RESEARCH FOR AERONAUTICS—FARREN a a | 
(1) A clear, unambiguous statement of the ultimate objective. 
This must be more than a statement of the specific problem. It must 
relate it to the general picture of which it is a part. Thus he will 
know why the work is being done. 
(2) An opportunity to give his own views on the value of the under- 
lying ideas. The basic plan must be, in part, his own. Thus he 
will start with a sound conviction that the plan is a good one. 
(3) An immediate leader in whom he has confidence, who will 
inspire him, help him, and keep him up to date in all the relevant 
parallel work on related problems. Thus he will retain the good 
spirits in which he starts. 
(4) Sufficient resources to enable his work to progress at what is, 
in his judgment, a speed commensurate with the importance of the 
objective. Thus he will feel that the value of his work is recognized 
in the only way that means anything to him. 
This formula can, in my experience, be applied to groups of work- 
ers under a central management or to separate establishments under 
a central direction. And the difficulties that one meets in applying 
it arise not from its shortcomings but from conscious or unconscious 
neglect of its essentials. 
Looked at in this way, such questions as the ideal size of research 
establishments cease to be of any great significance. Just as a team 
must have a leader who knows all about the work being done by its 
members, so a group of teams must have a leader who is recognized 
by them to know enough about their work for him to be able to guide 
it to its common objective. The limit of economical size of a com- 
plete unit is set not by some arbitrary formula but by the simple fact 
that no one man can know enough about work in more than a few 
fields to be able to inspire real confidence in his team leaders or 
their teams. The control of large equipment, the management of 
numbers of skilled industrials, and the commonplace daily problems 
of facilities are matters of consequence, but they are not the real de- 
termining factors. In any event they are well understood and can 
be broken down and shared among a properly balanced staff. 
I would summarize my views on this question as follows. There 
is no single or simple formula by which to determine the best method 
of handling research. But I believe there are a few simple prin- 
ciples in the light of which each particular situation may be reviewed 
and a good solution found. 
CONCLUSION 
You will see that my experience has led me to the view that the 
record of science and engineering in aeronautics is a creditable one. 
It justifies us in demanding the means of extending our efforts into 
