defined set of national policies. If so, a stimulus to 

 more fundamental research in industry can be 

 achieved. 



Respondents felt that important functions of 

 a national R&D policy would be the identifica- 

 tion of goals and the selection of the best means 

 for achieving those goals; initial steps would 

 involve recognizing what various parts of the 

 research system do best and then arranging for 

 these parts to work together. 



Thus, Robert M. Adams, Vice President, 

 Research and Development, Minnesota Mining 

 and Manufacturing Company, believed a 

 national policymaking effort could help define 

 the best mechanisms for university, govern- 

 ment, and industry interaction: 



The United States still seems to be groping for the 

 proper role of these three "institutions" in the 

 nation's research and development activity. 

 University research grew dramatically in the 50's 

 and 60's with the support of Federal funds. This 

 support has been diminished in the 70's, and in 

 many cases universities have turned to industry 

 to replace at least some of the lost Government 

 support. The equilibrium between these three 

 forces has been disturbed and has not yet really 

 settled out. Even within the universities there is 

 much disagreement on priorities, allocations, and 

 directions. Until the roles of government, in- 

 dustry, and universities are more clearly defined, 

 it is probable that fundamental research will 

 stumble. 



In a similar vein, W. Dale Compton, Vice 

 President, Scientific Research, Ford Motor 

 Company, noted a need to develop, on a national 

 scale, mechanisms that will enhance the in- 

 teractions between industrial research teams 

 and university research groups: 



Basically, there exist now only ad hoc 

 mechanisms that are, at best, tenuous. Both 

 groups would benefit from a closer working 

 relationship. I think this would also help stabilize 

 the long-term research efforts of the various 

 groups, both in the universities and in the 

 industrial laboratories. 



UNIVERSITY 



Although the perspective of industry and of 

 the universities may differ somewhat, the 

 problems they perceive are similar as can be 

 seen from the letter of Sidney G. Roth, Vice 

 Chancellor for Federal Relations at New York 

 University. As quoted here, he sets out the key 

 elements of Dependability in Funding for 

 Research as they are seen from the university: 



Academic institutions are asked to undertake as 

 well as suggest research programs which are 

 basic to issues of national need. Clearly, Federal 

 priorities are important and dollar resources must 

 be authorized and appropriated to implement 

 national policies with respect to such major 

 problems. But, as we look back over the past two 

 decades, we can document those efforts that 

 peaked all too quickly in almost each of the major 

 areas. The OMB, Congress, or other Federal 

 entity seems to get tired of a given program and 

 either pushes on to a new priority because of 

 political considerations or modifies its previous 

 effort by eliminating it or changing the rules 

 drastically. 



On the other hand, academia is urged to mobilize 

 its resources to assist in these needed 

 developments. If an institution thinks it can make 

 a contribution, it will do so hoping thereby to 

 meet a societal obligation and at the same time 

 participate in the development of new programs 

 of promise. And, academic institutions generally 

 invest a considerable sum of their own funds 

 when undertaking major ventures of interest to 

 the Federal establishment. When Federal support 

 changes abruptly or with very short notice, such 

 institutions can be left in an embarrassing posi- 

 tion. 



Further, the time scale for academia generally is 

 longer than a year or two or even three: people 

 have to be hired; students acquired; facilities 

 altered or constructed. If an institution beefs up a 

 given department, faculty, or program by adding 

 highly qualified staff, immediately it must think of 

 the future. Will the institution be able to afford the 

 number of people on its roster after the initial 

 funding is over? Will it be in a position to fulfill its 

 promise to students in process by continuing 



DEPENDABILITY IN FUNDING FOR RESEARCH 37 



