This book as many of the characteristics of academic papers. It contains a very detailed and complete review of issues and literature on the problem of managing R&D. However, each and every chapter typically ends with more or less generic recommendations and prescriptions on how to 'manage the unmanageable'. For one thing, the authors show a clear bias in favor of researchers and scientists as opposed to business managers. This is the most popular view commonly held in academia today, where professional management is considered ultimately a burden to creativity and true R&D. This position emerges especially in chapter 13 on "The University Research Enterprise". The concluding comments in this chapters match the simplistic views on R&D held in academia today, like: the largest and most creative segment of the basic research enterprise resides at academic institution, the public and Congress need to be "educated" about the importance of research", society and science 'need' research. Such conclusions are not only simplistic, but also very inconsistent with the history of R&D in this country. In particular, they miss completely the historical and political perspective on how research and science have evolved especially after World War II. It does not take much analysis to recognize that the big boost to basic research in the last 50 years has been motivated by political factors like World War II itself, and the ensuing Cold War (think of the big competition for space exploration). It was not an act of an 'educated' Congress, and it is not fortuitous that government funding of research has been decreasing in recent years as the Cold War came to an end. Similarly, a lot of technological advances have originated in companies, as more and more talented people have been leaving universities to seek better employment in rich industries. Failing to see the links between basic research and the current political and economical environment is a typical mistake that most people in academia make, and one that is causing a lot of academic research to become increasingly irrelevant to industries, because academic researchers fail to see the links between their work and the surrouding environment.

The authors also miss completely to analyze the relationship between the issues they treat in the book, efficient leadership, decision making, conflict resolution, and the actual managerial structure of academic and laboratory institutions. They never examine, for example, whether or not the current tenure system is actually compatible with effective management of R&D projects. The tenure system, where tenure faculties are basically 'untouchables' and hold much power over the rest of the researchers, is one of the causes that hinder rapid change and innovation of ideas in academia. Too often, in fact, the younger researchers have to limit their creative abilities in order to produce papers that are acceptable to their older peers, so that they can be promoted to the higher academic ranks (tenure). In this respect, research groups in academia are very different from groups in industry. Academic research groups are more like little feudal systems, where a single (tenured) faculty rules over the group. The ability to conduct technical research is routinely confused with the ability to manage, with disastrous consequences for the efficiency of the laboratories, and even more disastrous wastes of federal money. Furthermore, academia typically rewards individual contributions rather than teamwork, a practice that limits enourmously the management of large-scale projects. These issues are well known, and have been discussed in many professional publications.

In summary, I found this book much less useful than other books on R&D management written by consultants and project leaders involved with industry (e.g., the book by Roussel et al.). While it is a comprehensive source of references and data, it remains simplistic and generic in addressing the really complex issues of innovation and change in R&D organizations. Furthermore, it fails to discuss the hard managerial issues related to the current organizational structure of research institutions like universities, where the very notion of efficient management is totally absent.

As the Training Manager for a DOE contracted physics lab, I am concerned with increasing the management skills of our scientists, engineers, and technicians. This book was indispensable in providing the rationale for valuing management skills in an environment like ours, and also provided excellent advice on how to use them with our unique workforce. It is practical, user-friendly, and well-written. It can easily be adapted as a support text for management development since it has study questions and a review at the end of every chapter. We have 30 copies of the book on site, both in our Library and in the hands of individual managers. I highly recommend it.

R&D is not only important to organizations whose names do not include the words research or development or technology; it is important to managers whose job titles do not include the terms researcher, scientist or engineer. The transformation of our industrial society into an informational society requires research; and a thorough understanding of the R&D function has become a critical issue for every manager. Unfortunately, the R&D function is difficult to manage. This is partly due to the nature of the work, and partly due to the nature of the people. One of the major lifelong dreams of a scientist or engineer is to develop a leap-ahead technology that will cause previous scientific dogma to become obsolete. This revolution causes the management systems and organizational infrastructure that supports the old technology to also become outmoded.

Though there are many books citing the importance and unique aspects of R&D, there is a paucity of books on how to manage it. Most R&D management books are not broad enough in scope...they are project management books that detail PERT and budgetary control mechanisms. They are oft-times written in technical jargon making them inaccessible to the lay reader.

This book is unique in that it takes management concepts and innovatively applies them to an R&D environment in an easy-to-understand and easy-to replicate way. It bravely examines topics that are typically taboo in R&D organizations. The ethos of a scientific community espouses universalism and the sharing of scientific knowledge. To acknowledge, much less prescribe, remedial steps for all the various ways that conflict can manifest itself (conflict within individuals, between individuals, between groups, and inter-culturally) is very revealing...and healing. Beyond being very informative, there are aspects to the book that are entertaining. There's a structure questionnaire on "Identifying Your Leadership Style." In one of the sections, you must rate your level of agreement with statements like: "The people I supervise have trouble getting along with each other." There's also questions at the end of each chapter which can be used to stimulate further thinking and discussion; and case studies for group review and analysis. This book is unique in that it is entertaining to read; and can also be used as a textbook. It brings to mind Samuelson' book (Economics, McGraw-Hill, 1976), not only because of its format but because it is a landmark book that breaks from the tradition of boring, technically-jargonned books that are inaccessible or unappealing to the reading public...This book operationalizes the "High Touch" that John Naisbitt said "High Tech" (Megatrends, Warner Books, 1982) necessitates.

I have recommended this book to my colleagues at Motorola, and I recommend it to you as well.