Vol.4 No.1 2011

35/78

Research paper : Formation of research strategy and synthetic research evaluation based on the strategy (N. Kobayashi et al.)−32−Synthesiology - English edition Vol.4 No.1 (2011) AuthorsNaoto KobayashiCompleted the doctoral course at the Graduate School of Engineering, Kyoto University in 1978. (Ph.D.) Joined the Electrotechnical Laboratory (ETL), Agency of Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) in 1978, and worked as director of Planning Division and director of Quantum Radiation Division from 1997. Director of Photonics Research Institute, AIST in 2001; vice president and director of Evaluation Department, AIST in 2003; vice president, director of Safety and Environmental Management, and director of General Affairs Headquarters in 2007. Professor of Center for Research Strategy, Waseda University since April 2009. Specialties are optical device engineering, semiconductor material engineering, quantum beam engineering, and theories of research strategy and evaluation. For this paper, built the basic concept, considered the overall strategy formation, and discussed the synthetic research evaluation.Osamu NakamuraCompleted the master’s course at the Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyushu University in 1979. Engaged in education and research as assistant professor of Oral Biochemistry, Kagoshima University Dental School. Doctor of Dentistry (Osaka University) in 1987. Visiting researcher, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.; senior researcher, Kyushu National Industrial Research Institute; deputy director and manager of Bioresource Division, Biotechnology and Food Research Institute, Fukuoka Industrial Technology Center; senior researcher, Evaluation Department, AIST; and general investigator of industrial technology, Technology Evaluation and Research Division, METI. Appointed deputy director of the Evaluation Department, AIST in 2007, and was involved in the evaluation of R&D management, and built human network of evaluation in Japan and abroad. Director General of the Science and Technology Promotion Bureau, Nagasaki Prefectural Government from April 2009. Specialties are biochemistry and R&D management evaluation. For this paper, contributed to build the system of synthetic research evaluation, and wrote the section on the strategy formation and evaluation of the science and technology promotion for local revitalization of Nagasaki.Kenta OoiCompleted the master’s course at the Graduate School of Science, Nagoya University in 1976. Joined the Shikoku National Industrial Research Institute in 1977, as manager and chief of Planning Division. Principal researcher of the Institute for Marine Resources and Environment, AIST in 2001. Worked as manager of Technological Policy Survey Division, Technology Information Department; coordinator for industry-academia-government collaboration, AIST Shikoku; deputy director, AIST Shikoku; principal surveyor of Industrial Technology Division, Shikoku Bureau of Economy, Trade and Industry; and deputy director of Evaluation Diepartment, Shikoku Bureau of Economy, Trade and Industry in 2008. Specialties are inorganic chemistry, marine resource engineering, and technology evaluation. For this paper, wrote the section on the research evaluation at AIST.Discussions with Reviewers1 Synthetic evaluation versus analytic evaluationQuestion (Motoyuki Akamatsu, Human Technology Research Institute, AIST)When we use the term “synthetic evaluation”, we think of “analytic evaluation” as its antonym. For example, when you break things down in elements as in Fig. 6, it seems you are doing analytical evaluation. What is the characteristic of synthetic evaluation when seen from the stance of synthetic versus analytic?Answer (Naoto Kobayashi)As you indicated, evaluation by breaking down into elements as shown in Fig. 6 can certainly be called analytic evaluation. Particularly, the elemental evaluation (progress, depth, and phase) in this paper corresponds to the analytic evaluation. For example, in the depth evaluation, the evaluation performed along novelty, originality, logical completeness, and influence is an analytical process. On the other hand, the characteristic of synthetic evaluation is to take the result of such analytical evaluation, and 1) to synthesize along the direction shown in the strategy (what did the strategy emphasize to begin with?), and 2) to form a progressive evaluation through deep discussion (here, abductive inference is important) between the evaluator and evaluated side.2 Abduction in synthetic evaluationComment (Motoyuki Akamatsu)You state that abduction is important in research strategy formation, and that abduction is necessary when selection and concentration are required in an evaluation. I see that abduction becomes most important in strategy formation. However, I don’t think there has ever been a good discussion on this subject. I imagine that the readers won’t understand how abduction or hypothesis forming is done, so I think they can understand better if you describe what kind of hypotheses are made for the strategy formation using a specific example. Also, you state that abductive inference is necessary in the evaluation for the depth of research in the Y-axis, but what do you mean specifically?Answer (Naoto Kobayashi)Thank you very much for pointing out the central tenet of this paper. The abduction or hypothesis forming needed in the strategy formation is not a factual hypothesis, but is a hypothesis of what “ought to be”. The issue depends on how to form such a hypothesis. We added the description of how abduction is actually done. We also added the description of abduction using a specific example. Also, for the evaluation of the depth of research in the Y-axis, we added the explanations in places where abductive inferences are required.3 Timing of when the evaluator should step inQuestion (Kazunori Nakamura, Biomedical Research Institute, AIST)The appraisal is important in the research evaluation based on research strategy formation, Does the evaluator need to be involved from the process of research strategy formation?

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です