“At Issue - Product Design & Development” plus 1 more

Posted: 14 Oct 2009 04:56 PM PDT

By Roger L. Lundblad, Ph.D., Lundblad Biotech

I have been pondering the issue of creativity - or more accurately the lack of creativity over the past couple of years as I have compiled several encyclopedic works.

While science tends to remain clever, there seems to be an absence of creativity in the biological sciences; physics continues to be creative and such activity may increase if the Higgs boson is not discovered. I have a very bright nephew (Ph.D. Caltech) who is now pushing ultracold (nanoKelvin) Rubidium atoms around with lasers in ways which could revolutionize the way computing is done– but while basic physics is doing well, it does not seem to be translating into creative solutions to problems of water, environment, energy storage, etc.

On the other hand, innovation runs rampant giving me a phone that can do anything easily except make a phone call.

Early in my post-doctoral studies, one of my older and wiser colleagues observed that there were two sure ways to get famous in biological sciences; one was to discover a technique which is used (and cited) extensively such as a method for the measurement of protein concentration.

Another approach is to name a process or concept such as proteomics, biomarkers, systems biology, etc; it does seem to matter that the process, concept, material, etc., may not have changed – changing my name to Dick Butkus or Brian Urlacher or Bernardo Harris is not going to change me into an NFL linebacker. There is one protein (leukocyte protein 1) which has had at least four name changes in the fifteen year. There is a James Carville quote that I could use here but won't. Changing the name of a process, product, or concept does not mean improvement.

I attended two professional meetings last year; one was concerned with biosimilars in biotechnology while the other was a large multidisciplinary meeting which used to be held in Atlantic City.

The first convinced me that biotechnology, like the motion picture industry in Tinseltown, is stuck in a creativity crisis and is developing sequels rather than new productions. I should note that I grew up close to the studios in SoCal and have lived there on occasion in the past years. I was fortunate to be there during the era of extreme creativity.

At the second meeting, I attended a lecture which briefly discussed the role of serendipity in the evolution of medicine observing that while computer-guided combinatorial chemistry has greatly increased our ability to screen potential drug candidates, it is not clear that it has improved our creativity or productivity.

Likewise, the speaker observed that while text-mining for literature searches increases our ability to screen the increasing volume of literature, it does strip out context.

One of my distinguished colleagues has observed that while electronic journals enable us to do our scholarly reading in our pajamas with a glass of wine, does not necessarily mean that we are as effective as we were twenty years ago when I would walk into the library and sit a table with colleagues sorting through the new journals which had arrived that day.

The literature is full of articles and books on creativity and innovation sometimes not distinguishing between the two activities. After consulting several dictionaries, it would seem as if innovation is the alteration of current by the introduction of something new while creativity is the action of bringing something new into existence.

While a purist could argue that only the artist or musician can be truly creative. In my own discipline, I would argue that the Watson-Crick double-helix was creative while automated amino acid analysis was innovation. Both have contributed greatly to modern biotechnology.

In several of my previous lives, I have been involved in discussions of how to improve innovation or creativity, how to teach innovation or creativity, creating the impression that innovation and or creativity can be structured and that centers for innovation can be built.

First, I want to dispense with the idea that creativity can somehow be managed – it can't! In the United States, our educational process is intended to eliminate creativity from the first experience of being told to "color inside the lines!"

Creativity happens! – The discovery of the structure of benzene by Kekule and, more recently, the discovery of the polymerase chain reaction by Kerry Mullis are other examples of creativity. So, what can we say about innovation?

Professor Markus Pohmann of Ruprecht-Karls-University of Heidelberg published a thoughtful paper on the innovation process in 2005 which I recommend. This paper contained "The Six Rules of Innovation" – the best rule (in my opinion) is that there is no general rule.

The next is that innovation requires time, effort and money but provision of same is not a guarantee. I would also agree that you can't create an "innovation organization" and provision of incentives (money, awards, etc.) is actually counterproductive.

I would argue that the most important factor in innovation is the sincere and active support of senior management such as that in the fuzzy front end approach.

There usually is a disclaimer in articles acknowledging professional relationships; mine is that I am a "fuddy-duddy" of the slide rule generation as discussed in Science (July 4, 2008).

Dr. Roger L. Lundblad is recognized as an expert in the area of protein chemistry, biotechnology manufacturing process validation, GLP laboratory compliance, product development and cGMP issues. Dr. Lundblad is the author of some 120+ publications and is also the author of best-selling books in the area of protein chemistry.

For more information visit www.lundbladbiotech.com or contact Dr. Roger Lundblad at lundbladr@bellsouth.net.

This content has passed through fivefilters.org.

Kenosha County man killed in home invasion - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Posted: 13 Oct 2009 03:50 AM PDT

Oct. 17, 2009 | A central-city gas station where two aspiring basketball stars were gunned down this year could have its hours curtailed, Common Council President Willie Hines Jr. said Saturday.

Hines told about three dozen people at a meeting at Reformation Lutheran Church, 2201 N. 35th St., that a resident submitted a letter asking the city to require the gas station, which has remained open as late as 4 a.m., to close at midnight.

After the meeting, Hines said the incidents at the Marathon station at N. 35th St. and W. Garfield Ave. make it a "prime candidate" for having its hours cut back.

The council's Licensing Committee will review the request and make a recommendation to the full council, said Hines, who represents the district in which the gas station is located.

Querronaceosam "Querro" Z. Evans, 22, was shot and killed shortly before 2 a.m. Oct. 7 at the gas station. Stevie D. Johnson, 26, of Milwaukee has been charged in the killing. »Read Full Article

This content has passed through fivefilters.org.