STATEMENT OF ROBERT NELSON, DIRECTOR, PUBLIC SECTOR PROJECTS, RAYTHEON CO., LEXINGTON, MASS. Mr. NELSON. Thank you, sir. I appreciate being invited. It is a subject of great personal interest. It is also a very broad subject, but today, I will just touch on two aspects in which I think both acts will be very helpful, and I hope you will find these comments pertinent. I am Robert E. Nelson of the Raytheon Co., in Lexington, Mass., where I have been concerned with problems of the public sector and a private industry approach to them. The references I will make to Raytheon are factual but the opinions expressed are mine as an individual. Raytheon is one of the aerospace companies that has contributed to the development of systems technology for defense and space programs. For some time now Raytheon has been involved in the transfer of these skills to the public sector and currently is conducting programs in educational systems, natural resource systems, transportation systems and, as a part of a major program for a foreign government, building communities including housing, schools, roads, sanitation, and water resources plus literacy and vocational training. The applicability of the systems analysis and systems engineering tools to public problems has been demonstrated. The problems themselves are increasing in number and complexity. It is important simultaneously to increase the number of people in government at all levels, in universities and in industry who can administer and employ these techniques. Further, it is important to provide a focus on these experiences so that the efficiency of these management techniques can be improved and their usefulness extended. The Scientific Manpower Utilization Act will contribute to the former and the National Commission on Public Management will provide the latter. I would like to comment briefly on, one, a mechanism for providing immediate and effective training in the systems technology, two, an illustration of an impediment to solutions to public problems that could be overcome by using systems techniques under these acts, and, three, your specific questions. Training. Qualified personnel are limited in number and continue to be employed primarily on problems of defense and space. Happily, there is enthusiasm on the part of a large percentage of these systems people for transferring their skills to public sector problems. Many are spending their own space moments increasing their familiarity with the social sciences and in analyzing related problems. The question of creating an effective transfer of these skilled people to public problems remains. The universities have an important challenge to train both the new practitioners as well as the customers or end-users of the systems techniques. Several such programs are now being organized but it will take many years to produce the numbers of people needed. We have, however, already been introduced to an effective mechanism for training on the job a large number of people in this field. Consider the California systems studies with which you are familiar. Four studies were accomplished by four separate companies. But 50 companies competed for these study contracts. What of the other 46? The fact is that each company assigned its best talent and developed its approach on the subjects of crime, information, transportation, or waste systems. Each prepared and submitted its proposal. Where a company lacked the requisite skills, it teamed with others and employed consultants. As a result, the knowledge of the subject and the analysis of the applicability of the systems technology to these problems now exists in a reservoir of 50 companies, not just four. There is an additional advantage. Simultaneosuly, the State administrators had the opportunity to review and evaluate the best ideas of the 50 companies and in the process to increase their understanding of the problems and their understanding of the administration of these new techniques for their solution. This kind of on-the-job training is meaningful and lasting. It is problem oriented. The experience gained is real. On a larger scale the movement of experienced people from an initial program at a State level to other State, regional, and local agencies can be expected similar to the progression of experienced people from Rand to the Department of Defense and now to other Federal agencies. As the capability expands so will the demand for its use. The Scientific Manpower Utilization Act could initiate and fund such programs. IMPEDIMENTS TO THE SYSTEMS APPROACH There are certain practical impediments to the use of systems analysis and systems engineering. Some are traditional and some are legal. Studies under these proposed acts could identify these impediments and suggest solutions. For example, there is some evidence that technical innovation in building construction is limited by the existence of restrictive standards and codes. Certain community rehabilitation objectives might be achieved sooner at less cost if these innovations were available. But it may be necessary to demonstrate the value of these innovations in practice before the codes can be changed. The answer might be found in a model project under a Department of Defense construction program which would have the additional purpose of examining objectives of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and precipitating innovations that would help simplify the urban rehabilitation problem. This is a complex system problem involving interagency cooperation and congressional appropriation. It might be accomplished under the proposed Commission. RESPONSE TO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS 1. To the question of what is being done in the field, the answer is clearly a great deal. Without adding to the list you must have already, let me say that Raytheon is currently working on several additional uses of the systems approach for public problems and, if Raytheon is any reflection of industry at large, a great deal of planning for additional applications by industry are in process. 2. With respect to the role and relationships of Federal, State, regional and local government, universities, and industry, there is reason for some optimism. The willingness of many Federal and State agencies to discuss systems approaches has increased dramatically in the last 2 years. Further, analyses required to support the program, planning, budget systems should accelerate this process. Interagency and jurisdictional cooperation will be the key to success for many systems programs in the near future. In addition they will depend on the development of sufficient skilled systems people, the selection of appropriate projects, and funding. 3. The proposed Commission, as a new institution, would be a wise move at this stage to provide a focus for the evaluation of prospective programs and to assemble data on actual experience. Other ad hoc institutions or authorities may be practical for large interdisciplinary projects in the future. The public problems that concern us are complex and mounting. Every technological and management tool that will help bring these problems under control should be developed along with the organizations and personnel to use them. The Scientific Manpower Utilization Act and the National Commission on Public Management are important steps in this direction. Senator NELSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Nelson. You state that Raytheon is currently working on several uses of the systems approach for public problems. Is this just in-house research, or do you have some clients for whom you are doing this? Mr. NELSON. These are in-house research projects. In the fields of pollution, water resources, urban development, and additional applications of the educational systems concept. Senator NELSON. Have you done, are you doing any work on a contract basis on any social problems in the field of using systems analysis with a client? Mr. NELSON. On a contract basis, we are doing a considerable amount of work for several municipalities in educational systems, where we are relating curriculums development, the media required to meet the curriculums, and communications techniques, and there are several programs of that nature in process. Just to run through others quickly: In transportation, we have a contract presently with the Federal Government in which we are teamed with a university, and working on the evaluation, the improvement, and subsequent design of a traffic control system to be employed in the city of Detroit. The contract is with the Highway Research Board. In the major community building field, we have a contract with the Government, directly with the Government of Saudi Arabia. The basic contract is to provide a defense, military defensive system for the Government, but simultaneously, we are developing the communities. Senator NELSON. What are you doing in the water resource planning? Mr. NELSON. In water resource planning, we are particularly interested in the Merrimac River problem, up in New England, that affects Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and the interests of both States, and the Federal agency in that problem. Our work, as I say, has been in-house, to get up to speed for participating in such a program. Senator NELSON. You aren't working on any contract basis? Mr. NELSON. No contract basis in that instance. Senator NELSON. What kind of work are you doing in resource planning? Is it just as respecting this watershed, or water resource use in general? Mr. NELSON. With respect to resource planning, we have two subsidiaries who are pretty thoroughly involved in the analysis, land-use analysis problems, and in the exploration of mineral and oil resources. We are working with those subsidiaries to improve or to expand on their capabilities, to include some additional characteristics that we think a natural resources planning system should have so we are presently funded in several areas. They are the routine areas that those companies have been involved with in the past. We are now building on them, for additional applications that we can see of value, particularly AID programs, for example. Senator NELSON. If some legislation were to pass, such as the pending bills before this committee, do you have any ideas about what would be the best approach in funding, what kind of problems, what kind of programs? In other words, if the Congress were to decide that it was worthwhile to make some appropriations for the purposes of education, for the purposes of acting with some specific social problems, regional or city or State, do you have any idea, any suggestions as to what might be the most useful approach? Mr. NELSON. I haven't thought about them in terms of specific priorities, but the familiar ones of education, pollution control, transportation, are the ones that I think would be most meaningful to us, the ones that I think would be most meaningful to be started on in the near future, because there is a great deal that currently can be done in those areas. There is much that can be done, without bringing in any particular new technology, working with the existing capabilities, but organizing them differently. For example, in the pollution field, I feel that whether or not the Federal Government takes initiative, communities will find it necessary to band together to do things in their own best interests, because that way they can bring more effective financial capability and management capability to the problems, but I think the existence of these bills would greatly accelerate that process, and would certainly be beneficial. Senator NELSON. Well, I want to thank you very much for your fine contribution, and for taking the time to come here this morning. Mr. NELSON. Thank you. Senator NELSON. Was your company one of the contractors in the California contract? Mr. NELSON. No, it was not; nor a bidder. Senator NELSON. Thank you. That will conclude the hearings until tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. (Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m. the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 9:30 a.m., Thursday, March 30, 1967.) SCIENTIFIC MANPOWER UTILIZATION, 1967 THURSDAY, MARCH 30, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENTIFIC MANPOWER UTILIZATION OF THE COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, Washington, D.C. The special subcommittee met at 9:45 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 4232, Senate Office Building, Senator Gaylord Nelson (chairman of the special subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator Nelson (presiding) and Senator Javits. Committee staff member present: Robert Patricelli, minority counsel to the special subcommittee. Senator NELSON. We will open the hearings today on S. 430, the Scientific Manpower Utilization Act of 1967, and S. 467, a bill to create a National Commission on Public Management. Our first witness is Michael Michaelis, manager of the Washington office of Arthur D. Little, Inc. We are pleased you took time to come this morning and give us the benefit of your views. Your statement will be printed in full in the record. You may present it any way you see fit, extemporaneously, or by reading it, or however you like. STATEMENT OF MICHAEL MICHAELIS, MANAGER, WASHINGTON OFFICE, ARTHUR D. LITTLE, INC., WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. MICHAELIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I welcome this opportunity to join in your discussion of the "systems approach" to problems of public policy. Five years ago I had the privilege of serving as Executive Director of the White House Panel on Civilian Technology. I recall that we then recommended to the President that an Inter-Agency Task Force be created, and that it use the systems methods to guide Government actions in pursuit of social and technical innovation. At that time, the issue that appeared to me to be the most crucial was how to increase the rate of utilization of new knowledge, so as better to satisfy functional needs of our society, such as transportation, housing and construction, education, and health care. That was 5 years ago; the issue today, it seems to me, is still the same. We are still searching for ways by which we can bring to bear the rapidly growing fruits of science and technology on the problems of everyday living. I continue to believe as I did 5 years ago that the systems approach can provide a powerful stimulus to social and technical innovation. I also believe, and submit for your consideration, that a national council-representative of Government, industry, labor and |