salaries versus job descriptions versus your 3-year (or higher) qualification. The question then remains: so what is a “standard” starting salary for a new graduate in the food industry generally? Some context is required before trying to give any hard figures.

1. The first is that the labour market is a “free” system in which salaries are determined by the market as well as by the company concerned. The “market” relates to what the going rates are generally in industry and also the state of the economy (very broad issues). In terms of the company, one would expect that bigger companies are more able to pay equitable salaries than smaller ones, but this is a rule of thumb and also not necessarily the norm. There is no way that your alma mater can intervene in this since it is not our domain and we thus have very little (if any) business there.
2. Secondly, it is a matter of choice whether you apply for the job or not. These are matters of personal economics, personal trust in the potential employer and the degree of desperation of some graduates to at least get a job in the first instance.
3. Thirdly, there is also the supposed fact that salaries are generally better in Gauteng than down in sleepy old Cape Town and humid Durban (to name two industrial hubs out of quite a few). There is some truth in this but possibly not the whole truth i.e. multi-nationals and larger South African corporates would usually have a standard matrix in which salaries are determined. Again, I exclude medium to smaller companies from this statement.
4. However, it may be that some employers use the above oft quoted “fact” (C) to lower their salary offers based on the premise that potential candidates will accept it at face value i.e. salaries are lower down here, irrespective of (A) above. This also has elements of artificially reducing salary expectations.

I suppose one could then also bring many other factors into the pot but let’s leave that for the purposes of this discussion. At this point it also becomes evident that the answer to the question in the title is not one that is easily answered except in very broad strokes. One indirect answer is that the salary attached to the original advert mentioned above is more reasonably suited to a 4-year qualification with 2 years’ experience i.e. the post and conditions offered is unreasonable and not in line with our general observation and experience.

Finally, and more importantly, this particular instance of low salary and high job demands (paragraph 1) is not the norm and should not be used to make judgements of the industry generally and the career path that is Food Technology (or related qualifications) in particular.

And the next question then arises: Who can push this agenda locally or nationally? Is it SAAFoST? Or Unions? How else do you increase your value to industry? This will be for another blog. But, while you are on the web, look at http://www.ift.org/CareerCenter/Salary-Survey.aspx for ideas.

Larry Dolley
Station Manager

 See our sister blog: www.cput.ac.za/blogs/foodtech

How to make dried fish do an about turn!

In a recent project conducted on request by a client, we needed to dry fish using a rather simple traditional method in terms of the ingredients used for the drying process. The project deliverable itself i.e. a validated and optimised version of a traditional drying process, was to be used for allowing subsistence fishermen to add value to very low value catch. In a similar vein the method would also be employed by fisher folk with small quotas using the smaller harbours around the coast. The intended market is the local, and growing, immigrant population as well as a continental export market where a palate for such dried fish species exists. Local consumption also targets the training of local palates in order to enlarge the market for this high-value protein source.

There are many artisanal methods for drying fish, from the very simple (on slabs or hanging) to the more complex (solar and/or electrically heated dryers) with appropriate packing and storage facilities. The drying process validated in this study itself involves filleting and stacking fish while treating each layer with salt and ascorbic acid in a very specific optimised ratio. Originally, this was done by artisanal fisher folk stacking the fish on a pallet, wrapping it in plastic netting and allowing it to dry for one week, after which it is inverted and allowed to dry for a further three weeks prior to moving to the intended market. One problem attached to this is the fact that this very often is done in remote areas or in situations where access to mechanical assistance and/or electricity is not available. The turning process involved is thus a manual one involving appropriate muscle power depending on the mass being dried.

The Agrifood Technology Station, with the contracted assistance of the Product Development Station at the Central University of Technology, designed and built a prototype fish-drying frame and bin that allowed for the drying of approximately 100kg of fish. The unique point of the design was that, based on the frame structure, it could be more easily rolled over to invert the mass of fish to allow for the second phase of drying. At this point the frame can be removed and a new drying process started with fresh fish. The photograph below shows the design element referred to in the frame:

A plastic roto-moulded box, to contain the drying fish, is then placed in the frame:

It is envisaged that the material for building the frame, presently galvanised steel, could be replaced by plastic (lighter) and could thus also allow for bigger volumes/masses of fish to be dried in this manner. Furthermore, a mechanical press could be introduced into the design to further compact the drying fish as it loses water. The client, who contractually has first rights to manufacture such units under licence from CPUT, intends rolling out this drying process and its framed bins, in both local coastal communities as well as to inland freshwater fishing communities. It is envisaged that this would lead to employment opportunities for such communities and also to value adding to sometimes poor catch species with little or no street value.

The CPUT intellectual property for this resides under the name Luckyfish Bin.

Larry Dolley
Station Manager
See our sister blog: www.cput.ac.za/blogs/foodtech

A recent discussion point on a Food Technology group on Facebook regarding salaries led to the question being asked as in the title above. In particular, since the blog referred specifically to the issues of equitable salaries ion the food industry, and the disenchantment of some graduates with some offers seen by some companies as being way below expectations as well as the industry norm, the question of SAAFoSTs role arose in this regard. I decided that this required a possible answer and also a wider debate on the general role of professional and learned bodies in the lives of graduates. In addition and possibly more importantly, how could graduates contribute to improving their own positions in industry through such bodies?

To contextualise the discussion, let’s first define what is meant by:
A. Professional Body: these are usually bodies which are subscription based and to which professionals in a field belong. This body which also has the ability to accredit qualifications by such members (usually by accreditation through the tertiary institution concerned). An example is the Engineering Council of South Africa (ECSA) to which professional engineers belong. This makes them Professional Engineers.
B. Learned Societies and Associations: these are usually learned bodies of like-minded people and companies with similar aims and goals and are subscription based. These bodies are used to organize formal academic and other gatherings where information is shared and services offered via the body to the professionals concerned in their specific fields. Examples are the South African Society for Microbiology and the South African Association for Food Science & Technology (SAAFoST) – www.saafost.org.za. This body also has a Professional Code of Conduct.
C. Legislated bodies: These are bodies formed based on laws that require them and also which, in some cases, require certain companies and individuals to be registered with such bodies in order for them to operate commercially. One such example is the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP) – www.sacnasp.org.za. The latter body registers persons with tertiary qualifications in number fields in the natural sciences, including food science & technology. Membership is subscription based and allows one to use this on your business card as Professional Natural Scientist (with a registration number). Membership also carries the demand of adhering to a Professional Code of Conduct, to which SAAFoST also subscribes.

As a Food Technologist, you do not have a professional body solely dedicated to your field with a professional membership stand such as ECSA. You do however have access to (C) above, where you may be registered as a “Technologist” which gives you some standing in the field. As you go higher up the qualifications ladder and as you gather experience, you could eventually be registered as a Professional Natural Scientist. The head of Food Science & Technology at CPUT holds that status in Food Science & Technology while I hold status as a Professional Biological Scientist (400019/97). This holds us to a cod of professional conduct, allows us to sign of various reports and certificates of analysis and also allows us to charge for our private services against a recommended set of fees. Companies are recently more inclined to look for this registration when doing job interviews and designing adverts for positions. It is something to keep in mind for future self-development.

In terms of SAAFoST, membership again is voluntary and does not grant any professional status but it does have a fairly closed membership in terms of the food and related industries (ECSA and SACNASP have very broad fields in terms of membership i.e. engineering and the natural sciences. It gives you an insight into the general field based on its activities and dissemination of information to its members.

Now, I am not here to sell any specific organisation to you, but because the question was asked in the discussion thread on Facebook: how can SAAFoST help with making companies more aware of, and campaign for, better recognition of qualifications and its related salaries, I am using them as the target. More generally, the question becomes: what does, and what can, SAAFoST (or any other body) do for me? The question can actually be reversed to ask: How can you help SAAAFoST (or any other body) to give members better value for money, including that related to salaries?

I have been a Professional Member for many years, very active in the earlier years but now a quite member snoozing on the backbenches. In all these years, a limited number of students had become involved in organising and assisting at tertiary institution level, at local branch level and also at national level in the services provided by SAAFoST. In so doing, they had the opportunity to push their own agendas (which were all positive issues). Sadly, very few such members had emerged from what were Peninsula Technikon and Cape Technikon….. and now CPUT. None, if any, participated at national level. Much like a political party, your vote and your active participation is required to steer your organization to meeting your needs.

So, in terms of the salary issue, if you feel SAAFoST needs to make some form of “contribution” to the national norm or determine what the norm is (not into your bank account), then get involved. If there is another channel for your energies and involvement, go for it. The least that can be done is to pose the question to your branch Chairperson or the national President for consideration (even if you are not a member). It would require an answer and some logical explanation of why they cannot assist or how they could do so.

As mentioned in a previous blog, the Institute of Food Technologists (www.ift.org) has a salary survey nationally every two years for the last 40 years. Maybe this is an issue with which SAAFoST would be able to assist.

Come on, let’s do it!!!

Larry Dolley
Station Manager

See our sister blog: www.cput.ac.za/blogs/foodtech

I would suppose that any person worth his or her salt in the food industry would have an opinion about food trends for 2015 and that, using a random group of people and their own perceptions and preferences, you could get quite a wide response regaridng products, ingredients and processes. I attended Chocotec 2014 in Cologne in early December and was struck by a presentation, specifically on chocolate, but based on ten trends developed or identified by Innova Market Insights. I thus do not present this as my own work, but rather a South African extension of the insights from IMS. My comments are added to a very short summary of each trend.

1. From a “clean” label to a “clear” label. We all understand clean as being a product and label without all the “nasties” such as preservatives, GMOs, BPA (depending on which side of the food fence you sit, these may not really be an issue to you). “Clear” however is a trend which could also be seen as market edge i.e. a label which tells you a lot more than the average person would need in order to reassure more discerning consumers. An example of this is something such as indicating, like with high-brow wines of origin, where a specific ingredient actually comes from or a lot more about conditions under which the product is made e.g. Fair Trade in a nutshell, the latter being one sentence or more on a label. Label size constraints do play a role here but innovative thinking marketers could really change a product’s impact on a discerning consumer.

2. Convenience for foodies. This is again an area for a clever marketer or for companies interested in developing new ingredients or revitalizing older ones. This is based on the growing interest in food programmes on television and other media which is driving a move to consumers taking a keen interest in cooking. Obviously, being wired the way we are, we would still want some convenience in the way we express our interest and habits when preparing food from scratch at home. This will require upgraded or new ingredients to add some “quick” to “slow food” Or spruce up existing ingredients by looking at the market edge by selling it from a different angle. This goes for raw and fresh produce as well as all the other bits and bobs that go into a good, fresh, home-cooked meal.

3. Marketing to millenials. As much as a third of the world’s population is in the 15 – 35 year bracket. So, even if people are living longer, thus increasing that segment of the world population, there is a significant segment in millenials who have a totally different take on life and its quality. They do not stick to Klim powdered milk because it was what they consumed when babies (read any other product than Klim). They are much more able to make the leap to new products in siilar categories. They are much more daring and need a “kick” or a “hit” to satisfy what sometimes could be jaded appetites in a fast changing world. I think this does already drive marketers and producers in a push-pull relationship and is a reminder to the entrenched brands and products not become too comfy in that zone of dominance.

4. Snacks rise to the occasion. This one is counter-intuitive in that it predicts a rise on consumption of snacks as opposed to (2) above which predicts an increase in home cooking using convenient ingredients. However, the nub here is that the snacks referred to are healthy ones and indlude preparation snacks at home. This also ties in to the millenials and their consumption patterns. So there is an overlap of at least 3 of the 10 trends identified i.e. three birds can be cooked with one stove in a product or, put differently, three (and probably more) trends can be accommodated in one product.

5. Good fats, good carbs. In South Africa, Tim Noakes has stirred the “diet” pot considerably in terms of subscription to the Banting diet. However, this trend relates to natural sources of these ingredients based in whichever vehicle it arrives e.g. butter or omega fats and natural sugars rather than other sweeteners, be they non-nutritive or not. Most companies are already on the bandwagon of touting their products or improving their products with such. I doubt however that this has been fully exploited yet and, if so, it gives space for product revision, or extension in some cases, to accommodate the further projected demand for such in foods.

6. More in store for protein.  This could again be looked at from the point of view of the Banting diet but it does have many more nuances. New proteins are being researched and employed as ingredients or components of complex ingredients. Soy protein is “old hat” while pea protein may be considered as a “younger hat”….they have peaked. However, these have still not been fully exploited and, more importantly as my colleague (Prof. Jideani) would preach: we are not fully exploiting indigenous seeds and cereals in terms of protein, fibre and other components. So, in terms of quantity, nutritional value and costs, there is much to be done as part of meeting this predicted trend. And then the yucky but perfectly safe alternative source from insects.

7. Fresh look at frozen. Frozen is frozen is frozen. Yes, this may be true but what you freeze and how you freeze it is key to the nutritional and organoleptic value of products. There is a thought that this sleeping “giant” is awakening e.g. chocolate enrobed frozen products. And not to be missed out on is the element of fresh being equivalent to frozen depending on the product involved.

8. Private labels. IMS says the success of discount retailers has lead to a significant rise in private labels and product launches in this sector has increased on every continent since 2009. Cargill says that private labels are a brand on their own and not playing catch-up anymore. Is there an opportunity for Food Technology at CPUT to develop its own private label attached to products? I am sure you would have seen at PnP and Woolworths the number of private labels popping up. The alcohol-free malted beverage by the name of Breva is one such…..however, an aquaintance did want to know on a lighter note what the point of this beverage was:-)

9. New routes for fruit. There is a growing demand for products containing “real fruit”. Attached to this is the demand for natural flavours and colours. This need has not been fully exploited locally, again in terms of indigenous ingredients and raw materials. Just a few minutes ago a client walked into my office with a juice produced from an indiigenous fruit which grows wild and has not been used for production. The colour was stunning…..he did not tell me the name of the fruit though:-(

10. Rich, chewy and crunchy. There is an expected response to terms such as crunchy, gooey, velvety and other adjectives related to texture. Front of pack text and cut-through products to show such are expected to receive more attention to consumers, partly due to the mouth-feel and also due to, in some cases expectations attached to healthier products. Crunch munch eat your lunch!

The Agrifood Technology Station and the Department of Food Technology will keep these in mind in terms of training as well as advising clients.

Is it possible to conduct an academic and practical analysis of elements of the food innovation chasm as it exists in South Africa towards identifying products, processes and stakeholders for the design of an implementation plan towards utilizing existing, under-utilized or un-utilized solutions in new scenarios?

In terms of a number of national policy-based statements a well as rhetoric in the public domain, the term “innovation chasm” has cropped up regularly. This is true for the Department of Science & Technology (DST) via the Technology Innovation Agency (TIA), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the now Department of Higher Education and Training and also the Provincial Government Western Cape (PGWC) as well as numerous other state, public/private and private organizations.

In the second draft of the Industrial Policy Action Plan (February 2011) of the DTI, this particular issue of the chasm is addressed. On page 76 three levels of intervention are suggested regarding commercialization, one of which is exactly something which this proposal addresses viz.:
Consolidation of existing commercial opportunities from research work previously carried out but which has not been fully commercialised and with respect to technologies that can be acquired in order to upscale production capabilities in defined sectors where opportunities exist.
These references or statements to the “innovation chasm” have different connotations, including those related to very broad issues and also, at the other end of the spectrum, very narrow ones e.g. international, continental, national and local. This is further narrowed per economic and industry sector. This is so for the food industry.

For the purposes of this post, the term “innovation chasm” will be deemed to include the following general concepts:
a. The gap between  the fields of academic study versus the needs of the industry itself;
b. The existing body of knowledge with respect to these fields that had not yet been  applied;
c. The existing body of un-expressed needs and potential solutions vested in experts in the field.

This project, if realised, would aim to deal with the concepts outlined above by:
d.  Researching the literature and the industry for innovation gaps;
e.  Matching unused solutions to existing problems as well as not-yet-identified gaps;
f.  Identifying not-yet-explored problems and solutions relevant to this exercise.

A potential scope fo works for such a project would include the following:
1. ATS to agree with other service providers on the scope of the contract, projected work and costs related to this.
2. Sign an appropriately worded contract with all service providers involved, including primary and/or secondary funding agency.
3. ATS to coordinate all further activities, including construction of a project plan.
4. Identify appropriate academics, students, retired experts in the food industry (local and international), entrepreneurs, consultants willing to contribute and companies willing to add value to the project.
5. Construct an interview template for each category of person identified above in order to elicit information such as the following, keeping in mind that this relates to advanced technologies or ideas:
5.1  Related patents, especially unused patents, patents open to adjustment and re-patenting;
5.2  Potentially new products or product extensions;
5.3  Potential process adjustments or process development required;
5.4  Researchable problems, both science-related and otherwise;
5.5  Fields of study requiring investigation (short- and long-term);
5.6  Scientific literature in the public domain that has not yet been applied in a practical context;
5.7  Business models linked to commercialization of any of the above.
6. Identify and employ:
6.1  Appropriate expert interviewers relevant to a field or category of persons to conduct such interviews.
6.2  Appropriate patent-savvy experts to search patent databases.
6.3  Appropriate academics to search the scientific literature, especially journals and, more importantly, technical bulletins and conference proceedings to identify new opportunities.
7. Process the data and compile recommendations regarding bridging segments in the innovation chasm.
8. Moderate recommendations via an independent expert panel.
9. Construct an implementation plan based on recommendations (on the assumption of a      conducive set of circumstances for success).
10. Construct final report and sign off project.

Key perofmance indicators for such a project would possibly be:
A. Scope of work constructed and put into Gantt chart format.
B. Agreements reached and contracts signed with service providers.
C. Project plan produced by ATS.
D. A list of target individuals/organizations and entities produced based on authenticated/traceable procedures  and processes.
E. Questionnaire templates/guidelines constructed and agreed to with ATS.
F. Service providers appointed to conduct field-work.
G. Report produced by ATS encapsulating and summarizing data forthcoming from the exercise.
H. Final report produced after moderation process completed.
I.  Project evaluation report produced by funders/ATS.
J. Decision made on how to execute or implement elements of the report.

Anybody want to join us on such a journey???

1. PREAMBLE

This document attempts to paint the existing research status in the Station as well as its future direction (2015 – 2018). This is done in order to ensure complete understanding of the nature of the Station, its research priorities versus TIA targets and existing and planned projects on the horizon.

2. WHAT IS RESEARCH IN AN ATS CONTEXT?

It is critical that the term “research” in the context of Technology Stations generally, and ATS in particular, be explained. In a pure academic sense and environment, research is generally associated with scholarly reading, proposal writing with academic rigor attached to methods and processes finally resulting in peer reviewed publication in an accredited journal or protected property in the form of patents or trade secrets.

Another less rigorous definition would be to further include experimentation, trialling and numerous analytical techniques and processes attached to the remit of ATS in the broader food sectors. This does not exclude the definition given above but rather adds to and expand upon it.

ATS rather attaches itself to the second definition for completeness and also in order for it to be able to meet the mandate and targets of its funding agency as well as that of the CPUT research community. However, this does in itself pose certain challenges which are addressed further in this document.

3.  EXPECTATIONS FROM TIA

CPUT signs a rolling 3-year Grant Agreement with TIA. The existing Grant Agreement, which ends on 31^st March 2015. As much as the Grant Agreement is fairly broadly worded, the expectations of TIA in terms of reporting (quarterly and annually) puts much flesh to the bone on which the Stations gnaw. Furthermore, TIAs own mandate also puts further flesh to this bone. The two key areas of delivery are innovation support and technology transfer. Under these two key areas are sub-areas which again are neatly summarized in the statistical reporting table alluded to earlier.

4.  ATS TARGETS AND REPORTAGE TO TIA

It is worthwhile noting the spread of activities required in terms of the activities of Station staff, both in terms of conducting activities and meeting targets, as well as ensuring day to day running of the Station against set standards and also institutional constraints. The one key area monitored is Product & Process Development.

The set targets are partly dictated by TIA based on the Technology Station collective commitment to overall targets for TIA i.e. some Stations “cross-subsidize” other Stations in terms of targets due to poor performance. Hidden in all of this is a network of pressures which impact on Stations, many times by taking away capacity from core activities i.e. delivery of innovation support and technology transfer to clients. Some of this pressure is related to maintaining data w.r.t. clients and projects. This is required as evidence when reporting to TIA and has fast become an administrative challenge for most Stations.

The extended agenda and minutes of the last two to three Board and Advisory Committee meetings have also referred to the increasing non-technical workload added to the Stations plate. Furthermore, suggestions and plans to alleviate this have also been tabled, including conducting a Strategic Planning workshop on 30^th June 2014 facilitated by NMMU Innoventon (Downstream Chemicals Technology Station). This plan is still in draft form but has been presented to the Board and Advisory Committee. It intended that this be finalized by the end of 2014.

5. ATS RESEARCH STRATEGY

Considering the nuanced definitions of “research” previously and also the need to be seen to be conducting a bigger chunk of the more “formal” version of such research, ATS had previously taken a decision to push its own research envelope using the following tools:

5.1 The TIA mandate includes the need to use expert individuals from external consulting community and experts in other institutions. This is in place with ATS cherry picking projects which it can conduct internally while calling in external experts to assist where it cannot.

5.2 The TIA call also is for internal experts i.e. academics in the teaching area, to be used to assist with research projects and routine. This was the original concept of operation of the Stations as imported from Germany (Steinbeis concept). This also was why the Stations were placed at tertiary institutions i.e. easy to tap into the existing expertise available. This however has not translated well in that, for a variety of reasons, academics have not bought into the concept as easily as was planned. Part of it is related to their workload and part to difficulties associated with remunerating them within the relevant CPUT policy.

To facilitate the uptake of “formal” research, ATS adopted two models which work in tandem. The first is the based on the understanding that most clients, especially SMMEs, do not always want protracted, statistically sound, publishable research conducted but quick answers to meet their own deadlines. They often want this with the known risks attached to such research. At the same time, we may see a longer term project that is suited to qualifications-based and/or publishable research (even in some cases at the B.Tech. level). In this instance we negotiate with such clients to run a two-phase model.

The second model is the development of joint research niche areas with Food Technology by which ATS sources and/or directs appropriate projects to research groups in Food Technology (and by implication any other research group or specialist at CPUT). The client again is written into a contract governing such research and its potential intellectual property in consultation with the TTO. This has allowed a seamless research interface between the two units and ATS is selling this concept to industry presently to attract appropriate research projects. This does not mean that areas outside of these niches will not be addressed.

Further development of this model is being done by defining research group members for specific (but not all) joint niche areas, examples of which are also given overleaf. This is a work in progress presently. It must be noted here that a decision by both units is being considered whereby Food Technology adopts the ATS draft strategic plan, a move which is helping the development of the seamless approach mentioned.

At this point, having sketched the demands, challenges, constraints and reporting requirements facing ATS as well as its present model for procuring and conducting research (“formal” and otherwise), it is appropriate to sketch the present status of research in the group.

6. ATS RESEARCH STATUS

ATS is conducting research presently in the following ways:

6.1 Accepting project on its own and conducting the research internally.
6.2 Accepting client projects and adopting a Supervisor and post-graduate from Food Technology.
6.3 ATS staff conducting research toward a post-graduate qualification(s).
6.4 Employing completing M. Tech. students as Technical Assistants emanating from 5.2.
6.5 Generating internal projects for future joint work with potential clients.

All the above (except 6.5) involve clients that have approached ATS or Food Technology. The following is a brief description of work being conducted specifically related to research, whether “formal” or not and with outcomes and timelines. This does not include other jobs being conducted by ATS or the collective, some of which includes more routine analytical work and product & process development.

A. An Intern of the Station is conducting a Masters study on improving vinegar production. A recent trip to Bejing Forestry University  where vinegar-related work is also being done has a potential student exchange relationship built into it. Pending the outcomes and the final contract, at least some of the results may be embargoed in terms of publication in a journal, but these aspects will be patented. The construct of the study is such that at least part of the results, if published, will not infringe on the confidentiality  agreement with the client.

B. A fish drying project is presently being conducted by ATS with a client. It had been derived from a Service Learning project with Food Technology. ATS has taken over the experimental design and activities. The project essentially aims to validate an existing artisanal practice, the end of product of which would be appropriate training manuals and a Service Learning roll-out to coastal communities by the client.

C. Over the last 3 years ATS has been hosting the Blue Karoo Trust, an Eastern Cape social development entity which required assistance with fish processing trials, this including      mincing, canning, retorting and analysis.

D. Further work on fish is planned and in progress. It is envisaged that the data produced would be sought after by the fishing industry since no such work has been done in South Africa on some of the local fish species.

E. ATS had recently completed a date sugar extraction and crystallization project for a client where the brief was to determine the maximum extractable and crystallizable sugar from a date varietal.

F. ATS had undertaken to participate (and co-supervise) a project dealing with the use of milk from cross-bred cows for the production of appropriate dairy products to monitor the retention of conjugated linoleic acid during the processing phase.

G. ATS is also involved in its own internal method development in order to supply services in terms of histamine, MCPD, alginate and inulin analysis. This is in keeping with its theme of      niche analytical services for industry.

H. ATS has generated a few B.Tech. project investigations. One such is marula fruit waste press cake produced after oil expression. ATS will further look to team up with NWU in terms of them having expertise with supercritical fluid extraction of oil from marula.

I. ATS staff also participates in providing routine services as well as casual training to a number of registered Masters students from Analytical Chemistry, Food Technology, BTB Lab and      Chemical Engineering. This is done pro bono and is based on the expertise residing in ATS analytical staff as well as the fact that the relevant equipment is well-maintained and reliable. There is no scientific recognition for this but it is assumed (but not insisted upon) that ATS is recognized in whatever thesis or publication is produced, hence linking these services formally to research outputs.

J. A further strong research niche area is that of Maillard Reaction Product/Lipid Oxidation where both ATS and Food Technology staff are active. Funding for a collaborative study between CPUT and the University of Beunos Aires was received recently.

7. CONCLUDING REMARKS

All of the contents of this document is based on our experiences to date and is documented in staff meeting minutes, reports to clients, student reports, quarterly and annual reports to TIA, minutes of Board meetings and of Advisory Committee meetings. This document then merely contextualizes existing and planned research collaborations by ATS and also summarizes those projects considered pertinent to this debate. Other activities of the Station are not touched on in the document.

L. Dolley
13^th October 2014

The plan (an update of a serially updated document from a while back) has implications for, and responses from, relevant sectors of the food industry generally. For ATS, there are specific implications in terms of a “national agenda” and strategic directions. Some notes, observations and potential activities are outlined below in a rambling format but does follow the document sequentially.

A section on Transversal interventions on pages 49 – 50 of the document (available at http://www.thedti.gov.za/DownloadFileAction?id=851 ) touches on traceability of bio-analytical measurements in SA and also on providing reference measurement capacility for pesticides and also dioxins, dioxin-like substances and furans amongst others. This is entirely in keeping with a previous acknowledgement of the shortage of quality analytical services with quck turnaround times bythe DTI (and by the industry – anecdotal evidence). ATS still maintains its wish and intention to stick to servcing a the niche analytical market (low demand analytical techniques) as part of its own contribution in this regard.

Page 57 neatly describes our own observations in the space in which we work that innovation in SA is mostly incremental (based on % turnover generated from new innovations) rather than brand new. Furthermore, 65.4% of SA firms are involved with innovation but only 27.2% manage to bring these to market (data taken from South African Innovation Survey 2005 – 2007). An interesting recent blog by Dr. Shawn Cunningham of Mesopartner (http://shawncunningham.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/assisting-firms-to-improve-their-research-and-development-activities/ ) specifically highlights the tendency of firms to link innovation to customer complaints and specifications rather than to curiosity by staff in the firm concerned. He suggest de-linking R&D from such complaints or suggestions and rather to focus on taking interested, curious personnel (and form other companies) who are totally different from each other and “lock them in a room” to see what comes out of the wash. Interesting idea and not common practice in this country.

The second bullet on page 59 refers to something which has been on the periphery of the ATS plan i.e. the need to survey what R&D and innovation support initiatives exist, map these and identify possible mechanisms to create better linkages between them. This suggest that, just like universities, a silo mentality exists in terms of such initiatives and organizations. ATS had in 2011 developed a proposal to scan the industry and academic landscape to identify elements that could address the oft mentioned “innovation chasm”. The proposal specifically intended to identify technologies that exist but have not been applied in industry (both from academic sources and industry sources) and identify “grey” knowledge i.e. the huge experience embedded in recently required experts) with a view of putting all three together in a coordinated fashion i.e. problems, knowledge and experts.

This is further touched on under Technology Commercialization Strategy on page 61 in terms of overcoming the “valley of death” i.e. gap between R&D and commercialization. Importantly, to the purists to whom the word innovation means absolutely brand spanking new technology, akcnowledgement is given to both new-to-the-world and new-to-the-market initiatives that can ot cpature economic and social value.!!!!

Under the section on Sectoral Interventions (page 84 onward) reference is made to a number of sectors ripe for intervention viz. processing of cassava into starch, contribution of crops to biofuels and the milling sector still largely being in the hands of a few large industry players. This points to, amongst others, the need to develop a local source of cassava and also to encourage establishment of small millers close to the supply of maize and soybean feedstock. The latter has both regional implications in turns of reducing commodity costs and also to supply a gorwing international (South American) market for such raw materials. Making it even more local to CPUT, this also touches on confectionery products (chocolate and confectionery factory for WIlly Wonka), cereal-based crops and related product development and generally better beneficiation of the raw materials at hand and which could be produced on a bigger scale in future. These fit inot the research niches of ATS and the Department of Food Technology.

Aquaculture is still in the mix in terms of the need, and plan, to promote private investment in this sector. This also falls into a niche research area which ATS currently services via an aquaculture initiative in the Eatsern Cape and possibly via a newly identified niche in terms of wild freshwater fish. Watch this space!!!

In a typcially broad fashion, IPA also refers to Green Industries, a terms which in a flash brings to mind wind, solar and toher forms of clean energy. However, this “broad definition” actually needs to be teased out into other elemnts what “green” really is. ATS has previosuly been invovled in either product or process development where “green” is an element. Since it has become a KPI for the Technology Station movement, this is being looked at in greater detail presently by ATS. Examples of such are bio-remediation or greening is by working on waste from the olive industry value-adding to marine by-catches. Watch this space for more!!!

Finally, on page 127, reference is made to the overarching principle of employing Advanced Manufacturing strategies in the food industry generally:
A. Product innovation via new or advanced technologies (novel technologies are part of the research niches previously alluded to – see below).
B. Process innovation: new methods and techniques.
C. Organizational or business model innovation.

Our research niches and collaborations, we believe, supports this Action Plan.

Human Resources
Established: 2005
Staff Members in 2006 = 2: Manager, Technician
Staff Members in 2014 = 8: Manager, Administrator, Senior Technologist, Technologist, Technicians X 4
Equity Profile 2014 by Gender: Females X 4; Males X 4
Equity Profile by Race: Black X 4; Coloured X 3; White X 1

FInancial Model
CAPEX and OPEX Funding: Grant fromTechnology Innovation Agency (previously Tshumisano Trust)
Costs Recovered on subsidized work completed – “income”
Other funding agency support – based on individual projects
Provincial Government and other parastatal interaction based on services rendered

TIA operational Support for last 3 financial years:
2011/2012: R2.648 million
2012/2013: R3.419 million
2013/2014: R4.308 million

Costs Recovered for last 3 financial years:
2011/2012: R272 000.00
2012/2013: R411 000.00
2013/2014: R265 000.00

Number of Company Contacts Over 7 Years
More than 800
> 85% SMMEs