This month we asked Robotics by Invitation panel members Rich Mahoney and Frank Tobe for their take on what policy-makers need to do to keep economic development apace with important developments in robotics. Here’s what they have to say …

Rich Mahoney on “What do policy-makers need to do to keep pace with economic development?”

I am not sure how to describe the specifics of what policy makers should do, but I think there are two gaps that policy makers should think about that are associated with the economic development impact of robotics: sufficient funding to support an emerging robotics marketplace; and  detailed descriptions of the innovations needed to solve specific problems …

Read more →

Frank Tobe on “What do policy-makers need to do to keep pace with economic development?”

I think the biggest thing happening today is the acceptance of the low-cost Baxter and Universal robots into SMEs and small factories everywhere.  Sales will likely be 2% of the total; 5% in 2014 and possibly 15% in 2015. That’s growth! And that’s before the might of the big four robot makers start selling their low-cost entry robots for SMEs …

Read more → 

1. sufficient funding to support an emerging robotics marketplace, and
2. detailed descriptions of the innovations needed to solve specific problems.

The recent US National Robotics Initiative did a good job of coordinating marketing of existing funding opportunities in robotics R&D across government agencies, but was directed only at R&D.  Governments can drive innovation in economic development as well by creating acquisition opportunities, or where the government does not purchase directly, by aligning policy with requirements in the market. This is a little-used scenario for robotics so far, outside perhaps acquisition by the military of IED-defeat robots. Other markets that could benefit include agriculture, environmental protection, and healthcare.

To my second point, in order to develop economic incentives through acquisition or policy change, government agencies need well-articulated target solutions that provide a desired impact, and some sense of how acquisition budgets or policy would be aligned with those solutions. DARPA is very good at driving innovation this way. It does not say, ‘please work on robots related to the following list of healthcare areas,’ but instead, its Program Managers provide a very specific description of the robot they would like to see demonstrated, with a corresponding need that will be filled when that demonstration is accomplished. DARPA’s mission is associated with national defense. So, from a policy perspective, it would be valuable for various other government agencies to describe the robots that solve specific problems in their sector.

There are many other issues that will need to be addressed as robots emerge in these different markets but, typically, specific markets are very good at adapting standards as technology evolves. UAV-based solutions for agriculture, for instance, are forcing policy-makers to address laws related to our airspace for these types of devices.  The emerging self-driving vehicle market is leading to changes in driving laws.  But the markets police themselves.  Although there is a lot of attention to new developments in robotics, the actual level of applied innovation is relatively modest, and is throttled at some level by the factors I have highlighted.

Read more answers →

This post is part of Robohub’s Jobs Focus.

At this stage, I don’t think the core technology is the primary differentiator for the success of emerging companies. One aspect of robotics commercialization that is often highlighted, but often overlooked, is the fact that the actual business value of a robotics company can take many years to validate. The existing base of successful robotics companies, Intuitive Surgical, iRobot, etc., all took close to a decade or more to become successful. The basic premise is that low-cost hardware is helping to support more startups. But the success of a start-up is based on management ability, and it will take time to see which companies have the technology, target market, and team to succeed. Going forward, these teams will be the ones that reveal the real value of robotics, and the resulting impact on jobs.

I think there are two trends for management teams to watch regarding jobs and the emerging personal robotics market. The first is New Efficiencies.  In this case, emerging robotics technology is integrated into emerging markets as part of the overall business model and bottom line performance. In this case, there is a growth trend with respect to a new market, and robotics plays a role in the success of the emerging business solution by automating key activities that keep costs down. The jobs story in this case is usually a good one. New jobs are created as companies succeed. This is what is happening in the warehouse logistics market right now.  Driven by the competition to provide same day delivery, Amazon, Wallmart, Target, etc. are all building out new distribution facilities closer to population areas. Robotics technology (Kiva is a well-known example) is being used to create super efficient product handling.  These new warehouses become a source of jobs, although with different requirements than the traditional warehouse job.

Motorika’s ReoGo.

The second trend, and the one that is more compelling to me, is High-Value Gap Filling. In this case, the robot product works closely with a skilled human operator to augment the operator, performing functions that would not be done easily otherwise. I spent several years introducing a robot to support therapists working with stroke patients to rehabilitate arm function following a stroke. Our product focused exclusively on arm therapy, where it has been shown that intense rehabilitation can lead to better outcomes than were traditionally thought possible. The device is used by patients to perform hundreds of engaged arm movements per therapy session. Therapists know how to perform this type of therapy, but the current treatment landscape, which is very complicated for stroke recovery, rarely has room to just focus on arm movements, and actual arm engagements are in the dozens per session. In this case, the robot helps the therapist help the patient, but in no way could replace the therapist’s knowledge and experience.

A related example of Gap Filling is the use of robotics to address needs in agriculture. The opportunities are in part driven by the lack of available labor resulting from recent changes in immigration policy. It is likely that the labor market in agriculture will be impacted going forward.

Remember also, that the robotics market is where personal computing was back in the 1980s. Few would have been able to predict the types of jobs that would emerge related to personal and mobile computing, social networking, etc. Robotics has the potential to result in similar game-changing new markets, with similar implications on the jobs market.

Only time, and innovative management teams, will tell.

See all the posts in Robohub’s Jobs Focus →