Frequently, we read the news that Non-Resident Bangladeshi scientists have done this or that excellent research in this or that field or have won a prize for their invention or discovery. Though no statistics can be provided, those active in different internet-based groups of Bangladeshi will agree that there is hardly any world-class laboratory where Bangladeshi scientists are not working. Every year, an increasing number of Bangladeshi science graduates go to scientifically advanced and proficient countries, including the USA, UK, Japan, Singapore, Canada, Norway, and Korea, for PhD or postdoctoral research. At least from this increasing number, we can guess that the performance of Bangladeshi science graduates by international standards is satisfactory. This increasing trend indicates a high ability for research of Bangladeshi science graduates.
If this is the case, then why are our national research organizations’ performances not at a satisfactory level? Where are the problems?
We need to analyze and find out the reasons for poor performance and take measures accordingly. Before that, we need to know what performance is or the factors determining performance. Otherwise, we will not be able to find the real cause of such poor performance.
The equation for performance is Performance = ability X motivation.
The equation shows that the two factors are equally important for performance. Decrease or fall in anyone affects performance and the other factor. If the ability is poor or ability cannot be utilized, motivation decreases. If motivation is not enough, the ability cannot be utilized properly. In both cases, performance decreases. So, recruiting able researchers is not enough. Keeping them motivated is equally important.
Now come to the point.
What are the problems in Bangladeshi research organizations in the ability or motivation of the researchers? Is it that science graduates working in Bangladeshi laboratories are not able? Or cannot utilize their ability? Or not motivated enough to utilize their ability? Answers to these three questions are critical for improving the performance of Bangladeshi research organizations.
To answer the first question, we must keep in mind that one must have at least three first-class results in their four degrees/certificates to join national research organizations. A large number of very brilliant graduates also join these organizations. On the other hand, graduates with excellent results, good results, and below-average (with two-second class) results go abroad for higher study and then join research jobs. So, we cannot say that the average ability of the researchers in national research organizations is poor than the average ability of NRB scientists. So, the dearth of scientists in Bangladesh is not the cause of the poor performance of our national research organizations.
Then is the inability to utilize their ability the cause of poor performance? Or lack of motivation to utilize ability or improve the ability?
Yes, these are the cause of the poor performance of our national research organizations. Then comes the question, why are they not able to utilize their ability, or are they not motivated enough to utilize and improve their ability?
What are the specific reasons they cannot utilize their ability? Lengthy and faulty procurement process for which they don’t know whether they will get the instruments and types of equipment they are ordering or if yes, and then do not know when. The lengthy and faulty procurement process for which they can not buy whenever and whatever chemicals and reagents they need? Faulty procurement for which anyone can get tender for supplying instruments and equipment in these organizations. However, they don’t have a service engineer for installation, giving training on operation and post-sale service? One example can be given from the experience of the author. A multifunctional microscope came to one laboratory of the largest research organization in the country at the end of 2006. But those who have been working in the lab since August 2003 didn’t know who ordered it and for what purpose. The person who came to hand over the microscope didn’t know how to operate it and could not train the users. Similarly, at the beginning of the financial year, each laboratory has to give requisition equipment, instruments and reagents, and chemicals as per the allocated fund. People usually give requisition so that all allocated funds will be used whether they require all these things. They do this because if a laboratory cannot spend all the money, its budget will be reduced next time. If such is the procurement process, how come researchers use their full ability?
Is there any measure to keep the researchers motivated? Neither sticks nor carrot. If someone does excel in his work, there is no reward. If someone becomes too lethargic, there are no sticks to wake him up. Such a lethargic person gets sympathy during promotion due to seniority. There is no quality checking of research. A researcher can send a paper for Publication can be sent without sending it through the proper channels by using the organization’s name.
Are these all for the poor performance of our research organizations? Certainly not. The disrupted power supply is another reason for the poor performance of these organizations. During summer, the electricity supply is so disrupted that it is difficult to experiment for two hours continuously. This problem should be brought to the minister’s notice or high official of the ministry. But the interesting thing is done during the visit of the ministers or high officials. It is done not to bring the problem to the notice but rather to hide it. The organization’s Administration requests the local distributor of electricity to keep the supply of power at least for the time of the VIP visit. They never contact them other times for constant power supply in the organization. This is the author’s experience in his research organization.
Are All the reasons for poor performance discussed? No, one major cause is yet to be mentioned. What’s that? Everybody knows it. So even without mentioning it, the question can be asked. How much of our research fund is utilized, and how much is wasted? Can we utilize 25% of our resources? If the fund is doubled, but the management is as inefficient as now, what will be the consequence of increasing funds? Wastage of money or improvement in research? If the fund increases from 100tk to 200tk but its utilization efficiency is still 25% (author assumes that the fund utilization efficiency of Bangladeshi research organization is 25%, in no way is it more than 35%), 50 TK will be utilized, and wastage will be 150 tk. But even if funding is 100TK, but efficiency is increased to above 50 %, more than 50 TK will be utilized. If efficiency is 75%, then?
So before increasing funds, making the management process efficient to get the maximum output of input (Input) is more important. We have to find out and apply tools to measure the performance of research organizations.
