Going Global.pdf

7/27/2019 Going Global.pdf

1/16

E L S E V I E R R e s e a r c h P o li c y 2 4 ( 1 99 5 ) 1 6 9 - 1 8 4

r e s e a r c hp o l i c yG o i n g g lo b a l: t h e u s e o f I C T n e t w o r k s in r e s e a r ch

a n d d e v e l o p m e n t *Jeremy R. Howells

The Judge Institute of Manag ement Studies / Centre for Business Research, Unicersity o f Cam bridge, Fitzwilliam House,32 Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 IQY, UK( F i n a l v e r s i o n r e c e i v e d O c t o b e r 1 9 93 )

Abs t r a c t

Although the process of the internationalisation of Research and Development (R&D) has been partial andfragmentary, many multinational companies are now faced with coordinating and managing a range of R&Dlaboratories and technical and design centres spread across the world. The use of information and communicationtechnologies (ICTs) has been seen by R&D managers as one means of helping to deal with the problems and issuesthat have arisen with this expansion of international research networks. However, although communication withinthe R&D function has been seen as crucial in research and innovation performance, most of the stress in the use ofICT in research until recently has been in improving productivity. The paper explores some of the new ways thatcompanies are using computer-mediated communication systems as a way to improve communication and informa-tion flows between dispersed sites and in the new types of work organisation that are emerging. The paper concludesby looking at some of the benefits and problems associated with implementing these new structures and forms ofworking in R&D.

1 . I n t r o d u c t i o n

The post-war period has seen the gradual ex-pansion and development of overseas researchfacilities owned by multinational companies. AsPearce [58] has noted, the internationalisation ofResearch and Development (R&D) "has been byno means a persistent or generalised phe-nomenon" and its progress has varied, for exam-ple, according to the sector, firm nationality andtime period considered. Data from studies on theoverseas expansion of US-owned R &D facilities

* A n e a r l ie r v e r s io n o f th i s p a p e r w a s p r e s e n t e d a t t h e P I C TN a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e a t N e w p o r t , G w e n t , 2 3 - 2 5 M a r c h 1 9 9 2.

up to the early 1980s have indeed highlighted theslow and lumpy nature of its growth. Few woulddisagree with the assertion by Patel and Pavitt[57] that R&D and the production of technologyremain "far from global", particularly in terms ofthe lack of integration of the undeveloped Southwith the concentrations of research and technicalcapacity of the developed North.

Nevertheless, although R&D is not as yetglobalised, most would agree that it is undergoinga process of globalisation, albeit in a slow andfragmentary way. There have been a number ofreasons why academics have been so scepticalabout R&D internationalisation and for its rela-tive neglect by academics of R&D as a focus ofstudy [58]. One main reason is related to a convo-

0 0 4 8 - 7 3 3 3 / 9 5 / $ 0 9 . 5 0 1 9 9 5 E l s e v i e r S c i e n c e B . V . A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e dS S D I 0 0 4 8 - 7 3 3 3 ( 9 3 ) 0 0 7 6 0 - Q


2/16


3/16

J.R. Howells /Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184 171c o m p a n i e s s u c h a s B r i t i s h P e t r o l e u m ( B P ) , w h i c hh a v e t a k e n a l e a d i n c o l l e c t in g a n d a n a l y s in g d a t ai n R & D , t h i s r e m a i n s a p r o b l e m .

A m o r e r e a l is ti c r e f l e c ti o n o f h o w R & D iso r g a n i s e d a n d l o c a t e d i s e v i d e n t i n t h e t h r e e m o s tc o m m o n w a ys i n w h i c h R & D l a b o r a t o ri e s a re s e tu p a b r o a d [ 7 ] .

( 1 ) T h e d i r e c t e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a n e w r e s e a r c hl a b o r a t o r y o n a s i t e e i t h e r o n i t s o w n o r w i t he x i s t i n g c o r p o r a t e f a c i l i t i e s ( t e r m e d b y B e h r m a na n d F i s c h e r [ 7 ] a s " d i r e c t p l a c e m e n t " ) .

( 2 ) A s a n i n d i r e c t c o n s e q u e n c e o f a fi r m a c -q u i r i n g a n o v e r s e a s c o m p a n y w h i c h h a s e x i s t in gR & D un i t s .

( 3 ) A s p a r t o f a n e v o l u t i o n a r y p r o c e s s a s so c i-a t e d w i t h o v e r s e a s m a n u f a c t u r i n g a n d o t h e r f a c i l -i t i e s w i t h i n i t i a l l i m i t e d t e c h n i c a l , d e s i g n , q u a l i t yc o n t r o l o r p r o c e s s e n g i n e e r i n g u n i t s g r a d u a l l yd e v e l o p i n g i n t o m o r e f o r m a l i s e d r e s e a r c h l a b o r a -t o r i e s .

E s t i m a t e s v a r y a s to h o w m u c h e a c h o f t h e s ec a t e g o r i e s r e p r e s e n t s a s a p r o p o r t i o n o f to t a lo v e r s e a s R & D g r o w t h , a l t h o u g h R o n d s t a d t ' s [ 64 ]w o r k s u g g e s ts t h a t n e a r l y a q u a r t e r o f o v e r s e a sR & D e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w e r e a c q u i r e d v i a t a k e o v e r ,w h i ls t B e h r m a n a n d F i s c h e r [7 ] e s t i m a t e t h a t o v e ra h a l f a r i se t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s o f " e v o l u t i o n " 2

O n l y i n t h e f i r s t c a s e c a n t h e r e b e s a i d t o b ea n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a c e n t ra l i s e d , o n e - o f f p r o c e s so f r a ti o n a l d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g t o t a k e p l a c e . T h ea c q u i r i n g o f o v e r s e a s r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r i e s v i at h e t a k e o v e r o f f i rm s f r o m a b r o a d is a t b e s t o n l ya s e c o n d a r y e l e m e n t i n t h e o v e r a l l d e c i s i o n t og a i n c o n t r o l o f s u c h c o m p a n i e s . T h e f i n a l m a i nf a c t o r is b y it s n a t u r e a v e r y m u c h f r a g m e n t e da n d " b o t t o m - u p " a p p r o a c h a s s o c i a t e d w i t h m o r eg e n e r a l o b j e c t i v e s o f l o c a l o v e r s e a s s u b s i d i a r i e ss e e k i n g t o g a i n m a r k e t o p p o r t u n i t i e s a n d m o r ea u t o n o m y f r o m t h e i r p a r e n t c o m p a n i e s . A s s uc h ,t h e d e c i s i o n s t a k e n o n t h i s d e c e n t r a l i s e d , i n c r e -m e n t a l b a s i s o f t e n h a v e l i t t l e d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o nw i t h t h e m o r e c e n t r a l i s e d o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e f i r m i ni t s w o r l d w i d e o p e r a t i o n s .

2 Pearce and Singh [59], however, suggest that two-third s(69%) of all reasons given for the origin of overseas R&Dunits was that of a direct or "fre sh" installation.

2.2 . Cen tral i sa t io n us . dece ntra l i sa t ionA c e n t r a l a n d o n g o i n g t h e m e i n th e d i s c u s s io n

o f h o w R & D s h o u l d b e o r g a n i se d a n d l o c a t e d ist h e d e b a t e o v e r c e n t r a l is a t i o n v e r s u s d e c e n t r a l i -s a t i o n . T h i s c a n b e s e e n a t t w o l e v e l s : ( 1 ) i n t h ep h y s i c a l la y o u t a n d l o c a t i o n o f r e s e a r c h f a c i l i t ie sa n d ( 2) in th e m a n a g e m e n t o f R & D .

I n t h e c a s e o f t h e f o r m e r t h e a r g u m e n t s f o ra n d a g a i n s t c e n t r a l i s a t i o n o r d e c e n t r a l i s a t i o n a r en o t n e w ( s e e , fo r e x a m p l e , r e v i e w o f g o v e r n -m e n t - f u n d e d R & D i n t h e l a t e 1 95 0 s; [ 96 ]) a n dh a v e b e e n w e l l r e h e a r s e d e l s e w h e r e [ 3 4 , 4 9 ] . I nb r i e f, t h e b e n e f i t s o f c e n t r a l i sa t i o n r e v o l v e a r o u n dl a r g e ly i n te r n a l b e n e f i t s in r e s e a r c h o p e r a t i o n ,n a m e l y e c o n o m i e s o f s c a le a n d s c o p e a n d m i n i -m u m e f f ic i e n t s iz e , g o o d i n t r a - R & D c o m m u n i c a -t i o n l i n k a g e s a n d s e c u r i t y a n d s t r a t e g i c c o n t r o lo v e r R & D a n d t e c h n i c a l k n o w l e d g e [5 4 ,6 9 ,7 6 ,79 ,86 ,88] .

B y c o n t r a s t , d e c e n t r a l i s a t i o n h a s t h e a d v a n t a g eo f g o o d e x t e r n a l c o u p li n g a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o nl i n k a g e s w i t h o t h e r o r g a n i s a t i o n a l f u n c t i o n s [ 1 3 ] .I n a d d i t i o n , a d e c e n t r a l i s e d s t r u c t u r e a l l o w s t h ef i r m t o t a p i n t o s c a r c e p o o l s o f s c i e n t i f i c a n dt e c h n i c a l l a b o u r , t o p r o v i d e s u r v e i l l a n c e o r" l i s t e n i n g p o s t s " i n s p e c i f i c l o c a l i t i e s t o p i c k u ph o s t g o v e r n m e n t f u n d i n g o f R & D a c ti vi ti es a n dt o a l lo w a l es s b u r e a u c r a t i c , m o r e f o c u s e d r e -s e a r c h s t a f f [ 25 ].

P a r a l l e li n g t hi s d e b a t e is w h e t h e r t h e m a n a g e -m e n t o f R & D s h o u ld b e c e n t r a li s e d o r d e c e n -t r a l i s e d [ 6 6 , 7 6 ] . A t o n e e x t r e m e , a c e n t r a l i s e dm a n a g e m e n t s t r u c t u r e i n a l a r g e m u l t i n a t i o n a lf i r m c o u l d i n v o l v e a l l m a j o r l o n g - t e r m b a s i c r e -s e a r c h w o r k b e in g u n d e r t a k e n a t o n e ( o r s e v e ra l )c e n t r a l r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r i e s , w i t h o n l y v e r y l im -i t e d , s h o r t - t e r m d e v e l o p m e n t a l w o r k b e i n g c a r -r i e d o u t a t t h e d i v i s io n a l l e v e l o f t h e f i r m . A t t h eo t h e r e x t r e m e , o n a h i g h ly d e c e n t r a l i s e d b a si s, a l lR & D i n c lu d i ng n e w p r o d u c t d e v e l o p m e n t c o u l db e u n d e r t a k e n a t a d i v i s i o n a l , b u s i n e s s ( s u b - d i v i -s i o n a l ) o r e v e n e s t a b l i s h m e n t b a s i s w i t h n o c e n -t r a li s e d c o r p o r a t e R & D f a c il it ie s a n d l i t tl e c o o r -d i n a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d i v i s i o n s o r b u s i n e s s e s . O f -t e n , a s R u b e n s t e i n [ 6 6 ] h a s n o t e d , c o m p a n i e s c a ni n v ol v e a m a n a g e m e n t s ty l e w h i c h l ie s s o m e w h e r eb e t w e e n t h e t w o e n d s o f t hi s c e n t r a l i s e d /d e c e n t r a l i s e d s p e c t r u m .


4/16

172 J.R. HoweUs Research Policy 24 (1995) 169- 184In an international context Behrman and Fis-cher [8] similarly identified a spectrum of man-agerial styles relating to R&D management andcoordination. They found that the two extremes

of the management control spectrum, "absolutecentralisation" and "total freedom", were un-usual; however, they did find a firm's manage-ment style to be at least partially determined bythe market orientation of the products they pro-duced. Thus, companies which have become"world market" firms (whose products are manu-factured for worldwide distribution) tend to havetightly coordinated and more centralised interna-tional R&D activites, whilst "host market" firms(whose products have significant local adaptationfor individual host markets) tended to have moredecentralised, "supervised freedom" manage-ment styles.2.3. Pressures for change a nd global expansion

A final element that needs to be discussedhere are the recent developments in the interna-tionalisation of R& D and other corporate activ-ity. This covers the simple growth in multina-tional activity of companies and their evolution-ary development; the search for labour; the searchfor "lead" innovative customers and suppliersand managerial and organisational changes.The 1980s have witnessed the continued growthin foreign direct investment (FDI) and associatedproduction and sales networks by major multina-tional corporations. This continued to grow atrecord levels throughout the 1980s with FDI out-flow amongst countries growing on an annualaverage basis by $123.4 billion from 1986-88 [39]whilst US manufacturing investment in the Euro-pean Community alone grew by nearly 80% be-tween 1983 and 1989. The continued develop-ment of overseas production facilities has beenaccompanied by a lagged build-up and develop-ment of associated technical, engineering and de-sign facilities, in turn leading to more formalR&D establishments, following the evolutionarypattern of research internationalisation. In thiscontext, Steele [76] notes:

"Once some technical capability has been es-tablished, domestic scientists and engineers are

certain to see additional opportunities for im-provement. There is an almost irresistiblecreepage from production engineering up-stream into design and development. Thus,although the parent company may feel that forreasons of efficiency and standardisation itwants technology to originate with the parent,it will likely find it almost impossible to main-tain that position".In the context of labour, there has been agrowing recognition of labour shortages in keyscientific, technical and engineering disciplines.

As noted elsewhere, the Commission of the Eu-ropean Communities [12] estimated that in theUS there will be a potentia l shortfall of 500 000scientists and engineers in 2010 as a result ofdemographic trends and the pattern of universityenrolment. More recently, the Science and Tech-nology Agency in Japan estimated that by 2050there will be a researcher shortage of some480000 people in Japan (or about half of theestimated requirement for researchers by thatdate [78]). Many of these shortages now evidentat a national scale have been recognised by com-panies at an individual site level for some time.This is particularly true in areas such as theSouth East region of the UK or the New Yorkmetropolitan region, where labour supply prob-lems can be particularly acute. Companies arenow seeking to locate R&D centres in a muchwider area, including smaller towns and cities,than was previously considered.The search for lead suppliers or customers hasalso been important in widening the location ofR&D units. The growth in external research andtechnical links both with customers and suppliershas led to the acknowledgement by many compa-nies that they need to locate specialised researchand technical teams to engage in collaborationand also to act as listening posts in key technical"hot spots" around the world. Thus Japan hasbeen a growing centre for materials research forEuropean and American companies. Such movesare also evident in growing collaborative linkswith overseas Higher Education Institutes (HEIs)by major multinational corporations (for example,Upjohn's research discovery centres: [36]).


5/16

J.R. Howells Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184 173Lastly, there have been managerial and organi-

sational changes in the structure and operation ofR&D. The first of these has been the appear-ance and development of overseas research labo-ratories taking a lead role in a particular scien-tific field or technology area. Thus an increasingnumber of European companies, including ICI,Hoescht and Roche, have allowed their US R & Doperations to take a lead in specific technologies.The second issue is that of more general manage-rial restructuring and refocusing. Many multina-tional corporations have sought to sharpen uptheir operations by devolving power down to theirdivisional or, below that, business levels. This hasalso affected how R & D is structured within thesecompanies. Thus some have got rid of their cen-tralised corporate R&D laboratories altogetherwhilst others have introduced more complex pat-terns of restructuring. Thus in BP, their cen-tralised R & D laboratory in Sunbury has been cutback, the divisional research laboratory unitwithin BP Chemicals has been dissolved and in-stead chemicals R&D has been built up at themain operating plants such as Hull or Grange-mouth.2. 4. Conclusions: gro wth a nd com plexity

It is evident that many of these recent changeshave led to the growth and increasing complexityof R & D operations over time, associated in turnwith a direct increase in the number and disper-sion of R&D sites. Interestingly, most of thesepressures for growth and dispersion have comefrom factors largely external to the R&D func-tion itself. The chief elements of change notalready mentioned, namely the need to reduceescalating R&D costs (particularly developmentcosts) and cycle times (in some sectors referred toas the "design to build" period) could indeedargue for R&D to remain more centralised innature, thereby allowing tighter control, morefocused research teams and improved R&Dcommunication. The problem with this argumentis that although keeping R&D centralised mayspeed up research times and help reduce costs, inoverall terms it may delay the introduction ofinnovations because of "programme dislocation"

between R& D and other key corporate functionssuch as production and sales and marketing [85].

3 . R & D a n d c o m m u n i c a t i o n : c h a l l e n g e s a n d o p -p or tu n i t i e s for ICT s

The use of ICTs in R & D has largely followeda more general pattern occurring across compa-nies; namely that informat ion technology (IT) wasseen initially more as an element in improvingoverall efficiency and productivity than as alonger-term competitive weapon. In R&D labo-ratories in the 1960s and 1970s, therefore, theemphasis was on improving productivity, particu-larly in terms of the more general administrativeand office tasks surrounding research projects[91]. More fundamentally, developments in IT interms of increasing computer power were alsoaffecting R&D via significant increases in thecapacity and speed of calculation and in the ex-pansion in the number and variety of statisticaland mathematical software packages.

Paradoxically, little attention was paid to au-tomating laboratory or engineering tasks them-selves; this came much later with the introduct ionof Laboratory Information Monitoring Systems(LIMS) and the development of Computer AidedDesign (CAD) and Computer Aided Engineering(CAE) systems. These developments thereforemirrored more general office-based trends in ITusage with the emphasis being on informationprocessing rather than in terms of informationcommunication or as a mechanism to facilitatechanges in R& D organisation and structure.

This lack of stress on using ICTs to improvecommunication was not because communicationwas not considered important. A whole stream ofstudies from the late 1960s onward had empha-sised the importance of communication for theperformance of technological innovation withinfirms [23,53,63,68,77,84]. Within this the role ofgeographical distance, the physical layout of labo-ratories and the importance of face-to-face con-tact have clearly been recognised in terms ofcommunication and research performance [2,5,22,24,29,33,46,65,67,82,89]. The role of geographywas therefore important in affecting the volume


6/16

1 7 4 J .R . H o w e l l s / R e s e a r c h P o l i c y 2 4 ( 1 9 9 5 ) 1 6 9 - 1 8 4

1 . 0 ~

1 , o ,= o 2 2 5 , + o o 2 o= 5 0 . t q ~ .

e

0 .0 01 ' ' ' ' " " 1 ' ~ ' " T " I ~ ' '0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100Separa tion distance - Sa (Idlometres)

F i g . 1 . P r o b a b i l i t y o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a s a f u n c t i o n o f d i s t a n c e .Source: [ 3 , p . 2 3 8 ] .

of communication and its quality (i.e. the fre-quency of face-to-face contact). Work by Allen[1,2,3] has shown how distance can affect thevolume of communication between R&D staff,both on a macro- (Fig. 1) and micro- (Fig. 2) basiswith the familiar distance-decay pattern of con-tact links. The importance of good communica-tion, particularly in a highly creative knowledge-and information-intensive activity such as R&Dwhich often combines high levels of uncertaintyhas therefore been long recognised by companies.Studies of laboratories and research institutes inremote areas and information-poor environments

0.40 -0.35 -

"G" 0.30 -E"0 . 2 5 -

EE 0 . 2 0 -8"6=~ ' 015-J~ft. o.lo

0.05

Inter-group commun icat ion Intra-group communicat ion

~ wthorgansaonabond : . ' . . w i th o u t o rg :n is a tio n a lb o n d

0 I I ~ A I A__I__A__0 20 30 40 50 60 70Distance (metres)

F i g . 2 . P r o b a b i l i t y o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n a s a f u n c t i o n o f d i s t a n c ea n d o r g a n i s a t i o n a l l i n ks . S o u r c e : [ 3 , p . 241] .

have provided additional support for this view interms of the scientific isolation of such establish-ments [4,72].

The maxim for companies during the 1960sand 1970s was therefore to try and keep R& Dconcentrated as much as possible on a few siteswithin the "home" country. However, for a num-ber of companies which were already highly inter-nationalised, this was not possible. Four basicoptions were generally adapted here to amelio-rate the problem.

(1) Assume the problem did not exist. Al-though research and technical units were operat-ing overseas, they were seen as being small andinvolved in adaptive work that did not affect thecentral thrust of R&D work undertaken in thehome base. Hopefully duplication was minimal,some good work overseas might develop and itwould cause too many problems (and take up toomany resources) to try to coordinate and inte-grate such work into the main body of researchwork run by the company.

(2) To restrict the overseas spread of researchactivities to within easy reach of the home base.Steele [76] quotes the case of companies such asShell, Philips and Brown Boveri undertaking R&D on a multinational but essentially intra-European basis. He saw coordination and inte-gration of R & D at this time being only feasible ifthe laboratories were within an easy one-daycommuting distance of each other. This was alsoconfirmed by Granstrand [26] in the case of theSwedish company SKF in the 1960s.

(3) An alternative to this was staff second-ment. Scientific and technical staff would be sentto overseas laboratories for anything from a fewweeks to several years. In many companies thiscan be still an important procedure, allowingfirms to establish a common working ethos andstrong personal bonds which can then be main-tained via longer-term informal contact.

(4) A final option is to go for complete spe-cialisation between research laboratories. As ageneral rule, increasing research specialisationbetween research sites can be expected to reducethe need for inter-site communication; converselyincreased "research task interdependency" willincrease inter-site communication levels (Fig. 3).


7/16

J.R. Howells / R esearch Policy 24 (1995) 169 -184 175

~Eo~C3

Degree of Inter-Si te R&DTask InterdependenceFig. 3. Relationship between inter-site communication andR&D interdependence.

T h i s o p t i o n i s d i f f i c u l t t o a c h i e v e e v e n i n t h em o s t f a v o u r a b l e c i r c u m s t a n c e s . R a r e l y c a n s ci e n -t i f i c / t e c h n i c a l a r e a s b e r i g i dl y d e m a r c a t e d , w h i l sti t o f t e n t a k e s m a n y y e a r s f o r c e r t a i n l a b o r a t o r i e st o b u i l d u p " l e a d " e x p e r t i s e i n p a r t i c u l a r r e -s e a r c h f i e l d s . M o r e o v e r , w h i l s t i t m a y o v e r c o m ep r o b l e m s o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n R & D s it es ,i t c a n o f t e n e x a c e r b a t e c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e nR & D a n d o t h e r c o r p o r a t e f u n c t io n s .

T h e s e r e s p o n s e s h a v e a t b e s t b e e n o n l y s t e re o -t y p i c a l o p t i o n s t o f i r m s . D u r i n g t h e l a t e 1 9 7 0 sa n d e a r l y 1 98 0 s m a n y c o r p o r a t i o n s , e i t h e r t h r o u g hg r a d u a l e x p a n s i o n o r a s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f th em e r g e r - m a n i a o f t h e 1 9 8 0s , f o u n d t h e i r o v e r s e a sr e s e a r c h a c t i v it ie s t o h a v e c o n s i d e r a b l y e x p a n d e d .C o m m u n i c a t i o n w a s t h e r e f o r e b e c o m i n g i n c re a s -i n g ly i m p o r t a n t :- t o a ll ow s o m e f o r m o f c o o r d i n a t i o n b e t w e e nR & D l a b o r a t o r i e s i n t e r n a t i o n a l ly ;- t o a v o i d u n n e c e s s a r y d u p l i c a t i o n a n d m a i n t a i na n d i m p r o v e e f f i c i e n c y ;- t o i n c r e a s e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d r e s o u r c e s h a r i n g ,t h e r e b y a l lo w i n g a w i d e r " r e s e a r c h r e a c h " f o r th ec o m p a n y ;- t o a v o i d l a b o r a t o r y " i s o l a t i o n i s m " a n d- t o a l l o w r e s e a r c h t o b e u n d e r t a k e n o n a s p l i t -o r m u l t i - s i t e b a s i s .

T h e f o c u s o n i m p r o v e d i n t e r - s it e r e s e a r c hc o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n w a s al so , t os o m e e x t e n t , a re s u l t o f e x t e r n a l p e e r p r e s s u r e .A s s u c h , R & D a s a f u n c t i o n v i s -a - v is t h e r e s t o ft h e o r g a n i s a t i o n c o u l d n o t b e s e e n t o b e r u n n i n ga d i s o r g a n i s e d a n d i n e f f i c ie n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l o p e r -a t io n . M o r e o v e r , a s c o m p a n i e s w e r e b e g i n n i n g t or u n " R & D a u d i t s " [ 92 ], t h e i ss u e s o f r e s e a r c h

d u p l ic a t i o n a n d t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f i nd i vi d u alR & D l a b o r a t o r ie s a n d t e a m s w e r e b e i n g e x-p o s e d . I n a d d i t i o n , w i t h t h e e v e r - i n c r e a s i n gg r o w t h i n s c ie n t i fi c a n d t e c h n i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n ,r e s e a r c h m a n a g e r s a n d d i r e c to r s b e g a n t o r e a l is et h a t i n f o r m a t i o n - s h a r i n g b e t w e e n s it es w as n e c -e s s a r y , b o t h t o i m p r o v e t h e d e p a r t m e n t ' s o v e r a l l" s c a n n i n g " a b i l i t i e s a n d a l s o t o a v o i d p o s s i b l ei s o l a t i o n i s m b e t w e e n l a b o r a t o r i e s . A b o v e a l l , t h ea b s o lu t e n e c e ss i ty o f u n d e r t a k i n g R & D p r o j ec t sc o - l o c a t e d o n o n e s i t e w a s s t a r t i n g t o b e q u e s -t i o n e d .

D e v e l o p m e n t s f r o m t h e l a t e 1 9 70 s, p a r t i c u l a r l yt h e sp r e a d o f c o r p o r a t e c o m p u t e r - c o m m u n i c a -t i o n n e t w o r k s [ 4 1 ] , w e r e e n a b l i n g r e s e a r c h e r s t oi n t e r a c t m o r e e f f e c t i v e l y " o v e r t h e l i n e " . P a r a -d o x i c a l ly , t h i s w a s a t a t i m e w h e n i n t e r n a t i o n a ll a b o u r m o b i l i t y i n t e r m s o f s e c o n d m e n t w a s b e -c o m i n g m o r e o f a p r o b l e m t o c o m p a n i e s . T h ei ss u e o f " d u a l - w o r k i n g " h o u s e h o l d s ; t h e i n c r e a s -i n g i m p o r t a n c e o f a c c e s s t o a n d s t ab i li ty i ns c h o o l i n g f o r r e s e a r c h s t a f f c h i l d r e n ; a n d t h ei n c r e a s i n g s c a r c i t y a n d " p o a c h a b i l i t y " o f k e y s c i -e n t i st s a n d e n g i n e e r s ( w h o f e l t in c r e a s in g l y c o n f i-d e n t i n b e i n g a b l e t o r e f u s e o v e r s e a s p l a c e m e n t s )m e a n t t h a t c o m p a n i e s f o u n d i t h a r d e r t o m o v e

Table 1Key network services used in R&DService Comments/ExamplesElectronic mailRemote sys tems/facilities access

ComputingSpecialistequipment/facilitiesDatabase access

File transferVideoconferencing

Advanced work-station facilities

Easy to use, widely available, rapid,advantage of asynchronous nature

Remote login to CRAY supercomputerAccess to mass spectrometry

Remote access to central database ontechnical aspects of company's products,e.g. Glaxoline or mate rials/co mponen tsused in productionEasy transfe r to similar file systemsBecoming more widely available,costs falling; but problems ofasynchronous natureLimited availability; being developedand used by a number of key companies,such as Hewlett Packard


8/16

176 J.R. Howells / Research Policy 24 (1995) 16 9-184s t a f f a r o u n d . I n s t e a d , c o m p a n i e s b e g a n t o e x -p l o r e w a y s i n w h i c h p r o j e c t t e a m s m i g h t b e b u i l tu p i r r e s p e c t i v e o f w h e r e i n d i v i d u a l t e a m m e m -b e r s w e r e l o c a t e d .

T h e i n c r e a s i n g u s e o f , f o r e x a m p l e , s h a r e dd a t a b a s e s , e l e c t r o n i c m a i l a n d l a t te r l y v i d e o - c o n -f e r e n c i n g a n d w o r k s t a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y ( T a b l e 1 )h a s , a t l e a s t i n s o m e o r g a n i s a t i o n s , l e d t o c o m p a -n i e s e x p l o r i n g w a y s i n w h i c h r e s e a r c h c a n b eu n d e r t a k e n b e t w e e n s e p a r a t e s it es . A k e y i ss u e int h e u s e o f th e s e d i f f e r e n t c o m m u n i c a t i o n m e d i ai s t h e i r d e g r e e o f " s o c i a l p r e s e n c e " [ 6 1 , 7 1 , 7 4 ] o r" i n f o r m a t i o n r i c h n e s s " [ 1 5 , 8 3 ] . A s n o t e d e a r l i e r ,t h e h i g h d e g r e e o f u n c e r t a i n t y i n v o l v e d i n R & Dw o r k h a s m e a n t t h a t f a c e - t o - f a c e c o n t a c t w i t h it sh i g h m e d i a r i c h n e s s ( c a p a c i t y f o r i m m e d i a t e f e e d -b a c k ; n u m b e r o f c u e s ; p e r s o n a l i s a t i o n a n d l a n -g u a g e v a r ie t y ) h a s r e m a i n e d a ll i m p o r t a n t[ 1 1 , 1 4 , 1 6 , 5 2 , 7 0 , 8 1 ] . O t h e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n m e d i a ,s u c h a s t e l e p h o n e , l e t t e r s , m e m o s , o r e l e c t r o n i cm a i l h av e b e e n s e e n a s o f fe r i n g m u c h p o o r e rc o m m u n i c a t i o n c h an n e l s. H o w e v e r , m o r e r e c e n ts t u d i e s h a v e i n d i c a t e d t h a t n e w e r c o m p u t e r -m e d i a t e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n s y s te m s m a y h a v e b e e nu n d e r v a l u e d b y e a r l i e r r e s e a r c h i n te r m s o f t h e i ra p p l i c a b i l i t y a n d i n f o r m a t i o n r i c h n e s s / s o c i a lp r e s e n c e l ev e ls . T h u s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f e l e c t r o n i cm a i l , R i c e [ 6 1 ] f o u n d t h a t m a n a g e r s u s e d e l e c -t r o n i c m a i l f o r s c a n n i n g a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n t a s k st h a t w o u l d o t h e r w i s e b e a c c o m p l i s h e d l e s s e f f i -c i e n t ly a n d e f f e c t iv e l y b y t r a d i t i o n a l m e d i a . S i m i-l a rl y T r e v i n o e t a l . [8 3] f o u n d t h a t m a n a g e r s r a t e de l e c t r o n i c m a i l a s t h e m o s t l i k e ly to b e u s e d f o rc o m m u n i c a t i o n t a s k s i n v o l v i n g s i t u a t i o n a l c o n -s t r a i n t s . R i c e a n d S h o o k [ 6 2 ] t h e r e f o r e s u g g e s tt h a t e l e c t r o n i c m a i l s h o u l d n o t b e c o m p a r e d w i t ht r a d i t io n a l , i n f o r m a t i o n p o o r m e d i a , b u t r a t h e rc a n b e p l a c e d i n t h e m i d d l e o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o nr i c h n e s s / s o c i a l p r e s e n c e s c a l e s . T h e " c o m b i n a -t i o n a l " u s e o f t h e s e n e w I C T m e d i a i s a l so o fi m p o r t a n c e a n d is o n e o f th e a s p e c t s t h a t i t isi n t e n d e d t o e x a m i n e i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l i n t h e m a i np h a s e o f th e s t u d y .

T o o u t l in e s o m e o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e s a s r e g a r d st h e u s e o f I C T s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f R & D , t h r e el e v el s o f o p e r a t i o n w i ll b e c o n s i d e r e d :

( 1 ) t h e u s e o f I C T s i n t h e c o n t e x t o f a s p e c if i cr e s e a r c h p r o j e c t u n d e r t a k e n b y a t e a m o f st a f f

w o r k i n g i n d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s ( " c r o s s - b o r d e rt e a m w o r k " 3 ) ;

( 2 ) t h e m o r e g e n e r a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f I C T s i nt h e o p e r a t i o n o f R & D i n t e r m s o f s h a r e d a n dd i s t a n c e w o r k i n g a n d

( 3) t h e i m p a c t o f I C T s o n t h e m a n a g e m e n ta n d c o o r d in a t io n o f R & D .3 .1. Cross border R & D teamw ork us ing ICTs

I n a s e n s e , t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a s c i e n ti f i ca n d t e c h n i c a l t e a m l o c a t e d a t s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n ts i t e s b u t w o r k i n g o n t h e s a m e p r o j e c t r e p r e s e n t st h e m o s t f a r - r e a c h i n g a s p e c t o f th e u s e o f I C T s i nR & D . S o m e r e s e ar c h m a n a g e rs a n d d i re c to r ss ti ll d o n o t c o n c e i v e t h i s as a n o p t i o n a n d a t t h ev e r y le a s t c o n s i d e r i t v e r y m u c h a s a l o n g - t e r mp r o s p e c t . H o w e v e r , f o r m a n y m a n a g e r s c r o s s -b o r d e r t e a m w o r k h a s b e c o m e f e a s i b l e f o r c e r t a i nr e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s . I t w o u l d b e m i s l e a d i n g t o i m p l yt h a t t h i s i s a w i d e s p r e a d o p t i o n a n d i t i s n o tw i t h o u t a n u m b e r o f p r e c o n d i t i o n s . C r i t e r ia o rl i m i t a t i o n s w h i c h w e r e s e e n a s i m p o r t a n t t o s u c -c e s s f u l c r o s s - b o r d e r r e s e a r c h w o r k a r e s e t o u tb e l o w .

( 1 ) T h e m a j o r i t y o f th e t e a m h a s t o b e k n o w nt o e a c h o t h e r v i a d i r e c t p e r s o n a l c o n t a c t .

( 2 ) T h e t e a m is i d e a l ly d i v i d e d b e t w e e n a m a x -i m u m o f tw o o r t h r e e s i t e s( 3 ) A c l e a r l y id e n t i f i e d a n d d e m a r c a t e d r e -

s e a r c h p r o j e c t h a s t o b e e s t a b l i s h e d a t t h e o u t s e tb e f o r e t h e c r o s s - b o r d e r t e a m s t a r t s t o w o r k .

( 4 ) A c c e s s t o e l e c t r o n i c m a il , s h a r e d d a t a b a s e sa n d r e m o t e l o g i n is p a r a m o u n t , u s e o f v i d e o c o n -f e r e n c i n g a n d n e w w o r k s t a t i o n t e c h n o l o g y is a ls oi n c r e a s in g l y d e s i r a b l e w h e r e p o s s ib l e .

(5 ) F ace - t o - f ace con t ac t i s s t i l l h i gh l y s i gn i f i -c a n t . T r i p s b y t h e t e a m t o e a c h o t h e r s ' s i te sr e m a i n i m p o r t a n t a n d c a n o f t e n b e f r e q u e n t (e v -e r y f o r t n i g h t o r s o f o r s o m e l e a d i n g t e a m m e m -b e r s , w h e r e a p p r o p r i a t e ) .

O n g o i n g r e s e a r c h b y t h e a u t h o r w i l l s e e k t op r o v i d e m a n y m o r e p a r a m e t e r s f o r su c h w o r k ( i. e.

3 See William Fike's (President of Ford Europe) l etter to TheFinancial Times outlining the integrated nature of Ford'sresearch operations in Euro pe ( "Ford 's fully integrated oper-ations across the EC" Financial Times 05.03.92. p. 17).


9/16

J.R. Howells Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184 177average team size, type of project considered,project length and so on) and most of these"virtual research" teams are, as yet, in some kindof embryonic or experimental stage. However, itis worth noting important " learning experiences"which force companies to consider the option ofcross-border teamwork. This can arise most no-tably when one or more team-members movesmid-term in a project (at any one time a personmay be involved in two or more projects or mayget promotion), creating a split-site project bydefault. The special instance of the Gulf War ledto many US, and to a lesser extent European,companies banning foreign travel, at least for atime, preventing research staff from taking upposts overseas. In some instances, to avoid delayin the start of a project, the use of electronic mailand in particular videoconferencing was em-ployed to help at least the first phases of theproject. The impact of the Gulf War more gener-ally on v ideoconferencing use was highlighted bya large number of US companies.3.2 . Shared and dis tance working in research

The development of private computer-com-munication networks has, however, allowed moregeneral networking between researchers and theirequipment across sites. This has arisen out of thebasic provision of a number of services across thenetwork including electronic mail, remote access,access to central databases and file transfer and,more recently, use of videoconferencing andadaption of work station facilities. The impor-tance of electronic mail stemming from its ease ofuse, asynchronous nature and general informality,particularly between researchers located in differ-ent countries, has been emphasised by a numberof studies e.g. [73]. File transfer and databaseaccess are also crucial in the sharing of informa-tion, avoiding duplication, improving the knowl-edge base of the company and in helping toestablish "invisible communities" of research andtechnical staff spread throughout the country.Remote login and systems access is also increas-ingly important to research staff. Remote com-puting is an obvious example here, particularly interms of access to supercomputers, such as aCRAY. Other examples relate to remote access

and monitoring of pilot plant equipment andinstrumentation and access to specialist equip-ment, such as mass spectrometry facilities [30] inthe chemical industry.

The spread, development and application ofall these services, whilst supporting the creationof inter-site research teams, has also allowedmore general interaction by enabling scientistsfrom different countries in the same company tonetwork more freely with one other. It has alsoallowed remote access to equipment and facilitieswhich previously had to be used by scientistson-site. The overall volume of inter-site person-to-person and person-to-machine contact hasbeen increased by the introduction of these ser-vices, as well as the more unforeseen, informalcommunication that electronic mail has broughtwith it.3.3 . In ter-site ma nag em ent an d coordinat ion o fR & D

Although the introduction and development ofICTs in the R&D function can pose considerableproblems for R &D managers [20], they do allowthe potential for improved coordination and man-agement of R&D across sites. Companies arebecoming more confident in multi-site manage-ment of particular functions; some companiesalready have alternating lines of command be-tween sites, covering both domestic and interna-tional establishments. In addition, companies suchas Hoechst have set up steering committees tomanage technology on a global basis and this issupported by improvements in international com-munications.

As yet, though, much more work needs to bedone by companies on monitoring and assessingtheir pattern of information flows in R&D be-fore they can adequately use ICT to meet theircommunication needs. Batson [6] has charted thedifficulties faced by R&D management in termsof their information and communication require-ments and the application of various computer-assisted systems to help in meeting this challenge.The use of management information systems(MIS) in the R&D function appears to have beentaken up much later than elsewhere in the organ-isation [9]. Decision support systems (DSS), pro-


10/16

17 8 J.R. Howells Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184v i d i n g a m o r e c u s t o m i s e d d e c i s i o n s u p p o r t f o rm a n a g e r s c o m p a r e d w i t h M I S , h o w e v e r, d o a p -p e a r t o b e p l a y i n g a m o r e s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e f o rr e s e a r c h m a n a g e r s i n a n u m b e r o f i n d u s t r ie s [ 38 ].

4 . T h e r e l a t io n s h i p b e t w e e n R & D a n d t h e in f o r-m a t i o n s y s t e m s t e c h n o l o g y f u n c t i on s

A k e y e l e m e n t i n f l u e n c i n g t h e e v o l u t i o n o fI C T u s e w it h in R & D is th e l in k b e t w e e n R & Do n o n e s i d e a n d t h e I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m (I S ) o rI T d e p a r t m e n t o r f u n c t io n o n th e o t h e r. R & D a sa u s e r d e p a r t m e n t h a s a lw a y s b e e n s e e n a s ad i f f i c u l t , o r a t b e s t a d i f f e r e n t , u s e r - g r o u p t h a no t h e r f u n c t i o n s o f t h e f i r m . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e i sf u r t h e r e m p h a s i s e d b y c e r t a i n s p e c i a l c h a r a c t e r i s -t ic s o r p e c u l i a r it i e s o f R & D i n t e r m s o f I C T u s e .I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e g e n e r a l I B M o p e r a t i n g e n v i r o n -m e n t s u s e d i n m o s t o f t h e r e s t o f t h e c o m p a n y ,R & D h a s in t h e p a s t h a d s e p a r a t e s y st em s o ro p e r a t i n g e n v i r o n m e n t s o f t e n b a s e d o n D i g i t a lE q u i p m e n t V A X s y st e m s ( t o g e t h e r w i t h m o r eu n u s u a l s y s t e m s s u c h a s G l a x o ' s u s e o f P r i m ec o m p u t e r s [ 1 9 ] ) , a n d , l a t t e r l y , U N I X - b a s e d s y s -t e m s .

T h e s e r e l a t e t o t h e f o l l o w i n g :- T h e s tr e ss o n se c u r it y a n d n e t w o r k r e -

s i l i e n c e . T h i s c o v e r s n o t o n l y t h e p o t e n t i a l f o ru n l a w f u l a c c e s s to d a t a o n a p r o j e c t w h i c h m a y b ep o t e n t i a l l y w o r t h m a n y m i l l io n s o f p o u n d s t o t h ec o m p a n y i n t h e f u t u r e , b u t a l s o in t e r m s o f sa f e -

g u a r d i n g d a t a i n t h e e v e n t o f a n a c c i d e n t o rn e t w o r k f a i l u r e .

- T h e " l u m p y " a n d o f t e n i n t e r m i t t e n t n a t u r eo f R & D c o m m u n i c a t i o n f lo w s a c ro s s t h e n e t w o r k( F ig . 4 ), r a n g i n g f r o m v i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g t ol a r g e - s c a l e d a t a s e t t r a n s f e r , i n v o l v in g t e c h n i c a lo r C A D / C A M i n t er c ha n g e w h e r e sp e e d an db a n d w i d t h a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t [4 4] . T h i s isi n c o n t r a s t t o t h e m o r e r o u t i n e a n d r e g u l a r f lo w so f d a t a o r i g i n a t i n g i n o t h e r d e p a r t m e n t s a n df u n c t i o n s o f t h e o r g a n i s a t io n .

- O n t o p o f t h is is t h e r e c e n t d e c e n t r a l i s a t i o na n d i n t e r n a ti o n a l is a t io n o f R & D i ts el f. I S / T d e -p a r t m e n t s h a v e b e e n f a m i l ia r w i t h h a n d l i n g t h ed e m a n d s f r o m p r o d u c t i o n a n d s a le s a n d m a r k e t -i n g o n a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l b a s i s o n r e l a t i v e l y l o n gt i m e s c a le s . H o w e v e r , fo r m a n y c o m p a n i e s t h eb u i l d - u p o f r e s e a r c h f a c i l i t i e s o v e r s e a s a n d t h e i rc o n s e q u e n t I C T d e m a n d s o n l y r e a ll y b e g a n i n t h em i d - 1 9 7 0 s [ 4 2] . A g a i n s t t h i s, t h o u g h , t h e i n t e r - s i t er e s e a rc h , d e s i g n a n d e n g i n e e r i n g r e q u i r e m e n t sc a n b e a d r i v i n g f o r c e i n t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f av i a b l e c o m p u t e r n e t w o r k w i t h i n a m u l t i - s i t e c o m -pany [51 ] .

A s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f th is c o m p a n i e s h a v e o f t e nt r e a t e d R & D q u i te s e p a r a t e ly f o r t h e p u r p o s e o fI S / T o p e r a t io n s . I n G la x o , w h e r e G l a x o G r o u pR e s e a r c h L t d o p e r a t e s a s a s e p a r a t e o r g a n i s at i o nw i t h i n t h e c o m p a n y , t h i s p r o b l e m i s a m e l i o r a t e da s it c a n h a v e i ts o w n I T d e p a r t m e n t . H o w e v e r ,f o r o t h e r c o m p a n ie s t he I S / T d e p a r t m e n t h a sa l l o c a t e d p a r t i c u l a r s t a f f o r s e t u p p a r t i c u l a r I T

I N F O R M A T IO N A N D C O M M U N I C A T I O N T E C H N O L O G I E SI

I I IV I D E O - U N S T R U C T U R E D I N T E R -A C T I V EC O N F E R E N C I N G ~ II N T E R E ' M A i L I N F O R M A T I O NP E R S O N A L R E T R I E V A LM E S S A G I N G( IPM)

IS T R U C T U R E DII I I I

E L E C TR O N I C E L E C T R O N I C T E C H N IC A L C A D /C A MF U N D S D A T A D A T A D A T AT R A N S FE R I N T E R C H A N G E I N TE R C H A N G E I N TE R C H A N G E(EFT) (EDI) (TDI)

iI r regular ~ Regular ~ Ir regular ~=.= /1Frequency i F requency = F requency

i l i i] i i i i ] ] i ] ] ] I

i i l i ] ] ] t i

V O L U M E A N D S P E E D R E Q U I R E M E N T SF i g . 4 . I C T s a n d t h e i r v o l u m e a n d s p e e d r e q u i r e m e n t s .


11/16


12/16

18 0 J .R . Howel l s /Research Po l icy 24 (1995) 169-184I C T f o r t h e m a n a g e m e n t a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n o fR & D . A s n o t e d e a r li e r, c o m p a n i e s h av e o p e r -a t e d d e c e n tr a l is e d m u l ti n a ti o n a l R & D o p e r a -t i o n s l a r g e l y " w i t h t h e i r e y e s c l o s e d " . T h e y f e e lt h a t , o n b a l a n c e , o v e r s e a s R & D is n e c e s s a r y a n do u t w e i g h s t h e l o s s e s a n d d i s a d v a n t a g e s a s s o c i a t e dw i t h p o s si b le d u p l i c a t i o n o f r e s e a r c h e f f o r t a n dt h e o p p o r t u n i t y c o st s in n o t h a v i n g a m o r e t a r -g e t e d r e s e a r c h a p p r o a c h . T h e m a n a g e m e n t o fR & D w a s a t b e s t m i n i m a l ( o r e u p h e m i s t ic a l l yd e s c r i b e d a s " h a r m o n i s e d " m a n a g e m e n t [76 ] w i t hl i tt l e, i f a n y , c e n t r a l i s e d c o n t r o l o f o v e r s e a s r e -s e a r c h o p e r a t i o n s . C o m p a n i e s n o w h a v e t h e o p -p o r t u n i t y , v i a i n c r e a s e d c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d i n t e g r a -t i o n o f R & D i n t e r n a t i o n a l ly , t o h a v e g r e a t e r a n dm o r e c e n t r a li s e d c o n t r o l o f re s e a r c h . H o w e v e r ,i m p r o v e d R & D c o o r d i n a t i o n a n d i n t e g r a t i o n c a na l so o c c u r v ia m o r e d e c e n t r a l i s e d , l e ss h i e r a r c h i -c al n e tw o r k s o f m a n a g e m e n t - - " h e t e r a r c h i e s "[ 2 7 , 2 8 , 3 1 , 4 7 , 6 0 ] . I n t h e s e m o r e f e d e r a t e d n e t -w o r k s , o v e r s e a s r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r i e s c a n t a k e am o r e p a r t i c i p a t i v e a n d s o m e t i m e s l e a d r o l e i nc o r p o r a t e r e s e a r c h o p e r a t i o n s , a s n o t e d e a r l i e r . F ig . 5. E r ic s s o n E u r o p e a n N e t w o r k a n d m a i n d e s i g n c e n t r e s .

6 . C o n c l u s i o n sD e v e l o p m e n t s i n I C T i n f i r m s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e

i n t r o d u c ti o n o f a d v a n c e d p r i v a te c o m p u t e r - c o m -m u n i c a t i o n n e t w o r k s , h a v e c o m e a l o n g w a y inr e c e n t y e a r s [ c f . 3 2 , 5 6 ] . F o r a n i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e ro f c o m p a n i e s , s u c h a s E r i c s s o n i n e l e c t r o n i c s( F i g . 5 ) a n d G l a x o ( F i g . 6 ) i n p h a r m a c e u t i c a l s , i th a s b e c o m e a w a y o f li fe a n d is a n a l l - i m p o r t a n te l e m e n t i n t h e d a y - t o - d a y i n t e r n a t i o n a l o p e r a t i o na n d m a n a g e m e n t o f m a j o r r e s ea r c h p r o g r a m m e s .T h e e m e r g e n c e a n d s p r e a d o f s u c h f a ci li ti e s a se l e c t r o n i c m a i l , v i d e o c o n f e r e n c i n g a n d , l a tt e r ly ,w o r k s t a t io n t e c h n o l o g y w i t h i n f ir m s h a s b e e ns i gn i f i can t du r i ng t he 1980s [10 ,18 ,21 ,50 ,87 ,94 ,95 ] .T h e i r u s e , a t l e a s t o n a n i n f o r m a l b a s i s , a l s oa p p e a r s w i d e s p r e a d a n d c o m p a n i e s i n t u r n r e c o g -n i s e t h e s e i n f o r m a l li n k s as h ig h l y i m p o r t a n t i nt h e R & D p r o c e s s [4 5 ,4 8 ,9 0 ,9 3 ]. H o w e v e r , b e -c a u s e o f th i s c o m p a n i e s a r e o f t e n f r i g h t e n e d t ot a k e a m o r e s t r a t e g i c , p r o a c t i v e s t a n c e i n t h e u s eo f t h e s e t e c h n o l o g i e s f o r f e a r o f d i s r u p t i n g t h e s ei n f o r m a l l i n k s w h i c h w i l l i n t u r n a f f e c t t h ep r o g r e s s o f m a j o r r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s w i t h in t h e

c o m p a n y . A s o n e m a n a g e r p u t i t, th e y w e r e h a p p yt o i n v e s t i n I C T s ( i n p u t s ) a s l o n g a s i t c o n t r i b u t e dt o s u p p o r t i n g t h e r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m m e ( o u t p u t s )o f t h e c o m p a n y a n d , a s lo n g a s t h is h a p p e n e d , h ew a s r e l u c t a n t t o " m e d d l e " i n te r m s o f tr y in g to

S te v e n a g e Bu ry Gre e n F a rm

" ~ S / I P S S~ ' 7 " - PSS/IPSSI I ~ ~ ' ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ G ro u pPrivate~ ~ , ~ - TplecommurrK:ationsRa~hU,SA ~ ~ + Net*o,

. . . . . . . . (2.048Mbi t~) o ~ ~ SWITZERLAND~ x . 2 5 N- - - - - PSS,'IPSS '1 I Verona,~ i c a t ~ n Message I I ITALYProtocol (DDCMP ) used with DEC's~DigitalNetwork rcitecture

F i g . 6 . G l a x o G r o u p R e s e a rc h c o m p u t e r - c o m m u n i c a t i o n n e t -w o r k .


13/16

J.R. Howells Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184 18 1improve the use of ICTs within the R&D func-tion (i.e. the "black box" approach). It was recog-nised, however, that this process could not lastindefinitely as R&D became ever more impor-tant in the company's profile and came undermore scrutiny in terms of expenditure and perfor-mance.

This fear of disrupting research programmes;the "service" stature of IT (being seen as reactiverather than proactive to the demands of R&D)and the general lack of knowledge about commu-nication and knowledge/information processingin R&D 4 explains the general conservative na-ture and use of ICTs in R&D. It also has to berecognised that key individuals within the R & Ddepartment can also have a critical effect on theuse of new forms of communication media. Inone company, the IT manager suffered from whathe termed "the QE2 syndrome". The companyhad sizeable R&D operations in the UK and theUS, with considerable overlap in terms of scien-tific fields between the laboratories on both sidesof the Altantic. Endeavours to improve communi-cation between the two sides were thwarted anddelayed by the US R&D manager, who wantedto retain his autonomy as far as possible and sawimproved communication as a critical threat tothis. For this R&D manager, even communica-tion via the QE2 was seen as too rapid!

The availability of the new technologies is lessof an issue than the importance of companiesbeing willing to experiment in new forms of workpractice and organisational change connectedwith ICTs. This all-important incremental learn-ing pattern and more general "learning by doing"will be critical in the wider spread of cross-borderteamwork and global R&D interaction withincompanies. Above all, this study will seek toinvestigate the "combinational" use of these newICT media in the research process. In the past,studies have sought to treat communication me-dia as individual fields of study and to investigatethe potential communication trade-off between

4 I n f o r m a t i o n a u d i t s [ 5 5] in R & D f u n c t i o n s a r e s t il l v e r yu n u s u a l a n d o n l y m o n i t o r v e ry b r o a d p a t t e r n s o f i n f o r m a t i o np r o c e s s i n g a n d f lo w .

different types of media. However, initial evi-dence from this study suggests that new com-puter-mediated systems are being used in a morecomplementary way to solve and enhance com-munication links in R&D. Certainly, the increas-ing pressure arising from the needs of R&D"going global" will provide an all-important stim-ulus to the take-up and development of thesenew organisational practices in the 1990s andbeyond.

AcknowledgementsThis study is part of an ongoing programme of

work at the Newcastle PICT Centre funded bythe UK Economic and Social Research Council'sProgramme on Information and CommunicationTechnologies (PICT). The study is ongoing andthe author would like to thank R&D and IS/Tmanagers and staff from the following companieswho have provided considerable time and supportfor the study so far:Amersham International, British Gas, BP, BritishNuclear Fuels, Eastman Kodak (including Ster-ling-Sanofi), Ericsson, Glaxo, Hewlett Packard,ICI, Nissan, Pfizer, Proctor&Gamble, Sandoz,Sanofi (Elf), Shell, SmithKline Beecham, Well-come.

References[ 1] R .S. A l l e n , P h y s i cs I n f o r m a t i o n a n d S c i e n t if i c C o m m u n i -

c a t i o n : I n f o r m a t i o n S o u r c e s a n d C o m m u n i c a t i o n P a t -t e r n s , i n : C . S t e i n k e ( E d i t o r ) , Information Seeking andCommunicating Behaviour of Scientists and Engineers( H a w o r t h P r e s s , N e w Y o r k , 1 9 9 1 ) 2 7 - 3 8 .

[ 2 ] T . J . A l l e n , C o m m u n i c a t i o n N e t w o r k s i n R & D L a b o r a t o -ries, R&D Management 1 (1970) 14-21 .[3 ] T .J . A l len , Managing the Flow of Technology ( M . I .T .P r e s s , C a m b r i d g e , M A , 1 9 7 7 ) .

[ 4 ] T . J . A l l e n a n d S . C o o n e y I n s t i t u t i o n a l R o l e s i n T e c h n o l -o g y T r a n s f e r : a D i a g n o s i s o f t h e S i t u a t i o n i n O n e S m a l lC o u n t r y , R&D Management 4 ( 1 9 7 3 ) 4 1 - 5 1 .

[ 5 l T . J . A l l e n a n d A .R . F u s f i e l d , R e s e a r c h L a b o r a t o r y A r -c h i t e c t u re a n d t h e S t r u c t u r i n g o f C o m m u n i c a t i o n s , R&DManagement 5 (1975) 153-164 .

[6 ] R . G . B a t s o n , C h a r a c t er i s ti c s o f R & D M a n a g e m e n t w h ic hI n f l u e n c e I n f o r m a t i o n N e e d s , IEEE Transactions on En-gineering Management E M 3 4 ( 1 9 8 8 ) 1 7 8 - 1 8 3 .


14/16

18 2 J.R. Howells / Research Policy 24 (1995) 16 9-18 4[7 ] J .N. Behrman and W.A. F ischer , Overseas R& D Activities

of Transnational Corporations (O e le s c h la g e r, G u n n &Hain , Cambridge , MA, 1980) .

[8 ] P .C. Bens ten , K.D. Rappaport , R .C. Alf is i , B .A. S tewarta n d G . L . P er ry , T h e C o n t in u in g E v o lu t io n o f R & D /T e c h n ic a l C o m p u t in g , Research Technology Management35 (1992) 39-45.

[9 ] T .L . Case and J .R. P icke t t , R&D Informat ion Sys tems ,Research Technology Management 324 (1989) 29-33.

[10] V.G. Cerf , Ne tworks , Scientific American 265 (1991) 42-51 .

[11] A.K. Charkrabar t i , S . Fe in em an and W. Fuen tev i l la ,Charac te r is t ic s o f Sources , Channe ls , and Conten ts fo rSc ien t i f ic and Tec hnica l In form at ion Sys tems in Indus -t r i a l R & D , IEEE Transactions in Engineering Manage-m e n t EM 30 (1983) 83-88 .

[12] Commission of the European C o m m u n i t i e s , A F ra m e w o rkfo r C o m m u n i ty R T D A c t io n s in th e 9 0 s , D i s c u ss io n D o c -u m e n t , C o m m is s io n o f t h e E u ro p e a n C o m m u n i t i es , B ru s-sels (1989).[13] T . Connol ly , Com mu nica t ion Ne ts and U ncerta in ty inR & D P l an n i ng , IEEE Transactions on Engineering Man-agement EM 22 (1975) 50-54 .

[14] R. Cross and D. Bawden , In fo rmat io n Technology : Hu-m a n a n d O rg a n i s a t io n a l F a c to r s , Journal of InformationScience 13 (1987) 277-284.

[15] R.L . Daft and R.H. Lenge l , Organ isa t iona l In format ionR e q u i re m e n t s , Me d ia R ic h n e s s a n d S t ru c tu ra l D e s ig n ,Management Science 32 (1984) 554-571.

[16] P . Davis and M . Wilkof , Sc ien t i f ic and Technica l In fo r-m a t io n T ra n s fe r fo r H ig h T e c h n o lo g y : K e e p in g th e F ig -ure in i ts Ground , R&D Management 18 (1988) 45-58.

[17] E . D avis Smith , The Effec ts o f Ne w T echnology onIn fo rm a t io n Wo rk : E x a m p le s f ro m C h e m ic a l C o m p a n ie s,Journal of Librarianship 22 (1992) 145-60.

[1 8 ] M. L . D e r to u z o s , C o m m u n ic a t io n s , C o m p u te r s a n d N e t -works, Scientific American 265 (1991) 30-87.

[19] T . Durham, Cas t ing the Ne tworks Wider , Glaxo World 1(1986) 5-8.

[2 0 ] E IR MA , T h e Im p a c t o f N e w In fo rm a t io n T e c h n o lo g ie sin R & D a n d o n I& D Ma n a g e m e n t , E u ro p e a n In d u s t r i a lR e s e a rc h Ma n a g e m e n t A s s o c ia t io n , Wo rk in g G ro u p R e -port 31, Paris (1986).[21] D.L . Es tr in , In te r-O rgan isa t ion a l N e tworks : S tr ing ingWires ac ross Admin is t ra t ive Boundaries , Computer Net-works and ISDN Sys tems 9 (1985) 281-295.[2 2] M . A . E v a n s, M. F . Wo o d s a n d R . J . L e v e n e , C o m m u n ic a -t io n P a t t e rn s in T w o U K R & D L a b o ra to r i e s , R & D M a n -agement 4 (1974) 141-147.

[23] W.A. F ischer , Sc ien t i f ic and Technica l In format ion andt h e P e r f o r m a n c e o f R & D G r o u p s , TIMS Studies in theManagement Sciences 15 (1980) 67-89.[24] P .A. Fros t and R. Whit ley , Communica t ion Pa t te rns in aR e s e a rc h L a b o ra to ry , R & D Ma n a ge m en t 1 (1971) 71-79.[25] R.A. Fu l le r , Decen tra l ised R&D Organ isa t ion , in : J .K.Brown and L .M. Elvers (Ed i to rs ) , Research and Develop-

ment: Key Issues for Management (C o n fe re n c e B o a rd ,N e w Y o rk , 1 9 8 3 ) 3 4 -3 7 .[26 ] O . G ra n d s t r a n d a n d I . F e rn la n d , C o o rd in a t io n o f Mu l t i -

na t iona l R&D: a Swedish Case S tudy , R& D Management9 (1978) 1-7.[27] P . Hags trom, New Informat ion Sys tems and the Chang-

in g S t ru c tu re o f M N C s , in : C . A . B a r t le t t , Y . D o z a n d G .H e d la n d (E d i to r s ) , Managing the Global Firm ( R o u t -ledge , London , 1990) 164-185 .

[2 8 ] L . H a k a n s o n , In t e rn a t io n a l D e c e n t ra l i s a t io n o f R & D - -the Organ isa t iona l Cha l lenges in : C .A. Bart le t t , Y. Doza n d G . H e d la n d (E d i to r s ) , Managing the Global Firm(R o u t l e d g e , L o n d o n , 1 9 9 0 ) 2 5 6 -2 78 .

[29] K.P . Ha l l and E . Ri tch ie , A S tudy of Comm unica t ionB e h a v io u r in a n R & D L a b o ra to ry , R& D Management 5(1975) 243-245.

[30 ] R . A . H e a rm o n , T h e C o rp o ra t e IC I S p e c t ro sc o p y D a taSystem, Spectroscopy International 3 (1991) 14-18.

[ 3 1 ] G . H e d l u n d , T h e H y p e r m o d e r n M N C - - a H e t e r a r c h y ?Human Resource Management 25 (1986) 9-35.[32] S .R. Hi l tz and M. Turoff , The Ne twork Nat ion: Hu ma nCommunication ~,ia Computer (A d d i s o n -We s le y , R e a d -ing, MA, 1978).

[33 ] E . A . H o u g h , C o m m u n ic a t io n o f T e c h n ic a l In fo rm a t io nb e tw e e n O v e rs e a s Ma rk e t s a n d H e a d O f f i c e L a b o ra to -ries, R&D Management 3 (1972) 1-5.

[34 ] J . R . H o w e l l s, T h e L o c a t io n o f R e s e a rc h a n d D e v e lo p -m e n t , Regional Studies 18 (1984) 13-29.

[35] J .R. How ells , The Loca t ion and Organ isa t ion o f Re-s e a rc h a n d D e v e lo p m e n t : N e w H o r iz o n s , Research Policy19 (1990) 133-146.

[36] J .R. Howells , The Globa l isa t ion o f Resea rch and Deve l-o p m e n t , Sc&nce and Public Policy 17 (1990) 273-285.[37] J .R. Howells and M. Wood, The Globa l isa t ion o f Pro-duc t ion and Te chnolog y (Be lhaven , London , 1993) .

[38] G. Is le i , G. Locke t t , B . Cox and M . S tra t fo rd , A D ec is ionS u p p o r t S y st em U s in g J u d g e m e n ta l M o d e l l in g : a C a s e o fR & D in th e P h a rm a c e u t i c a l In du s t ry , IE EE Transact ionsin Engineering M anagement 38 (1991) 202-209.

[39] D. Julius , Global Companies and Public Policy (P in te r ,London , 1990) .

[40] P .W.G, Keen , Competing in Time: Using Telecommunica-tions for Competitive Advantage (Ba l l inger , Cambridge ,MA, 1988) .

[41] J . J . Ke l le r , A Scram ble fo r Glob a l Ne tw orks , BusinessWeek March 21 (1988) 72-79 .

[42] P .T . Kirs te in and J . Crowcroft , In te rn a t iona l L inks fo rR e s e a rc h C o l l a b o ra t io n , Computer Ne tworks and ISDNSystems 21 (1991) 261-273.

[43] B.R. Konsynsk i and F .W. McF arlan , In form at ion Par t -n e r s h ip s - -S h a re d D a ta , S h a re d S c a le , Harvard BusinessReview (Sep tember-October (1990) 114-120 .[4 4 ] O . K o u ld e lk a a n d R . A . H a r r i s , L A N In te rc o r re c t io n b y

Sa te l l i te and the COST 226 Pro jec t , Computer Networksand ISDN Sys tems 21 (1991) 285-292 .[45 ] L M . L a n d w e b e r , D . M. J e n n in g s a n d I . H . F u c h s , R e -


15/16

J.R. Howells / R esearch Policy 24 (1995) 16 9-18 4 183s e a rc h C o m p u te r N e tw o rk s a n d th e i r In t e rc o n n e c t io n ,IE EE Communica tions Magaz ine 24 (1986) 5-17.

[46] F .C. Leav i t t , Bas ic Research a t a Dis tance : a Func t ion ingMe th o d to Im p ro v e C o o p e ra t io n b e tw e e n B a s ic a n d A p -p l i e d R e s e a rc h e r s , Research Management 11 (1968) 225-229.

[47] N.S . Lev inson , Managing Innova t ion in the In te rorgan i-sa t iona l In format ion Era , in : R . Rothwel l and J . Bessan t(Edi to rs ) , Innovation: Adaptation and Growth (Elsev ie r ,A m s te rd a m ) 1 3 5-1 45 .

[4 8] J . Ma jo -C ru z a te , E C P o l i cy to P ro m o te H ig h -S p e e d N e t -w o rk in g fo r R e s e a rc h in E u ro p e , Computer Ne tworks and1SDN Systems 21 (1991) 233-138.

[4 9 ] E . J . Ma le c k i , C o rp o ra t e O rg a n i s a t io n o f R & D a n d th eLoca t ion o f Technolog ica l Ac t iv i t ie s , Regional Studies 14(1980) 219-234.

[5 0] T . W. M a lo n e a n d J . F R o c k a r t , C o m p u te r s , N e tw o rk s a n dC o rp o ra t io n s , Scientific American 265 (1991) 92-99.

[5 1 ] T . Mc C u s k e r , A B ro a d e r V ie w o f N e tw o rk in g , D a ta m a -tion 36 (1990) 83-86.[52] E . More , In format ion Sys tems : People Is sues , Journal ofInformation Science 16 (1990) 311-320.

[53] P .S . Nagpau l and S . Pru th i , P rob lem Solv ing and Idea -G e n e ra t io n in R & D : th e R o le o f In fo rm a l C o m m u n ic a -t ion , R & D Ma n a ge m en t 9 (1979) 147-149.

[5 4 ] J . O l in , R & D Ma n a g e m e n t P ra c t i c e s , R&D Management3 (1973) 125-135.

[55] E . Orna , Practical Information Policies (G o w e r , A ld e r -shot, 19901.

[5 6] J . R . U . P a g e , P l a n n in g a n d D e v e lo p m e n t o f t h e E u ro p e a nS p a c e D o c u m e n t S e rv ic e in : A . D e R e u c k a n d J . K n ig h t(Edi to rs ) , Comm unication in Science (Church i l l , London ,1967), 146-155.[57] P . Pa te l and K. Pav i t t , La rge F irms in the Produc t ion o fth e Wo r ld ' s T e c h n o lo g y : a n Im p o r t a n t C a s e o f " N o n -G lo b a l i s a t io n " , Journal of International Business Studies12 (1991) 1-21.

[58] R.D. Pearce , The Internationalisation of Research andDevelopm ent by Multinational Enterprises (Ma c m i l l a n ,Basingstoke, 1989).

[59] R.D. Pearce and S . S ingh , Globaliz ing Research and De-velopment (M acm illan, Basingstoke, 1992).

[60] L .K. Praha lad and Y.L. Doz , The Multinational Mission:Balanc ing L oca l Demands and Global Vis ion (T h e F re ePress, N ew York, 1987).

[6 1 ] R . E . R ic e , C o m p u te r -Me d ia t e d C o m m u n ic a t io n S y s te m sa n d O rg a n i s a t io n a l In n o v a t io n , Journa l o f Communica-tion 37 (1987) 65-94.

[62] R.E . Rice and D .E. Shook , Re la t ionsh ips o f Job Ca te -g o r i e s a n d O rg a n i s a t io n a l L e v e l s t o U s e o f C o m m u n ic a -t ion Channe ls , Inc lud ing Elec tron ic Mail , Journal ofManagement Studies 27 (1990) 195-229.[63] E . Ri tch ie , Communica t ion Ne tworks : Tools fo r the Eff i -c i e n t M a n a g e m e n t o f R & D , R&D Management 7 (1977)8 5 -8 8 .[64] R. Rons tad t , Research and Development Abroad by USMultinationals (Praeger , New York , 19771 .

[65 ] R . R o th w e l l a nd A . B . R o b e r t s o n , T h e R o le o f C o m m u n i -ca t ions in Technolog ica l Innova t ion , Research Policy 2(1973) 204-225.

[66 ] A . H . R u b e n s te in , O rg a n i s a t io n a l F a c to r s A f fe c t in g R e -s e a rc h a n d D e v e lo p m e n t D e c i s io n -m a k in g in L a rg e D e -c e n t ra l i s e d C o m p a n ie s , Management Science 10 (1964)618-633 .

[67] A.H. Rubens te in , R .T . Barth and C.F . Douds , Ways toIm p ro v e C o m m u n ic a t io n s b e tw e e n R & D G ro u p s , Re-search Management 14 (19711 49- 59.

[68 ] A . H . R u b e n s te in a n d R . C . H a n n e n b e rg , Id e a F lo w a n dPro jec t Se lec t ion in Severa l Indus tr ia l Resea rch and De-v e lo p m e n t L a b o ra to r i e s in : R . A . T y b o r t (E d i to r ) , E c o -nomics o f Research and Development (O h io S ta t e U n iv e r -s i ty Press , Colum bus , O H, 1965) 219-244 .

[69] F.M. Scherer, Industr ial Market Structure and EconomicPerformance (Ran d McN ally , Chicago , IL , 1970).

[70] R.S . Schu le r and L .F . Blank , Re la t ionsh ips among Typeso f C o m m u n ic a t io n , O rg a n i s a t io n a l L e v e l , a n d E m p lo y e eSa t is fac t ion and Performance , IEEE Transac t ions on En-gineering M anagement EM 23 (1976) 124-129.

[71] J . Short, E. Williams and B. Chris tie , The Social Psychol-ogy of Telecommunications (Wiley, London, 19761.

[72] T .K. Shotwel l , In format ion F low in an Indus tr ia l Labora -to ry - - a Case S tudy , IEEE Transactions on Engineering~Vlanagement EM 18 (1971) 26-33 .

[73] L . Sprou l l and S . Kies le r , Reduc ing Soc ia l Contex t Cues :Elec tron ic Mail in Organ isa t iona l Communica t ion , Ma n -agement Science 32 (19861 492-512.

[74] L . Sprou l l and S . Kies te r , Compute rs . Ne tworks andW o r k , Scientific American 265 (19911 84-91.

[75] G. S ta lk and T .M. Hout , Competing Against Time: How'lime-Based Com petition is Reshaping G lobal Markets (T h eFre e Press , New York, 1990).

[76] L.W. Steele , Innovation in Big Business (Elsev ie r , NewYork, 1975).[77] P . Su l lo , T . T r isca r i and W.A. W allace , R e l iab i l i ty o f

C o m m u n ic a t io n F lo w in R & D O rg a n i s a t io n s , I E E ETransactions on Engineering Management EM 32 (1985)9 1 - 9 7 .

[78] D. Swinbanks , M ore Y en fo r Japan ' s Univers i ty Re-search System, Research Techn olog~ Management 35(19921 3-4.

[79] L .J . Thomas , The Centra l ised Research Organ isa t ion in :J .K. Brown and L .M. Elvers (Ed i to rs ) , Research&Development: Key Issues for Management (C o n fe re n c eBoard , New York , 19831 30-33 .

[80] M. Thom as . Tech nica l Des ign Is sues in In te rna t io na lPriva te Ne tworks , Telecommunications March (1980) 39-48 .

[81] R.G. Thorp , M. Schur , D. Bawden and J .R. Jo ice , TheF o re ig n L a n g u a g e B a r r i e r : a S tu d y a m o n g P h a rm a c e u t i -c a l R e s e a rc h W o rk e r s, Journal of Information Science 14(1988) 17-24.[82] B. Tomlin , In te r-Loca t iona l Technica l Communica t ion ina G e o g ra p h ic a l ly D i s p e r se d R e s e a rc h O rg a n i s a tio n , R & DManagement 11 (19811 19-23 .


16/16

18 4 J.R. Howells Research Policy 24 (1995) 169-184[83] L . Trev ino , R. Lenge l and R. Daft , Media Symbolism,Me d ia R ic h n e s s a n d Me d ia C h o ic e in O rg a n i s a t io n s ,Communication Research 14 (1987) 553-575.[8 4] M. L . T u s h m a n a n d D . A . N a d le r , C o m m u n ic a t io n a n d

T e c h n ic a l R o le s in R & D L a b o ra to r i e s : a n In fo rm a t io nP ro c e s s in g A p p ro a c h , TIMS Studies in the ManagementSciences 15 (1980) 91-112.

[85] B.C. Twiss, Managing Technological Innovation (L o n g -man , London , 1974) .

[86] R. Vernon , Organ isa t ion as a Sca le Fac tor in the Growthof F irms , in : J .W. Markham and G.F . Papenek (Edi to rs ) ,Industrial Organisation and Economic Development(Houghton , Miff l in , New York , 1970) 47-66 .

[87] S .K. Voge l , Advanced Communica t ions fo r Bus iness inC a n a d a , J a p a n & U n i t e d K in g d o m : J a p a n R e p o r t , R e -p o r t fo r D e p a r tm e n t o f C o m m u n ic a t io n s , G o v e rn m e n t o fCanada , Ot tawa Ont . (1991) .

[88] J .T . Waa lmark , S . Eckers te in , B . Lange red and H.E.S .H o lm q u i s t , T h e In c re a s e in E f f i c i e n c y w i th S iz e o f R e -s e a rc h T e a m s , 1EEE Transactions on Engineering Man-agement EM20 (1973) 80-86 .

[8 9 ] V . M. Wa ls h a n d A . G . B a k e r , P ro je c t Ma n a g e m e n t a n dC o m m u n ic a t io n P a t t e rn s in In d u s t r i a l R e s e a rc h , R&DManagement 2 (1971) 103-109.

[90] K.R. Walton , J .P . Dismukes and J .E . Browning , An In -

fo rm a t io n S p e c ia l i s t J o in s th e R & D T e a m ResearchTechnology Management S e p t e m b e r - O c t o b e r ( 19 89 ) 3 2 -37 .

[91] S . W ard , Ph armace u t ica l Indus try In fo rma t ion Serv icesa n d th e Im p a c t o f N e w T e c h n o lo g y in Information forIndustry: The Next Ten Years (B r i t i s h L ib ra ry R & D R e -port 5802 , 1984) 47-62 .

[92] K.M. W atts and J .C. Higg ins , The Us e o f Adv ancedM a n a g e m e n t T e c h n i q u e s in R & D , Omega 15 (1987) 21-29 .

[93] T . Whiteha l l , C .M. Brea dm ore and A .J . But te rs , In for-m a t io n In p u t s t o R e s e a rc h a n d D e v e lo p m e n t Wo rk ,Journal of Information Science 15 (1989) 135-148.[94 ] P . Wi l s o n , A n O v e rv ie w o f C o m p u te r S u p p o r t e d C o o p e r -a t iv e Wo rk (C S C W): a N e w IT P a ra d ig m , AIS 91 (1991)125-138.

[95 ] P . Wi l s o n , T h e M e ta m o rp h o s i s o f t h e N e tw o rk . P a p e rp re s e n te d a t C o n fe re n c e o n In fo rm a t io n T e c h n o lo g y a n dP e o p le , IT A P 9 1 , T h e O p e n U n iv e r s i ty , Mi l to n K e y n e s(12-13 Apri l , 1991) .[96 ] Z u c k e rm a n R e p o r t , R e p o r t o f th e C o m m i t t e e o n th eMa n a g e m e n t a n d C o n t ro l o f R e s e a rc h a n d D e v e lo p m e n t ,(O f f i c e o f t h e Min i s t e r fo r S c ie n c e , H MS O , L o n d o n ,1961).

Documents

Going Global.pdf