Chapt er 5

Managi ng R&D for Res ul t s :

A Surv e y of Appr oac h e s and Pract i c e s
from t he Sel ec t e d Organi s a t i o n s
5.1. Introduction
This chapter is about how R&D is being managed in the organisations under study. The
material presented in this chapter as well as that in Chapter 6 provide the empirical
foundation for this study. The discussion is in two parts. The first part will provide an
overview of the activities of the organisations under review particularly focusing on the
way R&D activities are managed from the stage of conception to implementation and
finally to transfer. This part is in three sections covering organisations from the public
research institutions (PRs!" universities and industry. #t the end of each section"
summaries of similarities and differences in approaches and practices towards managing
R&D are briefly discussed.
The varying approaches and practices adopted by the organisations under study will be
e$plored in detail in Part Two. The various systems and mechanisms employed in the
conception" selection" implementation" monitoring" evaluation and transfer of research
pro%ects are assembled in order to draw the similarities as well as differences in orientation
across organisations. These approaches are discussed according to various organisational
dimensions and their managerial and policy implications signposted for fuller treatment in
Chapter &.

Part I : An Overview of the Organisations Surveyed
including their Research Processes

5.2. Public Research Institutions

5.2.1. Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM)
1

RR' is a statutory body under the 'alaysian Rubber Research and Development (oard
('RRD(! which reports to the 'inistry of Primary ndustries. t is one of the two cess
funded public research institutions in 'alaysia (the other being the Palm )il Research
nstitute of 'alaysia!. Currently RR' underta*es research on all aspects of rubber
cultivation" production and processing of new forms of rubber and product applications of
natural rubber either individually or with blends of rubbers. ncreasing emphasis is
accorded to activities which aim to increase productivity as well as to yield new methods
of reducing labour. #ttention is also given to resolving pressing industry problems. This
broad spread of activities is underta*en by its staff which number +66 research scientists
and +&,+ supporting and general staff.
-
The research activities in RR' are being
coordinated by the office of the Deputy Director (Research!.
(esides research activities" RR' has been providing specific technical advisory"
consultancy" testing and training services to local and foreign businesses. t also helps
companies start up rubber.product manufacturing and provides technical assistance to
countries wanting to develop their own natural rubber industry. /$tension activities on
rubber planting are largely underta*en by another government agency which reports to
another ministry. RR' provides technical support to these e$tension activities.
0
1ollowing government pronouncements
,
that public research institutions ta*e steps to
reduce their total dependence on funding from government sources" RR' has" in recent
years e$panded its consultancy" testing and other income generating activities through the
+
The description here unless otherwise stated is based on material in 'alaysia (+22,c! p.'.--"
'alaysian
Rubber Research and Development (oard (+22-! p. -6. as well as information provided by the Deputy
Director (Research!" RR'.
-
These figures were provided by RR' and reflect staff position as at #ugust" +22,.
0
t would have been more appropriate if such e$tension activities had been underta*en by RR' so as to
ensure better coordination as well as effective e$ecution of these activities. This view was transmitted to
the writer by RR'3s top management as well as industry association members.
,
4ee for e$ample 'alaysia (+225a! p.0,.
-
establishment of new facilities as well as engaging in contract research. n +220" income
from these activities amounted to some +-6 of the institute3s total budget.
7
RR' has
submitted proposals to the relevant authorities on changing its #ct in order to enable it to
engage in commercial activities. #lso" it is restructuring itself to reflect the prevailing
changes in its operating environment. Towards this end it is refocusing its R&D strategy8.
to develop cost effective R&D programmes to ensure the competitive advantage of
rubber cultivation in a changing agriculture sector9
to meet the re:uirements of a rapidly e$panding rubber products manufacturing
industry9 and
to commercialise R&D findings and services in order to generate own revenue as well
as to lessen dependence on public funds.
This planned restructuring e$ercise by RR' is appropriate given the declining importance
of rubber cultivation in the nation3s agriculture sector and the rapid e$pansion of the
rubber products industry which e$perienced a phenomenal upsurge in e$ports in recent
years.
6
The proactive role of RR' in this sector is critical since the small and medium
scale operations in this sector employ less efficient technology than those that characterise
the operations of the modern manufacturing units owned largely by foreign firms.
&
t is to
such roles that RR' will have to focus in its proposed restructuring e$ercise.
!"!#!#! $he Research Process in RRIM
%
RR'3s research process can be described as being a mi$ture of both ;top.down3 and
;bottom.up3. RR' practices a three year planning cycle where <eads of Divisions are
assigned responsibility to coordinate the preparation of research programmes for their
respective divisions. Researchers submit proposals based on standard formats for vetting
by their respective <eads of Divisions. The screening at this level is largely uneven as
there are no clear guidelines on approval of research pro%ects.
2
Proposals are then
submitted for fine.tuning by top management including the various <eads of Divisions.
7
Personal communication with Chief #ccountant" RR'.
6
/$ports of rubber products increased from about R' 055 million in +2=7 to reach about R' -.+ billion
in
+22+ . an almost seven fold increase within 6 years. ( see 'D#" +22,!
&
bid. p. ,.
=
Description of the research process in RR' is based on information provided by top management as
well
as by staff members.
2
This comment is based on informal discussions with RR' researchers.
0
The approved research programmes for the ne$t three years are then vetted by a
Coordinating #dvisory Committee (C#C! which meets biennially. The C#C consists of
representatives" both local and foreign" from the industry" academicians and e$perts on
rubber. The comments from C#C are incorporated before the programmes are submitted
to the RR' (oard for approval and implementation. Programmes for RP# funding are
submitted to the 'inistry of 4cience" Technology and the /nvironment via the 'inistry of
Primary ndustries. Figure 51 provides a schematic s*etch of the research approval
process in RR'.

'onitoring of research pro%ects is done largely through :uarterly reports and during
meetings on specific high priority inter.divisional pro%ects. /valuation of pro%ects are
underta*en by pro%ect leaders" <eads of Divisions" top management and the C#C. The
primary focus of the evaluation e$ercise is to determine the impact of the research on
industry. Promising research findings are transferred to industry at the initiative of the
researchers through the respective <eads of Divisions. There is no separate mechanism or
unit constituted to assist in the development and transfer of research findings.
5.2.2. Malaysian !gricultural Research and "e#elop$ent Institute (M!R"I)
1%
'#RD is a statutory body established in +262 under the 'inistry of #griculture. ts
principal function is to provide technological support for the growth and development of
the agriculture" livestoc* and food sectors in 'alaysia. The wide spectrum of '#RD3s
activities is carried out through its staff complement of 0"727 personnel" comprising ,&,
research scientists" =,2 technicians and -"-&- administrative and general supporting staff.
ts research activities are coordinated by a separate corporate planning unit under the
office of the Director.>eneral. Presently '#RD is the largest public research institution
in terms of manpower and R&D budgetary allocation. ?nder the 4i$th 'alaysia Plan
(+22+.+227!" it has been allocated almost ,&6 of the total R&D budget for the
agriculture sector.
(eing the premier R&D institution in the country responsible for multiple agricultural
commodities as well as food and livestoc* research" the tas* to manage such a broad
remit is both daunting and comple$. Research in '#RD is essentially commodity
oriented. # comprehensive integrated research approach is adopted for the ma%or
+5
The description given here unless otherwise stated is based on material in 'ohd. @usof <ashim (+22-!
and 'alaysia (+22,c! p.'.-5.
,
commodities namely rice" fruits" cocoa" coconut" vegetable" field crops" tobacco"
floricultural crops and livestoc*. The main aim is to produce appropriate technology
pac*ages ready for transfer to the end.user.
4tructured into the system is the promotion effort of the research findings. This is realised
through the conduct of technical training programmes" advisory and consultation services"
pilot pro%ects and active public relations programmes. # recent amendment to the '#RD
#ct by Parliament permits '#RD to commercialise its research findings through %oint.
venture underta*ings with interested commercial entrepreneurs.
'#RD spends about R' -.7 million annually or -6 of its annual budget on staff
training" both long.term as well as short.term. The long.term training has so far produced
=2 with doctoral degrees" -=, with masters :ualifications and a further =0 basic degree
holders in various disciplines. #s they move up the ladder within the mainstream of
research" researchers are provided the opportunity to be involved in management. The
divisional directors and programme leaders are selected amongst the potential and
interested researchers.
Researchers in '#RD" as in other PRs and universities" are evaluated annually on their
performances based on civil service guidelines premised on individual efforts. 4uch
evaluations" in recent years" have generated more ill will than motivation among
researchers since research is essentially a team effort and is seldom the product of one
individual.
++

!"!"!#! $he Research Process in MARDI
#"

'#RD practices a corporate planning approach in the formulation and implementation of
its research activities. This approach involves the establishment of corporate strategic and
operational plans (C4P and C)P! as well as the tactical or annual implementation plans
(#P!. The planning process can be described as both ;top.down3 and ;bottom.up3. The
C4P is prepared by the senior management group (Director.>eneral and the Deputies!
with contributions from all Divisional Directors. t involves the following activities8.
++
This point was conveyed to the writer by some researchers in '#RD.
+-
Description of the research process is based on information provided by '#RD3s chief of corporate
planning as well as material in 'ohd. @usof <ashim.
7
identification of '#RD3s long term overall ob%ectives based on a comprehensive
analysis of the national policies and developmental goals pertaining to agriculture9
identification of '#RD3s long term strategies to achieve the stated ob%ectives9 and
identification of research thrust areas through a comprehensive analysis on the
agricultural industries relevant to '#RD3s scope of functions
#ll research divisions use the C4P as a guide to prepare the C)P for research or research
support plans of which they are responsible for. The C)P is developed for a 7.year period
in line with national development and budgetary systems. t involves the following
activities8.
formulation of research programmes and their e$pected outputs9
formulation of research pro%ects under each programme9
preparation of implementation schedule and resource use (manpower" facilities" etc.!9
and
preparation of financial re:uirements
The preparation of the C)P is headed by the divisional director with contributions by all
programme leaders and research scientists. The screening of pro%ect proposals at this stage
is critical as it will determine which pro%ects will be included in the division3s C)P.
<owever" the screening process here" as in most other public research institutions and
universities" is very uneven.
+0
The prepared C)Ps are tabled to the top management for
approval. (oth the C4P and C)P are then presented to '#RD3s 4cientific Council and
subse:uently to the >overning (oard for comments and endorsement. The approved
research programmes and pro%ects are then submitted for RP# funding via the 'inistry of
#griculture before they can be finally implemented.
#s in the case of RR'" industry comments on '#RD3s research programmes are
obtained at the tail end of the research approval process" that is" at the 4cientific Council
and >overning (oard meetings. <owever" the degree of scrutiny of research programmes
is not e$pected to be searching at such high level meetings where issues on overall
programme thrust areas and research budget allocations dominate the agenda.

Pro%ects are monitored twice a year. The first monitoring is based on the mid.year
progress report submitted by the research scientists. The second monitoring is carried out
at the end of the year through formal meetings organised at divisional and institutional
+0
This comment is based on informal discussions with some '#RD senior research officers.
6
levels. (esides monitoring the progress and achievements for the year" the meetings also
evaluate completed activities as well as e$amine the programme of action prepared for the
coming year.
n addition to the above monitoring process" the ongoing programmes and pro%ects are
reviewed every two years by a Technical Review Committee (TRC!. The TRC was
established to help '#RD3s efforts in ensuring :uality and scientific e$cellence in its
research activities. The committee is made up of selected e$perts from local and
international R&D institutions and relevant industries. Figure 52 provides a schematic
s*etch of the research approval process in '#RD.
!"!"!"! $echnology $ransfer and &ommercialisation Activities
#'
nitial technology transfer efforts by '#RD were hampered by ine$perience and other
technical shortcomings. t reorganised its technology transfer activities in +2=, with the
establishment of a separate Technology Promotion Division which was provided with
facilities to conduct pilot pro%ects. The Division3s remit also included providing advisory
and consultancy services" organising dialogue sessions with interested groups"
participation in e$hibitions and organising field days.
'#RD has increasingly recognised that more direct" active and committed mechanisms
of technology transfer are needed for this process to be effective. /mphasis has now
shifted from mere dissemination of information about new products and processes to the
development of entrepreneurial s*ills and technological capabilities. This is achieved
through active participation of R&D personnel in consultancy pro%ects" R&D
collaborations" ;adoption schemes3 and underta*ing contract research.
'#RDT/C< Corporation was recently established to facilitate '#RD in
commercialising its research findings through %oint.venture pro%ects. t is envisaged that
the income earned through these %oint pro%ects will" in the long run" ma*e '#RD less
dependent on government funds. Presently" more than 256 of '#RD3s R&D funds are
obtained from government sources.
+7
#lready" '#RD" through '#RDT/C<" has
embar*ed on mar*eting many of the food products it has developed. #lso" a number of
+,
Description of this section is based on material provided in 'ohd. @usof <ashim.
+7
#ccording to information provided by '#RD" R&D funding by RP# accounted for almost 206 of
total R&D funds received by '#RD in +220.
&
%oint ventures with industry has been established to develop and promote potential
research findings.
!"!"!(! MARDI and the )ood Processing Industry
#*
Currently there are about 6555 food processing factories in 'alaysia" 256 of which are
small scale operations. The large number of small companies means that the promotion of
small enterprises becomes an important agenda for '#RD. Technology re:uirements for
the small operators and the bigger companies will obviously differ. The main re:uirements
of the small industries are for upgrading in respect of good management practice" basic
production techni:ues and mar*eting.
The 1ood Technology Division (1TD! is one of the larger divisions within '#RD. ts
main activities involve food handling and pac*aging9 food storage9 product development9
food engineering and food safety and nutrition. ndustrial e$tension activities are
emphasised but largely confined to smaller industries. The 1TD recognises the importance
of providing services to the bigger companies but is unable to do so because of staff
constraints. ndustry associations" while recognising the good wor* done by '#RD in
providing R&D and other technical inputs to small scale industries" have called for more
e$tension activities.
+&
These activities" they assert" should also cover management and
mar*eting aspects which are so essential to the success of a company but which are
seldom addressed by '#RD.
5.2.&. 'tandards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia ('IRIM)
1(
The 4tandards and ndustrial Research nstitute of 'alaysia (4R'! is a national multi.
disciplinary research and development statutory body under the 'inistry of 4cience"
Technology and the /nvironment (')4T/!. t is one of the two public research
institutions in 'alaysia dedicated to industrial research.
+2
/stablished in +2&7" 4R'3s
primary tas* is to assist companies solve technical problems through the use of technology
and help their business growth. t is also entrusted with the tas* of upgrading :uality
+6
Description of this section is based on material provided in 'ohd. @usof <ashim.
+&
This view was echoed by the Chairman of the 1ederation of 'alaysian 'anufacturers 1ood
'anufacturing >roup
+=
Description of this section" unless otherwise indicated" is based on material in 4R' (+220a!" 4R'
(+220b! as well as information provided by 4R' personnel.
+2
The other being the 'alaysian nstitute of 'icroelectronic 4ystems ('')4!.
=
through formulation of standards and technical services" assistance and consultancy to
industries.
#bsence of a clear strategic direction over the years had hampered the development of
4R'3s capabilities in industrial research.
-5
<owever" in recent years 4R' has adopted
several changes to its governing legislation" administrative structure and mode of
operations in order to enable it to respond swiftly to the demands of industry. # five.
year corporate plan was developed for the first time in +22+ to guide 4R' in its
attainment of corporate and business ob%ectives. ?nder this plan" which was revised in
+220" 4R' plans to focus its research activities in four technology areas" namely"
materials technology" advanced manufacturing technology" chemical and biotechnology
and product and machine development. The corporate plan also sets the financial ob%ective
of earning ,5 percent of 4R'3s total operating e$penditure by the year +227.
-+

n +220" amendments to the 4R' (ncorporation! #ct were approved by Parliament
enabling 4R' to underta*e commercial operations through the formation of %oint
venture companies with the private sector. #lso" through these amendments" the -,.
member 4R' Council (which governs 4R'! was replaced by a new 4R' (oard
with a smaller membership comprising +0 members . 6 from the public sector and & from
industry. The larger private sector representation is to ensure that 4R' focuses its
activities towards satisfying industry needs.
)ver the past three years" 4R' has revamped its operations and introduced a number of
initiatives designed to forge closer lin*ages with industry. Through its Research and
Technology Development Division" which coordinates the organisation3s research
activities" 4R' underta*es contract research" %oint research pro%ects and tripartite
research ventures (4R'.university.industry!. #dministrative mechanisms are in place
which enable 4R' to engage in underta*ing contract research which involve the
provision of R&D services to companies on a fees basis. n order to help establish an
active contract research mar*et in 'alaysia and encourage industry to play a more
dynamic role in technology development" 4R' has introduced a Aoint Research Benture
-5
This lac* of focus can be attributed to lac* of clear direction in the ndustrial 'aster Plan (+2=7! as
well
as the small representation of industry in 4R'3s Council. 4ee 'alaysia (+225b!.
-+
#lthough the mid.term review of 4R'3s Corporate Plan indicates that this target has been e$ceeded in
+22-" there is no brea*down as to where the income is generated according to the various divisions. 4ee
4R' (+220b! p.-2.
2
Programme. ?nder this programme" 4R' will use its research funds (either internal or
obtained from other sources" for e$ample" RP#! to enable %oint pro%ects to turn
promising ideas into mar*etable products" processes or services.
These programmes with industry have not only brought 4R' closer to industry but also
additional sources of income. 1or e$ample" in +220 it earned some R' - million alone
from contract research pro%ects. This amount represented almost +56 of its total income
for that year.
--
/ventually" 4R' hopes that contract research will emerge as one of its
main revenue earners. Towards this end" it has introduced changes to its research
management system following recommendations from a consultant study on the
implementation of a contract research management system for 4R'. The study
concluded" among other things" that 4R' can function as an effective contract research
organisation provided it initiates changes in approach as well as in R&D management"
including8.
-0
more proactive mar*eting9
a focus on small and medium enterprises in segments that have a high economic
contribution to 'alaysia but where the degree of technology intensity is presently low9
a shift in services for industry to more value.added production support and process
design and development activities9 and
comprehensive changes in the personnel policies and management systems.
The recommendations of the consultant3s report are in various phases of implementation.
1or e$ample" 4R' has recently introduced a pro%ect budgeting system that captures the
costing of all inputs into a pro%ect or service that are being incorporated or provided. 4uch
a budgeting system has enabled 4R' to be in a better position to cost its services. #lso"
it has made researchers to be more sensitive to cost and time considerations when
underta*ing a research pro%ect or providing a service to industry.

(esides contract research" 4R' also provides advisory and consultancy services to small
and medium scale industries. #ssistance is further enhanced through the government3s
ndustrial Technical #ssistance 1und (T#1! Programme. ?nder this programme" 4R'
has been designated lead agency for the implementation of two schemes" namely Product
Development and Design and Cuality and Productivity mprovement. 1inancial assistance
--
4tar" ;4R' to focus on contract research services3 -0 #ugust +22, p., ((usiness section!
-0
4ee #hmad Ta%uddin #li and C.D.Chong (+22-! p.7.
+5
is given in the form of a matching grant for small and medium siEed firms to underta*e
approved pro%ects. n +220" a total of 06 pro%ects with a grant value of R' -.,2 million
was approved under these two schemes.
4R' has presently a staff of +5&," about one third of whom are professional scientists
and engineers. (ecause of the lac* of clear strategic direction in its earlier years" 4R'3s
human resources have not developed in line with demands of its services. There are only
few staff members with industrial or research e$perience. To redress these shortcomings" a
special five.year <uman Resources Development Programme funded by the #sian
Development (an* has been introduced in +22- designed to develop 4R'3s manpower
capabilities in several disciplines. # special pre.service scheme has also been introduced
under this programme specifically aimed at attracting outstanding young graduates to %oin
4R' with the incentive of generous allowances while pursuing their postgraduate
studies. <owever" the response todate from graduates with e$cellent first degree results
has not been encouraging due to better offers from industry.
-,

4R' has organised its activities around four Centres namely the 'aterials Centre" the
#dvanced 'anufacturing Technology Centre" the Product and 'achine Development
Centre and the Chemicals and (iotechnology Centre. The Research and Technology
Development Division has been realigned to enable multi.disciplinary teams to be
constituted from these centres. 4uch cross.functional teams enable s*ills available within
the organisation to be optimally utilised in order to solve industry3s problems.
The vigorous changes to 4R'3s operations over the past 0 to , years have been initiated
and supported by its chief e$ecutive officer (C/)!. 4uch top level sustained commitment
was critical in ensuring that 4R'3s transformation to a more focused and customer.
driven organisation was smoothly effected. n order to effect this metamorphosis" the C/)
ensured that 4R' had a clear mission" a supportive organisational framewor*" and"
above all" staff who are infused with a new ;mindset3 to serve the organisation with
purpose and dedication. Together with other top management staff" e$tensive discussions
were held with all levels of staff in e$plaining the rationale for changes to the operating
philosophy of the organisation as well as obtaining their inputs to the changes proposed.
The corporate plan for the organisation" for e$ample" was developed %ointly by top
management and researchers. 4uch a participatory approach had a positive impact on
staff since they felt that they too had a sta*e in the change process. # number of in.house
-,
This point was conveyed to the writer by the Director of Research and Technology" 4R'.
++
programmes were underta*en to shape the attitudes of staff towards wor* particularly in
accordance with 4R'3s emphasis of serving industry better.

These organisational changes ta*e time to produce results but" if the increasing proportion
of industry funding in 4R'3s R&D portfolio (almost +&6 in +220 as against 76 in
previous years! is anything to go by" they point towards promising prospects. The gradual
adoption of commercially oriented operations is essential in ensuring that 4R'3s plans
of becoming a corporatised entity by +226 will be smoothly effected.
!"!(!#! $he Research Process in SIRIM
"
n the past" most of the research pro%ects underta*en by 4R' were largely initiated by
the researchers themselves" that is" it was essentially a ;bottom.up3 process. Their lac* of
research and industry e$perience as well as the lac* of sufficient industry representation in
the then 4R' Council meant that research pro%ects were not attuned to satisfying
industry3s needs. )ver the past three years several innovative schemes" as described
earlier" have been introduced to enhance the research process so as to ensure that the
technological and business goals of the organisation are attained.
Presently" e$tensive discussions are held with industry (either *ey players in the particular
industry or industry associations! in order to assist 4R' in formulating appropriate
research programmes for funding by RP#. Through its Corporate 4ervices Division"
4R' has recently initiated regular industry surveys to ascertain industry3s needs and
areas where 4R' can be e$pected to contribute. 4uch discussions and survey findings
will ensure that actual industry problems" and not imagined ones" are identified. #lso" from
these discussions opportunities for %oint research emerge. These consultations also help
4R' to develop closer rapport with industry and improve its delivery services.
#fter these discussions detailed research proposals will be prepared. Researchers are
encouraged to visit companies to obtain detailed information on the problems identified
for investigation before submitting their proposals. #ll proposals are screened by the
various <eads of Centres before they reach the Director of Research and Technology
Development. Proposals are evaluated on whether they are potentially of benefit to the
-7
Frite.up of this segment is based on information obtained from discussions with top management as
well
as researchers.
+-
country or to the specific needs of industry. n some cases pro%ect proposals are accepted
on the basis that they are aimed at developing 4R'3s capabilities in particular
technologies in which it is presently lac*ing or inade:uate although such proposals do not"
for the moment" contribute towards the organisation3s business goals. <eads of Centres
are assisted in the screening process by specific guidelines which see*" among others" to
evaluate proposals in terms of contribution towards organisation3s technological
capabilities" alignment with business goals and conformity with national goals.
#fter the research proposals have been approved by the Director.>eneral of 4R' they
are then submitted to 4R'3s Research and Development Council (one of the three
Councils established under the newly reconstituted 4R' (oard! for comments and
endorsement before they are implemented or submitted for funding under the RP#
mechanism.
'onitoring of approved research pro%ects are being underta*en by a specific unit within
the Research and Technology Development Division. Pro%ect leaders are re:uested to
submit :uarterly reports on the progress as well as the financial status of their pro%ects.
4uch information are fed into a computerised monitoring database system which provides
selective information for top management. # formal system of evaluation of research
pro%ects has yet to be instituted in 4R'. The research approval process in 4R' can be
depicted as in Figure 5&.
!"!(!"! &ommercialisation of Research )indings
Fith the amendments to its governing legislation" 4R' is empowered to pursue %oint
ventures with industry to commercialise its research findings or other services. t has
todate established a %oint venture company with a local multinational group to mar*et its
services on calibration and measurement.
-6
t also plans to establish a consortium of R&D
partners comprising other R&D institutions" universities and industry in order to pool
resources and investments in developing strategic technologies.
-&

Presently" all contract research pro%ects are underta*en through the Research and
Technology Development Division where details on the contract are discussed with the
sponsoring company. The research is conducted strictly on a fee.for.service basis. The
-6
Dew 4traits Times" ;4R'3s first steps to privatisation3 -0 Auly +22, p.+6
-&
4ee 4R'(+220b! p.-=.
+0
research results will be fully owned by the paying client organisation. # %oint pro%ect
management team comprising representatives from both 4R' and the client organisation
will be established to monitor the progress of the contract research pro%ect.
nformation on services and research findings generated by 4R' are actively
disseminated through newsletters" press releases" electronic on.line information service
and e$hibitions. The absence of a proactive industrial e$tension unit in 4R' reduces its
ability in reaching out more intimately to its target groups particularly to the small and
medium siEed industries which lac* the material and manpower resources of the bigger
firms and where the needs for technology development and adaptations are more acute.
Discussions with industry associations reveal that if 4R' were to provide facilities with
capabilities for limited batch production" the flow of interactions with industry will be even
further enhanced.
-=
4uch facilities will help industry to reduce the ris*s involved when
introducing new or improved products on a commercial scale. 1eedbac* from industry
associations also reveal that 4R'3s mar*eting efforts should be addressed to impress the
cost saving features of its findings in a language that is easy to comprehend by the
unsophisticated target group. 4uch a direct approach would find more appeal rather than
highlighting technical advances which ma*e little or no impact on the entrepreneur who"
usually" is not conversant with formal technical *nowledge.
5.2.). Malaysian Institute of Microelectronic 'yste$s (MIM*')
2+
The 'alaysian nstitute of 'icroelectronic 4ystems ('')4!" established in +2=7" is the
national focal point of technological competence in microelectronics and information
technology. # *ey ob%ective of '')4 is to underta*e activities that will enhance the
capabilities of the local electronics industry. t also plays a *ey role in national planning
and policy formulation for information technology. t began as a unit within the Prime
'inister3s Department and has e$panded rapidly since then to become a full fledged
department under ')4T/.
)ne of '')43s principal ob%ectives is to develop a strong indigenous capability in
microelectronics and information technology. This is particularly crucial given the fact that
-=
Personal communication with Bice President" 1ederation of 'alaysian 'anufacturers.
-2
Frite.up of this section" unless otherwise indicated" is based on material given in 'alaysia (+22,c! pp.
'
.+5 and '.++ as well a '')4(+22-!.
+,
the electronics industry represents a ma%or manufacturing activity and accounted for
almost 7- 6 of total manufactured e$ports in +220.
05
<owever" the electronics industry in
'alaysia is largely dominated by foreign multinational companies. Participation of local
companies in this sector is small albeit growing steadily. 'ost of the 'alaysian.owned
firms are involved in providing sub.contract assembly services or plasticGmetal parts
manufacturing. #lso" there has been little lin*ages forged between these foreign
companies and the local supporting industries thereby contributing to very little
technology transfer.
0+


/lectronics is a fast moving sector and it is essential that '')4 adopts a rapid response
capability in order to match the pace of movement of the industry. 'ore importantly" it
must ensure that its research programmes are responsive to industry re:uirements. n the
past" most of '')43s research programmes were internally generated and well in
advance of the general technical competence of 'alaysian electronic firms.
0-
t has since
reoriented its programmes towards achieving less ambitious but more practical goals. #
balance is emphasised in serving the local industry as well as enhancing its *nowledge
base. This balance could be better achieved if industry is represented" li*e in other research
institutions such as 4R' or RR'" in a formal structure where it can articulate its
re:uirements as well as guide '')4 on industry developments. 4uch a structure would
also help to contribute towards the development of closer rapport between '')4 and
the local industry.
00

'')4 has recently restructured its operations in order to focus on si$ priority areas"
namely" computer systems" telecommunications" BH4 design" semiconductor technology"
machine intelligence and product development. # corporate plan was adopted in +22- to
guide '')43s activities over the ne$t few years. n addition" a strategic management
and planning system was initiated to streamline its operations as well as to ensure that it is
able to respond :uic*ly to e$ternal re:uests. ndustry has often e$pressed reservations
over '')43s ability to underta*e contract research pro%ects according to industry3s
tight time schedule.
0,
4uch a negative image would be easily corrected if '')4 had a
05
4ee 'D# (+22,! p.+,.
0+
bid. p.--. 1or a more critical account of 'alaysia3s electronics industry" the reader may wish to refer to
)3Conner" D (+220!
0-
'alaysia (+225b! p. +-=.
00
#ccording to '')43s Deputy Director.>eneral a Technical #dvisory Committee is being planned to
include representation from industry as well as other e$perts in the electronics sector.
0,
This view had been e$pressed to the writer by President of the 'alaysian #ssociation of /lectronics and
/lectrical Products as well as from discussions with some local electronics firms.
+7
formal structure where industry could interact with it on a regular basis besides fostering
partnerships among the various actors in the electronics sector. The recent organisational
and management changes to '')4 have been aimed" among others" at developing
professionalism within the organisation as well as ensuring that it is sensitive to industry
re:uirements and needs.
n +220" '')4 received funds totalling some R' ++ million for its various research
programmes. )f this amount" almost = 6 were provided through the RP# mechanism.
07
The large bul* of the funding was provided by a special government allocation for
'')4 to engage in Ireverse engineering pro%ects.J ncome from testing" consultancy
and contract funding" though small" has been steadily increasing over the past three years.
Presently '')4 has some -7= staff but has never reached its full staff complement due
to recruitment difficulties arising from competition with the private sector who are able to
offer much attractive remuneration pac*ages for scarce electronic engineers.
06
'')4
hopes to overcome this limitation when its plans for corporatisation are being approved by
the government. #s a corporate body it will be in a position to offer competitive salaries
for s*illed personnel rather than being circumscribed by civil service salary schemes which
do not reflect mar*et conditions.
!"!'!#! Research Process in MIMOS!
n its formative years most of '')43s attention was devoted to infrastructure
development and capability building efforts. ts research programmes then were largely
internally generated and :uite distant from industry re:uirements. To address this
wea*ness" it recently restructured its research operations as mentioned earlier to reflect
the priority areas as contained in its corporate plan as well as to align its activities with
industry and national re:uirements. The focal point for coordinating all research activities
in '')4 lies in the office of the Deputy Director.>eneral.
'')4 has adopted a pro%ect management approach in the selection" implementation"
monitoring and evaluation of its research programmes. #ll research pro%ects must have a
business plan for consideration by top management. The plan must detail" among other
07
These figures were provided by '')43s Corporate Planning Department.
06
#n electrical Gelectronics engineer in industry commands a starting salary at least 75 percent more than
what is offered for a similar post in the civil service.
+6
things" the problem to be solved" the technologies to be developed or utilised" resources to
be used in solving the problem" relationship between problem to be solved and
development of local industry" end.user of the research3s findings" estimated cost of the
pro%ect" potential financial returns and benefits to '')4 and time and manning
schedules. Research proposals must fall within the purview of the priority areas identified
by '')4. Dot all research proposals" however" are re:uired to identify the potential
end.user. 1or e$ample" some pro%ects are underta*en to enhance '')43s capabilities in
certain technologies where it presently lac*s in order that it will be in a better position to
offer its services to industry at a later date.
deas for research pro%ects may come from a variety of sources for e$ample suppliers"
industry associations" customers and %ournals. 4ome research proposals are a result from
visits to local firms underta*en on a regular basis by researchers. These visits are part of
top management directive to all the operating units in '')4 to institute measures in
order to build rapport with the local industry. 4uch measures" besides ensuring that
researchers are conversant with the local industry problems" also contribute towards
eradicating the impression that '')4 is distant from the local industry.
#ll research proposals" whether initiated by the researcher or directed from top
management" are screened first within the respective divisions before they are transmitted
for the approval of the Committee on R&D which is chaired by the Director.>eneral.
There are no inputs from industry or other e$perts on the merits of the research proposals.
# number of factors are ta*en into consideration when deciding on the funding of a
pro%ect including the technical feasibility of the pro%ect" the available e$pertise within
'')4" the potential benefits of the pro%ect ( both tangible and intangible ! and end.user
participation in the pro%ect. )nce a pro%ect is approved it is left to the discretion of the
respective division to implement it.
Directors of the various units are empowered to draw resources from within the
organisation or" if these are not available" from e$ternal sources" in order to ensure the
success of the pro%ect. # common complaint echoed by all the divisions during the
implementation stage is the bureaucratic procedures that need to be adhered when
purchasing items or securing services. 4uch procedures ta*e time and are incompatible in
a research environment" more so in a fast.moving field as in electronics.
+&
Pro%ects are usually monitored wee*ly at the divisional level and monthly at the
organisational level. Progress of pro%ects is monitored against submissions made at the
proposal stage. # computer database pro%ect management trac*ing system has been
devised to monitor the progress of all pro%ects. # terminal report is prepared within three
months on completion of the pro%ect. n some cases" the pro%ect3s findings are presented at
a seminar within the organisation. <owever" this mode of reporting the progress of
pro%ects has not been institutionalised as yet.
The strict discipline adopted in scrutinising pro%ects particularly at the proposal stage has
ensured that only pro%ects that are in alignment with '')43s ob%ectives particularly
those that address towards meeting local industry3s needs are implemented. 4uch
discipline has the support of the top management which is committed towards ma*ing
'')4 a more responsive organisation. #dditionally" a flat operational structure has
been adopted with divisional directors empowered with sufficient authority and
responsibility to achieve planned outputs. Cross.functional teams are formed where
e$pertise from other operating divisions are re:uired. The effects of these organisational
changes will ta*e some time to demonstrate results. The research approval process in
'')4 can be portrayed as in Figure 5).
5.2.5. 'u$$ary of Research !pproaches and Practices a$ong the Public Research
Institutions
The operating environments and research practices of the four PRs under study" namely"
RR'" '#RD" 4R' and '')4 can be broadly summarised according to various
organisational dimensions
0&
as depicted in ,able 51. There are similarities and differences
in approaches and practices adopted by these organisations. 1or e$ample" in all the PRs
studied" research pro%ects were initiated both by the researchers themselves (;bottom.up3!
as well as directives from top management (;top down3!. 4imilarly" there are distinct
differences among the organisations in the way partnerships with industry were forged.
These characteristics provided some clues as to why some organisations are swift to serve
industry whilst others are still being perceived negatively. The salient features of the
approaches and practices can be described as follows8.
0&
The organisational dimensions chosen . strategy" structure" system" staff and style . are based on a
framewor* developed by Pascale and #thos (+2=+!
+=
#ll the organisations have some form of corporate plan" although in varying degree of
detail" to shape their strategies. 4R'3s emphasis towards serving industry as well as
achieving a targeted financial performance pervades through its entire operations.
RR'" on the other hand" does not have a detailed strategic plan as to how it would
shift its emphasis towards the more value.added downstream operations of the natural
rubber industry9
Research activities are largely underta*en on a matri$ mode" that is" members are
drawn from various divisions in order to pool e$pertise within the organisation.
<owever" RR'3s research operations is characterised by the strict divisional
demarcation9
/$cepting '#RD" none of the other organisations have institutionalised industrial
technical e$tension services9
Pro%ect formulation" screening and monitoring are broadly similar in all the four
organisations. '')4 has adopted a business approach towards pro%ect formulation.
n the case of 4R'" all pro%ects are formulated on the basis of feedbac* obtained
from surveys or dialogues conducted with industry. <owever" in all these
organisations evaluation of research pro%ects is not being institutionalised9
#ll the organisations are actively see*ing industry collaboration although in varying
degree. 4R' has initiated a number of programmes designed to build partnerships
with industry as well as with other PRs and universities. '')4 has yet to constitute
a mechanism where industry can channel its inputs to guide its activities. (oth RR'
and '#RD have industry representation in their respective management councils9
4taff training is given particular emphasis in both 4R' and '#RD. /$plicit human
resource development programmes have been formulated by 4R' while '#RD
sets aside a separate annual allocation specifically for training purposes9

#ll the organisations are sub%ected to prevailing civil service regulations. #doption of
these procedures have constrained the fle$ibility and responsiveness of PRs as well as
being incompatible to a research environment. 4R' and '#RD have amended
their governing #cts to enable them to operate more independently in efforts to
commercialise their research findings.
+2
,able 51- 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent !pproaches and Practices in
Public Research Institutions .nder 'tudy
RR' '#RD 4R' '')4
4trategy no detailed corporate
plan
broad corporate plan
prepared but no
specific targets9
corporate plan with
definite strategies
and targets9
general corporate
plan but lac*s
specific targets
4tructure statutory body but
still constrained by
civil service rules9
research pro%ects
underta*en on a
divisional basis
industry represented
in governing
council.
statutory body9 it
recently revised its
#ct to engage in
commercial
activities9
pro%ects
implemented on a
matri$ mode.
industry represented
in governing
council.
statutory body9
amended its #ct
recently to engage in
commercial
activities.
pro%ects underta*en
on a matri$ basis
industry constitutes
the ma%ority in
governing council
operates as a typical
government
department9
constrained by civil
service rules9
research pro%ects
underta*en on a
matri$ mode.
no specific
mechanism
constituted to see*
industry
participation
4ystems preparatory studies
not institutionalised9
system of selection
and monitoring of
pro%ects well
established9
evaluation of
pro%ects not formally
institutionalised9
provides technical
inputs to agriculture
e$tension services
underta*en by
another agency9
no system of
preparatory studies
prior to pro%ect
formulation9
system of selection
and monitoring well
defined9
evaluation of
pro%ects not formally
done9
technical e$tension
services provided but
limited9
surveys and
dialogues held with
industry prior to
pro%ect formulation9
system of selection
and monitoring
established9
management systems
to trac* cost of
services introduced9
evaluation of
pro%ects not done
formally9
technical e$tension
services not
institutionalised
no formalised system
of preparatory
studies9
business approach
adopted in selection9
pro%ect trac*ing
system adopted for
monitoring9
no formal system for
evaluation of
pro%ects9
technical e$tension
services not
institutionalised9
4taff lac* of cross.
fertilisation of
people since research
done by divisions9
e$pends about -6 of
total budget on
training9
staff training given
priority9
pre.service scheme
launched to attract
outstanding
graduates to pursue
further studies
staff turnover a
problem due to huge
disparities in starting
salaries between
industry and public
service9
-5
4tyle operated on a
hierarchical basis
operated on a
hierarchical basis
participatory style of
leadership9
operated on a
hierarchical basis9
Fhat clearly distinguishes the performance of the various PRs is the :uality of leadership.
Fhile some have revitalised themselves to serve more swiftly" others have been slow to
change to the changing environment that confronts them. This unevenness in the :uality of
leadership is not only confined to PRs but also in universities to which we turn ne$t.
5.&. .ni#ersities
5.&.1. .ni#ersiti ,e/nologi Malaysia (.,M)
&(
/stablished in +2&7" ?niversiti Te*nologi 'alaysia3s (?T'! ob%ective is to become a
centre of learning that is pre.eminent in the field of technology in the country. Fith a
student population e$ceeding +,"555" it has now a teaching staff of almost 0655 in +5
1aculties and & nstitutes. ?T' offers a range of courses including civil engineering"
mechanical engineering" petroleum engineering" land survey" property management"
valuation" :uantity survey" architecture" electrical engineering" polymer engineering"
electronics engineering and natural sciences.
R&D is being accorded emphasis by ?T'. #lmost &56 of the teaching staff are involved
in some form of research. n fact" performance in research activities is one of the *ey
criteria used when deciding on promotion of staff members. ?T' has identified three
thrust areas for its research activities" namely" manufacturing and processing9 materials and
structure9 and analytical and graphical computerisation. ?nder the 4i$th 'alaysia Plan" it
has been allocated some R' +&.7 million for research activities. #lmost &76 of the
research pro%ects funded by ?T' can be labelled as applied given the technological
orientation of the university. Contract research wor* totalling some R' &.7 million has
been underta*en by the university over the period +22+ . +22,.
)ver the past few years ?T' has instituted several reorganisations in efforts to streamline
its management as well as to enhance performance. Through these reorganisations" several
areas of specialisation have been grouped into nstitutes which are able to operate more
autonomously. #lso" efforts have been made to devolve more administrative tas*s to the
operating faculties so as to reduce bureaucracy. The underlying management philosophy
0=
Frite.up of this section is based on discussions and information provided by ?T' staff.
-+
of ?T' is process.orientation and this attention to processes is reflected in its
management of R&D programmes to which we turn ne$t.
!(!#!#! $he Research Process in +$M
1ollowing the establishment of the Research and Development ?nit (RD?! in +22+"
management of R&D in ?T' has emerged more structured and transparent. The system
of selection" monitoring and evaluation of research pro%ects as practiced in ?T' is by far
the most systematic among universities e$amined in this study in terms of approach"
rigour and comprehensiveness. #dditionally" it has set aside internal funding to encourage
researchers to underta*e preliminary studies on pro%ects" which if successful" would be
the precursors of larger pro%ects to be funded under the RP# mechanism.
The RD? prepares a circular to all Deans of 1aculties and Directors of nstitutes on
procedures pertaining to applications for research funding. The circular lists priority areas
of specialisation identified by the various RP# sectors as well as the thrust areas of
?T'. The RD? has published a guideboo* for all researchers on how to prepare a
research proposal for funding.
Research proposals are first vetted at the faculty level before they are submitted to the
RD?. # formal faculty research committee has been established in each of the +5 faculties
in the university. ts members are drawn from the various schools and centres under the
faculty. The committee3s remit is to ensure that all research proposals before it are well
prepared technically as well as in accordance with the university3s thrust areas before they
are forwarded to the RD?. #nother round of vetting is ne$t underta*en at the RD?
where proposals are e$amined in terms of conformity to ?T'3s thrust areas. #lso" the
more applied research pro%ect proposals are e$amined on their industrial relevance. 4uch
pro%ects need to furnish documentary evidence from industry that findings of the research
will be useful towards solving industry3s problems. This re:uirement by the RD? ensures
that researchers are forced to see* the views of industry before they submit their pro%ect
proposals for funding.
The research proposals for RP# funding are then submitted to ')4T/ where pro%ect
proponents are e$pected to defend their proposals before the various RP# sector
committees. The RD? will convene a meeting with all the pro%ect leaders to convey to
them decisions made by the DC4RD on the pro%ects and level of funding approved. #t
--
the same meeting" pro%ect leaders are reminded on their responsibilities to ensure that
pro%ects are implemented according to schedules. The RD? has prepared a guideboo* for
all pro%ect leaders enumerating their responsibilities as well as RD?3s research guidelines.
Pro%ects are closely monitored by the RD?. Pro%ect leaders are e$pected to submit
:uarterly progress reports to RD? detailing progress achieved todate as against original
ob%ectives9 the e$penditure incurred as well as papersGseminars presented on the research
wor*. These reports are compiled in a computer database monitoring system which
enables the RD? to *eep close tabs on all the pro%ects under its charge. #dditionally"
pro%ect leaders are e$pected to present their research methodology or findings at a
research collo:uium organised by RD? once every two months.
/valuation of pro%ects is done both at the faculty and university levels. The best three
pro%ects from each faculty.level evaluation e$ercise will be selected to be presented at a
university.wide evaluation seminar conducted by the RD?. Cash priEes of R' +7"555"
R' +5"555 and R' 7"555 are awarded to the best three pro%ects. 4uch incentives" it is
hoped" will spur researchers to be more serious in their research underta*ings. The money
from these priEes could be either ploughed bac* into the pro%ect or be used to finance
travelling costs in attending seminarsGconferences in which team members wish to
participate.
The RD? also underta*es a biennial audit of all research pro%ects funded. During this audit
e$ercise" the progress of the research" the e:uipment purchased and the statement of
e$penditure are e$amined and compared with progress reports submitted earlier. The audit
e$ercise impresses upon researchers the seriousness to which the university attaches to the
management of research pro%ects. Figure 55 illustrates schematically the flow of
activities involved in the research approval process in ?T'.
!(!#!"! &ommercialisation of Research )indings
n efforts to improve its interactions with industry" ?T' established a company
(?niTechnologies 4dn. (hd.!
02
in late +22- which would serve as a vehicle whereby ?T'
could e$ploit its research findings. #n nnovation Par* was also established towards the
end of +22- and its main ob%ectives" among others" are to8.
02
#t the time of writing this company has yet to commercialise any research findings generated by ?T'
staff
-0
facilitate industrial utilisation of ?T'3s human resources and facilities9
provide a mechanism for spin.off companies from university research activities9
to facilitate technologyG*nowledge transfer between university and industry.
The nnovation Par* also provides incubation facilities for firms intending to establish their
R&D groups or light production units in the campus. The nnovation Par* is still in its
infancy stage and is presently actively engaged in conducting an awareness campaign
amongst local industrialists. t is being managed by the nnovation and Consultancy
(ureau which coordinates all consultancy re:uests to the university. <owever" all contract
research assignments are coordinated by the RD?. This procedure does not apply to the
nstitutes which are given autonomy in negotiating the terms and conditions of their
consultancy or contract assignments.
5.&.2. .ni#ersiti 'ains Malaysia (.'M)
)%
?niversiti 4ains 'alaysia (?4'! represents one of the more innovative universities in
'alaysia. t has always emphasised an inter.disciplinary approach and this is reflected in
both its academic structure and research activities. #cademic programmes are conducted
through +6 4chools of study which cover all the basic and applied sciences" medicine"
engineering" pharmacy" education" social sciences" humanities" communication" fine and
performing arts" architecture" planning" management" computer science and *ey areas of
industrial technology. # 4chool of )ff.Campus 4tudies conducts a distance learning
programme which offers degrees in the sciences" humanities" social sciences and civil
engineering.
The current student and graduate population in ?4' is =555 and 055 respectively. The
number of faculty members is ++55 with another &55 supporting staff. Research areas of
special strengths at ?4' include environmental science" a:uaculture" biomedical and
pharmaceutical studies" food technology" polymer science and technology" distance
education" >eographical nformation 4ystem" structure analysis" materials science" surface
chemistry and robotics vision.
n +220" research and consultancy pro%ects worth some R' +=.6 million were underta*en.
#lmost 676 of this amount was funded through RP# grants. ncome from consultancy
wor* and contract research" though small (about R' -.7 million in +220!" has been
steadily increasing over the past few years. This increase can be largely attributed to the
,5
'aterial for this entire section is based on discussions as well as information provided by ?4' staff.
-,
active wor* underta*en by the university3s nnovation and Consultancy Centre in forging
closer ties with industry.
!(!"!#! $he Research Process in +SM
# formal research system has evolved in ?4' over the past & years following the
introduction of the RP# mechanism. 4ince +2==" ?4' has received research allocation
from various sources totalling some R' +5 . +7 million annually" that is" almost = . +5 6
of its operating budget. >iven this siEeable research budget" the university3s top
management has realised that ?4'3s research efforts cannot afford to proceed in an
uncoordinated and ad.hoc manner. # more systematic approach was needed.
Towards this end" the ?niversity Research Committee (?RC!" which is the locus of the
university3s research system" has published a boo*let which sets out the broad principles
for support of R&D pro%ects9 guidelines for consultancy and contract research wor*9
procedures for patent registration9 guidelines for application and utilisation of short.term
and RP# funding9 and guidelines for appointment of research assistants. 4uch a boo*let
lays down in unambiguous terms the procedures by which research is administered in the
university. The secretariat to this committee is the office of the Deputy Bice.Chancellor
(Research! which" although is short.staffed to manage this research tas*" obtains support
from other divisions within the university particularly in maintaining a database on the
research pro%ects underta*en by the university.
#lthough ?4' do not possess a corporate R&D plan or identified research thrust areas"
broad principles for R&D support have been spelled out in the boo*let referred to earlier.
Priority for R&D support will be accorded to pro%ects in which the university has a special
strength. #lso" support will be given to pro%ects that contribute towards development of
each 4chool3s capabilities.
Research pro%ects are largely initiated by the researchers themselves" that is" it is
essentially a bottom.up process. They are then screened by their respective 4chool Dean
or Deputy Dean. <owever" screening at this level is very wea* as there is no formal
mechanism where proposals are seriously vetted. This aspect must be strengthened since
the success of the research effort rests largely on whether fundamental :uestions have
been addressed at the outset itself. Proposals are then submitted to the Deputy Bice.
Chancellor (Research! who is the chairman of the ?RC. The ?RC is responsible for all
-7
matters pertaining to the administration of research in the university. ts membership is
drawn from members who are appointed by the Bice. Chancellor.
The ?RC is sub.divided into 7 sectors following RP#3s sectors" namely" agriculture"
industry" medical" strategic and social science. The chairman for each sector is appointed
from members of the ?RC. The sector chairmen have been entrusted to ensure that all the
pro%ect proposals are being e$amined thoroughly and to select the pro%ects for RP#
approval and that there is no duplication. #lthough there are no e$plicit written statements
on how pro%ects are being selected" the general principles which are being adopted include"
among others" 8
soundness of pro%ects9
advancement of *nowledge9
potentials for application9
commercial viability9
attractiveness for funding.
1ollowing the vetting and approval of pro%ects at the national level" the ?RC will then
inform all the pro%ect proponents on the status of their proposals. # special meeting is
convened by the ?RC with all the programme leaders to inform them" among others" how
pro%ect allocations and e$pensive e:uipment (bought under the research allocations! will
be apportioned and utilised.
The ?RC appoints coordinators who will assist sector chairmen in the monitoring and
coordination of the various research programmes within each sector. Pro%ect leaders have
to report to their coordinators on the progress of their pro%ects who then submit a report
to the respective sector chairmen before they are being discussed at the formal ?RC
meeting. The effectiveness of this monitoring system is that designated persons have been
appointed to underta*e this tas* rather than being left unattended. Do clear system for
evaluation of pro%ects has been adopted. /valuation of pro%ects is left to each 4chool to
organise.
The foregoing describes the research process for pro%ects see*ing RP# funding. The
process is similar for proposals for short.term and other e$ternal funding e$cept that there
is no specific screening mechanism as in the case for pro%ects for RP# funding. Figure 5
0 provides a schematic s*etch of the research approval process in ?4'.
-6
!(!"!"! &ommercialisation of Research Results
#rguably" ?4'" among all the universities in the country" has the best organised
university.industry lin*age mechanism in the country. /stablished in +2=+" the nnovation
and Consultancy Centre (CC!" among other things" aims to8.
act as the interface in developing contacts and entering into contract research between
the university and industryGgovernment agencies as well as other interested parties9
provide industry and individuals with access to the university3s physical facilities and
e$pertise to assist in the establishment of their own research and development groups9
to encourage the commercialisation of R&D underta*en by the staff or students of the
university by providing the necessary infrastructure and environment.
?4' is the first university in the country to introduce innovation centre type activities on
its campus. The CC provides space and supporting facilities to companies and individuals
who wish to establish their own R&D groups within the campus. Todate += companies
have been tenants in the CC. #s of the end of +220" +60 ma%or contracts worth R' ++.7
million had been underta*en" while routine testing services" the conducting of training
courses and the rental of facilities and e:uipment yielded an additional gross revenue of
R' &million.
The ?niversity has decided that all forms of cooperation and collaboration with e$ternal
organisations as well as dissemination of potential research findings must be underta*en
through the CC. 1or this purpose" the CC maintains a database on research staff"
e$pertise" e:uipment" facilities" as well as details on promising pro%ects. Despite its success
in forging a number of collaborative ventures between ?4' and private companies" the
CC functions essentially as an administrative and coordinating body. t is not a truly
mar*et oriented body although it has underta*en a number of activities to mar*et the
capabilities and facilities of ?4' to industry. )perating as a distinct mar*et oriented body
would re:uire additional funds in order for CC to underta*e industrial e$tension activities
-&
in order to create awareness among industries as well as determining the actual needs of
industry. n addition" additional finance is needed to translate many of the promising
research findings to a form which would be readily utilisable by industry. 4uch funds are
presently not provided. Dor are funds provided to enable CC to ta*e up an e:uity sta*e in
a %oint venture with industry. 4uch a venture" however" is not permitted under current
regulations governing administration of universities in 'alaysia.

The university is constrained in introducing administrative regulations to foster greater
interactions between researchers and industry. These regulations are generally set for the
entire civil service without any e$ception for fle$ibility in specific cases. 1or e$ample"
researchers in ?4' are only allowed a ma$imum of = wee*s a year to underta*e
consultancy or contract research wor*. 4uch a brief period is certainly not sufficient for
the research wor* or consultancy to be performed ade:uately. #lso" monetary rewards for
researchers engaged in contract research or consultancy wor* is unattractive. (oth these
stifling regulations have been recently suitably amended by the Dational Council for
4cientific Research #nd Development (DC4RD! as part of its overall efforts to enhance
industry.university.public research institution lin*ages. Despite operating under
unfavourable administrative and financial constraints" ?4' has demonstrated that" given
management commitment and enthusiasm towards forging lin*ages with industry" success
can be achieved.
5.&.&. .ni#ersiti Pertanian Malaysia (.PM)
)1
/stablished in +2&+" ?niversiti Pertanian 'alaysia (?P'!" represents the leading
university in the country devoted to the promotion and development of higher education
and research in the fields of agriculture" forestry and veterinary science. t also offers
courses in the natural sciences" engineering sciences and social sciences. t has a current
student and graduate population of close to +-"555 and 755 respectively. There are
presently about 255 faculty members with another -"&55 supporting staff.
?P' is one of the largest R&D institutions in the country in terms of research allocation.
?nder the 4i$th 'alaysia Plan (+22+.+227!" the research budget" has been tripled
compared to that allocated under the previous Plan period. 4ome +"055 research pro%ects
are being underta*en in three ma%or areas8 production of food through biotechnology"
,+
Frite.up of this entire section is based on discussions as well as information provided by ?P' staff.
#lso" reference was made to ?P'(+220!
-=
environmental conservation and the sustainable use of resources and the use of automation
and electronics in industry.
!(!(!#! $he Research Process in +PM
deas for research pro%ects are generally initiated by the researchers themselves. Bery
rarely are pro%ects driven by e$ternal clients or by top management in the university. #s
there is no specific research strategy adopted by faculty (or for that matter by the
university itself!" researchers submit proposals based on their interests. n other words" the
research process in ?P'" as in the case of the other universities" is essentially ;bottom
up3. Pro%ect proposals for RP# funding are submitted based on standard RP# format
re:uirements. These proposals are then vetted by the Dean who normally ensures that the
budgetary aspects of the proposals are in order. Cuestions as to who will utilise the
research findings" especially that of the more applied and development type of pro%ects"
are seldom as*ed. #lthough such :uestions appear in the RP# formats" they are not being
pursued more searchingly" for e$ample demanding that such pro%ects attach documentary
evidence of potential client3s interest in the research. The proposals are then ne$t
submitted for the attention of the Deputy Bice.Chancellor or DBC (#cademic!.
The DBC (#cademic! chairs the Research Committee which approves all research
pro%ects underta*en by the university. 'embership of this committee is drawn from
representatives from each faculty or centre in the university (usually at the Dean or Deputy
Dean level!. #t this level" research pro%ects for RP# funding are generally vetted for their
budgetary aspects. n very few cases" the technical merits of the pro%ects are also
e$amined. Pro%ects approved by this committee are then subse:uently forwarded to
')4T/ (which is the secretariat for RP#!. # s*etch of the research approval process is
given in Figure 51
This research committee also e$amines pro%ect proposals for university funding. The
process by which proposals for such funding are considered is similar to that as described
earlier for RP#.funded pro%ects. <owever" the criteria in funding these pro%ects will
obviously be different. ?niversity funding is normally aimed at assisting young lecturers
into research. #lso" it provides an additional source of funds for promising pro%ects which
lac* funding from RP# or other sources. The :uantum of such funding is normally
-2
limited . about R' -5"555 per pro%ect. 1unding for underta*ing development wor* on
promising research findings is not available.
/$ternally funded pro%ects (other than RP#! are handled directly between the respective
faculty and the funding body. Fhere the e$ternal funded pro%ects re:uire a formal
memorandum of understanding" such pro%ects will then have to be channelled through the
DBC (#cademic!.
'onitoring of approved pro%ects is underta*en at the faculty level by the respective staff
member assigned to oversee research pro%ects (usually the Dean or Deputy Dean!. #t the
university level" monitoring of research pro%ects is underta*en by the office of the DBC
(#cademic!. <owever" because the office is understaffed"
,-
such monitoring is poorly
underta*en. nformation on progress todate of pro%ects funded by RP# or other sources
of funding is not available and have to be referred to the respective faculties. #lso" there
is no formal mechanism for evaluation of research pro%ects at the university level. 4uch
wea*nesses undermine the effectiveness by which the office of the DBC (#cademic! could
e$ert over the management of R&D pro%ects in the university.
#lthough from the above description" vetting systems appear to be in place" both at the
faculty and university levels" they are" however" more preoccupied with budgetary matters
rather than the technical merits of the pro%ect proposals. The research committee do not
wish to adopt a too stringent approach in vetting since such a stance will only
disadvantage the university in terms of reduced research allocation. #lso" Deans do not
wish to be seen to penalise their peers or fellow colleagues. They would li*e to leave such
decisions to the RP# sector committees. ndeed" privately" many of the researchers
ac*nowledge that the vetting mechanism is not wor*ing as well as it should and this has
resulted in the approval of a number of pro%ects that should not have been approved in the
first instance.
,0
#nother area of serious concern is the lac* of interactions especially at the staff level
between ?P' and the main research institution engaged in agriculture research" that is"
'#RD. #lthough both these institutions are represented in each other3s governing
council" there appears to be minimal research collaborations between these two leading
,-
There is presently only one assistant registrar (who is an administrative officer! and one cler* in this
office. (y comparison" ?T' has & full.time professional staff in its Research and Development ?nit.
,0
Comments e$pressed to writer following discussions with a number of ?P' researchers.
05
agriculture research organisations in the country. 4uch a dis:uieting situation can be
attributed to institutional rivalry where both organisations are competing for research
funding from the same funding source. f senior researchers from both organisations were
represented in each other3s research committee" this will not only enhance the vetting
mechanism but will also minimise duplication of research efforts as well as identify areas
for %oint cooperation.
!(!(!"! &ommercialisation of Research )indings
?P' has established a consultancy institute in +220 to promote greater interactions and
collaborations with industry. t has identified four areas for collaboration . agriculture"
resource.based research" engineering and environmental pro%ects. #lso" this institute will
play an active role in disseminating research findings generated by researchers to industry.
t will also match re:uests from industry with the appropriate researcher. The institute
maintains a list of researchers for this purpose.
t is still too early to evaluate the performance of this institute. Todate no research
findings have yet to be commercialised through the institute although" at the time of
writing it was in the process of negotiating with some firms on two pro%ect findings. t has
prepared a standard legal contract that will facilitate in the commercialisation process.
'uch of the institute3s activities since its inception has been to establish closer lin*s with
industry as well as disseminating the university3s research findings.
#lthough standard procedures dictate that all research findings that are to be
commercialised must be underta*en through the institute" this ruling has not been adhered
to in a number of cases. 4ome researchers have e$pressed the ;distance3 that separates the
institute from themselves and emphasise that the institute should be seen to assist the
researcher and not otherwise. Fithout support from the researchers" the effectiveness of
the consultancy institute will be severely undermined.
5.&.). 'u$$ary of Research !pproaches and Practices a$ong the .ni#ersities
The varying research approaches of ?T'" ?4' and ?P' can be broadly summarised
according to the organisational dimensions as depicted in ,able 52. # common feature
that emerges from the descriptions given earlier is that research pro%ects are largely
initiated by researchers themselves" that is" it is essentially a ;bottom.up process.3 4uch an
0+
approach has tended to focus on pro%ects that reflect particular faculty or
departmental interests.
The discussions above have revealed a number of differences in approach among the
universities in managing their research effort. These differences can be enumerated as
follows8.

,able 52- 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent !pproaches and Practices
a$ong the .ni#ersities under study
?T' ?4' ?P'
4trategy thrust areas of research
clearly identified9
no e$plicit research strategy9 no e$plicit research strategy9
4tructure separate unit to manage the
research effort9
formal mechanisms
established for screening"
selecting and monitoring of
research pro%ects at both
university and faculty levels9
nnovation and Consultancy
(ureau is still in its infancy
stage9
office of the Deputy Bice.
Chancellor (Research!
manages the research effort9
obtains computing support
from other divisions.
formal mechanism for
screening" selecting and
monitoring of pro%ects at the
university level9 no such
mechanism at the faculty
level9
nnovation centre is active
towards interfacing with
industry9
office of the Deputy Bice.
Chancellor (Research!
manages the research effort9
formal mechanism for
screening" selecting and
monitoring of pro%ects at the
university level only9 no such
mechanism at the faculty
level9 no database on
research pro%ects9
Consultancy nstitute adopts
a passive approach towards
mar*eting researchers3
findings9
4ystem well developed selection"
screening" monitoring and
evaluation systems9
#lso" research audit
underta*en9
clear systems for selection
and monitoring of pro%ects
but no system for evaluation
of pro%ects9
#lso" no research audit
underta*en
poor systems for selection
and monitoring of pro%ects9
evaluation and audit of
pro%ects not underta*en9
4taff incentives given to
researchers with outstanding
research results9
wor* with industry
recognised as one of the
criteria for promotion9
office of Deputy Bice.
Chancellor (Research! is
understaffed to handle the
research management tas*
but obtains support from
other divisions9
office of Deputy Bice.
Chancellor (Research! is
poorly understaffed to
underta*e the research
management tas*9 no
support from other divisions9
4tyle focused" disciplined and open and supportive laisseE.faire
0-
supportive
)nly ?T' has identified its areas of focus in guiding its research priorities. The other
universities do not have e$plicit strategic research focus. Fithout an e$plicit strategy"
resources tend to get spread too thinly over a broad range of disciplines without
yielding any substantial gains to the research performing organisation9
#ll the universities have established a mechanism at the university level to screen"
select and monitor pro%ects. <owever" unli*e ?T'" no such mechanism e$ists at the
faculty level. #lso" ?T' has established a separate unit" staffed with full.time
academicians" to manage its research effort9
?4'3s nnovation and Consultancy Centre is the most active of its *ind among the
universities and demonstrates what can be achieved if an aggressive approach towards
interfacing with industry is pursued. <owever" it lac*s funding to engage in more
dissemination activities as well as to promote the development of promising pro%ects9
/valuation and auditing of research pro%ects are formalised only in ?T' but not in the
other universities9
Cash incentives are provided to researchers in ?T' who produce outstanding
research results. #lso" a researcher3s participation in industry" either through contract
research wor* or consultancy" will be ta*en into consideration during promotion
e$ercises. 4uch e$plicit recognition is not observed in the other universities9
Researchers underta*ing more applied pro%ects in ?T' are re:uired to furnish
documentary evidence from firms that findings from the research will be useful
towards solving the firms3 problems. 4uch a condition ensures that researchers are
forced to see* views from industry before they submit their proposals. This practice is
not adopted in the other universities.
00
Differences in approach and management practices among the universities as described
above are a reflection of the degree of top management3s commitment towards managing
R&D. Fithout such commitment" the research effort will be poorly organised and" worse
still" waste scarce resources. (ut" if the environment for research is not made competitive"
then such an unsatisfactory situation will continue to remain unchec*ed. 'a*ing the
environment for research competitive and yet hospitable demands top management3s
constant support and attention. 4uch focusing is characteristic of industry3s approach to
research to which we turn ne$t.

5.). Industry
5.).1. !2ino$oto (Malaysia) 'dn. 3hd.
))
The company" a subsidiary of a Aapanese multinational company" was established in +26+.
ts principal activities is the manufacture of food seasoning and other food related
products. t has a staff strength of about 055 people and its output is e$ported mainly to
4ingapore" (runei" <ong Kong" 4ri Han*a and the 'iddle /ast countries.
#n R&D unit was established in +225 in order to cater specifically for the e$panding local
operations. There are presently ++ people attached to the R&D unit. t underta*es both
new product development as well as adaptive R&D" that is" modifications to e$isting
products to satisfy consumer preferences. t underta*es about 6 pro%ects annually.
There is no separate R&D allocation. nstead" pro%ects are approved on an ad.hoc basis
depending on proposals received by management. 4taff are sent to the parent company in
Aapan for training stints from 0 to 6 months in order to learn latest techni:ues in food
technology. There are no e$plicit incentive schemes for outstanding staff. /$cellent
performance is reflected in the annual revision of salaries of staff.
!'!#!#! Research Process in A,inomoto -Malaysia.
Proposals for research are derived from a number of sources as follows8.
from parent company in Aapan9
,,
This write.up is based on discussion and information provided by Research Director"
#%inomoto('alaysia!
0,
from mar*eting department" Technical 4ervices ?nit
,7
as well as the R&D unit9
from surveys underta*en by specialised survey companies.
The parent company sometimes re:uests that certain products developed in Aapan be
tested for possible introduction into the local mar*et. #ppropriate modifications are made
by the R&D unit to these products and they are then rigorously tested. n some cases ideas
spring from visits underta*en by the 'ar*eting and Technical 4ervices personnel to
industry clients. #nother source of ideas for research pro%ects comes from survey findings
commissioned by the company on a regular basis to obtain feedbac* from the public on its
product lines.
The Research 'anager screens ideas from this spread of sources and ma*es %udgement as
to their li*ely potential development given the company3s research resources. Test
samples are developed by the R&D unit on those ideas which appear promising. These test
samples are administered to target client groups by the Technical 4ervices ?nit for testing.
1eedbac* from these testings are then incorporated into the development of a second test
sample. The modified test sample is then tested again with the target client group. f the
test sample is found acceptable" the Research 'anager prepares a detailed proposal on the
production of this product for decision by the top management. (efore the proposal is
submitted" comments from the relevant units are obtained" for e$ample" production as well
as mar*eting and technical services. Production commences once approval is given by the
top management. #s in other companies in this study" decisions on implementation of
pro%ects are influenced by profitability as well as technical feasibility.
# schematic s*etch of the research process underta*en in #%inomoto ('alaysia! is given in
Figure 5(.
5.).2. P.4.5lectronics
)0
P.K./lectronics (or P.K.! is a wholly owned subsidiary of the 4un >roup of companies. t
is a 'alaysian owned company and was established in +2=-. ts principal activities include
the design" manufacturing and distribution of computer power protection systems. #bout
,7
This unit provides technical services to clients and provides feedbac* to the R&D unit and the company
on the performance of its products.
,6
Description of this company3s research management is based on discussion and information provided by
the Research 'anager" P.K./lectronics.
07
,56 of its output is e$ported. t is also an original e:uipment manufacturer ()/'! of #C
motor speed controllers for an talian firm. t has established sales offices in the ?nited
4tates" Aapan and <ong Kong with distributors appointed in taly" 1rance" the ?nited
Kingdom and the #sia.Pacific region
P.K./lectronics has a s*illed wor*force of over 055. The company has a strong focus on
R&D. Three teams comprising -7 engineers and technicians are constantly engaged in
activities designed to produce new products or ma*ing improvements to e$isting
products. There is no formal training programme but staff are sent to relevant courses and
seminars to enhance their *nowledge. The reward scheme in the company operates
through the salary mechanism.
The company is engaged in R&D in order to develop niche products in order to e$pand its
business horiEons. 1undamental to its research efforts is the introduction of products that
can yield high margins for the company. #lso" developing products that truly matches the
users3 re:uirements is another important criterion. 4peed to the mar*et is a critical guiding
principle and the company does not unnecessarily delay the launch of a product in
attempting to come out with the perfect product. nstead" improvements to the product
launched are subse:uently made on the basis of mar*et feedbac*.
!'!"!#! Research Process in P!/!0lectronics
deas for pro%ects originate from various parties. They could come from the (oard of
Directors" top management" the Research Department or from the 4ales Department.
rrespective of where it emanates" each idea must be written into a proposal for the
decision of the Chief /$ecutive )fficer (C/)!. The criteria employed in deciding whether
a pro%ect proposal is approved for implementation or otherwise are returns on investment
and technical feasibility. /very research proposal must promise ade:uate financial returns.
#lso" a pro%ect must be both technically feasible and implementable by the company.
Technically feasible pro%ects which do not satisfy minimum financial returns to the
company are shelved. 4imilarly" pro%ects which promise attractive returns but which are
not implementable by the company are also not considered.
'ost pro%ects that come up before approval have a higher than average chance of success
on both technical and commercial counts. 4uch a situation is possible since P.K.3s R&D
activities are only confined to product development or improvements to e$isting products
06
in the mar*et. 'ost pro%ects underta*en have a short implementation period.generally less
than 6 months. P.K. also underta*es reverse engineering activities and modifies some
foreign products for the local mar*et. The company is not involved in the state of the art
technology but basically develops products based on mature technologies. #ccordingly"
the technical ris*s of the pro%ects are very much reduced.
There is no formal system in place governing procedures of channelling research
proposals. <owever" most proposals would have the views of the relevant departments
incorporated as to their technical and commercial viability before they reach the C/).
These views are sought informally . a hallmar* of the management style of the
organisation.
#fter the decision is ta*en to proceed with a pro%ect" the C/) will re:uest the Research
'anager to assemble the pro%ect team. Team members are selected based on e$pertise
re:uired for the pro%ect in :uestion. )nce the prototype of the product is developed"
assistance from the 4ales Department would be sought in order to obtain feedbac* from
selected end.users. #ppropriate modifications would be made based on the feedbac*
before final production is underta*en. Biews of the production department are ta*en into
account when the prototype of the product is developed in order to ensure that no ma%or
problems are encountered during the production phase. <owever" in certain cases when
secrecy is desired" a product is developed up to prototype stage without the inputs from
other departments.
There is no formal system of reporting or monitoring as these activities are informally
done. The Research 'anager" with the consent of the C/)" is empowered to terminate a
pro%ect particularly in cases where the pro%ect is facing prolonged technical difficulties or
that the mar*et demand for the product has dramatically changed. # simplified s*etch of
the research process in P.K./lectronics is depicted in Figure 5+.
5.).&. "e6ina Food Industries 'dn. 3hd.
)1
The company was established in +2== and its principal activity is the manufacture of
ready.to.serve #sian foods. t has a modern factory with state of the art facilities manned
,&
Description of this company3s research management is based on discussion and information provided by
the R&D 'anager" Dewina.
0&
by a wor*force of some -55 people. t is the only local company in 'alaysia that offers a
wide range of dishes in retort pouch pac*aging where shelf life can be e$tended up to -
years without any deterioration to :uality of the food. (esides serving the local consumer
and institutional mar*ets" Dewina also e$ports its products overseas to Aapan" #ustralia"
(runei" 4ingapore and the ?nited Kingdom.

The company is engaged in R&D in order to enhance its competitive position in the
mar*et. # small R&D unit has been created with = people assigned full.time to research
activities. (oth adaptive R&D wor* as well as new product development are carried out.
Dewina also underta*es contract manufacturing for e$ternal clients. Training of staff is
underta*en through specialised courses as well as with special training programmes
initiated with local research institutions.
!'!(!#! Research Process in Dewina
deas for research" as in other companies in this study" come from a variety of sources.
They include ideas from the mar*eting division" suppliers" competitors" institutional
clients" consumers" R&D unit itself and even the (oard of Directors. rrespective of where
the ideas originate" the Research 'anager has to translate each idea into a written
proposal for the approval of the (oard of Directors. Comments from the mar*eting and
production units are sought in order to ascertain initial feedbac* towards technical
feasibility" profitability as well as mar*et acceptability.
#pproved pro%ects are implemented by the R&D unit. Test samples are produced in order
for sensory testing to be underta*en by the 'ar*eting unit. 1eedbac* from these testings
are incorporated in the development of a second test product which is then subse:uently
tested. # favourable feedbac* would ensure that the product will be produced on a
commercial basis. (efore full scale production ta*es place" the R&D manager submits this
matter for the decision by the (oard of Directors incorporating the views from the
relevant parties. Production goes ahead once approval is given by the (oard of Directors.
There is no formal R&D planning or e$plicit R&D strategy adopted by Dewina. nstead"
pro%ects are being adopted if they satisfy immediate company3s business ob%ectives.
<owever" in the case of the development of retort pouch foods" Dewina sought technical
assistance from '#RD under a consultancy pro%ect for some += months in order to
0=
enable it to become the mar*et leader in this new form of pac*aging. This decision was
also influenced by its business plans of e$porting its products to Aapan where modern
pac*aging techni:ues such as employing retort pouch are critical in order to gain mar*et
entry.
#s the R&D unit is small" the R&D manager personally monitors all the pro%ects that are
being underta*en. Decisions on termination of pro%ects are made by the (oard of
Directors following recommendations by the relevant units. <owever" as in the case of
#%inomoto ('alaysia!" products that have undergone testing second time around generally
succeed in matching end.user3s e$pectations and" thus" promising financial returns to the
company. Figure 51% provides a schematic representation of the research process in
Dewina.
n summary" as in other companies in this study" research pro%ects in Dewina are
implemented only after they have satisfied meeting both technical and financial criteria.
#lso" a particular characteristic of Dewina3s research process" as is also in the case of
#%inomoto ('alaysia!" is the e$tensive sensory testing underta*en before a product is
being approved for production.
5.).). 7e#eafil 'dn. 3hd.
)(
The company is a %oint venture between two local companies and a foreign partner. The
local companies hold &66 of the e:uity of the company while the balance is held by the
foreign partner. The company was established in +2&0 and its principal activity is the
manufacture of e$truded late$ rubber threads.
The company is engaged in R&D in order to support its business ob%ectives. #n R&D unit
was established in +225 with +0 personnel. The unit underta*es essentially adaptive R&D
wor*" that is" it performs physical and :uality modifications to the product. t is not
involved in the introduction of new products since" presently" such an activity is beyond its
capabilities. #lso" the mar*et for late$ threads is tremendous that the company has not
considered venturing into new product lines.
!'!'!#! Research Process in 1eveafil
,=
Description of this company3s research management is based on discussion and information provided by
the R&D 'anager" <eveafil.
02
deas for research pro%ects emanate from various sources. They could come from
customers" mar*eting personnel" suppliers or even the R&D 'anager. rrespective of
where the ideas originate" each idea must be written into a proposal for the decision of the
4enior 'anager ('anufacturing!. <owever" all pro%ect proposals must obtain the
feedbac* from the production" mar*eting and technical service divisions. The criteria used
in deciding whether a pro%ect proposal is approved for implementation or otherwise are
returns on investment and technical feasibility.
#s in the case of other companies in this study" every research proposal must promise
ade:uate financial returns as well as that it must be technically feasible and implementable.
Pro%ects which do not satisfy either of these criteria will be dropped. 'ost of the pro%ects
that were approved in the past have achieved commercial success. There have also been
cases of failures. (ut these have been few. They have been largely due to technical
problems unanticipated when the pro%ects were first conceived. n the main" research
pro%ects underta*en by <eaveafil have a high success rate since these pro%ects do not
involve much technical ris* nor technical sophistication. 'ost of the pro%ects involve only
slight physical modifications or :uality enhancements. 4uch adaptations do not involve
much technical difficulty. #lso" product specifications in some instances have been laid
down by the customers. 4uch pre.determined specifications ma*e it easier for the
company to guarantee the success of a particular research pro%ect.
Planning of research pro%ects are made on an annual basis and involve the 4enior 'anager
('anufacturing!" R&D 'anager and 'ar*eting 'anager. Do strategic research plan has
been formalised since pro%ects are selected that satisfy immediate company3s business
ob%ectives. #bout 7 or 6 pro%ects are planned for the year. 'ost of these pro%ects" by their
nature" do not ta*e more than 6 months to implement. mplementation of pro%ects are
planned by the Research 'anager since the staff below him are not highly :ualified.
<owever" the staff perform the various activities involved in the research but under the
careful supervision of the Research 'anager.
There is no formal system of reporting or monitoring as these activities are informally
done. The Research 'anager *eeps the 4enior 'anager ('anufacturing! informed on the
progress of pro%ects from time to time. Decisions on termination of pro%ects come under
the purview of the 4enior 'anager ('anufacturing! who acts on the advice of the
Research 'anager. Pro%ects are terminated if technical problems arise which are beyond
,5
the capabilities of the company or problems which will have adverse effects on production.
The research process in <eveafil can be portrayed as in Figure 511.
n summary" the research in <eveafil is characterised by simple adaptive pro%ects. #gain"
as in the case of the other companies in this study" only pro%ects that satisfy technical and
financial criteria are implemented.
5.5. 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent !pproaches and Practices a$ong the
selected Fir$s
# summary of the research approaches and practices in the four firms can be depicted as
in ,able 5&. t is evident that unli*e the case of PRs and universities" similarities in
approaches and practices characterise the four firms in industry. There are" however"
differences" but these are in terms of emphasis and peculiar to the demands of a particular
industry. n essence" the research process in industry is mar*ed by the following features8.
Research pro%ects are initiated from a variety of sources including clients and
departments other than the R&D unit9
nputs from the various relevant sections of the company are obtained before a pro%ect
proposal is submitted to top management for approval. This is to ensure that all
aspects of the implementation of the pro%ect are fully considered before a final decision
on the pro%ect is ta*en. )nly pro%ects that satisfy both technical and financial criteria
are implemented9
/$tensive efforts are made to obtain informationGfeedbac* on products that are being
planned for introduction to the mar*et. 4uch efforts are to ensure that customers3
demands are fully met9
'ost of the research pro%ects underta*en are essentially adaptive in nature and are
largely short.term (less than si$ months!. Pro%ects that involve long gestation periods
are seldom pursued due to their heavy demands on the financial resources of the firms9
,+
Research management in industry is largely informal since their operations are
relatively small. There is no formal apparatus for monitoring or evaluation as in the
case of PRs and universities9
,able 5&- 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent !pproaches and Practices
a$ong selected fir$s under study
#%inomoto P.K./lectronics Dewina <eveafil
4trategy no e$plicit research
strategy9 pro%ects
selected to satisfy
immediate business
ob%ectives
no formal research
plan9
pro%ects selected to
satisfy immediate
business ob%ectives
no formal research
plan9
pro%ects selected to
satisfy immediate
business ob%ectives
no formal research
plan9
pro%ects selected to
satisfy immediate
business ob%ectives
4tructure separate R&D unit9 separate R&D unit9 separate R&D unit9 separate R&D unit9
4ystem research pro%ects
initiated by various
sources9
inputs from various
sections of firm
before approval9
selection of pro%ects
only when technical
and financial
criteria are met9
e$tensive sensory
testing underta*en9
research pro%ects
initiated by various
sources9
pro%ect proposals
commented upon by
relevant divisions
prior to approval9
selection of pro%ects
based on meeting
financial and
technical criteria9
research pro%ects
initiated by various
sources9
inputs from relevant
sections before
pro%ect proposals are
submitted for
approval9
pro%ects selected on
basis of financial
and technical
feasibility9
also e$tensive
sensory testing of
products9
research pro%ects
initiated by various
sources9
inputs from relevant
sections before
pro%ects are
approved9
selection of pro%ects
based on meeting
technical and
financial criteria9
4taff staff sent to parent
company for
training on
advanced
techni:ues9
outstanding staff
rewarded through
annual revision of
salaries
no formal training
programme9 staff
sent for relevant
seminars or short.
courses9 staff
rewarded through
salary mechanism9
no formal training
programme9 staff
sent to courses or to
local research
institutions for
e$posure to latest
techni:ues9
no formal training
programme9 staff
sent to courses
conducted by local
institutions9
4tyle informal informal informal informal
,-
Part II : R&D Management Approaches and Practices :
2essons from the Organisational Review
The previous discussion revealed a diversity in approaches and practices adopted towards
managing R&D. This diversity in research practices is a reflection of the different
operating environments as well as the different missions of the organisations under review.
4harp differences in research management practices can be clearly delineated among firms"
PRs and universities. /ven within these groups of organisations" particularly in the case
of PRs and universities" differences abound due largely to varying top level commitment
towards R&D management. These differences and similarities pertaining to research
management practices can be e$amined in terms of the organisational dimensions of
strategy" structure" system" staff and style.
5.5. 'trategy
!!#! )ormulation of &orporate3Strategic Research Plan
There are no e$plicit research strategies or plans adopted by the firms under study in order
to guide their research activities. #lso" in most cases their planning horiEons do not e$tend
beyond +- months. This is because firms" by the nature of their operations" are more
concerned with pro%ects that realise :uic* profits rather than indulging in long.term
pro%ects where the returns are highly uncertain. #ccordingly" adaptive pro%ects which are
less ;complicated3 and which can be :uic*ly introduced into the mar*et are preferred.
,2
n recent years" most of the PRs under study have developed corporate plans but to
varying degrees of detail. 1or e$ample" 4R'3s corporate plan" among other things"
defines its financial targets to be achieved within a certain period.
75
4uch e$plicit targets
are absent in the plans of the other PRs. The universities are characterised by the absence
,2
#bout 656 . &56 of research pro%ects underta*en by #%inomoto" P.K./lectronics and Dewina are
adaptive in nature. <eveafil underta*es only pro%ects which involve only adaptations to e$isting
products.
75
?nder its corporate plan" 4R' hopes to achieve a self.financing ratio of ,56 of its operating
e$penditure by +227 (4R'"+220b" p.-+!
,0
of formal research plans. <owever" ?T' has identified specific areas of technology where
it hopes to focus its research effort.
7+
5.0. 'tructure
!*!#! Organisation
The research activity in PRs" universities and industry is coordinated by a separate unit
entrusted to ensure that the resources e$pended are soundly managed. <owever" the effort
devoted to this activity varies considerably particularly among PRs and universities. 1or
e$ample" ?T'3s Research Development ?nit is staffed with full time academicians and
endowed with sufficient computing resources to enable effective monitoring to be
underta*en. n sharp contrast" the research effort in ?P' is poorly coordinated without
ade:uate staffing as well as computing resources. 4uch disparities are a reflection of top
management3s commitment to the research effort.
!*!"! Development4 05tension and Mar6eting Activities
Translating research findings to a form utilisable by the end.user is not easy. 4uch a
transformation is made even more difficult in the case of PRs and universities where
funding for such activities as development" pilot plant and testing are not provided for in
the normal research budget allocated under the RP# mechanism. # lac* of such funding
is acutely felt by the universities since the PRs have sufficient internal funding to institute
these activities.
>enerally" e$tension activities are poorly carried out by both the PRs and universities.
ndustry associations have e$pressed reservations over the limited e$tension activities
underta*en by PRs towards assisting small and medium industries.
7-
4uch activities will
contribute towards enhancing the operations of these industries. '#RD underta*es a
limited effort in providing e$tension services to 4's. 4imilar services are not provided on
an organised basis by the other PRs.
7+
4ee section 7.0.+.
7-
Biewed e$pressed to writer by 1ederation of 'alaysian 'anufacturers.
,,
?niversities underta*e industrial liaison activities through their respective nnovation and
Consultancy Centres (CCs!. (ut these CCs" as in other activities" vary enormously in
their degree of interactions with industry. ?4'3s CC has adopted a very active approach
towards interfacing with industry. 4uch an approach" has culminated in the establishment
of the nation3s first university with incubator facilities which have been fully occupied
since they were established. <owever" its mar*eting activities are limited since it is only
provided with limited internal funds. t re:uires e$ternal funding support in order to
underta*e more aggressive promotion of promising research findings generated by the
university.
Transfer and dissemination of research findings are actively pursued by the firms under
study since such activities will ultimately impact on the profitability of the organisation.
4eparate mar*eting and technical teams have been constituted to underta*e these tas*s.
1eedbac* from such activities have often been the well spring for the development of new
or improved products. 4uch an aggressive mar*eting approach has not characterised the
dissemination and e$tension activities of PRs or universities. (oth 4R' and '#RD
have recently amended their governing legislations in order to enable them to form
companies so that they will be in a better position to commercialise their research findings
with industry or other interested parties. RR' and '')4 are planning to follow suit on
a similar path.
70
?niversities are presently not permitted by legislation to establish
companies or engage in any %oint venture with industry or other parties although there are
proposals awaiting government approval to enable them to do so.
7,

!*!(! &ontrol and Procedures
(oth the PRs and the universities are sub%ected to civil service regulations which have
been specifically designed for purely administrative and repetitive tas*s and not for a
creative activity li*e R&D. Thus" some researchers in PRs and universities report of
e$ceedingly long delays in purchasing items for research due to the need to adhere to civil
service procedures. #lso" research managers are unable to appoint research assistants due
to remuneration scales which are grossly inferior to prevailing mar*et rates. #dditionally"
research managers are procedurally unable to utilise the balance of funds from e$isting
pro%ects to initiate research pro%ects in order to seiEe new opportunities or underta*e
development activities of e$isting pro%ects that have yielded promising results.
70
This point conveyed to writer following discussions with top management of both RR' and '')4.
7,
Personal communication with 'rs. 'imi smail" Principal #ssistant 4ecretary" 'inistry of /ducation.
,7

4uch restrictions as described above do not confront research managers in the firms
surveyed where they are given free rein to implement pro%ects so long as costs are *ept
within the stipulated budget. <ow they underta*e the pro%ect is not as important as
whether they are able to achieve the desired targets. Decisions on termination of pro%ects"
however" are referred to the top management for approval.
5.1. 'yste$
!7!#! Planning of Pro,ects
The research planning approach in both PRs and firms is largely a mi$ture of both ;top.
down3 and ;bottom.up.3 #dditionally" a firm3s planning process is largely influenced by
e$ternal sources including clients. Planning of research pro%ects in universities is largely
initiated by researchers themselves" that is" it is essentially a ;bottom.up3 process. #
distinctive feature of the research planning process in firms is their ability to respond
swiftly to new opportunities or changed demands. 4uch agility is absent in both PRs and
the universities which are constrained by e$isting operating procedures which have been
developed for more stable and predictable situations.
4oliciting ideas for pro%ects varies mar*edly across the organisations. Companies largely
obtain their ideas from their mar*eting personnel. 4ome" for e$ample in the case of P.K.
/lectronics" have sales offices and dealers abroad who guide the local mar*eting arm of
the organisation on current mar*et trends. n some cases" as in #%inomoto" ideas for new
product development are obtained from the parent company. #lso" particularly in the food
related companies" e$tensive surveys are commissioned to ascertain consumers3 tastes.
These preparatory activities" as evident from the discussion in Chapter -" are crucial
towards ensuring success in research utilisation. <owever" such upfront activities are
seldom initiated by PRs or universities. )nly ?T'" among the universities" has
encouraged its researchers to underta*e preliminary investigations on pro%ects by setting
aside specific internal funding for this purpose. 4imilarly" 4R' has recently launched a
number of industry surveys with the ob%ective of ensuring that its research pro%ects are in
alignment with industry re:uirements.
!7!"! Screening and Selection of Pro,ects
,6
4election of pro%ects is critical since it represents the stage when resources" both financial"
manpower and time are allocated to the pro%ect. t is also crucial since the ultimate success
of the research effort depends on choosing the right pro%ect. The firms interviewed in this
study all e$hibit a common approach towards selection" that is" pro%ects are selected on
the basis of satisfying both financial and technical criteria. Pro%ects which appear
promising technically but which are unattractive in terms of financial returns are discarded.
4uch a narrow basis for selection is adopted since companies are %udged by ;bottom.line3
considerations and not by underta*ing pro%ects which appear technically elegant.
Decision ma*ing on pro%ects is done in most cases by the chief e$ecutive of the firm. #ll
pro%ect proposals must incorporate the views of the various operating units of the
organisation" for e$ample" R&D" mar*eting and production. These inputs help to ensure
that potential problems that may arise from the subse:uent implementation are :uic*ly
addressed in the initial stages of development. 4uch an approach underscores the need to
treat R&D utilisation as a holistic process and not merely confined to the research aspects
only.
?nli*e industry" where the criteria for selecting pro%ects are clearly demarcated" the
situation in PRs and universities is somewhat less sharply defined. n the PRs" selection
of pro%ects is largely influenced by the degree of industry participation" industry relevance
or potential towards contributing organisation3s capabilities. # strict financial and
technical dissection of the pro%ect is seldom underta*en. <owever" in recent times" both
4R' and '')4 have adopted selection policies that provide considerable weightage
towards pro%ects that promise income for their organisations. 4uch policies have been
adopted in response to e$hortations by the government that industrial research institutions
be less dependent on public funds for their operational e$penditures.
77
4election of pro%ects in universities is hardly determined by financial or technical
considerations. nstead" selection" more often than not" is based on whether pro%ects are
properly formulated or otherwise. #lso" pro%ects for national funding" must be aligned
with the ob%ectives of the broad programmes defined by the RP# secretariat. ?T' has
directed that all applied research pro%ects must" at least" furnish documentary evidence of
77
The ndustrial Technology #ction Plan" adopted by the >overnment in +225" recommended" among
other
things" that all industrial research institutes in the country should target self.financing ratios based on
operating e$penditure of at least 056 by +227 and 656 by -555 ('alaysia" +225a" p.0,!.
,&
industry3s comments before pro%ects can be considered for approval. The introduction of
such measures are aimed at ensuring that pro%ects funded are directly relevant to
addressing industry3s problems.
4creening of pro%ects is more e$tensively underta*en in PRs and universities than in firms.
<owever" the efficacy of these filtering mechanisms is less than satisfactory in most cases
since organisations do not wish to penalise themselves from see*ing more funds from
national sources. RR' has instituted an e$ternal screening mechanism to ensure that its
research programmes are actually relevant to industry re:uirements. # Coordinating
#dvisory Committee (C#C! has been established which meets biennially to review
RR'3s research programmes. The C#C comprises representatives from industry as well
as e$perts on rubber including those from abroad. 4imilar mechanisms where industry are
involved in the screening of research programmes are also in place in 4R' and '#RD
but not in '')4. 4uch e$ternal vetting mechanism is absent in the universities.
!7!(! Monitoring and 0valuation
'onitoring of pro%ects in firms is underta*en through daily informal discussions between
the Research 'anager and the pro%ect leader. Thus" the Research 'anagers in these firms
are fully informed on the progress of all pro%ects underta*en. 4hortfalls in progress are
:uic*ly attended to. Pro%ects which are repeatedly encountering technical difficulties and
which do not appear to be resolvable are referred to top management for decisions on
termination.

'ost of the PRs and universities have in place computerised database systems to monitor
pro%ects. <owever" because of the large number of pro%ects involved" top management of
these organisations are seldom fully informed of the details of the research pro%ects
underta*en. To remedy this shortcoming" ?T'" has institutionalised systems to evaluate
all research pro%ects underta*en both at the faculty and university levels. 4uch regular
evaluation sessions provide top management opportunities in *eeping close contact with
the progress of the research effort of the organisation. ?T' is also the only research
organisation that has institutionalised auditing of its research programmes. This e$ercise"
underta*en biennially" is aimed at instilling a sense of responsibility and accountability
among pro%ect leaders as well as developing their professionalism in managing a research
pro%ect. Pro%ect leaders are e$pected" among other things" to account systematically all
purchases of goods and services ac:uired during the course of the pro%ect.
,=
5.(. 'taff
!%!#! Rewards3Incentives
1ostering a competitive environment for research can also be achieved through a reward
system that recognises outstanding results. 4uch incentives have been adopted by ?T'
where attractive cash priEes are given to the research team for achieving e$cellent research
results. n order to cultivate a positive attitude towards wor* with industry" ?T' has
decided that such industry engagements either through contract wor* or consultancy will
be considered as one of the main criteria for a researcher3s promotion. 4uch e$plicit
recognition for industry wor* demonstrates the commitment of ?T'3s top management
towards collaboration with industry. t also reveals what can be done in this effort if other
universities adopt a similar practice. The firms under study do not have specific reward
systems in place. nstead" staff who deliver outstanding results are rewarded through the
annual salary revision e$ercise.
Reward systems" as cautioned in Chapter -" must be carefully designed in order to foster
behaviours which are conducive to the research effort. <owever" the reward system that is
being adopted by the civil service including PRs and universities places emphasis on
rewarding individual performances rather than team effort. The annual increment of
salaries for all civil servants including researchers from PRs and universities is based on
individual performance. Triple and double annual increments are awarded to a small
number of staff in each organisation who have demonstrated e$cellent performance during
the year. R&D is a team effort and the adoption of such a flawed reward system" with its
emphasis on individual performance" will engender ill.will and discord among members of
the organisation.
5.+. 'tyle
,2
The research management style of the firms under study" due to their limited scale of
operations" is informal yet sharply disciplined towards attaining business ob%ectives. #ll
segments of the organisation are involved at the outset in contributing towards the success
of a research pro%ect. 4uch an integrative or holistic approach helps to ensure that all
uncertainties pertaining to the pro%ect are conveyed to the research team at the
commencement of the pro%ect thereby facilitating its subse:uent implementation.
The research approach adopted in PRs and universities is largely se:uential" from the
stage of idea generation to adoption by the end.user" with formalised systems for
screening" selection and monitoring to guide the research effort. The degree of
effectiveness of these systems" as mentioned earlier" varies considerably among the
organisations. n general" the PRs3 research efforts are more focused both in terms of
research ob%ectives as well as in the mobilisation of resources towards attaining the
research goals. 4uch discipline" with the e$ception of ?T'" is absent in the universities
where the style of research management can be described as laisseE.faire particularly once
pro%ects have been approved and funds disbursed to the researchers.
5.1%. 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent !pproaches and Practices a$ong PRIs8
.ni#ersities and Industry.
# broad categorisation of the differing research practices adopted by industry" PRs and
universities can be depicted as in ,able 5). There are differences in approach among the
three categories of organisations since they have different missions. The organisational
survey revealed that there are no conspicuous differences in research management
practices across sectors" that is" rubber products" food industry and
electronicsGengineering. <owever" particular practices of certain sectors appear distinctive.
1or e$ample" in the food industry" e$tensive sensory testing activities are a crucial aspect
of the research process.
The *ey similarities and differences in research management practices among PRs"
universities and industry can be briefly enumerated as follows8
deas for research pro%ects underta*en by firms are actively sought from various
sources including customers. n PRs" pro%ects are initiated by researchers as well as
directions from top management. n the universities" pro%ects are largely driven by
researchers3 interests9
75
#ll inputs from the relevant divisions of the organisation are incorporated before a
pro%ect is approved by top management in industry. This diversity of inputs will help to
ensure that whatever problems that may emerge in the various stages of the pro%ect3s
transformation are identified and ta*en into account at the outset. 4uch an approach is
seldom adopted by PRs or universities9
4election of research pro%ects in industry is based on meeting both technical and
financial criteria. PRs and universities" in general" approve pro%ects on the basis of
technical soundness as well as conformity to organisational goals. <owever" selection
of research pro%ects in PRs and universities is usually made without recourse to
detailed vetting9
#ll three categories of organisations have a separate unit to organise their R&D
activities. <owever" the effectiveness of this function varies widely across PRs and
universities9
(ecause of their public nature and the siEe of their operations" PRs and universities
are characterised by a high degree of formalisation. #lso" decision.ma*ing is slow
since they are constrained by civil service regulations. R&D operations in the firms
under study are largely informal and their decision.ma*ing process is swift9
Prefeasibility studies and testing activities are e$tensively underta*en by firms as part
of the research process. 4uch activities seldom feature in research pro%ects underta*en
by PRs and universities9
Transfer of research findings is underta*en by the mar*eting arm of the organisation in
industry. 4uch activities are" with some e$ceptions" poorly institutionalised and
supported in PRs and universities.
5.11. Chapter 'u$$ary
This chapter provided an account of how R&D was managed in the selected PRs"
universities and firms under study. The discussion revealed that there were distinct
differences in research management practices adopted by firms" PRs and universities
reflecting differences in orientation and priorities. Research operations in firms were
characterised by swiftness in decision ma*ing and stringency in pro%ect selection due to the
7+
overarching need to generate profits. 4uch characteristics were absent in both PRs and
universities since they were not operating along business lines. #lso" PRs and universities
were constrained from adopting more responsive research management practices due to
the need to adhere to civil service regulations. The institutional survey also revealed that a
wide disparity in research management practices e$isted particularly among PRs and
universities despite being sub%ected to similar operating environments. Fhile some
organisations have adopted sound practices" others were indifferent reflecting different
degrees of top management commitment to the research effort. universities. # central
theme that emerged from this discussion was that the adoption of sound management
practices" regardless of the organisation3s operating environment as well as the sector in
which the research was underta*en" can ma*e the difference in shaping the direction of the
research effort.
The discussion in this chapter has raised several issues which have both managerial and
policy implications. These issues include" among others" the following8.
the need for PRs and universities to underta*e preparatory wor* before proposals are
submitted for funding9
the wide disparity in research management practices among PRs and universities9
the lac* of competitiveness and comprehensiveness in funding of research pro%ects in
the public sector9
the need for closer research cooperation among PRs and the universities to utilise
scarce e$pertise as well as to share resources in order to promote research utilisation9
the adoption of reward systems that motivate staff to engage in wor* with industry as
well as to foster a culture of e$cellence and cooperation9
the lac* of industrial e$tension activities in PRs9
the need for PRs and universities to be provided with greater autonomy in their
operations in order to enhance research utilisation9
the need to treat R&D in a holistic fashion" that is" involvement of all parties relevant
to the successful transformation and utilisation of the findings of the pro%ect" at the
outset of the pro%ect.
The above issues will be fully e$plored in Chapter &. # more microscopic e$amination of
some of these and other issues will be pursued in the ne$t chapter.
7-
,able 5)- 'u$$ary of Research Manage$ent Practices a$ong Fir$s8
Public Research Institutions and .ni#ersities
Fir$s Public Research Institutions .ni#ersities
4trategy no e$plicit research plan9
ideas for pro%ects are actively
sought from various sources9
participation by all sections
of organisation in a research
proposal before it is
approved9
corporate plan prepared but
varies in detail among the
PRs9
planning of pro%ects a mi$ture
of both ;top.down3 and
;bottom.up3" that is" from top
management as well as from
researchers. Discussions are
seldom held with end.users
unless %oint pro%ects or
contract research9
no e$plicit research plan9
pro%ects initiated largely by
researchers themselves"
that is" a ;bottom.up3
process.
4tructure separate unit to underta*e as
well as to organise the
research function9
decision.ma*ing is swift to
respond to changed
conditions9
research findings are
transferred to mar*et by
mar*eting arm of the
organisation
separate unit to organise the
research function9
decision.ma*ing is slow due
to the need to adhere to civil
service regulations9
e$tension activities only
underta*en to a small e$tent
in '#RD and not
institutionalised in the others.
separate unit formed to
coordinate the research
function9
decision.ma*ing is slow as
in the case of PRs9
transfer of research
findings underta*en by
nnovation and
Consultancy Centres in
each university. (ut
performance of these
centres is very uneven.
4ystem selection of pro%ects based on
meeting technical and
financial criteria9
prefeasibility studies and
testing are an integral
component of the research
process.
selection of pro%ects based on
soundness of proposals9
prefeasibility studies seldom
underta*en9
selection" screening and
monitoring systems
formalised9
selection of pro%ects based
on soundness of proposals9
prefeasibility studies
seldom initiated9
selection" screening and
monitoring systems
formalised but their degree
of implementation varies
greatly9
4taff no e$plicit reward system9
outstanding staff rewarded
through annual salary
e$ercise9
governed by civil service
reward system which is not
appropriate for a research
environment9
governed by civil service
reward system9
style informal operations but
discipline in purpose and
implementation9
focused research management
but degree of commitment
varies among the
organisations9
generally laisseE.faire style
of management9 wide
disparity in commitment
towards the research effort9
70