Internal Communications in the Research Laboratory
Coordination of Research and Development W o r k J. A . LEERMAKERS, Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, Ν. Υ.
The productivity of a n industrial r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r y is a reflection of t h e efficiency of t h e physical a n d m e n t a l e n v i r o n m e n t p r o v i d e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l scientist y^XF Ti£E many aspects of scientific and ^-^ technological direction of a research laboratory program, only three shall be considered here. They are so closely re lated that they cannot readily be sepa rated from each other. These are: the character and quality of the research di rector and the scientific staff, the internal organization of the laboratory, and the direction of research. No research laboratory can succeed un less it has some kind of organization within whose framework the staff oper ates, and a system, formal or informal, by which the problems of the laboratory are evaluated, distributed among the workers, followed in the course of their progress, and finally either discontinued or carried LO some conclusion. The means of direc tion of the laboratory work is directly de pendent upon the organization of the laboratory, and the coordination of the work of the scientiBc staff, in turn, is governed by the system of direction and the organization. The Director and Staff The productiveness of an industrial re search laboratory is simply a reflection of the performance of the research director and the technical staff. The director must integrate the laboratory work with that of the other departments of the company and see that laboratory operations are consistent with over-all company policy. It is the director's responsibility t o con duct research of importance to the com pany, to select from the results of the re search new products for the market, to develop these new products to the stage of early customer acceptance, and to effect Improvements in products and processes. In a small industrial laboratory, all of these integration functions can b e taken care of by the research director. In a larger laboratory, a single man cannot look after the details adequately. In many of the larger companies, this problem has been solved by appointing a vice president in charge of research, responsible for the 3152
over-all operation of the laboratory and lor maintaining satisfactory relations b e tween the laboratory and the other com pany departments. T h e vice president then delegates laboratory operation to a director of research. In a large laboratory, the director re quires a personal staff, which generally includes the business manager, the assist ant director, and one or more personal assistants responsible for certain sections of the laboratory administration. The suc cess of the director's work depends to a considerable extent upon the smooth and harmonious cooperation of this staff. Since many of the more important sci entific discoveries have been made by m e n of genius, there i s a general belief that research work must rely upon such m e n for its execution and that t h e prosecution of research depends upon the develop ment of men o f exceptional caliber. Though it is true that men differ greatly in ability and that their value for research work varies, the fact remains that much scientific research depends upon the a c cumulation of facts and measurements, a n accumulation requiring many years of patient labor by numbers of investigators. In considering t h e planning of research laboratories, it carmot be assumed that men w h o are geniuses can be obtained. All that can be assumed is that it will b e possible to obtain at a fair rate of recom
pense, well-trained, average men having a tuste for research and a certain ability for investigation. The effective use of these men will depend upon organization and maintenance of communications. Internal Organization Scientists collaborating in the investiga tion of technical problems require some form of organization to define their duties, individual responsibilities, and privileges. T h e organization should encourage free dom, cooperation, and initiative, and pro vide for t h e development of group enter prise. It should be considerate of t h e idiosyncrasies of individuals, and on n o account should it limit or hinder t h e work i n hand. The only virtue in organization o f any sort is to assist the scientist and t h e technical supervision to this end. The individual is the ultimate unit of t h e laboratory organization, but his ac tivities must in many cases b e integrated with those of others, and this naturally leads to the formation of a group of workers w h o have certain objectives or knowledge in common. Such a group m a y b e concerned with only one phase of a broad program or field of science or tech nology, related work being done by others. T o coordinate the parts of the whole program, the separate groups are com bined into a larger organizational unit. T h e process of combining laboratory units
JOHN ANDREWS LEERMAKERS, Nebraska-born after receiving an education from Iowa State
College, CaïTech. and Harvard, joined Eastman Kodak Co. in 1934 as a research chemist. H e became technical assistant t o the director of research in 1943 and ascended to his present post as assistant director in 1947. H e is a civilian member of the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. His specialties are the kinetics of photochemical and thermal decompositions o f organic compounds; the mechanism of optical sensitization o f photographic emulsions; and the preparation a n d properties of photographic emulsions. .. ..- i-i^t*
C H E M I C A L
"-'•.AU;·,.5·,""· J.
A N D ENGINEERING
NEWS
progresses to a point where the individuals can no longer work effectively and creatively; this point may b e readied with a unit consisting of one individual, or the consolidation may continue until there are one hundred or more persons included within a single major laboratory division. The size and disposition of the groups depend principally o n the system used by the director to allocate, inordinate, and guide the work of the laboratory. The organization of an intermediate- or large-size laboratory should primarily fit the personnel involved. The obvious parallel for such a system is the form used for the organization of factories, in which the various supervisory levels correspond to ranks with direct line responsibility. Such a system, however, gives a very poor approximation to the organization of a research laboratory. T h e departure from the strict line organization results from the direct contacts between the director and the technical men, and between the men in the different departments at all supervisory or working levels. The director sets the policy that determines the extent of such by-passing of lines of authority and, consequently, the pattern of technical direction of the work. A number of logical bases can b e used in grouping the scientists and technologists in a large laboratory. Examples may be found of grouping according to fields of science or technology (that is, chemistry, physics, metallurgy ) . fields of investigation ( that is, high polymers, color photography, x-ray tubes), or to stage of application, such as fundamental research, applied research, development, or pilot plant. An important difference in the systems of grouping lies in the distribution of the technically trained staff among the departments. In the separation according to fields of science, each department is staffed only with men trained in closely related sciences, and therefore it is the exclusive source of research or development in that field. In the other systems, a department is staffed with scientists having whatever training is required to carry out its program, and may b e made up of chemists, physicists, metallurgists, or any other combination of specialists. In actual practice, most laboratories are hybrids of several of the departmental systems, with some grouping according to fields of science worked in with one of the other functional arrangements. There are obvious advantages and disadvantages to the different systems, and the best for a particular field oi research depends upon a number of factors. Perhaps the most important consideration is the degree to which the duplication of skill, knowledge, and equipment in the functional organization is offset by the greater simplicity and directness of coordination and planning of the work. This duplication can b e avoided to a certain extent if a department is established to provide research development or service assistance to all of the departments concerned with special fields of work. A laboratory devoted mainly to fundaV O L U M E S 9,
NO.
32
mental and applied research is usually operated by ' .>>steni pennitting maximum freedom »«.»r the nsoarch workers. T h e need for close coordination of work between groups is not so great as in the case or development work, and laboratory units can be formed according to the needs of the problems and programs. Such groups are smaller than those engaged in development work. The greatest emphasis in most industrial laboratories is placed on development, that is, on the improvement of existing or the introduction of new products and processes. For such work, close coordination of the problems and programs is essential from their very early stages to the point or commercial application. This coordination involves transition from laboratory group to laboratory group, and from the laboratory to the operating departments. In organizing a laboratory of this type, a system should be set up tor ensuring effective cooperation both within the laboratory and between the laboratory and the operating departments. Such cooperation can only be maintained by constant attention on the part of the laboratory supervision, and consequently a more direct system of technical control is required than for the research-type laboratory. T h e Direction of Research The success of any industrial research laboratory rests to a large extent upon the guidance which the scientists receive from the research director and the scientific supervision in selecting and carrying on their technical investigations. It is important, therefore, that the research director retain an active interest in the technical work of the laboratory and not allow administrative matters t o occupy all his attention. The objectives of the laboratory must b e kept clearly in mind in establishing any system for research direction. T h e basic problems are to select, assign, coordinate, guide, report, and, finally, bring to commercial application the work of the laboratory. The most important aim is that of ultimately making commercial use of the information accumulated, whether it be of indirect value, as in the case of fundamental research, or of direct value, as in the case of development work. The direct objectives of an industrial research laboratory are fundamental research, research and development on n e w products and processes, and the improvement of existing products and processes. For a number of large research laboratories, approximately 1 0 t o 20 hlciiis are undertaken at the request or suggestion of departments outside the laboratory, but by far the majority are Miggested in the laboratory by individual >cientists, section heads, department heads, .mti tht- director. Fundamental research problems usually originate with the individual scientists, although the director
