size of <strong>the</strong> conglomerates would certainly prove a great advantageshould <strong>the</strong>y decide to promote innovation. It makes it easier for <strong>the</strong>mto justify investment in risky activities, to plan over <strong>the</strong> long term, tofend off corporate predators, <strong>and</strong> to increase <strong>Canadian</strong> control byacquisition of foreign subsidiaries.Because conglomerates control activities in different industries<strong>the</strong>y can potentially establish production <strong>and</strong> technological linkagesbetween equipment suppliers, forest-product firms, <strong>and</strong> constructioncompanies, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>y can engineer marketing connections. Also <strong>the</strong>yoften have overseas subsidiaries that enable greater flexibility inindustrial planning <strong>and</strong> marketing of innovations.Conrad Black has recently justified <strong>the</strong> presence of huge <strong>Canadian</strong>owned<strong>and</strong> -controlled conglomerates as <strong>the</strong> only effective way ofoffsetting <strong>the</strong> power of large foreign-controlled multinationals in <strong>the</strong><strong>Canadian</strong> economyf He urges that <strong>the</strong> role of conglomerates in preservinga degree of sovereignty in <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong> economy should beformally recognized - not attacked by more rigorous federal competitionlaws. Black is essentially offering a kind of social bargain between<strong>the</strong> most powerful corporate interests in Canada <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> government.This offer should be seriously considered if conglomerates would inreturn promise to enhance <strong>Canadian</strong> industrial strengths, especiallyby committing <strong>the</strong>mselves to increased R&D.The acceptance by <strong>Canadian</strong> conglomerates of an obligation to abroad social interest may be Canada's last chance to build industrialstrength through innovation in <strong>the</strong> resource sector. Although R&Dbasedsmall <strong>and</strong> medium-sized firms in high-value-added segmentsof <strong>the</strong> forest-product industries can also playa part, given <strong>the</strong> structureof <strong>the</strong> industries, whe<strong>the</strong>r attitudes toward innovation within <strong>the</strong>sector change significantly depends on leaders in <strong>the</strong> conglomerates<strong>and</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r big firms.Getting R&D out of <strong>the</strong> Lab <strong>and</strong> into <strong>Product</strong>ionThe challenges of mature industries are becoming more <strong>and</strong> morelike those of high technology: automation of production, incorporationof advanced technology into <strong>the</strong> final products, <strong>the</strong>necessity to compete in global markets, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> need for a moreeducated <strong>and</strong> professional labour force?To develop <strong>the</strong>ir full potential <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong> forest-product industrieswill have to become more innovative. Policy makers mustremember that innovation includes not only <strong>the</strong> science <strong>and</strong> engineeringactivities of <strong>the</strong> R&D system but also <strong>the</strong> entrepreneurial (market102
ing, investment, industrial relations) activities of <strong>the</strong> productionsystem.'? An increased commitment to R&D is not all that is required.The aim of <strong>the</strong> following recommendations is to encourage <strong>the</strong>commercial application of <strong>the</strong> results of R&D so as to maximize <strong>the</strong>competitiveness of <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong> forest-product industries. Theserecommendations, which are directed toward industry, <strong>the</strong> cooperativeresearch laboratories, <strong>and</strong> government, are concerned with, first,<strong>the</strong> long-range production strategies of forest-product corporations;second, <strong>the</strong> nature of technological planning ("technology strategies");<strong>and</strong>, third, <strong>the</strong> nature of <strong>the</strong> forestry sector R& D system. Finally,suggestions are offered on how business <strong>and</strong> government leadersmight help stimulate greater concern for innovation in <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong>forest-product industries.Toward Flexibility <strong>and</strong> Value Maximization in<strong>Forest</strong>-<strong>Product</strong> ManufacturingIn <strong>the</strong> past <strong>the</strong> adoption of "proven" equipment <strong>and</strong> cost rrurumizationhas taken precedence over innovation in <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong>forest-product industries. Technological planning has typically beenan implicit process <strong>and</strong> emphasized adaptive R&D, despite a fewexamples of <strong>Canadian</strong> technological leadership, such as <strong>the</strong> developmentof twin-forming technology (see chapter 3). Characteristically,however, <strong>Canadian</strong> forest-product firms (<strong>and</strong> equipment suppliers)have made no attempt to initiate technical or product change. Only ah<strong>and</strong>ful of firms have developed noteworthy in-house R&D programs<strong>and</strong> sought to establish <strong>the</strong>mselves in <strong>the</strong> technological vanguard of<strong>the</strong> industry.The emphasis on adaptive R&D <strong>and</strong> conservative attitudestoward innovation have been consistent with Canada's historic roleas a marginal supplier of bulk commodities. Canada will <strong>and</strong> shouldcontinue to be an important world producer of bulk commodities.However, fewer plants are needed for this, because <strong>the</strong> size <strong>and</strong> speedof machines have increased <strong>and</strong> dem<strong>and</strong> has declined. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rh<strong>and</strong>, markets for higher value <strong>and</strong> more differentiated forestproducts have grown. Moreover, if <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong> forest-product industrieswish to escape <strong>the</strong>ir overwhelming reliance on <strong>the</strong> United Statesmarket, <strong>Canadian</strong> firms will have to cater to <strong>the</strong> distinctive requirementsin terms of type, quality, <strong>and</strong> size of products of alternativemarkets, especially in <strong>the</strong> Pacific Rim. Therefore, if <strong>the</strong> <strong>Canadian</strong>forest-product industries are to develop <strong>the</strong>ir full potential, <strong>the</strong>y willincreasingly have to emphasize principles of flexibility <strong>and</strong> value maximizationin <strong>the</strong>ir production processes. They will also have to make103
- Page 3 and 4:
Science Council of Canada100 Metcal
- Page 5 and 6:
ContentsForewordAcknowledgments1113
- Page 7 and 8:
In-House R&D by Equipment Suppliers
- Page 9 and 10:
Table 2.5: R&D Employment in 10 Can
- Page 11 and 12:
ForewordTechnological innovation an
- Page 14 and 15:
adapted sufficiently rapidly to the
- Page 16 and 17:
Finally, the author interviewed sen
- Page 18 and 19:
Table 1.3: Degree of Foreign Contro
- Page 20 and 21:
Figure 1.1: Innovation Patterns and
- Page 22 and 23:
Since 1945 the pace of technologica
- Page 24 and 25:
Toward Reliance on Research rather
- Page 26 and 27:
science occurred between 1900 and 1
- Page 28 and 29:
Forestry Sector R&D SystemIn Canada
- Page 30 and 31:
up its forestry research group at N
- Page 32 and 33:
and one other that was strongly ori
- Page 34 and 35:
closely involved in the establishme
- Page 36 and 37:
to vet and control research priorit
- Page 38 and 39:
In-House R&D by Equipment Suppliers
- Page 40 and 41:
product. One, by no means atypical,
- Page 42 and 43:
only internal source of dissolving
- Page 44 and 45:
of which only 18 per cent came from
- Page 46 and 47:
New information can be generated by
- Page 48 and 49:
Chapter 3The R&D System andHow It W
- Page 50 and 51: Table 3.2: Summary Characteristics
- Page 52 and 53: Sixteen firms provided details on s
- Page 54 and 55: The Opco Process: A Case Study of I
- Page 56 and 57: however, within the last two decade
- Page 58 and 59: in 1959, and a full-scale experimen
- Page 60 and 61: Papritection was developed as follo
- Page 62 and 63: Further tests were conducted in 198
- Page 64 and 65: fully automatic machines, and its s
- Page 66 and 67: Chapter 4Technological Capability a
- Page 68 and 69: Table 4.2 provides measurements of
- Page 70 and 71: forest-product equipment patents, w
- Page 72 and 73: Foreign-Ownership and In-House R&DT
- Page 74 and 75: Technological Liaisons: Forest-Prod
- Page 76 and 77: for this deficiency the federal gov
- Page 78 and 79: On the other hand, three of the lea
- Page 80 and 81: one of Sweden's forest-products gia
- Page 82 and 83: Capital Investments in the Canadian
- Page 84 and 85: and Quebec accounted for 33.9 per c
- Page 86 and 87: Table 5.5: Canadian Forest-Product
- Page 88 and 89: Scandinavian manufacturers are in t
- Page 90 and 91: was implemented smoothly and manage
- Page 92 and 93: the foundations were poured, until
- Page 94 and 95: inherent capabilities were never fu
- Page 96 and 97: especially in the east, has receive
- Page 98 and 99: "export staples mentality." The bel
- Page 102 and 103: the concept of flexibility explicit
- Page 104 and 105: This author therefore recommends th
- Page 106 and 107: with respect to technology transfer
- Page 108 and 109: of the R&D system and influence the
- Page 110 and 111: operations, attitudes toward innova
- Page 112 and 113: limited R&D base, but they do empha
- Page 114 and 115: The small size and non-innovative n
- Page 116 and 117: Promoting In-House R&D in the Fores
- Page 118 and 119: Notes1. The Technological Challenge
- Page 120 and 121: 7. For example, nj. Daly, "Weak Lin
- Page 122 and 123: 7. P.G. Mellgren and E. Heidersdorf
- Page 124 and 125: this R&D facility has become even s
- Page 126 and 127: 3. K. Noble, "Forest Industry Urged
- Page 128 and 129: Publications of the ScienceCouncil
- Page 130 and 131: Reports on Matters Referred by the
- Page 132 and 133: No. 40. Government Regulation of th
- Page 134 and 135: 1981An Engineer's View of Science E