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" From: " benchmark, Reston, VA " (Benchmark) Subject: 27August1996 Benchmark Note X-Mailer: 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