ANALYSIS OF THE suitable set of categories under which to 



RESPONSE LETTERS classify the problems and suggestions con- 



tained in the letters. The original inquiry letter 

 When the response letters were received, they had not contained any such categories, since its 

 were subjected to a content analysis. The intent was to give the respondents as much 

 purposeof this analysis was todevelop themost freedom as possible in their replies. 



Table 2-2. Issues Most Often Mentioned from the University Sector 



There is pressure for applied research in preference to basic or pure research; projects are overly 



"targeted" or their sub|ects too minutely defined. 



There is need for more continuity and stability in government funding of research; research grants 



should be longer. 



Hiring and research support problems are experienced by younger faculty; departments cannot hire 



because of tenure; older faculty do not leave. 



The continued supply of manpower to do research must be insured. 



More coordination of research at the national level, more consistent policy, and more planning are 



needed. ' 



More support is needed for graduate studies. 



More money in general is needed for research; there should be more basic research. 



The public has a negative attitude toward science and technology. 



Government (State, local, or Federal) or one of its branches or agencies has a negative attitude toward 



science and technology. 



Funds are needed for research equipment, instrumentation, and maintenance. 



Increased teaching loads take time away from research. 



More support for university research should be supplied at the institutional level. 



A program of education or communication is needed to convince the public and government of the value 



of research. 



There are excessive demands for accountability in the use of funds provided by government. 



Table 2-3. Issues Most Often Mentioned from the Industry Sector 



Government regulations and controls (unreasonable, not thought out, no cost/benefit/risk analysis). 



Absence of national science and technology policy, priorities or goals. 



Near-term relevance is only research objective (due to government regulations or decentralization 



of research to profit centers). 



General economic conditions, particularly inflation in salaries and laboratory costs, lead to decreases in 



fundamental research in industry. 



Low public confidence in and/or poor image of science, technology, research or scientists 



Lack of availability of money, low profitability or obstacles to capital formation lead to decreases in 



fundamental research in industry. 



Concern over general decrease in fundamental and other research in industry. 



Deteriorating patent protection or patent policy is a disincentive to industrial research and 



innovation 



Too few/too many scientific and technical personnel — no match with need— lack of national policy on 



scientific and technical personnel. 



Competing R&D functions (e.g., applied research or development in response to government regulations) 



decrease fundamental research in industry. 



Concern about quality of new people— best are not entering science and engineering 



or, if they do, are kept for university 



26 THE INQUIRY TO THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY 



