Hank Shakes the Technical Ladder

Gale Cutler, Research-Technology Management: May–June 2007

With the retirement of Tom Evers after 20 years as XYZ's R&D vice president, company management was forced to look outside for a replacement. They eventually selected Henry (Hank) Sympson, a senior scientist from one of the company's suppliers. Hank boasted a long list of significant achievements, many of which had benefited XYZ, so it was not surprising that management looked to him to revitalize some of its R&D activities and improve the development of new or improved products, which had been lagging in the last few years. Hank set to work quickly to acquaint himself with the technical personnel makeup of R&D. Going over organization charts and personnel records with Pete Gettings, the director of R&D personnel. Hank commented, "I see a scattering of people—they seem to be fairly senior—with titles like 'Staff Scientist,' 'Staff Engineer,' and 'Principal Scientist.' Who are they and what do they do?"

Pete explained that these were the top two levels of XYZ's technical ladder—its top technical talent. "How do they get promoted to the top of the technical ladder and to whom do they report?" Hank asked. Pete replied, "Most of them were technically top notch and had run out of salary room in their present assignment—so we made two new grades at the 'staff' and 'principal scientist' level to give them more salary room. But there is also one case of a senior researcher who was made manager of a department but didn't do well in that role. Because he had been an excellent researcher, we didn't punish him for his inept management, we simply relieved him as a manager and promoted him to a top spot on the technical ladder, which kept him at the same salary level he'd had as a manager.

"The technical ladder as we use it is largely recognition for outstanding technical performance—sort of a long term bonus," Pete explained. "Technical ladder personnel continue to report to the same department they were in before their promotion to these top spots." "These people are not a cohesive unit as I see it," Hank observed. "They just keep doing the same research work and report in the same structure they previously did." "That's correct," Pete replied. "The technical ladder, as I said, is largely a reward for previous work. We expect them to continue to be good researchers and also to spend some time watching out for new technologies and also for any technologies that might threaten our business. However, mostly they have just continued in their normal research assignment."

Misusing the Talent?

Hank retorted that he didn't think XYZ was using its top technical talent properly at all. "You are emphasizing recognition when I think the emphasis should be on utilization. You've just rewarded people for past efforts. I see the top levels of the technical ladder as a separate unit made up of folks who have demonstrated certain characteristics." Hank listed the following:

• A source of sustained value creation for the company through their technological contributions

• A recognized innovator in their technical field

• A go-to person in their technical area for help on hard challenges and problems

• A mentor for young scientists and engineers

• A strategic business thinker who is adept at linking new technology programs to significant business results

• An idea leader with the skills to work an issue within the organization

"I also think it's wrong to leave top-level members of the technical ladder scattered throughout the organization," Hank continued. "They need a definite amount of autonomy, access to resources, and interaction with top management. As soon as we can accomplish it practically, I want these folks organized into a separate unit and I want them to report to me." Hank told Pete that he expected these people to continue to do research in the field of their expertise but also to function as:

• A corporate conscience for challenging management's thinking about technology, related business practices and strategy

• An effective technological networker, both inside the company and in the external scientific community

• A technology champion for emerging technological initiatives with important business potential

• A leader who helps to strengthen the technical ladder by fostering employee development and strategic thinking about the company's technology needs

• Gatekeepers in key technical and business processes

Pete thought a few moments and replied, "This is really a major organizational change. How soon do you want to implement it?" Hank said he would go over this with the department heads and then meet with the entire top technical ladder group. "They will take a major share of their present work with them but that research work will be secondary to their main function as technology champions. This is really a strengthening of our R&D effort, particularly in the direction of new technologies. We may discover, in time, that some of the folks we are now considering to be top technical ladder material really don't belong there and will have to be moved back to regular research assignments. We should think about how to cross that bridge when the time comes."

Tapping Industry Peer Networks

Hank explained further that he needed to get XYZ's top technical ladder members into networking—connecting to key scientific/engineering communities both internally and externally. He had heard about industry peer networks—networks of noncompeting peers from other areas of the country and from abroad. More than trade associations, industry peer networks comprise small groups of noncompeting peers who gather regularly to exchange information. They have to do this in an atmosphere of significant intimacy and trust. The principal problems they can help with are inertia and myopia. The inability of U.S. manufacturers to respond effectively in the 1980s to the entry of Japanese autos, cameras, copiers, and televisions is a prime example of how immersion in a local context may blind companies to disruptive external events. That's myopia. Inertia is based on a sense that things will always continue as they are.

"If we can get our top technical ladder people hooked into some sort of industry peer group it might stimulate us to make some performance-enhancing changes," Hank exclaimed. "I'm confident that if we get our top technical ladder people deployed in an optimal manner and urge them to do their best, they can be expected to make strong contributions in four areas: challenging management's thinking about technology and strategy; effective technological networking inside the company and in the external scientific community; championing technological initiatives with important business potential; and strengthening the technical ladder by fostering employee development. Pete, I'm anxious to meet with these people and get them enthused about my ideas of what being a member of the top of the technical ladder means!"

Questions