Innovation and US Research - ACS Publications - American Chemical

19 Appropriate Role of Government in Innovation

Downloaded by UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST on June 2, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: August 8, 1980 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1980-0129.ch019

J. H E R B E R T H O L L O M O N Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Policy Alternatives,

Cambridge, M A 02139

In this paper I shall discuss some of the factors that influence governments to effect technological change and innovation and suggest some policies and programs that might or could be adopted in the United States. A l l major industrialized countries are now concerned with innovation, the role of technology, and how technology affects industrial development. I would say that most countries have been ahead of the United States in their concern for industrial innovation and industrial technology with respect to economic development. The discussions we are now having in this country began in Europe and Japan several years ago and those nations have reached a state of sophistication and decision somewhat in advance of that of this country. I wish to describe the circumstances with regard to industrial development and technology that the U. S. w i l l face in the next decade. There are four circumstances which are important: (1) Most major technological developments w i l l take place outside of the United States in the future. (2) The businesses that make relatively mature and commodity-like products w i l l be threatened by the invasion of products of that same type from newly-industrialized nations of the world - Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore. Those countries w i l l , in general, have lower factor costs than w i l l American industry for relatively mature, slowly changing products. As a consequence, many U. S. firms w i l l be threatened by invasion of products from abroad. (3) The United States w i l l find i t s e l f competing with other countries in which the technology i s well supported and where there i s a relatively sophisticated understanding of industrial development. Most particularly, the United States w i l l be competing with Japan, West Germany, and to a lesser degree, with the other nations of the European Common Market. (4) Factor costs of energy and some raw materials w i l l rise throughout the world as shortages develop and as the OPEC cartel continues to raise prices. 0-8412-0561-2/80/47-129-197$5.00/0 © 1980 American Chemical Society Smith and Larson; Innovation and U.S. Research ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1980.


198

INNOVATION AND U.S. RESEARCH: PROBLEMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The recent r i s e s i n the l a s t two years o f o i l p r i c e s are not the cause o f our i n f l a t i o n , r a t h e r they are the r e s u l t o f i n f l a t i o n here. The p r i c e o f o i l i s denominated i n d o l l a r s and the decreasing value of the d o l l a r w i l l f o r c e and permit the c a r t e l to r a i s e i t s p r i c e s . Such i n f l a t i o n o f p r i c e s has not occurred to any s i g n i f i c a n t extent f o r the Japanese because the value o f the yen has continued to r i s e with respect to that o f the d o l l a r . T h i s r i s e i n the value o f the yen has almost compensated f o r the increase i n o i l p r i c e s denominated i n dollars. The United States w i l l , at the same time, be f a c i n g the same s i t u a t i o n , to some degree, f o r which Sweden i s the precursor. There have been and continue to be l a r g e t r a n s f e r s of funds from p r i v a t e to p u b l i c hands, a large and growing concern f o r p r o t e c t i o n i s m and s e c u r i t y and f o r what the Swedes and the E n g l i s h now c a l l a r i s k l e s s s o c i e t y . One would expect the p r o t e c t i o n i s m i n the face o f competition from abroad and i n the face o f a slowing economy with r i s i n g unemployment. One would expect the s o c i e t y to i n c r e a s i n g l y wish to p r o t e c t , s u b s i d i z e and otherwise act i n a way to p r o t e c t the general p u b l i c welfare. On the other hand, such p r a c t i c e s increase the t r a n s f e r from p r i v a t e to p u b l i c funds, put burdens on the i n c r e a s e i n p r i v a t e savings and decrease g e n e r a l l y the a v a i l a b i l i t y of c a p i t a l while i n c r e a s i n g the cost of c a p i t a l . In a d d i t i o n the U. S., along with Great B r i t a i n and, to a l e s s e r degree, France spend a v e r y large f r a c t i o n of our t e c h n i c a l resources on defense and space. I do not b e l i e v e that i t i s c o i n c i d e n t a l that the two f a s t e s t growing competitive c o u n t r i e s are West Germany and Japan who spend almost none of t h e i r t e c h n i c a l resources on the n a t i o n a l needs f o r defense and space exploration. With respect to the r o l e of governments, there are two general o v e r r i d i n g p r i n c i p l e s . The f i r s t p r i n c i p l e was enuidLated by Dr. Ed M a n s f i e l d who s t a t e d i n h i s paper that a l l the evidence shows that the s o c i a l b e n e f i t from t e c h n o l o g i c a l change and innovation exceeds the p r i v a t e gain. In other words, people i n i n d u s t r y and i n firms i n v e s t i n g i n technology, i n d u s t r i a l development, and innovation w i l l always underinvest. They w i l l underinvest from the p o i n t of view o f the values that flow to the s o c i e t y g e n e r a l l y as a consequence of the innovation a c t i v i t y . That does not mean that a l l p r o j e c t s w i l l be underfunded. What i t means i s that the p o r t f o l i o of p r o j e c t s w i l l be such that many w i l l not be funded that would b r i n g p o s i t i v e b e n e f i t s to the s o c i e t y g e n e r a l l y even though not p r o f i t a b l e f o r an i n d i v i d u a l f i r m . This general p r i n c i p l e means that governments are d r i v e n to provide subsidy to reduce costs or increase the b e n e f i t s . These p o l i c i e s encourage i n d u s t r y to i n v e s t i n p r o j e c t s i n which they otherwise would not. I t was s u r p r i s i n g to me the other day to hear at t h i s Symposium that p r i n c i p l e so c l e a r l y eitmcLated and two subsequent spokesmen f o r i n d u s t r y then demand that there be no

Smith and Larson; Innovation and U.S. Research ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1980.


19.

HOLLOMAN

Government in Innovation

199

a c t i v i t e s o f governments to s u b s i d i z e and otherwise support the innovation process. These two p o i n t s o f view are c o n t r a d i c t o r y . I f s o c i a l b e n e f i t s or s o c i a l r e t u r n s exceed the p r i v a t e b e n e f i t , one must argue that there i s an appropriate r o l e f o r government to e i t h e r decrease p r i v a t e c o s t s or increase p r i v a t e gains. The second general p r i n c i p l e i s that the innovation process occurs throughout a product l i f e c y c l e somewhat l i k e that which James Utterback d e s c r i b e d i n h i s paper i n which the e a r l y stages o f i n n o v a t i v e a c t i v i t y take p l a c e by the entry o f a l a r g e number o f firms and i n s t i t u t i o n s i n t o the development o f the product. Here the process i s f l u i d and, as J . Selden s t a t e s i n h i s paper, the i n t e r n a l development takes p l a c e i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s that are h o r i z o n t a l i n s t r u c t u r e . The i n n o v a t i v e development takes p l a c e i n imaginative ways u s i n g e x i s t i n g manufacturing f a c i l i t i e s , the product i s f r e q u e n t l y adapted to the needs o f customers and the o r i g i n a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f the product i s u s u a l l y not the one that succeeds. A d d i t i o n a l l y I would say that you know the name o f the p l a y e r s i n i n n o v a t i v e organizations. I n d i v i d u a l s c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the f l u i d stage o f i n n o v a t i v e a c t i v i t i e s at the e a r l y i n c i p i e n t phases o f the product l i f e c y c l e . At the end o f the product l i f e c y c l e the product becomes mature and changes slowly with r a d i c a l innovation not l i k e l y , product improvements o c c u r r i n g incrementa l l y , and u s u a l l y with a small number o f manufacturers p r o v i d i n g the product. The c o r p o r a t i o n at t h i s stage i s o f t e n c h a r a c t e r i z e d by l a r g e economies o f s c a l e , very l a r g e c a p i t a l investments, and the s t y l e o f the o r g a n i z a t i o n i s b u r e a u c r a t i c , h i e r a r c h i c a l and anonymous. In a f l u i d o r g a n i z a t i o n , the o r g a n i z a t i o n that i s entrep r e n e u r i a l and r i s k - t a k i n g depends upon the imagination, courage, and daring o f i n d i v i d u a l s -- i n d i v i d u a l s e i t h e r i n e x i s t i n g firms or i n new f i r m s . You know the names o f the p l a y e r s . The Honda automobile was designed by Mr. Honda -- not be a design team that produced the X-body car. Dr. Land i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r P o l a r o i d . The necessary o r g a n i z a t i o n s i t u a t i o n with respect to i n n o v a t i v e new products i s f l u i d , h o r i z o n t a l , b o l d l y venturesome, e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l and p e r s o n a l . The kind o f o r g a n i z a t i o n that deals with improvement o f the e x i s t i n g products o f s o c i e t y i s slowly changing. In between these extremes i n the product c y c l e while the product matures, process innovation takes p l a c e . As the product has to meet competition from others who have entered the market, an improved production process becomes more important than the product. Therefore process innovation occurs d r a m a t i c a l l y a f t e r the i n i t i a t i o n o f the product to the market. In the chemical process i n d u s t r y , these two steps tend to take p l a c e s i m u l t a neously. On the other hand, i n the assembly-parts business, f i r s t product innovation occurs r a p i d l y and then d e c l i n e s , followed by the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f r a d i c a l new processes. The product l i f e c y c l e dominates not only the behavior o f firms



200


and whole i n d u s t r i e s but i n a sense dominates the behavior o f an i n d u s t r i a l economy l i k e the United S t a t e s , Sweden, or West Germany. The e s s e n t i a l problem i n Sweden today i s that there has been l i t t l e recent growth i n i t s economy. I t i s one o f the r i c h e s t c o u n t r i e s i n the world. Only one o f the top 40 Swedish companies was s t a r t e d a f t e r World War I I . Sweden now has r e l a t i v e l y mature commodity-like businesses where the t h r e a t from firms o u t s i d e o f Sweden having lower f a c t o r costs i m p e r i l the behavior o f those Swedish firms and the economy o f Sweden. Government p o l i c y , t h e r e f o r e , has to be i n v o l v e d i n three d i f f e r e n t kinds o f a c t i v i t e s which overlap. F i r s t and importantly, i t must help c r e a t e an environment i n which r i s k t a k i n g , e n t r e p r e n e u r i a l , personal kinds o f new ventures w i l l begin i n e x i s t i n g firms or i n new f i r m s . That r e q u i r e s an economy not dominated by giant monopolies which cannot be entered by other firms who threaten the monopoly. I t r e q u i r e s a patent or recovery system such that the i n n o v a t i v e , adventuresome person can capture a s i g n i f i c a n t p a r t o f the rewards o f h i s own c r e a t i v i t y . It requires a climate f o r r i s k t a k i n g with the p o t e n t i a l f o r huge rewards. Otherwise the r i s k i s not worth the gain. Whether that be an e x i s t i n g f i r m or a new f i r m i s i r r e l e v a n t . F i n a l l y , and more importantly, i t r e q u i r e s an atmosphere i n which people are w i l l i n g to save f o r the f u t u r e . Some people wonder how entrepreneurs can be recognized. Entrepreneurs are those people who have a negative discount rate. For the entrepreneurs a l l present costs are viewed as small and a l l f u t u r e p r o f i t s are i n f i n i t e and that i s t h e i r p e r s p e c t i v e o f the world. The p o i n t I wish to make i s that the atmosphere that encourages the beginning o f the establishment o f new products i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from the atmosphere and a c t i v i t e s o f governments to maintain and improve the p o s i t i o n o f the e x i s t i n g f i r m s and the firms making r e l a t i v e l y mature products. In t h i s f i r s t phase o f i n n o v a t i v e a c t i v i t y there must be an environment that stimulates r i s k . Secondly, from many seeds o n l y a few flowers grow. As a consequence, the s o c i e t y must be w i l l i n g to accept a s u b s t a n t i a l number o f f a i l u r e s . Further those who f a i l should not be unduly punished but r a t h e r accommodated i n ways that w i l l r e v i t a l i z e t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n c r e a t i n g new a c t i v i t y . F a i l u r e i n some o f the i n d u s t r i a l i z e d western c o u n t r i e s can be as d i f f i c u l t as i t i s i n c l o s e d s o c i e t i e s as i n the Soviet Union. During the second stage o f development o f a product, process technology, manufacturing, automation, and q u a l i t y c o n t r o l are a l l important. In that stage o f the development o f a product and those i n d u s t r i e s there u s u a l l y i s i n s u f f i c i e n t b a s i c information about the technology o f manufacturing and process. In t h i s country, f o r example, as f a r as I know there i s o n l y one engineering school that o f f e r s a degree i n manufac-



19.

HOLLOMAN


201

t u r i n g engineering. There i s almost no research i n American u n i v e r s i t i e s i n process technology, q u a l i t y c o n t r o l , m a t e r i a l s s p e c i f i c a t i o n and those matters that a f f e c t change i n the manufacture o f a new maturing product. Most o f the developments during t h i s second stage are not done by invaders from the outs i d e , but r a t h e r from w i t h i n the e x i s t i n g f i r m f o r a c t i n g as i t s own customer. In the t h i r d stage o f the product l i f e c y c l e , incremental change, the d i f f u s i o n o f a v a i l a b l e knowledge, the t r a n s f e r o f know-how from one small o r l a r g e f i r m t o another, the nature o f the accumulation o f small product-cost r e d u c t i o n s by process improvement developments are a l l an i n t e g r a l p a r t . Here the r o l e o f government and s o c i e t y i s t o open the way f o r t r a n s f e r of n o n p r o p r i e t a r y know-how. Given the three stages and kinds o f a c t i v i t i e s d e s c r i b e d above, we can now consider what governments a c t u a l l y do. Most c o u n t r i e s are now beginning t o provide s t a r t u p c a p i t a l f o r i n v e n t o r s and i n d i v i d u a l entrepreneurs t o pursue new developments whether i n e x i s t i n g o r new f i r m s . The program o f the D e l e g a t i n Generale a l a Recherche S c i e n t i f i q u e et Technique (DGRST) i n France provides on the order o f f i f t y t o s i x t y percent o f the c a p i t a l o f the cash r e q u i r e d f o r new product development. The N a t i o n a l Swedish Board f o r T e c h n i c a l Development (STU) provides money t o i n v e n t o r s and a s p i r i n g innovators t o determine and prove the t e c h n i c a l f e a s i b i l i t y o f t h e i r ideas. Japan, c o n t r a r y t o general o p i n i o n , has the most extensive programs o f any country i n the world t o support new and i n n o v a t i v e f i r m s . The Japanese government o f f e r s n o - i n t e r e s t loans t o new f i r m s r e q u i r i n g e a r l y prototype manufacturing equipment. Through t h e i r M i n i s t r y o f I n t e r n a t i o n a l Trade and Industry (MITI) advice and counsel concerning taxes, investment p o l i c y , a v a i l a b i l i t y o f cash f o r new, small and growing f i r m s are dispensed. I am not suggesting t h a t our government should undertake s i m i l a r programs, but am simply d e s c r i b i n g what other c o u n t r i e s are doing. Most major n a t i o n s i n the world are now beginning t o see the advantages that t h i s country had i n the 1960s when government p o l i c i e s i n a d v e r t e n t l y encouraged s t a r t u p and t e c h n i c a l development o f new products and processes. The inadvertent encouragement stemmed from the s p i l l o v e r from enormous expenditures i n the N a t i o n a l A e r o n a u t i c a l and Space A d m i n i s t r a t i o n and the Department o f Defense that aided s t a r t u p of new venturesome firms during that p e r i o d . Most c o u n t r i e s provide support, d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t , f o r product and process development w i t h i n e x i s t i n g f i r m s -- d i r e c t l y by s u b s i d i e s and i n d i r e c t l y by s u b s t a n t i a l tax r e d u c t i o n s or investment tax c r e d i t s , the general argument being t h a t firms do not take r i s k s appropriate to s o c i a l b e n e f i t s . In the t h i r d phase o f development, that i s d u r i n g the p e r i o d o f incremental product change, a l l major c o u n t r i e s provide e x i s t i n g f i r m s with i n f o r m a t i o n on product design, new


202

INNOVATION AND U.S. RESEARCH:

PROBLEMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


techniques environmental c o n t r o l s , e t c . Also through i n d u s t r i a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , extension s e r v i c e s and through education, some c o u n t r i e s are able to do more than others. In West Germany an i n d u s t r i a l extension program based on l o c a l chambers o f commerce has r e c e n t l y been e s t a b l i s h e d to advise e x i s t i n g firms concerning manufacturing and process development. Such a c t i v i t e s i n t h i s country are u s u a l l y r e s i s t e d by the proponents o f R$D f o r a very simple reason: firms that support R§D are u s u a l l y firms that do not need t h i s information. But the 3 or 4 m i l l i o n other f i r m s who manufacture p a r t s , f o r g i n g s , c a s t i n g s , and the l i k e who do u s u a l l y need that information cannot a f f o r d to o b t a i n i t independently. The Commerce Department makes an assessment every year or so o f the producti v i t y o f firms i n each o f s e v e r a l i n d u s t r i e s . In general the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f the most productive firms i n an i n d u s t r y i s two or three times greater than the l e s s productive firms i n the same i n d u s t r y . The r a t i o o f the p r o d u c t i v i t y to the firms i n the upper d e c i l e o f p r o d u c t i v i t y i s u s u a l l y two and a h a l f to three times the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f the firms i n the lower d e c i l e o f p r o d u c t i v i t y . The p o i n t i s that i f we simply worked as w e l l as we know how, p r o d u c t i v i t y i n t h i s country should increase on the order o f 50 to 100 percent. Any o f you who have been i n r e l a t i v e l y small firms that supply b i g companies o f t h i s country w i l l recognize the p r a c t i c e s that were w e l l knowiten, twenty or t h i r t y years ago are not i n p r a c t i c e i n some o f those firms today. Most c o u n t r i e s provide some kind o f i n c e n t i v e f o r savings, whether remaang c e r t a i n taxes, as has been r e c e n t l y proposed by Representative Ullman i n the House, or by d i r e c t subsidy. For example, i n the case o f the Japanese, I b e l i e v e that the bonus system f o r workers that r e c e i v e from one to two months supplemental pay per year at one time encourages savings. They cannot depend on i t and t h e r e f o r e l i v e at a c e r t a i n l e v e l o f income. The r a t e o f saving i n West Germany i s two to three times greater than ours. Innovation and t e c h n o l o g i c a l change, d e s p i t e the s t a t e o f technology and the economy, cannot occur without c a p i t a l investment and c a p i t a l investment i s not p o s s i b l e without savings. I f people consume only, p r o d u c t i v i t y w i l l suffer. No matter what we or other c o u n t r i e s do to s t i m u l a t e i n n o v a t i o n , i t w i l l be to no a v a i l i f we do not save. In c o n c l u s i o n I would l i k e to present a summary o f the t h i n k i n g o f the v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s regarding i n n o v a t i o n . By f a r the most s o p h i s t i c a t e d country i s Japan. The cooperative understanding between MITI and Japanese i n d u s t r y i s deep; there i s a good grasp o f the nature o f the product l i f e c y c l e and a widespread acknowledgement o f the importance o f new small entrep r e n e u r i a l f i r m s . As you may know, the Japanese have decided on d i f f e r e n t p o l i c i e s f o r s u n r i s e and sunset i n d u s t r i e s . The sunset i n d u s t r i e s are those that manufacture products at or near the end o f t h e i r product l i f e c y c l e or l i f e . The s u n r i s e



19.

HOLLOMAN


203

i n d u s t r i e s are o f high t e c h n o l o g i c a l content, o f higher value i n d u s t r i e s f o r the f u t u r e . They are making investments to move the sunset i n d u s t r i e s o f f the i s l a n d and t o b r i n g the s u n r i s e i n d u s t r i e s i n t o being. No other country a p p r e c i a t e s more the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the dynamism o f i n d u s t r i a l technology and growth than does Japan. Other n a t i o n s tend t o p r o t e c t t h e i r mature i n d u s t r i e s by manipulation o f t a r i f f s and p r i c i n g p o l i c i e s . Most o f the r e a c t i o n o f other i n d u s t r i a l i z e d c o u n t r i e s with the exception o f Japan and t o a l e s s e r extent Korea i s t o p r o t e c t - t o provide f o r the common welfare by p r o t e c t i o n r a t h e r than encouraging the new. Most c o u n t r i e s are now supporting b a s i c technology, that i s technology that i s important t o i n d u s t r i a l development but not important t o space, defense or health. I suspect there may not be as much as a couple o f m i l l i o n d o l l a r s a v a i l a b l e f o r t r y i n g t o understand the nature o f manufacturing i n the generic sense. That i s not t o say that firms do not do i n n o v a t i v e work, but i t i s t o say that b a s i c teaching aimed at improving the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f the country, which i s how t o make t h i n g s o f q u a l i t y , measure t h e i r performance, and have them d e l i v e r e d i s simply not supported i n the U. S. There i s a l s o r e s i s t a n c e i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r t o such support, perpetuated by the myth that most firms and most product development occurred i n t h i s country without government interference. Anybody who reads the h i s t o r y o f the economic development i n t h i s country would understand that many o f the developments were encouraged by some s o r t o f government p o l i c y and i n t e r f e r e n c e . The land grants s t i m u l a t e d the r a i l r o a d . The formation o f the land-grant c o l l e g e s , the a g r i c u l t u r a l r e s e a r c h program, and a g r i c u l t u r a l extension s e r v i c e are b a s i c to our a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o f i c i e n c y - - a model which every country i n the world has followed t o improve the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f agriculture. Many other examples o f government involvement e x i s t , i n c l u d i n g the mining technology l a b o r a t o r i e s o f the Bureau o f Mines; the a c t i v i t e s o f NASA, and NACA before i t became NASA; i n a e r o n a u t i c a l technology; the investment o f t h i s country i n n u c l e a r p w e r ; the e l e c t r o n i c s developed during World War I I ; the gas t u r b i n e engine f o r a i r c r a f t during World War I I ; a l l o y s t e e l s during World War I; and the beginning o f the s t e e l i n d u s t r y i n the United States s u b s i d i z e d by the Northern f o r c e s i n the C i v i l War. How can we say that the government does not p l a y a s u b s t a n t i l r o l e i n t e c h n o l o g i c a l change and how can we remove the e x i s t i n g b i a s so t h a t we can at l e a s t i n t e l l i g e n t l y d i s c u s s an a p p r o p r i a t e r o l e f o r government which does not take over product process development, o r the ownership of f i r m s ? As I see i t , we are now i n a world i n which most of our competitors, both f o r mature products and f o r newlydeveloped ones, are i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r understanding and w i l l i n g ness t o face f a c t s with regard t o how i n n o v a t i o n and t e c h n o l o g i c a l change occur. I b e l i e v e we have enormous



204


advantages, p a r t i c u l a r l y with respect to the atmosphere f o r r i s k t a k i n g and entrepreneurship which other c o u n t r i e s do not have. We s t i l l have the l a r g e s t s i n g l e homogeneous market i n the world. We are r i c h . There i s no excuse f o r the f a l t e r i n g performance o f the l a s t f i v e years which has seen the American people become g r a d u a l l y poorer other than our own r e l u c t a n c e to t a l k about the subject i n r e a l i s t i c c o n s t r u c t i v e ways, r a t h e r than i n i d e o l o g i c a l terms.

************ QUESTION:

Would you comment on the s c h i z o p h r e n i c a t t i t u d e o f i n d u s t r y toward government involvement?

H0LL0M0N:

Having worked both i n government and i n d u s t r y I ' l l say something that I do not think i s very u s e f u l because I don't know what can be done about i t . Most people i n t h i s country have l i t t l e understanding o f how t h e i r government works. I spent s i x years i n government and I have spoken to people i n i n d u s t r y who r e f e r to government people as "them." That i s one aspect, o f course, i n v o l v e s the excesses which i n d u s t r y and others are g u i l t y o f i n the face o f f r e e goods, f r e e a i r , f r e e water, f r e e p l a c e s to dump r e f u s e -- i n s t a n c e s where i n d u s t r y , because o f the system we have, d i d not act f o r the s o c i a l w e l f a r e . I don't think about the government and about i n d u s t r y I t h i n k about the people that I know and how they react. For example, most people i n i n d u s t r y do not know how to lobby. You don't lobby by asking someone f o r him. Most people t r y to persuade somebody to do something f o r themselves. My experience has been to act e f f e c t i v e l y on t h e i r b e h a l f and i n r e t u r n you gain t h e i r t r u s t and confidence i n your advice and judgement. I t h i n k the s i t u a t i o n with respect to the American economy has to d e t e r i o r a t e f u r t h e r before any meaningful progress i n improving both i n d u s t r y and government.

RECEIVED December 18,

1979.


Innovation and US Research - ACS Publications - American Chemical

Recommend Documents