Individual research/innovation

The Belmont Report (24), in considering differences between the research and the clinical setting, noted that departure from commonly accepted drug practice for individual patients should not be considered research. Innovative strategies, however, should be developed in research protocols as quickly as possible to assure safety and efficacy of such a practice. 

We list this first, because we believe that it is by far the most important, ttie great developments in shortterm test systems, such as the Salmonella/microsome system, are direct outgrowths of molecular and cellular genetics. These highly effective tests could not have been developed without basic knowledge. Furthermore, individual research workers, not advisory committees, recognized the need for and developed these tests. In our opinion, the most innovative and ultimately the most important advances are likely to come from basic research. 

Let us them consider the "case study" of the Induviducil in industrial research/lmovation from several viewpoints, and conclude with some observations about current economic and political climates which most certainly have an effect on the Individuals vdio innovate. 

In consumer research innovativeness has been defined as the degree to which an individual makes innovation decisions independently of the communicated experience of others (Midgley, Dowling 1978, p. 235). On the contrary, Lee (1990, p. 40) defines national innovativeness as the degree to which a country adopts an innovation relatively earlier than the rest of the other countries . This relative-time-to-adoption definition, however, includes a selection bias. It considers only internationally successful innovation designs. As a result, countries that early, compared to other countries adop-... 

The factors that favour successful industrial innovation have been memorably analysed by a team at the Science Policy Research Unit at Sussex University, in England (Rothwell et al. 1974). In this project (named SAPPHO) 43 pairs of attempted similar innovations one successful in each pair, one a commercial failure - were critically compared, in order to derive valid generalisations. One conclusion was The responsible individuals (i.e., technical innovator, business innovator, chief executive, and - especially - product champion) in the successful attempts are usually more senior and have greater authority than their counterparts who fail . 

The pharmaeeutieal industry began to take over the produetion of most medications used by the medieal profession. In many ways this has provided superior service, new methods, and a vast array of innovative products that could not have been provided in a one-on-one situation. Research and development have been the hallmarks of the pharmaeeutieal manufaeturers. However, the very nature of providing millions of doses of a produet requires that the dosage forms (capsule, tablet, suppository) and doses (individual strengths of eaeh dose) be limited and results in a one-sided approach to therapy. It is simply not eeonomical for a pharmaeeutieal eompany to produce a produet in 50 different eoneeivable doses, or 15 different dosage forms, to meet the needs of the entire range of patients reeeiving therapy. Windows of activity are determined whieh meet most patient needs, but the very nature of the process is not able to meet all patient needs. 

This new formulation of electrolytes based on a mixture of EC with a linear carbonate set the main theme for the state-of-the-art lithium ion electrolytes and was quickly adopted by the researchers and manufacturers. Other linear carbonates were also explored, including DEC, ° ethylmethyl carbonate (EMC), ° and propylmethyl carbonate (PMC), ° ° and no significant differences were found between them and DMC in terms of electrochemical characteristics. The direct impact of this electrolyte innovation is that the first generation carbonaceous anode petroleum coke was soon replaced by graphitic anode materials in essentially all of the lithium ion cells manufactured after 1993. At present, the electrolyte solvents used in the over one billion lithium ion cells manufactured each year are almost exclusively based on the mixture of EC with one or more of these linear carbonates, although each individual manufacture may have its own proprietary electrolyte formulation. 

For instance, there are some people who believe that discovery is more exiting and highly valued than other aspects of research in the development process. In these cases the people are square pegs in round holes. It is therefore very important to move the individual to an area that matches his or her profile, on both skill set and mindset. Proper resource deployment is critical for rapid innovation. 

Elsa Reichmanis That s an interesting question. I can t say that the research management at Bell Labs uses a defined process for encouraging innovation. I think that we have a dual personality. We have a very strong individual contributor component where individuals are rewarded for their accomplishments. At the same time, many of those individuals traditionally have—and I would say more so today—also participated in team-based activities. If you look at the publications coming out of Bell Labs, I think you re going to be hard pressed to find many papers with a single author. 

Elsa Reichmanis We don t use formal innovation processes such as those described in the preceding presentations. We do continually examine our portfolio of activities and determine what relates to the business from the advanced development, applied research perspective and from the very long-term research perspective. We need to have a mix of both, and we have a broad continuum of activity. In reality the spectrum of fundamental research to productization requires different modes of working at different stages—there is an evolution from what could perhaps be more individual blue-sky research to a team-based, problem-solving approach. To be successful, we need flexibility. 

---