Mr. WEILER. The CIC can call on each of the 11 universities for staff, and there are precedents for having done this. There are a number of projects which are interuniversity in nature, and this is a means of pooling the academic resources of the 11 universities to accomplish an objective.

Now, each one has to be approached individually on an ad hoc basis. We are not set up to do this, but it can be done.

Senator NELSON. In the course of the hearings, I think the most common theme running through the testimony was that there is a shortage of trained systems analysts and the shortage of people who know how to use the systems concept. We raised the question in previous hearings of how you train a systems analyst, where are they being trained, what is a systems engineer or analyst, what courses are there in the country in the academic institutions and elsewhere where systems engineers are being trained?

The other aspect, the question of where you conduct some programs to train the people ought to be using that-that is, the State budget directors, city budget directors, heads of planning sections of your State government, or city governments, people who are not aware of the concept, or if so, vaguely aware, who ought to have a 1-month course or a 2-month course in what the concept is and how you would use it.

These two questions were raised several times and previous testimony indicated there ought to be more educational programs in the country to train analysts and there ought to be some kind of programs in the country to give some education to the people who ought to be using these analysts.

My query is, what expertise is there in the 11 midwestern universities and, too, is the personnel present to establish a program of giving 1-week training to heads of departments, 2 or 4 or 6 weeks' training to deputy assistants to heads of departments on systems engineering?

Mr. ALPERT. I would be less than candid if I were to say that each of our universities could just start in and give educational programs across the board to various kinds of units that need such education.

Typically, the characteristics of those people in our universities that are well equipped and sophisticated in systems analysis are those people who are truly problem oriented.

For example, in some of our engineering departments that tackle large scale, real problems in the real world, you find people that can educate and are educating a variety of people, including industrial people, in the use of systems analysis.

An example is our civil engineering department, which is providing a computer-based system. It is an educational system for small contractors throughout the State of Illinois, and teaches them the various aspects of systems approach, in the design of their building and the scheduling of their workers and so on.

Typically, one needs problem-oriented people, and problem-oriented areas in the university, and as many witnesses have testified, our typical professor is discipline oriented.

The manner in which we can cross disciplines and get an approach to real problems is one of the things we are addressing ourselves to collectively to see what is the best way of getting more problemoriented people in the urban problem areas and in planning areas.

Senator NELSON. Are there, in any of the institutions, specific programs aimed at teaching people to become systems analysts?

Mr. WEILER. I do not know of any. They are usually the byproduct of other work, and as Dean Alpert has said, unfortunately for this purpose, universities are organized around disciplines, and the disciplines do not constitute the optimal kind of organization for producing these kinds of people.

Senator NELSON. But as to the second part of my question, if the 11 universities were requested to set up a program to train budget analysis in a 1-month or 6-weeks or 8-weeks program, would you have personnel within the universities to set up such a program and run it?

Mr. WEILER. That is a difficult question. I think we could find a limited number of people in the 11 universities who could do this. To be very candid, it would not be a very large number. This is an area that has not been well developed, even in these institutions, which are service oriented.

The land grant universities, the Midwest universities, have probably had more concern with service to their communities and their constituencies than most universities, but we have not learned to do this job for the urban society, and this is of course one of the advantages of the commission here. It would enable these universities to get geared up to do what I think they must do if they are going to fulfill their function.

Would you like to add to that?

Mr. ALPERT. Yes. It seems to me that support in the systems analysis area would best be done with a problem orientation rather than the technique orientation. I think that one of the characteristics of the Rand type of organization is not that they stressed so much the development of the technique, which was necessary, but it was a problem orientation that developed systems analysis. I think that would characterize a requirement. An interdisciplinary laboratory in a university, or an institution for public policy research would be one that tackled problems by bringing together teams of people to work on problems, and that is characteristically the way education gets done. People transmit to students and to others the kind of culture they have built up themselves.

Senator NELSON. I would agree with that. Would you apply that, however, to the case where you are simply trying to take somebody from one of the governmental bureaus and give them a brief introduction to what the concept is all about?

Mr. ALPERT. I think we could do that, and in our university it would be the institute for government, which now works with many of the smaller bureaucracies in the State of Illinois, to help in such ways. Again, it is a problem-oriented organization, and as the name implies, oriented toward governmental problems.

Senator NELSON. But you could take somebody, then, and give them a 6 months' course and introduce them to the concept of systems engineering.

Mr. ALPERT. We must be candid and say we would have to tool up for that. Our university would have to turn to this task, with the kind of interest and activity that they have turned to some of the other problems posed by the National Government.

In the case of space science, when NASA came along we did generate a number of groups in the university with a very great interest in the physics and in the science of space. I think that an orientation toward some of the problems which can be tackled in this area would represent the kind of challenge that would be needed to build up a greater capability in this area.

It should be cautioned that just to teach the techniques that are involved, when you take the systems approach and break it down into the separate techniques as such, they really require the problem in order to make them cohesive, and to make them meaningful in a short course.

Senator NELSON. I would agree with that. Most of the problems that budget analysts or a planner or somebody on management's side have been tackled some place in a systems form—and I suppose if you would run a program to teach them something about it you would take the area in which they are working where they have problems to show how those problems have been tackled elsewhere.

That is what I am trying to get at. Is there any place for you to train these people? This does not make systems analysts out of them, of course, but the problem is they do not even understand that such approaches to problems exist. As decisionmakers a necessary part of their education is to understand this approach to problems.

Mr. ALPERT. Of course, if the key decisionmakers in the governmental process just send down some of the people who have been in the bureaucracy 10 years or 20 years, to take a short course on the use of computers or the like, without having himself imposed some goals for his office, for example, that by such and such a date we will transfer into a program budgeting system-and we will do it either by getting some help from outside or by asking you to learn enough about it. I think one would then have the kind of incentive to really make a new system apply.

I think the decisionmaker, rather than the technician, is a key element in the process.

I admit, as I said, that you need sophistication at the technical level as well as within the decisionmaker's office.

Senator NELSON. I am assuming that the decisionmaker would have to be motivated to send the technician in the first place. I would assume further that it probably would be valuable to run a 1-week course for the budget director, for example.

Mr. ALPERT. Right.

Senator NELSON. Or whoever studies the problem of space utilization, and if he is motivated to come in the first place, at the end of the first week if the course is any good he is motivated to use the concept, and following that there is some understanding on his own part and he sends to the course whoever the technical people might be.

That is the kind of program, at least, that I have in mind, and I am trying to find out if there is any place in the United States where you could set up a program where you could give some education to the decisionmaker and subsequent to that to the technical people. Mr. WEILER. Senator Nelson, I am sure this could be done within the universities. We were in part reacting to the kind of sophisticated client problem, the problem of getting the sophisticated client prob

lem, the problem of getting the sophisticated client capable of dealing with some of the problems that now characterize the Midwest.

We will have a crescent city, starting from Madison and Milwaukee and swinging through Chicago across the northern tier of counties, across northern Indiana and including Michigan, including Cleveland and possibly Buffalo, within 20 years.

This is a whole new urban area here that just cries out for some kind of planned planning. We have masses of people who need to be moved into recreational areas both north and south. We have a transportation problem that is going to be a very, very difficult problem throughout this whole area. The kind of sophisticated client that is called for, in this case, to energize the kind of study that needs to be made in order to do this intelligently, in order to exploit the Midwest's real potential-it is the kind of client that takes more than a week or two to create, and this is what we really need somehow to do in the Midwest. We also have emerging a new educational program. The space between these State universities is diminishing. With the development of television, we can have seminars in any university that are attended by people from all the other universities, and the whole problem of developing a regional educational program is a tremendous challenge, and this needs to be tackled.

We could go on. There are all kinds of problems that we are going to have to answer one way or the other within 15 and 20 years, which is a very short time.

Senator NELSON. In what you stated about the metropolitan complex in Madison, and across, Cleveland is one of the big problems, and needs some careful study.

Again, however, unless at the State level and the local level you can develop an interest and understanding of the concept, you cannot settle the big problem. You have got to start some place, and one of the places you have got to start is to educate at the local level and the State level, so that it will be understood that there are major regional problems that must be solved on a regional basis.

That is why I keep raising the question of getting some education programs started. We have got some people around the country who are prepared to analyze the biggest problems. We cannot find anybody prepared to analyze the little ones.

I think we have to build from the little ones to the big ones.

Mr. WEILER. You have a very, very fine point.

Senator NELSON. We will now take a 5-minute break.

I appreciate your taking time and your very valuable contribution. It will be helpful to us in working out legislation.

(Whereupon, a recess was taken.)

Senator NELSON. We will resume the hearings.

Our next witness is Mr. Robert Nelson, Director of Public Sector Projects, Raytheon Co., of Lexington, Mass.

Senator NELSON. Mr. Nelson, I appreciate very much your taking the time to come here and present your view today on these two pending bills.

Do you have a prepared statement?

Mr. NELSON. I do, yes, sir.

Senator NELSON. You may read it, or extemporize, or handle it in any way you see fit.