Archives
Editorial
Mark Dodgson
Professor; Director, Technology and Innovation Management Centre, University of Queensland Business School, St Lucia QLD
Article Text
Korea has become a model of reform in the wake of the Asian economic crisis of 1997. Some months ago, r&D Enterprise - Asia Pacific published a preliminary economic analysis of the effect of the crisis on Korean R&D. This issue of REAP contributes to the development of the model by providing a two-part investigation of the impact of the crisis and progress made in reform since the crisis.
The first article, by Taeyoung Shin, describes the methodology and results of a study of how Korean R&D was affected by the crisis. The study, undertaken by STEPI (Science & Technology Policy Institute, in Seoul), provides a clear indication of the reduction in investment in mainstream R&D undertaken, evident among other developments in the loss of 4,500 R&D jobs.
The second article, by Professor Linsu Kim, one of the APEC region's best-known science and technology analysts, looks at how reform has affected the government, industrial, financial and educational infrastructure of Korea. Aided by a culture that emphasizes a strong work ethic, Korea's much-lamented 'meltdown' may well have been a blessing in disguise by forcing change on outmoded institutions. For example, Professor Kim points to the encouraging emergence of small technology-based firms, many launched by the 4,500 scientists and engineers laid off by the chaebols, Korea's largest firms.
The critical importance of motivating high performers in the research environment is a subject which receives too little attention. Paul Nesbit has provided an article in this issue which demonstrates the value to technology-based enterprises of training supervisors before performance evaluations are undertaken.
The remainder of this issue is devoted to case studies, applicable to virtually any technology-based organizations, which address some of the knotty problems of research commercialization. If there is any doubt of the heroic powers of perseverance required of some technology transfer professionals, Stanford University's Jon Sandelin has provided a 30+ year-long saga of the challenges of commercializing Ultra High Carbon Steels that will lay those doubts to rest. Sandelin's description of the barriers to adoption of 'disruptive technologies' by established industries has important implications for how technology developers should target potential partners and what must be done to help them limit the risks of investing in such innovative technologies.
Useful conference and book reviews provide insights on how to plan for and develop a team to manage the IPO process; they also offer some good tips on assessing the value of, market for, and commercial partners for, new technologies.
eContent Home
