program basis, where problems and programs cross for- 

 mal departmental boundaries. In this part, we first 

 briefly describe the traditional process of vertical 

 disaggregation of plan tasks, and then discuss hori- 

 zontal relationships among performing and sponsoring 

 organizations on the same level. We then focus on 

 interbranch S&T problems . 



Vertical Relationships 



Disaggregation of plan assignments along vertical 

 administrative lines still constitutes the basic 

 framework for planning research, development, and the 

 implementation of results. In large part, this is 

 because most such assignments fall naturally within 

 the purview of a traditional organizational entity, 

 such as a ministry, which generally is constituted on 

 thematic grounds. In addition, other chapters of the 

 overall plans, including those concerned with produc- 

 tion, supply, and finance, are formed even more com- 

 pletely by vertical disaggregation of assignments. 

 Because R&D-related targets must be well coordinated 

 with other targets, there is a strong case for simi- 

 larly managing plan formulation. This rationale sug- 

 gests the most telling reason for the maintenance of 

 the vertical relationship: the process is already so 

 complex and demands the integration of so many par- 

 ticipants that to require the performer to synthesize 

 and establish priorities for directives coming from 

 several sources would bring the system to a grinding 

 halt. Accordingly, even priority directives origi- 

 nating from interbranch programs must be incorporated 

 in the traditional vertical planning process at the 

 level of the intermediate management organ, such as 

 the ministry. 



The R&D planning process follows, on the whole, 

 the main lines of the overall planning process. The 

 formal procedure occurs in four stages: (1) transmis- 

 sion of directives to lower organs; (2) presentation 

 of draft plans to higher authorities; (3) approval of 

 the plan and its transmission; and (4) adjustments to 

 the plan. These distinctions or stages represent on- 

 ly a first approximation, however. As Zaleski ex- 



129 



