/^%^CH&s^^
•iJ^'vM...
ALFRED
P.
SLOAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMEN
THE KNOWLEDGE BASE FOR EDUCATION
OF RESEARCH MANAGERS
Donald
May, 19b6
G.
Marquis
1^200-66
MASSACHUSETTS
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
50 MEMORIAL DRIVE
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139
•>
i*
-sPi'
<• •
&
THE KNOWLEDGE BASE FOR EDUCATION
OF RESEARCH MANAGERS
Donald
May,
19fc>t3
G.
Marquis
#200-bb
Paper presented at the 19th National Conference on the
Administration of Research, Newport Beach, California,
October b-8, 19o;5, and published in the Proceedings by
the Denver Research Institute, University of Denver,
April, 19bt>.
iw.-iu._. ,'..rrj
..
.
,
p
^
^"fr(-
iUG'7l9g?
Third Session
'5
o-
THE KNOWLEDGE BASE FOR EDUCATION
OF RESEARCH MANAGERS
Donald G. Marquis
Professor of Industrial Manui^ement
Alfred P. Sloan School of Manaf>emenl
Massachmetls
Dr. Williams has been looking
like to turn
interested in research
we
cause
in
my
now
our attention
are
all in
management,
I
In the latter part of the nineteenth century,
are
management
is
at this
moment
cal difference
the
history
in
in
financial
want
to tell
you why
I
believe this.
think
I
During
we would
and distribution, with the advances in communicaand transport making mass markets possible. At
the present time the critical difference between an
effective and a less effective organization is in the
way they manage research, innovation, and the utili-
At various
organization has depended upon competence
trade and
company was how
well
made
they
the difference
new
technologies.
Research management
managed
was manage-
all
the functional activities.
Compare,
uncertainty.
now
trial
you can do
public
and
he held the Chairmanship
their
eral Electric
he
is
such
fields
his
Ph.D.
certainty
new product development.
and engineers
Scientists
from other employees in their expectations,
values, their attitudes, and their motivations.
many
is
so great that
it
results as a basis for
is
hard to use
planning
in
the
future.
This analysis leads to the proposition that a good
is one who can deal capably with
and therefore he should be
problems,
these special
Ford
research manager
and Space Administration.
a consultant for the Genother corporations.
feedback loop
knowledge of
at
paid
more than other managers.
It is
also of interest
to note that in these times of rapid change, the top
Hi":
management tasks in an organization
sound more and more like those of a
and publication have been
social psychology, and
as learning,
human behavior
degree of
in the
Company and
contributions in research
the
and University of Michi-
private organizations, including the
time,
the
partments of psychology:
Yale University (1942-45)
has served as considtani to
the National Aeronautics
is
The third source is the diflSculty in measuring results when each research task is unique and never repeated. Even if you could measure results, the delay
two distinguished de-
Foundation, the National Science Foundation, and
At the present
in
a professional person.
differ
gan (1945-57). Dr. Marquis obtained
He
as
Before join-
ing the Institute in 1959,
of
Yale in 1932.
first
example,
The second source of difficulty is that you are
managing a new kind of employee who views himself
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.
for
is
the
at
There are three sources
with which you can plan and schedule production or
inventory or sales or cash flow compared with what
professor of Indus-
Management
not only the critical dif-
The
of this special difficulty.
Donald G. Marquis
is
ference between a good organization and an average
one, but research is the most difficult to manage of
industrial revolution
commerce. After the
the difference that
zation of
between a successful and
critical difference
unsucessful
dif-
in
Prior to the eighteenth cent-
ferent critical activities.
in
management.
ing
times in history the difTerence between an effective
ury the
was
part of the twentieth century
tion
versities.
I
first
agree that the critical difference has been in market-
critical for the overall effec-
performance of industry, government, and uni-
tive
when
the great business empires were constructed, the criti-
of course, be-
first
Technology
ment of production.
would
We
the business, but second, at least
judgment, because
research
at the past.
to the future.
Institute of
ager.
in organizations.
77
are
coming to
man-
research
Third Session
3
a-
Top
tention to their reply but then asked a second ques-
executives have to deal with the uncertainties
"How do you know?" He
found he could put
of long-range planning, foreign competition, govern-
tion:
ment policy, and so forth. They have to deal more
and more with professional personnel in all parts of
their organizations. They have to deal with the social, economic, and political environment of their
the answers into four categories.
and lowest in terms of accuracy of perwould be "no information at all." Next
would be "information comes to me without my
seeking it, and I interpret it to suit my wishes."
Third, "information comes to me, and I pay careful
attention to it." Fourth and most accurate, "I go
out actively and deliberately seek information directFirst,
ception,
organization with the inevitably long delays in the
feedback loop that brings them knowledge of
I
firmly believe that
improved,
it
will
if
results.
management can be
research
be the best training groimd for top
executives.
The
ly."
American
Scientific
what we mean, then, by accurate percepsample of only 20 companies there was a
clearly significant relation between the score on accuracy of perception of customers and employees,
documented the
recently
men
increasing proportion of technically trained
This
tion.
in
top management, and I know one science laboratory
manager in a very large company who says that one
of his missions
is
to
and the hard facts of rate of increase in profitability and growth of the company.
Othf
studies conducted by Edward B. Roberts
have examined the formation of new technical enterprises by individuals who left government-funded
develop alumni of his laboratory
become presidents of all the divisions of his company. If we are going to talk about research managers we should acknowledge the fact that they are
to
many
not a single species, but that there are
varieties
of research managers.
as
we
two
entirely
One
large
people
is
new
a small
in
which
the
the technical entrepreneur
enterprise which
may
who
starts
eventually grow
into a large organized business.
A
study carried out
last
MIT
year at
by Harry
new
tablished
bridge region.
of 20
small technical
He found
who had esenterprises in the Cam-
individuals
that the rate of
profitability of these enterprises
to certain
was
growth
clearly
a
there
motivation
for
achievement
cess of the
which
the
of enterprise
He
this.
During a long
were accurate perception of
talk
with the founder-presi-
company he would
"What do
the
customers think of your product''" Hi- paid no
at-
ask,
from the
larger
MIT
Lincoln
organization
father's
with
Laboratories,
perhaps
in
the
2000
last
15
50 new companies by individuals who are
technical entrepreneurs, who want to take the technology that they have learned in the parent laboratory and use it as a basis for forming a new business.
Of these 50, there are 45 still viable and successful.
The aggregate volume of business of the spin-off
companies from these two laboratories is rapidly approaching the point where it will exceed the volume
of the two parent companies, and 40 percent of their
devised a very ingenious method of getting
dent of each
a
which the
his
years
the customers and accurate perception of employees.
at
is
(in
in
probability of suc-
employees, there have been formed
as
—
type
some other), then the
new company is less.
Similarly
rale
measured on McClelland's test; they had a lower desire for power and authority
they didn't try to hold
the strings too tightly; and most important of all, they
had an accurate perception of critical aspects of their
environment. The two most important aspects for
this
two or three years
a gap of
business or
characteristics of the founder.
higher
is
founder of the new business works
in
related
The men whose companies showed a higher
of increase in profitability had, compared to
others,
is
—
1965 issue of the Harvard Business Review, examined
characteristics
of
One is how directly the technology of the parent
company is taken into the new company the more
directly, the more successful the new enterprise. If
Schrage, which will be published in the Nov. -Dec.
the
is
from government-supported R and D
to commercial research.
For example, the MIT Instrumentation Laboratory, which got started shortly after World War
II, has graduated, or spun off, or lost, 27 employees
who have started their own companies. Of these, 26
are successful and still in business, although they
differ in their rate of growth and profitability. The
differences depend upon some interesting factors.
requiring organization.
a large laboratory
is
other
is
This
transferred
manager of a
organized laboratory, and anything over 50
find research managers.
The
situations
different
interest to us as a
own companies.
channel by which technology
laboratories to start their
The job of research manager differs by industry,
was made clear yesterday. Moreover there are
certainly
is
In a
business already
We
78
is
commercial.
would go on and
talk
about other types of
Third Session
i/»
'
research managers. Certainly
who
we ought
traditions of research
who
search
are
from
can also distinguish research managers by
team leaders or
managers
several
at
first-
manager
a research
much
in
who ought
production.
many
there are
Recognizing,
then,
kinds of research manag.
can we say about the education, training or
seems
to
me
we can
know whether
with sufficient
need to
know
there
are
certainty
to
an average research manager. This
of
title
my
report refers
—unlike
If
We
bilities
and
of
say a
little
—who
we
all
word
is
it
rules of
thumb
—
is
some
Investigation
is
memory
to carry in
It
is
about
it
Now,
is
worth the
let's
in
Mes-
we have
our actions.
The fourth
I
want
to
managers
is
a quite
try.
formation on research managers we have. As a mat-
know
is only one large-scale systematic
one reported by Clarence Randall in
ter of fact,
there
study. This
is
based upon very careful assessments of re& Hamilton. It sur-
whom
300 were R and D
in companies of
managers, by systematic procedures
all
sorts
On
young, perhaps
grown up very
—because
turn to what kind of systematic in-
veyed 1427 executives, of
because traditions always grow quickly
myths,
I would like to suggest that in no field of management than research management is it more necessary
to do systematic research. In no field is it more difficult, but, for reasons that I hope to have made clear
The second and perhaps more common
knowledge is tradition. The management of
years. But the traditions have
fables,
ago; besides, times have changed and this
Tradition.
ly,
much
different situation.
spoke of yesterday.
20
for
absence of learn-
difficult for
1956,
is
of
results
show up
the results of an action five years
search managers by Booz, Allen
organized research and development
in
systematic investigation of the results
research.
source of
been
not expect
Results.
of
Mesthene
to
the
not
basis for
manage
about
approval
the sort of things that Dr.
the a posieriori a priorisiics that Dr.
directly
—
D may
we would
of research management.
operate
how
and
just don't exist. In the
put in a plug,
and who give speeches as if
they went up on top of the mountain and received
the
R
source of knowledge, and the one for which
some research managers
of course none of them are here, but
This
for
already,
Revelation. There are
other fields
in
the case,
is
Systematic
each.
some
this
to believe that there
to.
me
budgeting
for
has been of a spec-
thene was talking about yesterday
you are teaching polymer chemistry or magnetohyrodynamics, there is an established body of
knowledge, and you can test whether a student has
mastered that body of knowledge. Is there anything
comparable to that in research management?
The body of knowledge in research management
accumulated over the past 19 years (which Dr. Williams is working to summarize) is pretty thin. I tend
to think of this body of knowledge as derived from
four sources; revelation, tradition, experience, and
Let
it
by experience we see the growth of
ing
If
systematic investigation.
resources,
projects
learning on the basis of experience, because the possi-
what the announced
is
the
in
research manage-
three, five, ten, or fifteen years.
about
foundation
is
very hard to operate on the basis
kind, and-
ial
the difference between a superior and
sound management knowledge
is
it
of
selecting
only one or a few laboratories,
we need
any principles known
be worth teaching.
management
his
of experience because your experience has
that
de\'"'
talk
improve
you don't know for a long
Whether you
that
is
a managerial action in
that before
to
going to challenge that statement.
laboratory,
or termination,
courses or curricula or on-the-job training,
to
The reason
for your
ment of research managers?
It
am
planning the allocation
are
as
what
"s,
I
contend that one of the hardest things
ment.
about research as he does about finance or
marketing or
am
I
time the results of what you have done.
to be
knows
how
his experience
I
the laboratory director,
the sense that he
of re-
experience; and
is
world to learn from experience
the vice president for research and development, and
the president of the organization,
management, then,
of research.
managers, the functional
levels,
from the
principally
sure that everyone here believes that he has learned
keting.
line supervisors, the project
management,
of
management of production facilities.
Experience. The third source of knowledge
search and development into manufacture and mar-
their level of responsibility; the
forms
other
are concerned with carrying the products of re-
We
The
management have come from
sence of other more soundly based knowledge.
to distinguish
managing a science-or discipline-oriented activity from those who are managing an applied research or advanced technology activity, those
who are managing a development activity, and those
those
throughout the country.
the basis of the assessments and talking with
colleagues and superiors, the managers were classi-
rapid-
fied as those
the ab-
79
who were
clearly promotable, those
who
'5
o-
^
«
Third Session
I/I
'5
IT
o
would never be promoted, and a middle group of
marginally promotable. About one-third were clearly
good research manager.
promotable.
though
The
We are depending here upon a measure of performance based on evaluation by people who observed their work and who perhaps shared the myths
and fables and rules of thumb of the person being
It
turns out that eight characteristics dis-
the
promotable from the not promotable
all fields. These are performance in his
evaluated.
tinguish
manager
present
in
position,
drive,
intellectual
as
sounds to
me
like
the
Boy Scout oath
honest, obedient, courteous, etc.
ful,
any idea how
tics to
to
move from
this
the selection of research
I
list
some of
social
to the
acceptability.
(Well,
if
but
there
are
some promising
ap-
years ago, those of you
in
The current report of the MIT Research Program on the Management of Science and Technol-
more
ogy, copies of which are available here, represents
Another is
you have no other
creativeness, whatever that
even
good research people by the use of bioThe work that I described at
that meeting was largely a promise, a direction, and
a hope, and you were kind enough to say, "Go ahead,
and when you have some results, let's see them."
the
is
necessary,
graphical information.
fields.
One
is
to analyze systematically
tentially
faith-
turns out
little
is
who were at Esles
which Dr. Donald Pelz reported some very interesting results on factors in
research effectiveness. Dr. Calvin Taylor, on the
same program, talked about ways of selecting po-
research managers than for managers in
critical for
other
these characteristics are a
It
sounds,
Two
wouldn't have
managers or
it
Park heard a session
of characteris-
design of a training program for them.
that
—
think
I
proaches.
ness.
It
that
difficult,
outcomes of research management by some obmeasure of results. TTiis is not nearly as easy
the
leader-
ability,
seems
jective
administration, initiative, motivation, creative-
ship,
alternative
it
first
time
we have
felt
confident enough of our
is.
results to issue a report.
now
good one; white Anglo-Saxand Protestant). Less important than in other
fields, according to this very thorough systematic
criterion that's always a
to try to
I
will
not take your time
survey the results of the 38 published
papers and 70 theses which are summarized therein.
on,
I
hope, instead, that
this
organization
years, invite reports of the
and drive. This is what you can get with a very
thorough study of people's opinions about who is a
jective research studies
tions for
80
management
will,
over the
more substantial and obwhose results have implica-
study, are initiative, administrative ability, leadership,
policies
and procedures,
Third Session
c
o
DISCUSSION OF THIRD PANEL SESSION
3
u
I/I
FRENCH, Panel Chairman
While you are thinking of something to question
these gentlemen about I would like to ask some ques-
of communication
tions that occurred during the speeches.
government, and
J.
D.
First of
ment.
Yet,
is
believe
more
I
Is
that very
manage-
few professional
mean
government.
political
me
to
that a great deal of the in-
down
being fed
stems from
any relationship
between what you said and the need to have more
people in Congress, and perhaps in the administrative
branch of the government, who have had experience
is
wonder
1
to us all
there
if
is
in professional research.
gather you
MARQUIS,
D. G.
structured and predictable methods are
going to emerge successfully?
me
In your
research:
there any pattern emerging, since
1
seems
fluence that
Nevertheless, about this divergence of considera-
view
it
government.
in that interval of time).
management of
the development of top
in
occurred to
people, certainly very few people in research, go into
all,
Mr. Williams, you indicated earlier concepts of the
almost chaotic method of managing research on the
one hand, as opposed to a more ordered attempt to
structure research. (Incidentally, I was struck by the
fact that the chaotic group seemed to do rather well
tion regarding the
It
Panelist
Others yesterday spoke about the fact that governin the past has largely been in the hands of
there any pattern
ment
emerging which indicates what the instructional problems these managers will face will be?
good reasons, because of the
upon the powers of government. Dr.
Mesthene especially pointed out, and I don't need to
elaborate on it, that the nature of government is
lawyers, and for very
legal constraints
L. B.
I
WILLIAMS, Panelist
am not quite sure. Dr.
mean
French, what you
changing
—
that the objectives of government are shiftand we are swallowing them, and that in this new
kind of government, especially on the executive side
and perhaps later on the legislative side, 1 would agree
with you that there is a place for people who have
had experience and have learned something as re-
by the word "instructional."
ing
CHAIRMAN FRENCH:
Teaching or learning
become an administrator of
I,.
B.
WILLIAMS;
Well.
I
to
research.
think
it
is
very, very clear,
managers.
.scarch
you cannot really expect a
maximum of efficiency of your research of R and D
organization to come from leaving it alone, leaving
as
I
pointed out,
that
the situation in chaos.
M. HARRIS, Ihe
serious
you read and reread these Proceedings, that certainly some kind of
order and system in the planning and executing of
research and R and D effort is recognized now as not
only desirable but necessary. Peltz" studies seem to
have brought that out (his studies being at least an
academic and scholarly attempt), so that whether or
not we are ready to start teaching these methods of
two-way channels of influence 1 am not qualified to
say, and I don't think that the Proceedings would in
any way reflect this.
see, as
It
occurred
to
ask
Don
I
telling
point
when you suggested
common
management and
that
was
management, and
perhaps research management might be a direct
a rather
the
this question.
who spend
ducing products such as
their
in the
pharmaceutical industry, the
Gillette
Company), and
dustries
I
call the
con-
still
I
own money on
pro-
chemical industry, the
textile industry,
and the
find that people in these in-
think that, for most types of work, the
is
more
eff^ective.
I
am
as to the source of the information
rather curious
that
you have
shown here, which distinctly showed that functional
work is more productive. Is it more productive with
a
between the responsibilities of
of research
is
stressed
I
have held discussions among what
dustries (people
me. Dr.
there
this
sumer-oriented, generally non-government-funded in-
Marquis, when you were speaking, that you made a
great deal in
Company
have been pulling each other's
importance of the project type of thing versus the
functional, and I still stick to this. I would like to
project system
CHAIRMAN FRENCH:
I
some time on some things, but
comment, because yesterday
legs for
here yesterday by Dr. Harris.
More and more you can
Gillette
Don Marquis and
The word "chaos" was used
government-funded money, be-
the large projects of
that
cause,
line
proach
91
if
it
so, that's a different story
than what
I
of the
way
was discussing yesterday.
to ap-
Third Session
c
MARQUIS: You
(A
D. G.
3
u
were, in 35 cases, for very large
in
million
government-funded
The reason
industry.
that
Marquis
are correct that the data
— $4
—performed
by
questions that were asked about whether the projects
started our studies with
are Air Force projects, whether we are dealing with
commercial development, and so on.
The basic point that Don Marquis mentioned is
the need to know much more about the evaluation of
results. Although he and his group have moved very
far beyond this kind of study that was mentioned
earlier, the kind of study where you simply ask people
for their opinions as to who is good and who is bad,
I think that we are still a long way from the desired
end product. That is the measurement of the actual
government contract projects is that it is easier to
get your hands around them. They have a beginning
and an end, an initial estimate of cost, and so forth.
We started this summer trying to do the same
sort of thing in commercial laboratories, and wc welcome your offer of cooperation. We would like very
much
to study the eight laboratories in Gillette.
GORDON,
R. S.
would
I
because
think
I
Panelist
to follow
like
up Dr. Harris' question
results which, in the case of the Gillette
evaluation of functional versus project organization.
It
my
would be
understanding, then,
tegrative function
—
that
is
to say, the utilization of
information for a mission
this
that the in-
sir,
—
is
really
If this
true,
is
is
from the
this not different
kinds of criteria will
The important
beyond the
concern of the people performing the contract.
was done within the government.
It
even
in
it
it can not
ready for application
so than
first
D. G.
is
we need
that
a
You
government operation. But
it
was
the gov-
N.
One
These were a mixture of Air Force,
and other government agencies.
usual morning cautionary note:
to detract at all
from Don Marquis'
very excellent presentation, for which
but great admiration,
about
how
thing that
I
think a
of these fables and myths, a
just as
this
is
This
live,
little
some-
is
J.
T.
I
which con-
to take a lot
think
it
is
more of
going to take time;
it
I
man
entirely.
a
little
Norman,
split
them
in a variety
of ways, and the re-
reported are true, regardless of the
other
is
number
interesting
fact
came
out,
since
we
JR., Thiokol
Chemical Corporation
look at these results from a somewhat different
mind.
My
I
What was
raise the following question in
the breadth of the technical con-
programs?
concern for
that of late
going
the kinds of studies that
GREY,
tent in these
think
I
asked previously about project versus functional orI
would agree
lot
point of view, and
my
data might be
harmful as the myths themselves, and
I
examination.
indicated by the two questions which have been
ganization.
disagree with your
be said
to
think was not stressed sufficiently.
In the world in which most of us
sists
have nothing
word ought
these results can be used.
I
I
I
managers in this case: the
ones who ran projects that were judged more successful had less experience than those who ran projects
which were judged less successful. I wouldn't, on the
basis of that, argue that experience is a bad thing, but
I would argue that the myth that the man with a lot
of experience is the best project manager deserves re-
NASA
KAPLAN: My
Although
are talking about project
use in an operational system by a govern-
Without wishing
computer.
of other factors of that sort.
ment, and these, incidentally, were all development
projects. That evaluation is given in terms of its potential for
could
sults that
ernment's evaluation of the success of the develop-
ment agency.
Navy, Army,
is
more research. For this particular
development projects, you could split
them into large and small. The results are the same.
and
tween the industry's laboratory and the government's
technical people. The follow-through, the implemena
has in the past, and
result rolls off the
a bad thing,
sub-.set of large
is
it
MARQUIS:
the integration involves a cooperative relationship be-
tation,
re-
has to go forward
general proposition that for a starving
different,
is
on
much more
food
Yes, of course
that this research
It
as soon as the
an academic laboratory, such as the brain
MARQUIS:
is
search has to be encouraged.
concern or
surgeons team that our chairman runs?
D. G.
differ.
point
be viewed as something that
inte-
gration that occurs in laboratory mission or operational performance, say, within a private
Company,
would be what kind of product and how profitable is
it.
In the case of an Air Force project it would be
how good is the weapons system, and so on. The
does bear on Professor Marquis'
it
more knowledge
of the parameters involved, of precisely the types of
projects
we
talking about, with a lot
is
million to $6
my
question arises from the fact
we have had many
discussions of the stim-
ulation of the interdisciplinary project team.
Don
ever, in this case
92
it
might appear that
if
How-
the technical
Third Session
problem areas that have been reported over the past
18 years. I hope this is one of the outputs of your
content of the project was rather narrow, the techni-
were rather stimulated by association with
cal people
their technical peers.
MARQUIS: When
D. G.
$30 million
content
were
effort.
which
project,
Don, I hope you look into how you transfer the
knowledge you are generating and how you get the
word across to the R and D manager. The other thing
a
a system, the technical
is
interdisciplinary, although in general these
is
all
you are talking about
aerospace, electronic and electric.
These are
exactly the ones for which project organization
is
GREY:
T.
I
relates to his earlier
If
I
Kaplan's example, and how
comment. Let mc give you a
were a lab manager and
of projects under
me
Allen's data, which
that will be used.
J.
with reference to
it
hypothetical case.
recommended and, as a matter of fact, government
agencies are now requiring it and insisting that the
proposals outline the form of project management
I
had a large number
along with the results of
showed
that the best project
Tom
teams
consider two approaches at a time, would I use his
data from the standpoint of looking at my many pro-
address this question to Mr. Williams.
and finding those project teams that are considThen I can do one of two
things. The ones that are considering more than two
approaches I can fire, or I can force them to consider
only two at a time.
jects
NCAR
Will your study of the Proceedings of the
Norm
is
in-
ering two approaches?
clude a critical analysis to determine whether the apparent beneficial effects of the shift from chaotic to
organized research may be a self-induced artifact of
our concern for our raison d'etre as the research management establishment?
WILLIAMS: I would like to respond to your
comment. Certainly over the years we have recognized that several kinds of people have come into
L. B.
WILLIAMS:
L. B.
"artifact" a "straw
tell
Well, certainly,
man."
you mean by
we can
if
don't think that
I
from the Proceedings whether such
not, really.
after
I
consideration
the case or
is
don't think they will reveal that.
are experiences, and, as
all,
first
we heard
of
research
administration
from an academic viewpoint.
had the people interested in
These,
yesterday,
First of
problems
all,
think
I
we
the behavioral sciences
and psychologists, who wanted
no doubt research administration
area, the sociologists
happens, perhaps, and what
some of the problems of motivation and
control and some of the things I mentioned that Dr.
is
is still an art.
What
happening is the same
to explore
thing that happened, for instance, to the medical profession.
I
J.
1
think
it
don't
know what
relatively
is
MAHONEY,
E.
Peltz treated.
the timing might be, but
ple of science
comparable.
Administration
The
first
comment
is
to
I
Les Williams, and
hope
is
person, and he generally
—
Conference form here. I see in these gatherings
have seen a couple over the years now a very unique
bringing together of academic minds, industrial people, the guys who push the buttons on R and D management, and also the government people who, in
some
R
cases, are sponsoring either contracts
and
work
D
in
work, or they are actually doing
under
in things,
I
am
all
together.
I
effort,
hope
I
R and D
where he
This
proach, or a noble goal,
I
that
interested
is
think.
a noble type of ap-
We
are just so far
dark ages on the academic point of view
going to take quite a while before we learn
in the
it
is
to describe
terms what
is
in
mathematical or even heuristic
the real situation in research and re-
search management. So, I think that our Conferences
have included in the past some of these academicians
and results of scholarly efforts.
is
see a research
this.
In other words, I hope we use
us say, as a research mechanism, possibly every year reporting on some of the general
forum,
research administration.
how
emphasis after
this
is
together things and people into a working model for
this
back
very happy to see Les'
who
More lately, of course, we have had the academiwho generally can be classified as the operations research people, who would like somehow to tie
and of themselves.
trying to pull this
a person
is
not people.
cians,
I think, as Don Marquis brought out, we have
over the years relied upon this Great Man coming
forward and speaking on how he manages his project,
and
the peo-
manager or business-administrator type of
business
this is
evolution of the
—
in
A little later, or maybe about the same time, we
had another kind of scholarly and academic person
coming into the picture. This is the economist or the
National Aeronautics and Space
with reference to what
These are people interested
and research.
let
I
personally believe that
tinue that.
93
What
it
would be good
to con-
the distribution between experience
M
M
3
u
Third Session
c
3
u
and theory should be is not, of course, up to me, but
up to the Conference management directly from year
to year.
am
I
when I say
more of it.
want
I
come
the closest.
to
E.
couldn't agree with
I
is
first
the
most
many
of his reasons for
to the extreme speculative
learn
my own
man-
in
and 1 have
belief on that
times,
my
R
end of the
to the
D
and
then
If not,
luding myself for 25 years
me
in
believing
I
had done
I
would
The question
MARQUIS: From
develop.
that
velopment contracts, what
control system, as
mercial
sir, in
.
HERSHEY: My
experience goes back to
when
way
was no PERT, so I am disqualified to measure
me tell you what I am talking about. This was
a series of development projects in the 1930's, in
which we had a problem of taking the discoveries of
chemists and, as chemical engineers, converting them
Now, we
MARQUIS:
successfully
from a chemical reaction
how
to
It
is
development
That's not an easy question to
hard to use
statistical
evidence of any
about the unique events, the Lavoisiers,
the Maxwells,
and so
Tom
forth.
You
don't try to predict
new book on Revolutions
In Science. These revolutions occur when these great
breakthroughs come, and in between we little ants
work piling up pebbles and grains of sand to confirm,
them.
Read
Pruden's
to apply, to test aspects of a theory.
clearly learned over a
succession of half a dozen of these
satisfy yourselves that the
out?
sort to talk
Let
into operating plans.
concerns, to government,
utility to industrial
.
there
it.
are supposed to
de-
answer.
R. L.
men
environment that existed then, and may now be on
D. G.
.
business gets
how do you
smoother,
of such individuals was not actually the result of the
PERT
the value of a
is
compared with a simple
much
And, quite aside from the immediate com-
how do you
the
your experience,
management
as this
propose to insure that the essential nutrients are re-
so,
one necessarily learns from experience. This certainly
is a myth. One does not learn from experience unless
one has the ability and the desire to examine experience in order to learn from it.
D. G.
is,
efficient,
tained in the soil in which these
remark on the myth
like to
borderline
much more
have been de-
I
question pertains to research
as chaos.
it,
possible to
is
it
My
There are those who believe that the time is not
when the dramatic advances in fundamental knowledge may still be made by individual
intellectual giants. Such giants in the past, I think,
have grown in the soil of what is known here today
phases of the development process.
Finally,
don't
entirely past
spec-
development side of
purely industrial research,
from experience.
in certain
I
Gordon may have
think, by
the
of the
difficult
experience would suggest to
you move over
at least in
Dr.
anyone here, not the contentious part at
of application and development. 1
justify this discrimination on the ground that the title
of this Conference did not contain "D," nor does the
title of this session, and I can limit the question perhaps, and decrease the argument.
I
him more
On the other hand, I was a little startled to hear
him apply so broadly the statement that you cannot
learn from experience. I think this is right if you go
if
somebody would
that
in the latter part.
of the kind which will be called fundamental research,
make a few remarks on Professor Mar-
point.
that
hope
it
specifically.
word "R and D."
du Pont de Nemours & Co.
I.
myself have said so
trum, but
to
Professor Marquis referred entirely to the single
various functions a businessman has to face
given the
was done
good and we should have
is
that the research function
I
part in the
it
quis' excellent talk.
aging.
first
some remarks
think
HERSHEY,
R. L.
direct
only expressing a personal opinion
think this
I
end of the
go more
disagrees with the existing paradigm
—
New
—-that
knowledge
is Kuhn's
word but we explain it away. We try to fit it in with
new ad hoc hypotheses; eventually it accumulates to
the point where somebody with real insight can get
us a new paradigm, and then we work for another 50
years building up both confirmatory and disconfirma-
to the operating
plant.
D. G. MARQUIS: I couldn't agree with you more,
and I don't want anything that I have said to carry
the implication that
don't have the highest admiration lor the accomplishment of the R and D people
I
over the
last
20 or 30
done about ten times
years.
I
only think
it
tory evidence.
I
could be
don't think
as effectively.
we can
J.
E.
MAHONEY:
like to direct to
This
is
a question which
Professor Marquis.
we need try to predict these great
make the history of science. What
breakthroughs that
1
held
I
it
would
this
do, perhaps,
is
increase the effectiveness of
intermediate level of work that
lay the foundation for the genius.
at the
94
is
so essential to
o r p
h n
.'•
sn
1
Date Due
Lib-26-67
MIT LIBRARIES
3 9080 01439 2028