1.2. A PERSPECTIVE ON R&D MANAGEMENT

The ideas presented in this book focus on ways to improve the productivity of R&D organizations and foster excellence in such organizations. The book is primarily aimed at principal investigators, their colleagues, and supervisors. As indicated, others may also find the information presented here interesting.

In mathematics or physics, most concepts can be readily judged as useful or worthless. Management concepts, on the other hand, are more difficult to evaluate. The following example might illustrate the case.

One well-known scientist was recruited to be vice president of a biotechnology company. In trying to prepare for this important new position he took a course at the California Institute of Technology on "Managing Research and Development." After completing the course the scientist felt that it had failed to teach him how to prioritize and manage research projects. On his evaluation he stated that the course had been "expensive and worthless." In response to this criticism, the course program director pointed out that the scientist had "completely misunderstood the goals of the course." According to the director, the course was geared toward planning research and development activities rather than managing scientists (Wall Street Journal, November 10, 1986).

Managing researchers is one of the most daunting tasks a manager can undertake. It's not clear how one plans or anticipates a "scientific breakthrough." If this is the case, is there any point in undertaking extensive efforts in strategic planning or doing any planning at all? Scientists are thought to be dedicated to ideas and research. However, as shown in Figure 1.1, a majority of the R&D is devoted to product development and applied research, and less to basic research. The challenge then is to provide a mix of activities to achieve organizational goals and sustain the researcher's motivation and curiosity, which are essential to scientific breakthroughs and product development.

The effect public policy and management decisions have on the resources available for R&D is well understood; one also needs to consider and understand the important role engineers and scientists can and should play in developing science policy. Of the approximately 595,000 doctoral scientists and engineers employed in the United States as of 2003, approximately 372,000 work in R&D. Of the 372,000, it is estimated that about 60,000 work in management of R&D. The remaining doctoral scientists and engineers are involved in many forms of professional practice, in addition to the substantial number who teach (184,000). Those involved in professional services and consulting number nearly 96,000. Consulting engineers and scientists undertake creative activities that are, in many ways, responsible for closing the loop between research and development and application. Table 1.1 shows the primary and secondary work activities of doctoral scientists and engineers (note that respondents could choose more than one category).

A doctorate is a research degree, and the majority of scientists and engineers with PhDs work in research, development, and teaching. It is significant that relatively few engineers, as compared to scientists, hold doctoral degrees. In 2003, 101,500 engineers held doctorates but this represented only about 7 percent of all employed engineers. Among scientists, however, about 23 percent hold doctorates (Science and Engineering Indicators, 2003).

We favor managers of R&D organizations with high-level technical skills, because studies have clearly shown that where supervisors were rated highest in technical skills the research groups were most innovative. And where supervisors did not possess excellent technical skills (but had high-level administrative skills), the research groups were least innovative (Farris, 1982, p. 340). These findings in no way minimize the importance of administrative skills, but rather point to a fundamental need for a supervisor in an R&D organization who possesses excellent technical skills. Ideally, both kinds of skills should be available to a manager. Consequently, the role of a scientist^[] in managing R&D organizations has been and will continue to be an important one.

^[] Whenever we are considering engineering, technology, or pure science for the purpose of this book, the word scientist is used to apply to a person (engineer or scientist) who possesses the technical knowledge and skills that are essential to the work of an R&D organization.

To make sure we communicate effectively, we must first define some basic terms. We will do this in the next section.