WHOI-90-52

of exchange among the university and industr scientists caing out the collaborative resech,
achieving a certn ratio of industral support to government support and achieving a certn
fraction of small and large companies pacipating in the program. These tys of proximate
objectives should be state clealy at the outset of the progra and they should provide the foc
point for the assessment of program progress and accmplishments in its ealy yeas of operation.
The procsses through which R&D parerships ca contrbute to tehnologica innovation and
ecnomic development are vared and complex and require patience and a long-term perspetive.
Demonstrating such contrbutions wil be difficult. 30 In this regard, it is importt to point out
another dimension of varation in'this complex system of university-industr coperation--the
procss of innovation and the sources of tehnica change var by industr setor and even by
the individual firm within a given setor. Understading the contrbutions of the new alliances
to innovation requires an examination that looks at different industres separately. For example,
many new organizational forms are emerging to promote industr-industr and industruniversity
coperation in the micro-electronics and biotehnology industres. In the chemica
industry, however, there is a long history of industr-university coperation that continues
through more traditional mechanisms. Consideration must be given to the rationales for the
different approaches use and to what the industr expets from each such approach.
Expetations fi Ecnomic Development
What should we expet of these alliances with respet to tehnologica innovation and ecnomic
development? Perspetives of Raph Gomory, senior vice president for science and tehnology
at ffM, and Harold Shapiro, president of Princeton University, may be considered in answering
this question.31
According to Harold Shapiro: ... if we want to get economic growth out of new science and
technology, we have to pay attention to wha I call "everything else, and the everything else
really could not be summarized better than by saying "how groups work together" -- how we
relate to each other, how we treat each other, and how we trut each other.
. . . wha ma not be in our best interest is the belief tha superiority in science alone -- at the
expense of "everything else" -- will ensure this country's economic strength.
The lessons of history tell us otherwise. For example, it was not Britan's science and
technologica superiority that made it first in the Industral Revolution. It was politica stabilty,
it was the soiety's concept of private property, it was decntralization of authority in British
30Id.
31Gomory and Shapiro, A Dialogue on Competitiveness, Issues in Science and Technology,
Summer 1988 (National Academy Press 1988); Gomory and Schmitt, Science and Product,
SCIENCE, May 27, 1988.
104