27August1996 Benchmark Note

Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 11:03:03 -0400
Message-Id: <199608271503.LAA01074@igsrsparc4.er.usgs.GOV>
X-Sender: pmalam@opsmail.er.usgs.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: "USGS Employees"<distribution>
From: " benchmark,  Reston, VA "<benchmrk@igsrsparc4.er.usgs.GOV> (Benchmark)
Subject: 27August1996 Benchmark Note
X-Mailer: <PC Eudora Version 2.0>

If you wish to send e-mail to me or my immediate staff, 
please use one of the following addresses:

SMTP:              BENCHMRK@USGS.GOV
Groupwise:       INTERNET:BENCHMRK@USGS.GOV
Banyan Vines:  BENCHMRK
CCMail:            SMTP_MAIL BENCHMRK@USGS.GOV

Supervisors, please share this message with employees without 
access to e-mail.

===============================================

This issue of Benchmark Notes provides another approach to
communication across our bureau, the incorporation of an invited
guest editorial.  Over the next year or so, I plan to ask each of
our Policy Council members in turn to share some of their
thoughts and philosophical views through this forum.  They have
been diligently doing so within the general confines of their own
organizational units, but many of the matters with which they
deal are not division-specific.  Further, their participation
here will provide those of you in one part of the Geological
Survey with better informed insights into the values and beliefs
of another unit.  This approach is part of my continuing effort
to erase the artificial and sometimes programmatically limiting
walls that separate the major divisions of our organization and
increase the level of understanding and communication within the
USGS.

These "guest appearances" begin with thoughts from our Chief
Hydrologist, Bob Hirsch.  The Water Resources Division has a long
and successful history of balancing vital research and
interpretive studies with equally vital monitoring and data
collection, along with meeting the demands of a highly regarded
Federal-State cooperative program.  WRD approaches these program
components in proportions and in a manner that differ from those
of our other divisions.  I hope that many of you in the science
and technology arena of our organization will find his arguments
compelling.  They mirror my own.  His basic thesis is one that
finds much agreement within the Policy Council.  The words that
follow, then, are those of Bob Hirsch.

Guest Editorial by Bob Hirsch, Chief Hydrologist

     "There is much debate today about the inherent value of
     diversity in its many forms.  I believe there is one kind of
     diversity that is particularly important to the vitality and
     continued success of the USGS, and that is the diversity of
     the mechanisms that drive our program activities.  To
     maintain a vital program, I believe that we need activities
     that are driven in three distinctly different ways:   some
     that are centrally managed, some that are customer-driven,
     and some that are driven by the scientific investigators
     themselves.  Let me explain what I mean by each of these and
     describe the special value they bring.

     "Centrally managed programs draw on one of the most
     significant strengths of the USGS, our national scope.  We
     have a workforce that spans the entire United States, which
     can be mobilized to collect and analyze earth science data
     and produce uniform products in a manner that no one else
     can.  We do this by our own data collection efforts and by
     working with others to assemble and quality-assure data that
     they collect.  These national data bases cover a wide range
     of topics, including mineral resources, coal, oil, water
     quantity and quality, land use, water use, topography,
     biological populations, and cultural features, to name just
     a few.  These data sets have particular value to society
     because they are collected in a manner that is consistent
     nationwide, and they are easily accessible to all. Users who
     want a particular type of data can come to one central place
     rather than, say, 50 different data sets if the information
     were managed on a state-by-state basis.  The data are of
     known quality and are untainted by the perception of bias as
     might arise if the agency collecting them were a
     development, protection, or regulatory agency. 

     "In addition to collecting and maintaining these valuable
     data, the USGS conducts some highly important national
     interpretive studies such as the National Oil and Gas
     Assessment and the National Water-Quality Assessment
     Program.  These national efforts, based on national data and
     knowledge, position the USGS to provide analyses that are
     vital to the development of national policies governing the
     use and protection of our natural resources.  No university
     or collection of universities, no State agency or agencies,
     and no management or regulatory agency can accomplish what
     we can in these areas.  When the call for devolution of
     Federal responsibility is sounded, it is these centrally
     managed national programs that carry the day in the
     philosophical debate over the role of a federal earth
     science agency. 

     "In contrast to these centrally managed programs, our
     customer-driven activities are characteristically smaller in
     scope.  They are activities that are undertaken to provide
     information needed by other agencies (Federal, State, or
     local).  They are typically, but not always, conducted on a
     fully or partially reimbursable basis.  Some of the work we
     do for other bureaus in the Department of the Interior is
     not reimbursed because, as a science bureau within the
     Department (soon the only science bureau there), we are
     obligated and expected to support some of their needs with
     our own appropriated dollars.  These efforts may involve
     collection of data, preparation of maps, interpretations
     that are needed for wise resource management by the customer
     agency, or even research related to the other agency's
     mission.  Given that we have our own mission and our own
     appropriated funds, why should we engage in this kind of
     customer-driven reimbursable work?  There are three reasons.

     "First, it enables us to increase the amount of work we can
     do in support of our fundamental mission.  The first litmus
     test for reimbursable work is that it should be compatible
     with and advance our mission and extend our data sets or
     knowledge about the Nation's resources.  Given our mission
     and our expertise, it is important that we do MORE than
     simply follow the wishes of our customers as they express
     them; we must rather work with these customers and help
     shape their immediate need into a project of broader
     regional or even national applicability.  Thus we must be
     good listeners, creative thinkers, and scientific leaders,
     and we must show flexibility in developing and executing
     projects that meet their needs while also satisfying our own
     mission objectives.  We must also make a continuing effort
     to bring together and capitalize on the results of these
     local studies, to learn more about the resources of the
     Nation as a whole.  To quote our second Director, John
     Wesley Powell,   The results of local investigation are of
     general value to many districts, and a knowledge of one
     locality must be derived from an examination of many other
     locations.'

     "Second, engaging in customer-driven work is critical to
     maintaining our relevance.  Congress and the senior
     leadership of the executive branch who make the decisions
     about appropriations for the USGS are only incidental users
     of our products.  Justifying our programs to them is not a
     real test of relevance.  The real users are often those in
     the trenches making the routine decisions within agencies at
     all levels of government.  When we go out to these agencies
     to discuss how we can help them, we quickly learn what is,
     and is not, relevant to them.  In fact, such interactions
     with other agencies have been vital to showing USGS managers
     what the new and emerging resource management issues are. 
     These discussions not only lead to highly relevant
     reimbursable projects but also develop an understanding of
     the real needs for earth-science information.  They can
     guide us in the development of new, more user-friendly
     products. It is this knowledge that can, and should, help us
     formulate new directions for our centrally-managed programs
     described above.  In short, talking to and negotiating with
     real customers keeps us mindful of relevance.

     "Third, customer-driven work is important to our ability to
     build and maintain a constituency that will support our
     entire program.  Agencies that have determined that they
     should allocate some portion of their funds for work done by
     the USGS have thought through some of the reasons why it is
     useful for the nation to have a USGS.  The leaders of these
     agencies know better than anyone why the Nation needs a USGS
     and are generally not shy about expressing it.  The $95
     million that we receive from over 1100 state and local
     agencies, and $193 million that we receive from other
     Federal agencies are one measure (but not the only measure)
     of our value to the Nation.

     "Finally, the scientific understanding mechanism for program
     direction in the USGS is what I like to call
      investigator-driven research.'  Others may call this
      curiosity-driven research,' but I choose my term to make a
     particular point.   Curiosity-driven research' sounds
     aimless and puts no emphasis on the question of who is doing
     the research or why.  A sound program of investigator-driven
     research demands that management take great care in
     identifying the researchers who will lead these efforts --
     investigators who have proven records of meaningful and
     relevant accomplishment, who have a thorough understanding
     of the Survey's mission, and who are in direct touch with
     other activities (the centrally managed and
     customer-driven), so that the research they conduct will be
     able to feed back results and capabilities that are relevant
     to and enhance these activities for the future.  Managers
     have to decide how much of this research to fund, carefully
     select the project leaders who will conduct it, provide the
     encouragement and resources to promote success, and then
     diligently evaluate their progress to make sure that they
     are continuing to produce products that have impact and are
     relevant to the mission of the wider USGS.  Managers also
     have to recognize the risk associated with such research and
     accept that some of the best science can take years to lead
     to a significant product.

     "Jim Cloern, a USGS scientist from Menlo Park, recently sent
     me a reprint of an excellent summary paper he just had
     published.  The paper covered the results of almost 30 years
     of multidisciplinary investigator-driven research.  Jim's
     cover letter to me captured the idea of our role in
     investigator-driven research very well.  He said, in part,
      If we abandon the complex . . . . problems, and especially
     those not easily associated with a well-defined client or a
     discrete product, then who will pursue these critical
     problems?  The kind of earth science which we do best is
     rarely seen in other Federal agencies, and is nearly
     impossible to conduct with the modes through which the
     Nation funds academic research.  I believe we have a
     responsibility to utilize our unique research expertise to
     continue pursuit of problems that are national-global in
     scope, require patience and sustained effort, and integrate
     the talents of our hydrologists, geographers, geochemists,
     geologists and biologists.'

     "The future viability of the USGS depends on a continuing
     investment in investigator-driven research to develop new
     understanding and new tools to solve the earth science
     problems of tomorrow. Our ability to respond to emerging
     issues and to develop technologies and programs depends on
     having some scientists in our midst who are world leaders in
     their fields.

What Bob Hirsch has just described has served the Water Resources
Division well for several decades now and is a reasonable and
effective working model for others to consider. It represents a
diverse program portfolio approach that has enabled the division
to weather periods of uncertainty through making adjustments in
the relative proportions of the three fundamental components of
their overall program.

Because times are going to continue to change further, however,
we all must make adjustments in the way we address our tasks.
This belief was the basis for two important strategic actions put
forward recently by our Strat Team:
(1) "Encourage other organizations to collect data to USGS
standards, with the purpose of substantially supplementing 
USGS-maintained data bases"; and 
(2) "To reduce potential for conflict with the private sector,
focus data collection and interpretive studies in areas where the
Federal role is clearly defined."

Both of these strategic actions reinforce and strengthen the
bureau's role as the earth system information provider for the
Nation. 

Closely related to these proposals is a set of thoughts with
which I close this note. They were taken from a recent report
entitled "Endless Frontier, Limited Resources."  It was prepared
by our Nation's Council on Competitiveness, which urges us to
link arms with the academic and industrial sectors, suggesting:
"R&D partnerships hold the key to meeting the challenge of
transition that our nation now faces.... The common thread that
runs throughout all partnerships is the joint commitment of
participants ... to share costs, resources, and experiences and
to draw strength from each other by leveraging capabilities.
Government, industry and academia must find new ways of working
in concert to develop and carry out the Nation's research
agenda.... Each sector must adapt its mission and performance to
new realities, set clear ... spending priorities, determine and
develop core competencies, and cultivate a culture of
cooperation.... Federal research should be refocused and adjusted
to today's missions and budget environment..."

As Director in this new time in which the Geological Survey no
longer will have adequate fiscal resources to "do it all
ourselves" and must, therefore, utilize the findings,
measurements, and interpretations of others to support our own, I
could not agree more.

Gordie