business
R&D, environmental issues focus of European chemical meeting Sunny weather and a thwarted demonstration by Greenpeace environmental activists had chemical industry executives in good humor at the Society of Chemical Industry (SCI) European Chemical Industry meeting in Venice earlier this month. Even challenging words about some of the factors directly influencing the future of industry—environmental concerns and R&D, among others—were factors to think seriously about, not worrisome problems to spoil the day. In fact, "optimism" was on the agenda for Bryan Sanderson, chief executive officer of BP Chemicals and chairman of the conference. "Too often, we have lost our self-esteem and started with a negative attitude. Let's strike a blow for optimism. "There are many who think nongovernmental organizations [NGOs], including environmental groups, consumer organizations, and so on, and big companies have taken over the roles that used to be held by national governments," said Sanderson. "That's an exaggeration, perhaps, but they do help set our agendas: Ethical issues may take as much managerial time over the next 10 years as environment has over the past decade." However, the choice of debate forum can be important, too. SCI organizers took to heart the lesson learned two years ago in Venice at the annual meeting of the European Chemical Market Research Association. That year, in a surprise assault on the conference hotel, the environmental activist group Greenpeace disrupted thefirstmorning of the conference. This year, a strong force of police kept Greenpeace activists hovering just beyond the shore of Venice's lido. To disrupt this audience of top executives would have been a stunning coup for Greenpeace, but with the element of surprise gone, the opportunity for a daring hotel assault—and publicity—was lost. Despite the blocking of Greenpeace, the environment was on the mind of one of the speakers. Pieter Winsemius, a director at the international management consulting firm McKinsey & Co., said there is an inherent tension among chemical companies, NGOs, and governments regarding improvements in environmental performance. This tension, he said, "complicates things immensely." He gave an unusual perspective to the issue, modifying for industry the classic 24 OCTOBER 20, 1997 C&EN
councils for the U.K. Office of Science & Technology—essentially the man responsible for the U.K. research budget. Cadogan made an impassioned plea for continued strong science in the European chemical industry. One reason for the industry's success, he suggested, is "a strong science and engineering base in universities and their relationships with industry. It's patchy, of course, but still strong. "Research opens doors to entirely new opportunities. The prize goes to those who recognize this and harness it. We need people who can think the unthinkable and change mind-sets rather than invent widgets to order," he said. "Your industry understands that without outstanding basic and strategic research, there is no applied research; without applied research, there is no development; without development, there are no products, processes, and services. Without the science base, there is no innovation, and without innovation, there is no competitiveness." Outsourcing noncore activities is a popular way to cut costs, he said, but the need is also to recognize that "insourcing"—putting effort into accessing new science and engineering from external sources—is also essential for competitiveness. Not only must there be an excellent science base available, but companies must also have a high-quality in-house scientific resource able to recognize a good thing when it sees it: "You can't go out and buy scientific expertise in the supermarket if you don't know what to buy or what you are buying," he observed. The age of discoveries is far from being over, Cadogan commented during a panel Sanderson: strike a blow for optimism session. For example, combinatorial chemistry promises significant opportunities environmental response more mature and over the next decade. "The human gesophisticated than in the past. Responsible nome will be cracked, opening 100,000 Care is appropriate for this—it is well rec- closed books of information. Once those ognized. The chemical industry, if any- books are open, they are there for anybody to read. It's important for Europeans thing, is not proud enough of it." Industry's response, he added, is being to be there with money to take the risks." Another panel member, Albert Richdesigned to meet demands coming more from sources other than the govern- ards, a managing director of finance house ments—for example, from NGOs, the Salomon Brothers, agreed and predicted public, and so on. This poses particular dif- that the money would be available. ficulties for the chemical industry, which "Wall Street has shown the ability to works in countries with wide differences in throw huge money at searching for neetheir economic development, and hence, dles in a haystack in pharmaceuticals and with wide variations in their Maslow levels. biotechnological research," he pointed On the other hand, "NGOs are applying a out. "It is a bit of a paradox: Wall Street fourth-level perspective across the board" appears to be overly focused on perforand thereby complicating matters. mance during the past quarter for an onManagers also have a duty to ensure a going company, but is willing to put fabstrong R&D capability to underpin their ulous values on companies that are only company's competitiveness, said Sir John a concept, or just starting up." Cadogan, director general of research Patricia Layman theory of hierarchy of needs of individuals developed in the 1950s by management psychologist A. H. Maslow: a fivelevel hierarchy beginning with (1) basic needs and progressing to (2) safety and security, (3) belonging, (4) respect, and culminating in (5) self-actualization. "Maslow said you cannot... progress without satisfying the needs at each level," Winsemius said. For the chemical industry, the problem is clear: Different groups are at different levels in the hierarchy, and that gap has great ramifications for environmental policy. The European chemical industry currently is at level 3, trying to escalate to level 4, he suggested. "The industry wants to be a respected part of society, not an [outsider] . Many companies are developing an
