be consistently successful in science management if 

 one pursues only one part of the system of goals."' 

 Official Soviet claims to the contrary notwithstand- 

 ing, the Kremlin still lacks comprehensive and coher- 

 ent S&T policies. This is especially true in the 

 civilian sector where capabilities for problem de- 

 finition and systems management have been much more 

 deficient than in the military and space areas. On 

 both the theoretical and practical levels recent ef- 

 forts point to the need and determination of Soviet 

 leaders to develop a greater integrative capability, 

 analytical and administrative, in order to apply more 

 effectively a systems approach to S&T policy. 



While there are still many loose ends and untreat- 

 ed questions in the literature, nonetheless the work 

 of Soviet specialists in wrestling with complex S&T 

 issues is impressive. A new sophistication is evi- 

 dent. More and more, new ideas and attitudes are be- 

 ginning to penetrate and shape S&T thinking and pol- 

 icy making in the Kremlin. 



Much of the debate on how to improve performance 

 and to promote S&T progress has centered on six is- 

 sues. One prominent set of concerns relates to the 

 question of expanding the boundaries of science pol- 

 icy and of integrating science policy with economic 

 policy. A second major theme is the need to move to 

 an intensive growth strategy for science and technol- 

 ogy with an emphasis on increasing the efficiency and 

 effectiveness of R&D. The four remaining issues are 

 essentially subsets of the latter problem. Taken to- 

 gether, they deal with ways of raising overall per- 

 formance through greater organizational flexibility 

 and institutional restructuring, improved planning 

 and resource allocation, and more effective manage- 

 ment and motivation throughout the research-to-pro- 

 duction process. A common theme punctuating and dom- 

 inating discussion in all these issues is the need to 

 apply a systems approach to contemporary problem 

 solving. The whole thrust and tone of the debate are 

 in line with the intrinsically comprehensive and cen- 

 tralized approach of Kremlin decision makers. It is 

 also not accidental that "linkage" and "integration" 



254 



