PART II Conclusions and recommendations

The international committees have reached a number of conclusions related to the feasibility study and the value added of international collaboration in this domain and have developed recommendations related to a full-scale program including some open issues. These conclusions follow.

II.1 Conclusions related to the IMS feasibility study

• (i) The guiding principles embodied in the Terms of Reference for the feasibility study were adhered to and were proven to be workable and necessary. The committee structure which was put in place in the feasibility study allowed each of the committees to concentrate on specific issues and allowed rapid progress to be achieved in a limited time frame.
• (ii) The experimental framework for international collaboration - i.e., modalities, technical themes and IPR guidelines - developed in the feasibility study was thoroughly tested and proved its worth. The process of bid preparation, proposal evaluation and selection, resulted in the launch of five international test cases and one international study. Feedback on improvements in these processes was obtained. There was limited time for consortia to prepare proposals and the consortia had limited time to produce concrete technical results.
• (iii) The experience gained by the partners in the five test cases and one study is invaluable. Overall, 140 entities, of which 73 were companies and 67 universities/research institutes, participated in the test cases and study. Entities from all regions were actively involved and have demonstrated that collaboration in the field of advanced manufacturing on an international scale is feasible. Cultural, language and technical barriers were rapidly overcome. International collaboration provided added value which outweighed additional overheads incurred through collaborating on this scale. Further added value came through exploiting diversity of, and global access to, technology and people.
• (iv) Overheads of collaboration were found to be substantial and are estimated at 25 per cent. However, this high overhead rate should be seen in the context of a start-up exercise. It could be expected to reduce in a steady state.
• (v) The infrastructure put in place in the IMS feasibility study facilitated international collaboration. The potential for industrial interest in international R&D collaboration in the area of advanced manufacturing seems to be high. This is indicated by industrial participation in the test cases, by the fact that some of the collaborations will extend beyond the feasibility study, and by the high level of general interest in the IMS feasibility study and its results.
• (vi) The feasibility study fostered in each region a better understanding of the other regions, their cultures in general and manufacturing expertise in particular. The importance of manufacturing to the global economy was stressed, as was the increasing need to share information and work together towards global objectives.
• (vii) Experience with formation and operation of the test cases demonstrated the following:
  • Consortia must be industrially based and comprise at least three partners, each from a different region.
  • The proposed research must be of high quality and of relevance to industry.
  • The value to be added through international cooperation and the cost effectiveness of proceeding in the manner proposed are to be clearly and convincingly argued.
  • Details of equity and balance provisions are to be documented and agreed on by all partners. There must be a high degree of international interaction between the participants and the collaboration structures must be clearly set out.
  • Management and communication costs should comprise a small proportion (about 20 per cent) of total costs.
  • There must be a commitment to dissemination of results.

II.2 Value added by international collaboration in advanced manufacturing

II.2.1 For industrial partners

• Facilitates the elimination of redundant R&D effort.
• Facilitation of worldwide partnerships and provision of a platform to join complementary skills.
• Provision of access to complementary technology (which might not be available within a region) and possibility of comprehensively studying production technology.
• Possibility of gaining a better understanding of global markets.
• Sharing of development costs, burden and risks; acquisition of technical abilities in areas of manufacturing technology where it would be difficult to acquire them independently.
• Guidance for research into the application domain and towards global research priorities.
• Technology trials on a large basis, involving a worldwide user community which would ensure more general applicability of the technology that is developed.
• Acceleration of global standardization related to manufacturing, and as a result of this, contribution to worldwide diffusion of manufacturing technologies.
• In addition for SMEs, co-operative relationships could be forged with large companies and academia, through which limited, regional-level transactions could be expanded to a global level.

II.2.2 For academia

• Further extension of co-operation worldwide and the possibility to engage in research with industrial partners.
• Increase the professional level and image of manufacturing. Provide focus for worldwide manufacturing research.
• Improved quality of education and training which would facilitate the transfer of knowledge to future generations.
• Ensure state-of-the-art information is broadly available for curricula development.

II.2.3 For public administrations/governments

• Obtaining better value for money in publicly funded R&D.
• Assigning clear priority on an international basis to methods for solving problems common to manufacturing industries in all regions including environment, safety and quality of industrial life.
• Improvement of social welfare and healthy growth of economies through the resulting improvement and diffusion of manufacturing technology.

II.3 Recommendations for a full-scale IMS program

Accordingly, the ISC makes the following recommendations:

• (i) The ISC recommends the launch of a 10-year full-scale IMS program in international collaboration in advanced manufacturing, with a review in the seventh year for a possible renewal.
• (ii) A full-scale IMS program should be a catalytic agent for global cooperation in manufacturing, addressing not only the advancement of the state of the art in manufacturing but also the raising of existing levels of technology in many companies, including SMEs.
• (iii) Terms of Reference and a framework in which to conduct the full-scale program need to be agreed upon between the regions. The ISC recommends that the guiding principles embodied in the Terms of Reference for the feasibility study should be retained, and in Part III offers recommendations for revised Terms of Reference.
• (iv) The ISC recommends that the initial Participants in a full-scale IMS program would be the Participants who were involved in the IMS feasibility study. Additional Participants could be considered on a case-by-case basis. It should be ensured that any eligible party (industry, academia or research center) in the Participant's region which is interested in participating and has the resources to do so can take part in the full-scale IMS program.
• (v) The ISC recommends that a management structure consisting of a single international management committee, regional secretariats and a small interregional secretariat should be established. The infrastructure in each region to facilitate international collaboration should be strengthened. Each region will be responsible for supporting the costs of its own participation.
• (vi) The ISC supports the approach of defining broad themes for collaboration, but within these themes to select sharply-focused industry-led projects. The ISC recommends that a full-scale IMS program should cover the full innovation cycle, and allow for projects in manufacturing which fall within any phase of the product life cycle.
• (vii) The ISC recommends the IPR provisions, given in Appendix of Part III, as a minimal set of rules to which consortia should adhere. The ISC acknowledges the importance of IPR issues and confirms that only projects conforming with the IPR provisions should be supported. Explanatory notes of IPR provisions should be provided to potential bidders.

II.4 Recommendations for the transition period

• (i) The ISC recommends the target date for the start of the full-scale program be 30 June 1994, but the IMS program should begin as soon as the conditions in Section 7 of the Terms of Reference (Part III of this document) are met, but not later than 31 December 1994.
• (ii) During the transition period the Participants should make every effort to ratify Terms of Reference for the IMS program expeditiously and to complete appointment of members to the International IMS Steering Committee after the last intention of each Participant is conveyed to the other Participants within a reasonable period.
• (iii) The ISC recommends that test case activity should be allowed to continue on an ad-hoc basis during the transition period, the decision to continue being based on individual consortia and regional considerations. However, no new test cases should start during the transition period.
• (iv) The ISC recommends that any meetings held during the transition period should be informal. The Committee members could be called upon to give advice and or assistance in the transition period.
• (v) The ISC recommends that secretariats should remain in place during the transition period.
• (vi) The ISC recommends that regional activities such as holding of symposia, etc. continue during the transition period.

II.5 Issues for attention

• (i) The involvement of SMEs and universities needs further consideration. Mechanisms at the international level could be developed using as input the experience gained in regional programs.
• (ii) It is necessary to draft the documents and refine the processes of bid making, evaluation, selection and launch which need to be put in place.
• (iii) Further work needs to be done to develop explanatory notes of IPR provisions.
• (iv) A model consortium cooperation agreement which makes provision for all aspects of the legal framework for individual projects would be desirable.
• (v) A process must be devised to ensure effective communications between the IMS management structure, the interregional secretariat, the regional secretariats and the IMS project consortia.
• (vi) Case studies of successful consortia should be developed.
• (vii) The question of a broad-based and evenhanded distribution of results has turned out to be beyond the scope of the feasibility experiment and still needs to be addressed in the full-scale IMS program.
• (viii) An international glossary, and organization of topics of interest would be beneficial as a vehicle for communicating areas of interest and collaboration for a future IMS program.
• (ix) Provisions should be made for each consortium to address the opportunity for other regions and or organizations to join the consortium after the initial formation stage. That is not to require that such late joining be possible but rather that it be addressed by each consortium as a possibility.
• (x) A regular method of distributing IMS program opportunities and information which allows regional secretariats to keep their regions up-to-date needs to be defined. For example a speakers bureau, traveling demonstrations, electronic information networks, etc. could be made available to each region.
• (xi) The IMS Symposia served a useful purpose and should be continued. They should provide information on the current state of manufacturing which some may use for ranking IMS projects.