By wcrdadmin on Thu, 01/28/2010 - 20:25
Competition in areas of great uncertainty gives the interplay and challenges needed for each idea to get honed to its greatest potential... Design Principles:
Build competition into the science and into the funding of science (i.e., into most transactions) Competitive scoring is based on effectiveness, not on quantity or style. Scoring is by an independent agency. Build safeguards against individual hyper-competitive behaviors (see Knowing-Doing).
Discussion:
Expand all | Collapse all This is perhaps the greatest of the fundamentals, reflecting the competitive nature of industry itself
We mimic competition in our internal transactions to achieve internally the same benefits enjoyed by society externally. Competition is often a prerequisite for other behavior fundamentals+ + +
This is an internal competition for ideas, for funding, for position and for advancement
Tactically we want each of our researchers defending their own ideas in a robust competition, so the best ideas survive. Strategically we want each team to compete for funding based on the commercial attractiveness of their R&D pursuit.
We cooperate to the extent that is needed to ensure a level playing field, and to avoid the emergence of anti-competitive behaviors (e.g., collusion)
Innovative R&D is often not a matter of size – cooperation extends within small teams responsible for individual R&D pursuits. Competition is for everyone else.
Quotes:
If I only have one or two investments the researchers can blow smoke in my eyes. I have no way of really knowing as an outsider whether or not the technology merits further infusions of cash. On the other hand, if I have a half-dozen or more similar investments it becomes very easy for me to see who's blowing smoke and who's really smokin' – Pharmaceutical Industry Venture Capitalist (2007). Personal Communication
References:
Further Reading
