More than two centuries ago, just before the Battle of the Pyramids, Napoleon Bonaparte placed the expedition’s most valuable asset in his hands and issued his famous order, sometimes remembered as, “Arise, donkeys and scientists.” That line has echoed through the ages, suggesting that science and decisive action shape destinies. The Egyptian expedition’s scholars, Fourier, Berthollet, Monge and others played a crucial role in shaping how the campaign is remembered, even if the immediate military outcomes were mixed. Their work helped unlock new ways of understanding Egypt and its people, infusing meaning into a pivotal historical moment.
Today’s turbulent times push technology leaders, engineers, and researchers—together, the core of the R&D community—toward technological leadership as a condition of freedom and independence. Change is a constant in volatility, and current developments seem to accelerate a shift in how research is managed and organized.
The new economic reality raises two intertwined questions that will influence the survival and future growth of research programs. The first asks which initiatives should continue even as circumstances evolve, and which should be discontinued because their context has changed. Answering this requires courage and clarity from researchers and managers alike. Many projects are beloved, yet their original conditions may no longer apply, perhaps for good.
The second question asks which initiatives should be launched now because they are essential to business and national interests. This requires a careful look at present capabilities, competitive dynamics, and the long game of technology leadership.
Echoing a line from John Mandel’s Station Eleven, the idea that staying alive is not enough frames a broader view: life is about more than survival. Creativity, the pursuit of new ideas, and the advancement of knowledge give societies their direction. Even in hard times, the future matters—especially for the generations that follow. Leadership in science and technology is measured by the ability to spot opportunities and steer resources toward future gains, rather than chasing immediate fixes. Visionaries steer institutions toward a broader horizon, turning ideas into sustained progress rather than mere inquiry.
Across organizations, planning horizons have shortened and risk appetites have cooled. Does that mean abandoning long-term bets with 3- to 5-year timelines? Not at all. Breakthroughs in quantum computing, microelectronics, and synthetic biology don’t appear overnight. A well-founded, long-term proposal can lay the groundwork for a resilient future, even in markets that prize speed. In a climate where many chase quick wins, the winners are those who balance patience with practical steps and maintain a steady course for decades when necessary.
When addressing these questions, it helps to remember past teams that achieved ambitious goals despite temporary shifts in relevance. It is wise to empower teams to tackle new, significant challenges without sidelining talent. A clear team vision—what the project is, why it matters, and what will be built—motivates members and aligns effort. It may be time to consider combining efforts across corporate R&D units to tackle a large, ambitious objective that advances national technological strength. Each team brings its own strengths and expertise to the table.
The discussion weaves together engineering development, exploratory research, and applied science. History shows that fundamental discoveries often predate practical applications. Steam engines emerged long before the full understanding of thermodynamics, and theoretical insights about mass and energy eventually enabled modern engineering. The evolving relationship between science and technology now underpins fields like quantum computing, microelectronics, artificial intelligence, energy innovations for climate resilience, and synthetic biology. This synergy is central to techno-science research and its potential to drive meaningful progress.
Understanding the R&D process means recognizing both scientific and technological components and maintaining a clear sense of purpose. When the technological direction is stated but science remains abstract, the link to real work can weaken. Conversely, focusing solely on short-term, applied improvements can obscure the future benefits born from new scientific knowledge. Striking the right balance keeps research connected to tangible outcomes while remaining open to transformative discoveries.
In research, both question seeking and answer seeking matter, regardless of whether the focus is on basic science or practical applications. It is important to pursue known questions, but breakthroughs often hinge on asking new ones. The capacity to surprise cannot be scripted or engineered; it must be funded by supporting talented people and exceptional teams alongside ongoing projects. This approach gives R&D leaders the freedom to retain talent while pursuing ambitious paths. That is a central principle of an effective management model for research and development.
R&D initiatives aim for breakthroughs whose timing and beneficiaries are uncertain. Consequently, research should not become a narrow, short-term influence confined to a single company. The proposed principles help direct applied research toward industries facing critical challenges, enabling a qualitative leap toward future breakthroughs and helping avoid repeating old solutions.
In the end, the ideas expressed reflect a personal perspective and are not necessarily aligned with any editorial stance.