Even science and technology must change

Kanyawim Kirtikara, director of the National Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (Biotec)

Science and technology budgets are often the first to be considered for cuts during slow economic periods, and this is true for government budgets as well as those in the private sector. Hence, public and private research institutions should prepare to adapt to changes and adjust to new situations. 

US President Obama preached the value of change during his presidential campaign, and after taking office warned people to brace for more hardships, saying they may need to change their ways of thinking. All of this requires a positive attitude towards change.

Personally, I believe change is a constant companion of science and technology development. Without a doubt, those research institutions that have incorporated change as part of their culture will stand a greater chance of survival during economic downturns. 

Acceptance of change only occurs when the people within an institution truly understand their original purpose, the initial conditions and the limited boundaries at any given moment in time. It is natural that in dynamic research institutions these parameters will change over time, with boundaries being more susceptible to change than original purposes and initial conditions. Complacency is the biggest enemy of change. Research institutions involved in science and technology development cannot afford to sit back and savour past accomplishments. Management and research teams must have the desire to evolve and move forward.

In today's global economy, the business sector must strive for reinvention. In most cases, the period of reinvention is every five to 10 years. Likewise, research organisations cannot ignore reinvention if they are to avoid being pushed to the side.  Reinvention helps institutions regain, or in many cases, maintain a competitive edge.  For example, in classical thinking a research institute aims only for excellence in science and technology. Currently, however, a new paradigm dictates that research excellence must be accompanied by social relevance. Funding agencies have started to demand information on predicted socio-economic impacts, as part of their requirements. In times of increased economic constraints, a research project that gives priority to economic impacts might have an edge over those that do not. However, economic and socially relevant research projects are not a pretext for dropping scientific excellence. Research institutes must embrace this change and carefully balance between excellence and relevance.

Economic downturns are also considered to be a time to form new alliances. Alliances act as multipliers for networking and expanding existing and future research projects. In addition, they can also help budgets because research partners may be able to absorb some expenses or introduce new funding opportunities. In brief, to be complacent and cherish past successes is not a prudent path in the current situation.

Dr .