Realities of R&D as a business: MBI's experience

The level of effort in a R&D activity on research or development depends upon whether the R&D activity is basic or applied. In general, the R&D at a university is focused more on the research (R of R&D) whereas the emphasis in an industrial R&D is more on the development (D of R&D) and less on research. In the past, this created a gap difficult to bridge between the R&D needs of an industrial sector and the R&D output from university and governmental laboratories. The recent success in R&D as a business has mainly been due to understanding the critical steps needed to take an idea to a marketplace and, thus, the emphasis on R or D has become a moving target depending upon the need. MBI International, a non‐profit R&D organization, was created to bridge the gap between academic and industrial R&D and to validate, develop and demonstrate technologies having commercial potential in the industrial sector. In the process, MBI developed partnerships with universities, governmental agencies, foundations, and industries to resource innovative technologies, funds, physical facilities and market opportunities to make the R&D business a reality. In this paper, we present MBI's experience in developing and commercializing R&D technologies in several new spin‐off companies, joint ventures, and out‐licensing.     

In-house R&D management development — strategy and implementation in a major government R&D agency

Abstract
The paper describes the experiences of CSIR in developing an in-house capability and implementation process of R&D management development programmes. The conceptual approach of the laboratory-based R&D management development programmes is described. Different phases in the process of implementation are presented along with the case studies of recent training programmes in two different laboratories. Some of the key aspects of the training programmes —- successful implementation, relationship with policy-making, and improving R&D performance have been examined. The role of international co-operation in R&D management development is suggested. The paper also discusses the future prospects of R&D management development programmes in the country.     

Research and development (R&D) beyond manufacturing: the strange case of services R&D

The share of business research and development (R&D) expenditure stemming from the services sector of the economy has been growing rapidly in many (though not all) OECD countries, according to official statistics. The same data sources also indicate, however, that services contribute less to R&D than would be expected given their large shares of employment and output in national economies. In part, incomplete sampling of services in R&D surveys may lead to some underestimation of their R&D activity, but this is unlikely to account for their apparently poor performance. This paper draws on an analysis of existing statistical sources, and on interviews and workshops with service firms' managers. It finds difficulties associated with the ways in which R&D has been operationalised in survey questions. Examination of survey questionnaires suggests that the formulation of these questions, focusing on technological R&D and ruling out much social scientific R&D, disproportionately reduces the reporting of R&D by service firms. But beyond this, the R&D concept itself has some problematic features where it comes to documenting innovation in service firms. This was investigated through a programme of interviews and workshops with service firms, where a lack of familiarity with the R&D concept and R&D management practices was found to be commonplace. R&D performance and innovation activities vary across services of different sorts, even though most service subsectors appear to be low R&D investors. It is thus important to examine services' innovation patterns and processes, to establish what types of R&D‐like activity are underway in these subsectors. While some modification in R&D measurement would be desirable to capture services' activities, effort to understand the non‐R&D elements of services innovation is also important – for management and for policy (given that governments are seeking to create R&D incentives and targets for services and other sectors). There are grounds for expecting (a) services' share of business R&D to continue to grow; (b) this share to continue to be well below what would be expected from the prevalence of services in economic activity, and (c) for many services' innovation to continue to rely heavily on sources that are not directly associated with R&D.     

The growth and management of R&D outsourcing: evidence from UK pharmaceuticals

Outsourcing of research and development (R&D) activities has become a major management issue for R&D and technical managers within firms. It has also been of growing concern to academics who are trying to chart the implications of the increasingly distributed nature of research and innovative activities in advanced economies. This study is based on a survey of research-based pharmaceutical companies operating in the United Kingdom conducted in 2004–2006. The aim of this paper is to outline the main reasons for pharmaceutical firms to outsource R&D and the management practices followed by such companies in relation to outsourcing. The research results provide interesting findings in relation to, for example, the reasons behind outsourcing, the decision-making processes behind such practices and barriers to outsourcing arrangements. These issues are evaluated together with the characteristics of the firms and the specific project outsourced.     

R&D at Indian Organic Chemicals Limited (IOCL) – from a service to an enterprise: a case study

IOCL is a pioneer in the country in the field of bulk chemical manufacture. The company achieved its leadership position by utilizing the locally available feedstock i.e. ethyl alcohol from molasses and homegrown technologies to produce a range of bulk chemicals. The R&D activity in the company started almost simultaneously with the erection of the first production plant. It was envisaged to play a role of a typical ‘in-house’ R&D set up. Thus, its activities encompassed the traditional spectrum that most in-house R&D departments of the times were built to perform. These were: 1. Supporting ongoing production activity. 2. Value addition by extending the product line. 3. Improving the quality of the products. The R&D department played these roles competently. Towards this end, the department was well served by trained task oriented staff. However, perhaps the very success of its efforts led to the development of a highly inward-looking culture. However, the post liberalization era brought with it a new set of challenges. With entry barriers slowly diminishing, the company was no longer able to sustain its position of pre-eminence in the fields that it was a leader. Local competition by leaner and meaner players equipped with better technology also played its part in this erosion. Unfavourable economies of scale and lower margins on the traditional products led to the management to rethink on future business strategy. A change of course was called for. For a company with IOCL’s resources, the course change that the management thought would preserve share holder value, was to shift the product mix from bulk chemicals characterized by high volume/low value to fine and specialty areas characterized by low volumes and high value. It decided that the R&D would provide the driving force for this strategic change. In essence, the R&D would be supporting a cluster of new activities, which would be revenue generating and thus be able to metamorphose from a cost center to a profit center. In order to play its new role, the R&D required to redefine its own character. Several changes in the existing systems and introduction of some newer management practices were necessary. The steps to be taken were identified as follows: 1. Shifting from a skill-based to knowledge-based staffing; 2. Creating a structured approach to project management; 3. Initiating a multi functional approach to shorten the project time cycles; 4. Putting in place mechanisms to interface and interact with the customers; 5. Inculcate a business orientation into a traditionally groomed group of scientists and technicians; 6. Integrating the activities of R&D into the enterprise resource planning network of the company; 7. Most importantly, set up a mechanism to market the R&D services.     

The impact of EC R&D programmes on corporate R&D practice in Europe: a knowledge-base approach

This paper examines the role of additionality in the impact of EC R&D pro-grammes on firms. It comes from a study of the Impact of the EC Framework Pro-gramme on European Industry, which was sponsored by the Support Programme for Evaluation Activities in Research (SPEAR) of the EC. The argument is that there is an interaction between ie use of additional R&D resources, the organization of the R&D process, and the exploitation of R&D results. The analysis of the R&D process takes place within a framework based on the concept of the knowledge-base of the firm. A number of case studies are discussed and conclusions are drawn as to the impact of the EC Framework Pro-gramme on European firms.     

Assessing collaborative, pre-competitive R&D projects: the case of the UK LINK scheme

The paper addresses the evaluation of outcomes of collaborative, pre-competitive R&D projects. It draws on some empirical analysis carried out on data and information gathered under the UK 'LINK' scheme, a programme supporting R&D collaborative projects and assessing collaboration outcomes. A new indicator of performance, based on the outputs of LINK projects, has been constructed. It provides a relative and quite consistent measure of performance for making comparisons among different LINK projects. However it does not correlate with the more subjective grade applied by LINK's own management. For further improving evaluating mechanisms, more attention should be paid to the benefits that universities and companies as well as governments are drawing from R&D collaborations.     

Determinants of increasing R&D complexity in affiliates of manufacturing multinational corporations in the UK

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the technological trajectories of the UK subsidiaries of manufacturing multinational corporations as measured by changes in their R&D complexity over a five year period. The data was gathered from a postal survey of 500 randomly selected subsidiaries in the UK; of the respondents that had been established in Britain for at least five years, 16 were found to demonstrate decreasing and 48 increasing complexity of R&D activities. These 64 firms were compared across a number of strategic variables, and a powerful logistic regression model developed that predicts technological trajectories with great precision.
The key variables in the model were differences (over five years) in sales volume, decision making autonomy about human resource matters in the subsidiary, sensitivity to the needs of sister subsidiaries when developing new products, heterogeneity of the subsidiary's markets, and the degree of localization of certain control functions. The central lesson for the subsidiary R&D manager is that HQ undertakings about R&D strategy as it concerns the subsidiary may be fairly accurately evaluated via the model and its five strategic variables.     

The R&D performance in Taiwan's electronics industry: a longitudinal examination

R&D investment has been widely regarded as an important input for firms, particularly for high‐tech firms, to achieve competitive advantage within their industry. Hence, a number of high‐tech firms are now investing substantial amounts into R&D. Since R&D efforts enable firms to raise the competitive advantage, one noticeable and interesting issue expected to know is the degree to which R&D investment influences firm output performance. In Taiwan, much greater emphasis is also being placed into R&D investment in the high‐tech industries; however, R&D output performance has never been seriously examined within this sector. Since the island's electronics industry is widely regarded as the most promising industry in the ‘high‐tech sector’, and is expected to place greatest emphasis on its R&D efforts, we take the electronics firms as our analytical sample. This paper therefore sets out to estimate the impact of R&D on firm performance, in terms of productivity growth and the rate of return on investment, within the electronics industry in Taiwan, whilst also examining the Schumpeterian hypothesis, that R&D performance is an increasing function of firm size. Our examination of R&D performance is based on a panel sample of 83 large electronics firms, completely balanced over the period from 1994 to 2000, with series data of R&D capital also being constructed. Based upon the extended Cobb‐Douglas production function, a random effects model is developed with the estimations revealing that the output elasticity of R&D is around 0.19 and the average rate of return on R&D is around 22%. These findings clearly demonstrate that investment in R&D by these electronics firms has had an impact on their competitive advantage. Compared to the findings of previous studies, where the analytical unit of data was at firm level, here the rate of return on R&D is consistent with similar estimates for the US and UK, but lower than those for Japan. However, our estimations do not provide support for the hypothesis that the impact of R&D on productivity is an increasing function of firm size.     

White collar unions in R & D: some UK experience

A survey of 34 UK R & D organizations found that over 60% recognized unions at some level. Many had negotiated full bargaining agreements for particular groups of staff. Although unions came in for plenty of criticism, on the whole organizations which had recognized unions felt far less negatively about them than those which had not. The former were sometimes able to point to specific benefits they had gained from dealing with white collar unions.     

Towards networked R&D management: the R&D approach of Sonera Corporation as an example

In this paper the authors delineate the challenges of a dynamic environment to R&D management. The authors build on most recent ideas, such as the dynamic capability view of the firm, as strategic foundation for modern R&D management. Collaboration is emphasized as a meta-capability for innovation. These ideas are merged into a 'Networked R&D Management' approach that emphasizes internal and external collaboration networks as critical for companies operating in a dynamic business environment. The approach is illustrated with ICT industry as an example. The implementation of Networked R&D Management is reflected in the illustrative case discussion of R&D management of Sonera Corporation.     

The importance of internal and external R&D network linkages for R&D organisations: evidence from Singapore

This paper examines the importance of internal and external R&D networks for R&D organisations of multinational firms (MNCs) in Singapore and investigates corresponding R&D management requirements in this context, namely a late-industrialising country in Asia. A unique feature of Singapore is its ability to attract 'high quality' foreign direct investment, involving activities of higher value added and more complex technology without having developed full-fledged R&D activities among its business organisations, thus creating a challenging situation for subsidiary R&D managers, both in the internal R&D organisation as well as in the external research environment. This paper analyses these issues.
Based on in-depth interviews with 53 R&D subsidiaries of MNCs operating in Singapore, this paper identifies internal and external R&D management needs. Through our analysis of data gleaned from these interviews, we found that subsidiary R&D managers need to increase and/or maintain the strategic importance of their R&D site internally within their global corporate R&D organisation. This requires constant upgrading of the technological level at the R&D subsidiary and intense communication with headquarters as well as other R&D subsidiaries. Furthermore, our findings indicate that in the external research environment, subsidiary R&D managers need to create an efficient local network of external players. If these internal and external issues are properly addressed, the R&D subsidiary can effectively contribute to the corporate R&D organisation and be a critical partner in the local research network. Lessons learned from the Singapore experience include the need to develop sufficient local expertise as well as to change the mindset of managers to focus on creativity rather than precise execution.     

International management of R&D: The Swedish Experience

This paper summarizes the results of in-depth case studies of international R&D management in four Swedish multinational corporations. The results suggest that foreign volumes and shares of R&D expenditures are rapidly increasing. Through a rapidly increasing number of foreign acquisitions, foreign R&D laboratories have been added. As part of international rationalization of production, foreign units have been given global product mandates with responsibility both for manufacturing and R&D. In maturing foreign subsidiaries, routine technical activities have often evolved into proper R&D. Tight labour market conditions for engineers in Sweden have made it increasingly necessary to exploit existing technical capacity, regardless of location.
Concurrently, companies face new pressures for international coordination and control of R&D. Coordination is required to reduce product differentiation, to facilitate technology transfer and to ensure the technical and market compatibility of products and components developed at different locations but sold as part of total systems. Drawing on the experience in the four investigated companies, the paper discusses how systems and procedures can be developed to meet the need for coordinated international R&D management.     

The roles of R&D team leaders in Korea: a contingent approach

This study empirically examines the relationship between the role of R&D project leaders and their team performance using data from 87 project teams in 6 R&D organizations in Korea. The results reveal that:
(1) R&D project leaders played five different roles in performing their jobs – strategic planner, team builder, gatekeeper, technical expert, and champion;
(2) All but the champion role of a leader is positively related with project team performance;
(3) However, this relationship between the role of leader and project team performance varies according to the characteristics of R&D project teams and their tasks.
Specifically, it becomes important for a leader to focus less on the team building role as the team gets older. The team building role of a leader, however, is more important for higher performance of relatively certain R&D projects, while for uncertain R&D projects, the strategic planning role appears to be more crucial. Based on these results, this study discusses several managerial and theoretical issues related to the role of a leader in R&D project teams.     

Strategy in pharmaceutical R&D: a portfolio risk matrix

The management of any research-intensive company must weigh carefully the expenditure on any particular development product with the sales revenues that are likely to be obtained when the new product is introduced to the market. In particular, the technical risk (whether the development product results in a marketable product) and the market risk (whether the new product can be introduced to a suitable market niche where it will generate the required revenues) have to be scrutinised.
This paper sets out to develop an original model by Drews into a methodology for assessing the risk associated with a company's research portfolio. To test a model they had developed, the authors carried out in-depth interviews with three British pharmaceutical multinational companies, and compared the overall technical/market risk profiles of their respective development portfolios. Some interesting differences between the three were detected in terms of the overall risk profiles, in market risk, and in technical risk. The authors conclude that the matrix described here may be a useful tool in discriminating between the risk levels of the research portfolios of several companies; it may also be useful for plotting the movement of a particular firm's research risk over time.
While this paper concentrates on comparing the portfolios of three pharmaceutical firms at a particular point in time, R&D managers in other industries and other situations may find some evaluative utility in the model.     

System modeling of the R&D domain through the object–process methodology: a practical tool to help R&D satisfy its customers' needs

Research and Development is an intricate process involving a host of challenging technological frontiers. This paper presents a practical tool to help R&D personnel satisfy the needs of customers by a systematic evaluation of R&D performance. To establish a sound methodology for R&D performance evaluation, we employ the object-process analysis (OPA) part of the object–process methodology. Using OPA, we gradually expose the constituents of the R&D system, its environment and the interaction between them. Through this systematic top-down refinement, we provide a comprehensive generic view of the R&D domain. The framework presented in the paper allows the user to describe, order, and inter-relate the issues that R&D managers should consider when managing, evaluating and planning R&D. As the approach addresses structure and behaviour in a unified, integrated manner, the analysis provides insights into both the static and dynamic aspects of the R&D domain and establishes a solid basis for its enterprise modeling.     

Bell system R&D activities: The impact of divestiture

Divestiture of the US Bell System in 1984 caused concern about the future of research and development activities conducted at Bell Labs. This article 4describes the history of R&D in the Bell System, and in the organizations which have been formed since divestiture, and looks at likely future trends in research. In terms of both staffing and funding levels, no major changes have occurred as a result of divestiture. However, competitive pressures on AT&T may cause AT&T Bell Labs to be more secretive and proprietary about its research. There is also cause for concern about the stability of funding levels. Vigilance is warranted for the future.