University-Industry Cooperative Research: Expectations, Rewards

4 University-Industry Cooperative Research: Expectations, Rewards, and Problems CHARLES W. GEHRKE and ROBERT W. ZUMWALT

Downloaded by FUDAN UNIV on February 3, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: February 6, 1984 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1984-0244.ch004

Department of Biochemistry and Experiment Station Chemical Laboratories, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211

The title of this presentation covers a range of interrelated subjects: expectations, rewards, and problems associated with cooperative research between industry and the academic institution. These are critical attributes to the understanding of this interface. I will refer to these points and also present an industry-university program to improve the effectiveness of research in our universities. First, in a historical context, "the founders of the American political system clearly believed that the secrets of nature must be better known so that they might be used to advance the welfare of a l l our people...From the very outset of our Republic, the government of the United States has sought to encourage science and learning." These statements were made by President Eisenhower (1) at a time when the government support of science was at an a l l time high and science administrators were vitally concerned with types of support which would best increase basic research in our universities. One-half of a l l basic research of this nation is conducted in the universities (2), and "no one would think of defining a university leaving out basic research as one of its foundation stones" (3). Glen T. Seaborg (4) clearly presented the relationship of the university to basic research. He stated "that beyond question the university graduate school is the most effective device we have for the cultivation of the intellectual powers of a potential scientific investigator." A l l components are there: teachers, students, atmosphere, drive, interrelated disciplines, libraries, etc. He also indicated "there is a need to attract and identify increasing numbers of people capable of creative thinking. Now we are again f a c i n g a growing concern that the u s u a l forms of f i n a n c i a l support of research should be supplemented by d i f f e r e n t approaches and there are strong i n d i c a t i o n s that our e f f o r t s i n science education are inadequate. Since "ideas and the development of ideas are weapons," (5) our s u r v i v a l as a n a t i o n depends upon the c o n t r i b u t i o n s of our s c i e n t i s t s (6). 0097-6156/ 84/0244-0021 $06.00/ 0 © 1984 American Chemical Society

Runser; Industrial-Academic Interfacing ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1984.

22

INDUSTRIAL-ACADEMIC INTERFACING

The a c c e l e r a t e d tempo of change i n many spheres of knowledge and the problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h these changes have p l a c e heavy r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s on the personnel, r e s e a r c h , and e d u c a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s of our i n s t i t u t i o n s of higher l e a r n i n g . I b e l i e v e that new t h r u s t s t o a i d research as a p a r t of science education are needed i f t h i s n a t i o n expects to go forward i n b a s i c research and graduate education. Teaching through research i s a most important p a r t i n the education of f u t u r e s c i e n t i s t s . Whether the q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y of b a s i c research and graduate education i n the United States i n the 1980 s w i l l be adequate or inadequate depends to a considerable extent upon new and i n n o v a t i v e programs of support from sources other than the government, such as the N a t i o n a l Science Foundation and N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e s of Health. Downloaded by FUDAN UNIV on February 3, 2017 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: February 6, 1984 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1984-0244.ch004

f

Some Considerations f o r Industry and Academe: In my experience w i t h u n i v e r s i t y - i n d u s t r y cooperative r e s e a r c h , I have seen programs that have been very s u c c e s s f u l , as w e l l as programs that were u n s u c c e s s f u l . I t seems that the s u c c e s s f u l programs a l l have some general f e a t u r e s i n common that are d i r e c t l y concerned w i t h the expectations o f , and rewards f o r , the r e s p e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t s . I n t h i s l i g h t the f o l l o w i n g areas w i l l be discussed. The "Expectations". A. What does the academic s c i e n t i s t s expect when cooperating w i t h i n d u s t r y ? B. What can i n d u s t r y expect from the academic s c i e n t i s t , and the academic i n s t i t u t i o n ? The "Rewards". A. What are the rewards f o r the academic i n s t i t u t i o n ? B. What are the rewards f o r p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y ? C. What are the rewards f o r the academic s c i e n t i s t ? The "Problems". A. What are the problems f o r the academic s c i e n t i s t ? B. What are the problems f o r the academic i n s t i t u tion? A L i b r a r y of Instruments P l a n . and U n i v e r s i t i e s .

A. R e s p o n s i b i l i t y of Colleges

A Research C o u n c i l P l a n f o r I n d u s t r y - U n i v e r s i t y Research. A. Approaches and recommendations. The

"Expectations"

A. F i r s t , expectations of the s c i e n t i s t i n academia. What are the u s u a l e x p e c t a t i o n s , or assumptions, of the academic s c i e n t i s t regarding cooperative research w i t h h i s counterparts i n i n d u s t r y ? R i g h t l y or wrongly, the academic s c i e n t i s t u s u a l l y assumes the g o a l ( s ) of the research p r o j e c t w i l l be w e l l - d e f i n e d and achievable i n the r e l a t i v e l y short term, e s p e c i a l l y i f the


4.

GEHRKE AND

ZUMWALT

University-Industry Cooperative Research

23


research program or p r o j e c t i s being proposed by i n d u s t r y , and the i n d u s t r y i s seeking cooperation from a s c i e n t i s t ( s ) i n an academic i n s t i t u t i o n . The academic s c i e n t i s t a l s o expects that s u b s t a n t i a l progress or s u c c e s s f u l completion of the p r o j e c t w i l l r e s u l t i n economic b e n e f i t to the i n d u s t r y , and t h e r e f o r e tends to view i n d u s t r i a l research i n general as perhaps more short-term g o a l - o r i e n t e d than h i s / h e r own research program at the u n i v e r s i t y which i s c o n s i d e r ed more long range. To o v e r s i m p l i f y , the academic s c i e n t i s t r e gards the primary product of s u c c e s s f u l academic research as knowledge, w h i l e the products of s u c c e s s f u l i n d u s t r i a l research are m u l t i p l e and v a r i e d ; eg. new or improved products, new s e r v i c e s , and increased corporate earnings and growth of the company. B. What can, and should, i n d u s t r y expect from the academic s c i e n t i s t , and the academic i n s t i t u t i o n ? F i r s t , the academic s c i e n t i s t can provide a p e r s p e c t i v e of the research problem that w i l l tend to be somewhat d i f f e r e n t from that of h i s colleagues i n i n d u s t r y . The academic s c i e n t i s t g e n e r a l l y conducts h i s own research f a i r l y independently, and t h e r e f o r e can provide a p o i n t of view to i n d u s t r y that could be of c o n s i d e r a b l e value i n approach and s o l u t i o n of the problem. Secondly, the academic s c i e n t i s t should not be expected i n any way to use the i n s t i t u t i o n s ' resources to s u b s i d i z e a p a r t i c u l a r i n d u s t r i a l f i r m f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n . This i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e f o r the academic s c i e n t i s t s employed at p u b l i c academic i n s t i t u t i o n s . Industrial f i r m s need to be aware of the academic s c i e n t i s t ' s concerns i n t h i s area. That i s , the d i r e c t i o n and type of proposed u n i v e r s i t y - i n d u s t r y cooperative research must not be seen to h i n d e r , or be i n c o n f l i c t w i t h , the m i s s i o n or r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of the p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n . The research programs should be mutually acceptable to both and a l s o to advance the research programs of the academic s c i e n t i s t . Thus, i n d u s t r y can expect the f u l l cooperation of the p u b l i c academic i n s t i t u t i o n i n programs that can be seen to b e n e f i t the i n s t i t u t i o n , the p r o f e s s i o n a l i s m of the s c i e n t i s t , and the p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n s c o n s t i t u e n t s : the public. At the p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t y , however, i n d u s t r y - p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t y cooperative research may be subject to somewhat l e s s s c r u t i n y , as the funding of such i n s t i t u t i o n s may be mainly from non-public sources. 1

The "Rewards" A. The p o t e n t i a l rewards f o r the academic i n s t i t u t i o n are: 1. F i n a n c i a l ; 2. Improvement of p u b l i c i m a g e — t h e u n i v e r s i t y could be seen to be i n v o l v e d i n s o l v i n g " r e a l world" problems, and c o n t r i b u t i n g to the w e l f a r e of the community, s t a t e , and n a t i o n ; and 3. P r e s t i g e and s t a t u s are a l s o i n v o l v e d . For example, i n instances i n which u n i v e r s i t i e s r e c e i v e very s u b s t a n t i a l


24


funding, the i n s t i t u t i o n i s recognized among peer i n s t i t u t i o n s as a leader i n a p a r t i c u l a r research area, B. Rewards and Advantages f o r Industry. These are: 1. Industry can achieve immediate access to s c i e n t i f i c e x p e r t i s e and f a c i l i t i e s a t a r e l a t i v e low c o s t ; 2. Access t o a "network of experts u s u a l l y i s a l s o p o s s i b l e , as academic s c i e n t i s t s exchange i n f o r mation among themselves more f r e e l y than s c i e n t i s t s i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r (eg. experimental r e s u l t s are p u b l i s h e d i n j o u r n a l a r t i c l e s , and are not u s u a l l y h e l d as "trade s e c r e t s . " ) 3. Exposure t o a d d i t i o n a l and new p o i n t s o f view regarding s o l u t i o n of a research program. 4. The p u b l i c image of the company can a l s o be enhanced when the p u b l i c i s aware that the c o r p o r a t i o n i s cooperating i n programs w i t h an academic i n s t i t u tion.


11

C. Rewards f o r the Academic S c i e n t i s t . These are: 1. D i r e c t contact w i t h the l a t e s t developments and d i r e c t i o n s of i n d u s t r y provides a background that w i l l i n c r e a s e h i s e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n teaching and research. The s c i e n t i s t can then b e t t e r advise h i s students (and graduate students) of the needs and d i r e c t i o n s of i n d u s t r i a l research and development, and have an understanding of the problems the i n d u s t r y s c i e n t i s t must s o l v e i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . 2. Personal s a t i s f a c t i o n i s a reward a l s o i n successf u l l y a p p l y i n g h i s "academic" s k i l l s t o p r a c t i c a l p r o b l e m s — a l s o the p r o f e s s i o n a l development that takes p l a c e i n c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t i n g w i t h h i s counterparts i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r . 3. The academic s c i e n t i s t ' s r e c o g n i t i o n among h i s colleagues can a l s o be enhanced by s u c c e s s f u l l y c o n t r i b u t i n g t o a j o i n t research program w i t h i n d u s t r y . 4. F i n a n c i a l — A s any p r o f e s s i o n a l , the academic s c i e n t i s t expects t a n g i b l e b e n e f i t s f o r h i s research program from i n v e s t i n g h i s time, e x p e r t i s e , and e f f o r t s i n advancing the research p r o j e c t . I n a d d i t i o n , other b e n e f i t s a r e a v a i l a b l e as t r i p s , meetings, and new acquaintances. The

"Problems"

A. F o r the Academic S c i e n t i s t . I n some cases, i t appears t o the academic s c i e n t i s t that i n d u s t r y may have a misconception of the work, e f f o r t , money, and l e v e l of t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t i s e r e q u i r e d to solve a p a r t i c u l a r research problem, o r to answer c e r t a i n questions. For example, the academic s c i e n t i s t may be contacted as a means of " l a s t r e s o r t " to s o l v e a problem. The i n d u s t r i a l f i r m may have t r i e d f o r a s o l u t i o n , and being unable to achieve i t w i t h i n c o n s t r a i n t s of time and f i n a n c i a l o u t l a y , then contacted the academic s c i e n t i s t h o p e f u l l y to provide an answer. U s u a l l y there are no quick answers, and t h i s i s not a r e a l i s t i c expect a t i o n . A l s o , on an i n d u s t r i a l research p r o j e c t , the s c i e n t i s t has costs f o r everything from chemicals to dishwashers, and he


4.

GEHRKE AND ZUMWALT


25

must be accountable and able to document t h a t these c o s t s are t o t a l l y covered by non-public funding. F u r t h e r , i n s t i t u t i o n a l demands on the academic s c i e n t i s t s time f o r t e a c h i n g , committees, seminars and other d u t i e s prevent him from o b t a i n i n g short-term s o l u t i o n s to the problem. As a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n he needs to work i n a time frame of not l e s s than 6 months. We must keep i n mind the i n d u s t r y - u n i v e r s i t y p r o j e c t goals must be mutual i n b e n e f i t , somewhat long range, and f i t i n to the ongoing research program of the academic s c i e n t i s t .


f

B. "Problems f o r the Academic I n s t i t u t i o n . " The p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n must m a i n t a i n i t s r e p u t a t i o n as an o b j e c t i v e , non-biased e n t i t y dedicated to the highest of i d e a l s . Therefore, the i n s t i t u t i o n i s extremely s e n s i t i v e on i s s u e s d e a l i n g w i t h c o n t r o v e r s i a l areas of r e s e a r c h , e s p e c i a l l y i f i t views i t s e l f as s u s c e p t i b l e to p u b l i c c r i t i c i s m . In cooperating w i t h a p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n , i f the p r i v a t e f i r m i s cognizant of the i n s t i t u t i o n ' s s e n s i t i v i t y to r e p u t a t i o n , cooperation w i l l be achieved more e a s i l y . A L i b r a r y of Instruments

Plan

One of the most f r u s t r a t i n g f a c t o r s which dims the dreams of a research-minded f a c u l t y member i s inadequate f a c i l i t i e s . A l though most a d m i n i s t r a t o r s would count b a s i c r e s e a r c h as an important f u n c t i o n of a u n i v e r s i t y , the u n i v e r s i t i e s themselves have not g e n e r a l l y accepted the f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of an "emp l o y e r " to provide the t o o l s needed by the "employee." Where e l s e i n our s o c i e t y must the employee f u r n i s h major t o o l s ? Except f o r token amounts and the i n h e r i t a n c e l e f t by predecessors, the u n i v e r s i t y researcher i s expected to p r o v i d e h i s own equipment through the u s u a l channels, whether or not he i s adept at t h i s . Thus, seeking of funding becomes added to t e a c h i n g , student conferences, committees, and some a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a l l to be done p r i o r to r e s e a r c h . On the n a t i o n a l l e v e l , the chemical and b i o l o g i c a l i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n programs of NSF and NIH are s t r o n g l y b i a s e d i n favor of the e x c e s s i v e l y s e l f - c o n f i d e n t person and the " b i g operator". These programs are not w e l l - d e s i g n e d to favor the q u i e t l y c r e a t i v e s c h o l a r . In the average u n i v e r s i t y there are a few s c i e n t i s t s w i t h w e l l - r e c o g n i z e d research and/or f u n d - r a i s i n g a b i l i t i e s ; they have vigorous and rewarding graduate student programs. These f o r t u n a t e few represent a s m a l l f r a c t i o n of the research p o t e n t i a l on many campuses. Most s c i e n t i s t s i n most u n i v e r s i t i e s are the Ordinary Common Man of Science. He i s the one who w i l l do the b u l k of the t e a c h i n g — g o o d , bad, or i n d i f f e r e n t — a n d he i s the one who w i l l i d e n t i f y and develop the teacher-researcher p o t e n t i a l i n students. Since i t has been s u c c e s s f u l l y argued t h a t the o r d i n a r y u n i v e r s i t y s c i e n t i s t i s the key to the r e a l i z a t i o n of a great present and f u t u r e research p o t e n t i a l , the q u e s t i o n i s — b y what means can t h i s be accomplished?



26


A. R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of Colleges and U n i v e r s i t i e s . The u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o l l e g e s should accept the p r i n c i p l e that they, as employers, are o b l i g a t e d to provide the research-teachers w i t h a s u b s t a n t i a l percentage of the fundamental t o o l s of h i s t r a d e — i n t h i s way a r e a l burden would be l i f t e d from the i n d i v i d u a l s c i e n t i s t s w i t h obvious advantages. The u n i v e r s i t i e s should make a systematic e f f o r t to help to provide the accepted instruments of those sciences represented by t h e i r f a c u l t i e s . Each s c i e n t i s t should expect to have a v a i l a b l e somewhere on campus the needed equipment f o r h i s / h e r work i n a " l i b r a r y of instruments." The instruments would be a v a i l a b l e t o students and f a c u l t y f o r teaching and r e s e a r c h . I t i s of paramount importance t h a t the ideas and research o b j e c t i v e s must f i r s t come from the i n d i v i d u a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s across the s c i e n c e areas. Instruments, as we know, are only t o o l s f o r t e s t i n g ideas and t h e o r i e s . The major purpose for p r o v i d i n g t h i s " s p e c i a l i z e d f a c i l i t i e s , " simply s t a t e d , i s to support the p e r s o n a l research a c t i v i t i e s of the i n d i v i d u a l i n v e s t i g a t o r , and to strengthen the s t a t e d missions of the u n i v e r s i t y i n s c i e n c e research, t e a c h i n g , and p u b l i c s e r v i c e . In 1981, at the U n i v e r s i t y of Missouri-Columbia, our admini s t r a t i o n i n matching NSF Grants has s i g n i f i c a n t l y supported our research programs by p r o v i d i n g i n excess of $500,000 f o r s t a t e o f - t h e - a r t h i g h r e s o l u t i o n chromatographic and mass s p e c t r o m e t r i c i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , and two n u c l e a r magnetic resonance spectrometers. The t o t a l f a c i l i t y package c o s t about $1 m i l l i o n . More import a n t l y , f i n a n c i a l support has been provided by the U n i v e r s i t y f o r the e x p e r t i s e s a l a r y f o r 2 h i g h l e v e l s c i e n t i s t s and 2 t e c h n i c a l s t a f f to operate the f a c i l i t i e s , and to provide research-support on a u n i v e r s i t y - w i d e b a s i s . This i s one of the most important a d d i t i o n s to s c i e n c e at our u n i v e r s i t y i n the past 30 y e a r s , and sets the stage f o r the 1980s to experiment and t e s t the ideas of our r e s e a r c h e r s . A Research C o u n c i l P l a n (RCP) f o r U n i v e r s i t y - I n d u s t r y Research A. Approaches and Recommendations - Viewpoints. Industry and the academic i n s t i t u t i o n should view each other as resources — t h e academic i n s t i t u t i o n as a resource of e x p e r t i s e and i n f o r m a t i o n i n s h o r t time frame to i n d u s t r y a t r e l a t i v e l y low c o s t . Industry should make greater e f f o r t s to f i n d what e x p e r t i s e i s a v a i l a b l e so that they can use t h i s e x p e r t i s e , or have i t a v a i l a b l e f o r the f u t u r e to address t h e i r problems. The academic s c i e n t i s t i s g e n e r a l l y very r e c e p t i v e to i n q u i r i e s from i n d u s t r y , and a f t e r a l l , h i s "business" i s knowledge. As i s w e l l known, the u n i v e r s i t i e s are considered as the t e c h n i c a l center of g r a v i t y i n advancing the l e a d i n g edge of technology. On the other hand, the academic i n s t i t u t i o n should consider the i n d u s t r i a l f i r m as a p o t e n t i a l resource; a resource of current i n f o r m a t i o n on general i n d u s t r i a l d i r e c t i o n s , needs and problems to be s o l v e d i n the p r i v a t e s e c t o r .



4.

GEHRKE AND ZUMWALT


27

The U.S. House of Representatives has r e c e n t l y passed a b i l l that s e t s a s i d e a share of f e d e r a l research and development funds to advance i n n o v a t i o n by s m a l l f i r m s . C a l l e d the Small Business Innovation Research Program, the intended r e s u l t i s t h a t s m a l l f i r m s w i l l be spared, to an e x t e n t , the burdensome, u n c e r t a i n process of competing f o r R & D funds. Perhaps t h i s program could develop i n t o a s y n e r g i s t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h academe. In the Research C o u n c i l P l a n , i n d u s t r i a l f i r m s would make funds a v a i l a b l e as u n r e s t r i c t e d g i f t s to i n d i v i d u a l s c i e n t i s t s , or departments, or to the Research C o u n c i l f o r f a c u l t y competit i o n . These funds would be i n the range of $10,000 to $100,000 each. I n p a r t i c u l a r cases they could be c o n s i d e r a b l y g r e a t e r . Top and middle i n d u s t r y management would make contact w i t h s c i e n t i s t s who have the needed e x p e r t i s e to meet the goals of the problem to be s o l v e d . The u n i v e r s i t y and i n d u s t r y would j o i n t l y sponsor e f f o r t s f o r c l o s e communication between i n d u s t r y and academic s c i e n t i s t s on a l o c a l and r e g i o n a l b a s i s through forums, symposia, or a s p e c i f i c i n d u s t r y ( i e s ) day or week at the u n i v e r s i t y . Industry should accept the l e a d e r s h i p and i n i t i a t e contacts t h a t w i l l prove u s e f u l and mutually b e n e f i c i a l to both. Advantages of the "Research C o u n c i l P l a n " (7)• The Research Counc i l P l a n (RCP) provides the f o l l o w i n g advantages i n t h i s area: Crea t i v e research would be s t i m u l a t e d . 2. Support f o r research p r o j e c t s would be immediately a v a i l a b l e without drawing up formal d e t a i l e d p l a n s . 3. F a c u l t y w i t h newly acquired Ph.D. degrees could begin b a s i c research immediately w i t h a minimum of e f f o r t , red tape, and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e channels. 4. Many s m a l l p r o j e c t s and ideas would be probed which otherwise might be passed over due to a l a c k of personnel, f a c i l i t i e s , and support. 5. I n dustry would provide a s i n g l e grant to the c o l l e g e or u n i v e r s i t y , w h i l e the research c o u n c i l would be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r reviewing research proposals on the l o c a l scene. 6. Research Councils at the u n i v e r s i t y l e v e l are i n a good p o s i t i o n to help and encourage the researcher w i t h new p r o j e c t s . 7. Small c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s would p a r t i c i p a t e more e f f e c t i v e l y i n research. 8. RCP would improve education of graduate students by p r o v i d i n g access to modern science t o o l s and t e c h n i c a l supporting s e r v i c e s . 9. Expenses of handling research grants would be reduced. RCP would provide a workable s m a l l grants program so o b v i o u s l y needed i n the framework of c o l l e g e and u n i v e r s i t y research support. 10. RCP would s u s t a i n and strengthen present centers of e x c e l lence. 11. RCP a c t i v i t i e s would r e s u l t i n an i n c r e a s e d i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of c r e a t i v e t a l e n t . B a s i c research i s a major element of s u r v i v a l i n the new world of biotechnology, automation, and other science t e c h n o l o g i e s that has emerged and which w i l l be ever more evident i n the decade of the 1980s. What our u n i v e r s i t i e s now need at a l l of i t s l e v e l s of science i s other sources of funds to help i n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and



28


development of more c r e a t i v e minds; a constant flow of i d e a s , c o n v e n t i o n a l , t r a d i t i o n a l , unorthodox and unique; and a c l o s e r t i e between academe and i n d u s t r y t o tap the e x p e r t i s e of both groups t o s o l v e both fundamental and a p p l i e d problems. In most cases, s m a l l to medium-sized i n d u s t r i e s , unless they have a broad base, cannot and do not have e x p e r t i s e i n many areas of s c i e n c e , nor the funds, t o s e t up and operate expensive " L i b r a r y of Instruments" centers such a s : e l e c t r o n microscopy, NMR, chromatography-mass spectrometry, automated chemical systems, plasma spectroscopy, b i o e n g i n e e r i n g technology, complex animal c e n t e r s , and e n g i n e e r i n g systems. Many s p e c i a l i s t s a r e at u n i v e r s i t i e s . I n a u n i v e r s i t y - i n d u s t r y cooperative research venture, the goals of the r e s e a r c h problem can be mutual, even though the missions of the i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e d i f f e r e n t . The Research C o u n c i l P l a n could p l a y a dominant r o l e i n t h i s process t o b e n e f i t not only i n d u s t r y and the academic i n s t i t u t i o n , but the general p u b l i c as w e l l .

Literature Cited 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

7.

Eisenhower, D.W., Science: Handmaiden of Freedom, in Symposium of Basic Research (American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C., 1959) pp. 133-142. Waterman, A . T . , Basic Research in the United States, ibid., pp. 17-40. Gould, L.M., Basic Research and the Liberal Arts College, ibid., pp. 73-85. Seaborg, G.T., Chem. and Eng. News, 1957, 35, pp. 35-38. Gardner, J.W., "Overseas assignment," in Annual Report of the Carnegie Corporation of New York, 1959. Reynolds, O.E., "The Process of Science," Bulletin for Medical Research, 1960, 14, pp. 5-6, July-December. Killian, J.R., J r . , "Making Science a Vital Force in Foreign Policy," Science, 1961, 133, pp. 24-26, January. Luckey, Thomas D., Gehrke, Charles W., McDermott, Robert E., "Research Council Plan", School and Society, 1962, 90, No. 2203, pp. 29-31, January

RECEIVED June 13, 1983


University-Industry Cooperative Research: Expectations, Rewards

Recommend Documents