How to build a good research partnership: A Q&A with Dr. Kit Delgado on his work with Progressive

CHIBE is highlighting the ways our affiliates have created successful research partnerships. This is the first in a series of articles illustrating effective collaborations. Are you a CHIBE investigator looking for a partner for your research, or do you have a partnership story to tell? Contact chibe@pennmedicine.upenn.edu to connect with the CHIBE Steering Committee.

How do great research collaborations happen? CHIBE Associate Director Dr. M. Kit Delgado cultivated a successful partnership with Progressive Insurance and TrueMotion (now called Cambridge Mobile Telematics) on a series of studies testing ways to reduce handheld phone use while driving. The results led to important findings that behavioral economics tools can help reduce distracted driving by 20-28%. See how Dr. Delgado crafted this partnership in this Q&A below.

How did this partnership come about — Did Progressive come to you, or did you reach out to Progressive?

It was a series of fortunate opportunities:

• Using CHIBE-CTSA pilot funding, we were already piloting approaches to reduce cell phone use while driving with a start-up tech vendor. But there were limitations with the technology, and the company no longer exists.
• Dr. Katy Milkman was on the Freakonomics podcast talking about applied behavioral economics and field experiments. A representative from the smartphone telematics company TrueMotion reached out to connect with Katy. Knowing I was working in this area, Katy forwarded them to me. We developed an initial research service agreement to pilot TrueMotion’s app to collect data on driving behaviors on the phone in a pilot study.
• At the same time, we successfully competed for funding from the Federal Highway Administration, which put out an RFA on applying behavioral economics for reducing distracted driving. We were going to use our old software vendor, but now had a much better vendor in TrueMotion.
• Based on the success of our work and relationship we built, TrueMotion connected us with their contacts at Progressive to see if they would be interested in doing a field study to test different strategies for reducing phone use while driving in the context of their existing Snapshot Mobile usage-based insurance program.
• After several meetings and an in-person visit to Progressive’s HQ, they agreed to move forward. Find the press release on the 3-way partnership here.

What sort of people did you work with at Progressive and TrueMotion?

At Progressive, we worked with the product manager and analyst for their usage-based insurance program. At TrueMotion, we worked with a product and customer experience manager, their data scientist, and a member of their software development team. TrueMotion was later acquired by Cambridge Mobile Telematics.

Who was involved in the early talks with them? How did you determine who needed to be in the loop at each step of the way from the Penn side?

We met several times with the members of the TrueMotion and Progressive team to align on goals and scope of work and to set up and to launch the project. I usually included a project manager from my research staff. I reached out to CHIBE Director Dr. Kevin Volpp and CHIBE Managing Director Joelle Friedman for advice and examples of prior contracts, which informed our process.

How long did this process take from initial reach-out to starting the work together?

Probably 9-12 months.

How did you navigate things like what a contract should look like or how to share data or how to create a SOW?

We came to agreement on what the scope of work should be in terms of the study design and who would do what, and the study protocol was included as an attachment in the contract.

What advice would you give someone looking to partner with a major organization?

It helps to have a personal connection who can vouch for you. It’s essential that the research informs their business operations and aligns with their business interests and doesn’t require a lot of extra resources in terms of time and effort from the company. Having funding to cover our time and effort on the university side and the research expenses was essential.

If you could go back to the start of the project, is there anything you would have done differently?

We did a second trial with Progressive, this time using Way to Health to program the interventions rather than relying on Progressive’s software vendor to program the interventions and run the study. It’s much easier when you have control and you’re not relying on the good will and in-kind support company to fully execute the study and balance with operational priorities and timelines.

What was the biggest challenge you encountered?

Coming to an agreement on the design of interventions and the study to align with things Progressive was interested in testing and that would be feasible within the constraints of their program. It wasn’t hard, just took time.

Was there anything that took longer than you expected?

A contract with multiple partners takes time, especially if it’s the first time working together.

Did you navigate things with Penn Legal? Any advice there?

We allowed Progressive to write the first draft using our protocol. This made it easier rather than the other way around.  

Anything else you’d add?

It was a lot of work, but one of the more fun and impactful projects I’ve ever gotten to work on. In our first study, we enrolled over 2,000 drivers from 40+ states in 72 hours. Now they can use the data to directly inform their operations and product to hopefully create the win-win of better safety and better business.

You can see the related releases from the two trials we published here and here.

We used this experience to develop a similar partnership with GM OnStar to study ways to increase seatbelt use. The results from this trial are undergoing journal peer review and will be forthcoming.

Related content: 5 ways behavioral economics can help promote safe driving.