cation, greater specialization, better organization 

 of design work, fewer documentation errors, greater 

 standardization of parts, and more extensive automa- 

 tion of work processes. In addition, NPOs are cred- 

 ited with harmonizing the actions, goals, and inter- 

 ests of different performers and with creating a more 

 favorable climate for innovation. They enjoy greater 

 possibilities of applying network planning methods 

 and computer techniques to the innovation cycle, of 

 using matrix organization and project management to 

 improve the decision process and to build more dynam- 

 ic and flexible structures. Above all, they are said 

 to generate favorable conditions for the conduct of 

 uniform policies and integrated leadership throughout 

 the associations.^ 



As Berliner notes, however, much of the evidence 

 on NPOs deals with the performance of individual or 

 groups of associations. Aggregate data in systematic 

 form are still lacking. 43 Nonetheless, there is 

 sufficient fragmentary information and critical anal- 

 ysis to suggest a mixed record of performance and di- 

 verse development. Not all associations have been 

 resounding successes. Even those NPOs that have been 

 held up as stellar examples, like Pozitron and Plast- 

 polimer , have important problems. Despite individual 

 accomplishments and some remarkable gains, deficien- 

 cies persist in both the theory and practice of sci- 

 ence-production associations. 



One area of criticism and controversy concerns the 

 optimal structure and composition of NPOs. Basically 

 at issue are conflicting views about the essential 

 purpose and function of the NPO. There is general 

 consensus that in promoting the rapid creation and 

 smooth transfer of technology the associations are to 

 encompass the entire research-to-production cycle. 

 The precise role and form of participation of the NPO 

 in the initial and concluding phases of the cycle are 

 debatable, however. There are two main schools of 

 thought. One holds that the task of the association 

 should be limited essentially to the development and 

 testing of prototypes. According to this view, the 

 business of series and mass production of new tech- 

 nology belongs not to the NPO but to the production 



208 



