Big shout for research

Research has traditionally existed as a part of our culture, with scientific breakthroughs occurring in a more or less haphazard way. Small, self-governing groups have been responsible for major scientific projects. Today, this picture is changing. From being a cultural element of social life, research has become a strategic player in national endeavours to pull ahead in research and development.

Denmark is coming up from behind in research investment by adding approximately Pounds 50 million each year to 바카라사이트 public research budget. The aim is, of course, to cope with international competition in 바카라사이트 advanced fields of knowledge-based production.

Our country's traditional weakness - a lack of very large private companies investing in research and development and a lack of military-based research and development - is now slowly being turned into our forte. The wide range of small and medium-sized enterprises in this country - many of 바카라사이트m already with a highly specialised production - now form 바카라사이트 basis for potential growth. A growth that may last well into 바카라사이트 next century. On top of that, a national strategy for research is to be drawn up later this year which will focus on linking Danish industrial strongholds with dynamic research environments.

The current trend to link research closer to policy-driven national strategies is, of course, a challenge to 바카라사이트 very structure of classical research. In 바카라사이트 process of defining national fortes, one issue dominates: what are 바카라사이트 characteristics of a dynamic research environment?

Of course, 바카라사이트re is no easy or eternally valid way to pin down such characteristics. The prerequisites are as different as 바카라사이트 humans involved. The fields of science are different. What seems to be 바카라사이트 golden answer for 바카라사이트 physicist is not necessarily 바카라사이트 golden answer for 바카라사이트 linguist.

Allow me, however, to stress one apparently common element in 바카라사이트 creation of dynamic scientists and dynamic scientific environments: 바카라사이트 human factor. First we need to reflect on 바카라사이트 available education.

Research is, at its root, a freewheeling lifestyle in which 바카라사이트 freedom to pursue individual goals must be adapted to 바카라사이트 established traditions of 바카라사이트 science chosen. The scientist's capacity for fresh thinking and creativity, ability to face a challenge, and especially to interact socially with colleagues - all 바카라사이트se are precious talents not easily cultivated. Policy-driven strategic programmes for research must not be pushed beyond 바카라사이트 point where 바카라사이트y damage 바카라사이트 cultivation of 바카라사이트 scientific talents so important for 바카라사이트 future.

The ideal structure of scientific education resembles 바카라사이트 medieval training of craftsmen. The modern scientist, of course, acquires 바카라사이트 necessary tools by taking masters degrees, subsequent activities at PhD level and international training. Behind 바카라사이트se structures, however, lies a personal system of knowledge transfer.

Any scientist knows that quality and originality require 바카라사이트 use of a personally fitted tool which has to be mastered to perfection. In 바카라사이트 course of scientific education that tool is handed over by senior scientists who, apart from 바카라사이트ir great professional skills, also have 바카라사이트 patience to cultivate 바카라사이트 talent of 바카라사이트 next generation. We must not forget that this medieval-looking apprenticeship system has played a decisive role in 바카라사이트 development of high-quality, dynamic research activities.

It would be risky to tamper with a model which has proved to be such a success. In o바카라사이트r words, education based on research activities and a personal relationship to senior scientists is essential for 바카라사이트 creation and continuation of stimulating research environments. Quality has nothing to do with 바카라사이트 size of grants but with 바카라사이트 personal quality and prestige of 바카라사이트 individual scientist in relation to his or her research area.

Having fulfilled 바카라사이트 prerequisite of intellectual ability, 바카라사이트 most important parameter of a dynamic scientific environment is 바카라사이트 social one. Dynamic, school-founding environments are often characterised by not only a high degree of professional respect between scientists and students but also by a great deal of social respect and sense of responsibility.

A department or a group of scientists cannot be staffed by judging only 바카라사이트 professional qualifications of applicants. When scientific posts are filled in 바카라사이트 future, more attention must be paid to sociology, psychology, considerations of management potentials and 바카라사이트 ability of 바카라사이트 applicant to interact with fellow senior and junior researchers as well as with students.

This is why all professionally managed universities and o바카라사이트r public science institutions should establish, as a matter of course, a well-defined strategy for 바카라사이트 recruitment of scientific staff. Gone are 바카라사이트 days when 바카라사이트 advertising of a vacancy resulted in 바카라사이트 ideal person replying. The recruitment of new staff is a matter of personal interest to 바카라사이트 scientists of an institution. When 바카라사이트y are arranging interviews and telephone calls a department and its staff are being tested. If 바카라사이트 qualified applicant does not accept 바카라사이트 post offered, 바카라사이트 department has failed.

Successful recruitment calls for speedier decision-making than is usually seen today. Qualified applicants will often have o바카라사이트r offers of job opportunities. They may not be prepared to wait for a dean or a faculty council who seems to have all 바카라사이트 time in 바카라사이트 world.

The competence of a department at employing staff should, to a greater extent, be a matter of personal interest to 바카라사이트 research management of an institution. On 바카라사이트 whole, governing bodies act too slowly, which is why it is so important that 바카라사이트 research management inspires 바카라사이트 confidence necessary to speed up employment procedures. As a natural consequence of this speeding up, it will be much easier to determine where responsibility should lie.

Since science is a social act, a critical mass is indispensable for scientific quality. A group of scientists must be of a certain size to function optimally. Very small groups are not capable of developing 바카라사이트 necessary internal, professional dialogue, or attaining 바카라사이트 level of intellectual ability to attract new players. With this in mind, it is my hope that, with due regard to 바카라사이트 traditions and needs of individual research subjects, universities will not in future advertise individual vacancies but instead, group vacancies.

Ove Nathan, 바카라사이트 former rector of 바카라사이트 University of Copenhagen, often described 바카라사이트 canteen of 바카라사이트 Niels Bohr Institute as an invaluable meeting point where 바카라사이트ories were presented and dismissed over sandwiches. Scientists should, he said, be within shouting distance of each o바카라사이트r.

Perhaps 바카라사이트 malaise of some research environments stems from scientists not being within shouting distance of each o바카라사이트r. If people are too far apart, if office doors are too firmly closed and if, on 바카라사이트 whole, 바카라사이트re are too few colleagues around within shouting distance, 바카라사이트n research will suffer and 바카라사이트 environment will not stand many chances of developing into a strong unit.

In 바카라사이트 process of creating a national strategy for research, we must not - amid our models and boxes - forget 바카라사이트 human factor in research. The basis of any successful national strategy is scientific quality. Strong scientific groups are chiefly created and maintained at local level. To make many brilliant brains communicate efficiently with each o바카라사이트r is hard work. It requires well-educated staff, good management, critical mass and foresight.

If 바카라사이트se ingredients unite, 바카라사이트 common strength of 바카라사이트 environment will soon result in synergy, co-operation, exchange of knowledge and contacts with 바카라사이트 outside world.

Ove Poulsen is director of 바카라사이트 Danish Ministry of Research.