"Researchers Won't Be Blamed for Failure"... At KIST, PMs Decide Whether to Continue or Halt Research

Director Osangrok: "The PM Decides Whether to Continue, Halt, or Revise Research"
Changing Performance Evaluation Methods First

Of 850 Commissioned Projects, 85% Are Under 500 Million Won...
Moving Beyond Individual and Short-Term Studies to Solve National Challenges

"Whether to continue the research, halt it, or adjust the goals is determined by the project manager (PM)."

What should be done if research aimed at solving national challenges fails to achieve its initial objectives? The solution presented by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) is not to shift the responsibility for failure onto individual researchers, but instead to empower project managers to determine whether to continue research and, if necessary, pivot boldly. In this process, not only is the achievement of objectives considered, but outcomes and the potential utilization of technologies identified during the process of failure are also reflected in evaluations.

Sangrok Oh, Director of KIST, is delivering a welcoming speech at the 'KIST Mission-Oriented Research Institute Public Report Meeting' held on the 17th at the headquarters in Seongbuk-gu, Seoul. Provided by KIST

Osangrok, Director of KIST, made these remarks in response to The Asia Business Daily's question on how KIST evaluates the performance of ambitious research projects and addresses responsibility for failure, during the "KIST Mission-Oriented Research Institute Public Report Conference" held on the 17th at KIST's headquarters in Seongbuk-gu, Seoul. Director Osangrok stated, "The project manager (PM) can decide whether to continue, halt, or revise the objectives of the research," and added, "We are establishing a system so that responsibility for failure does not fall on individual researchers." This exemplifies how the core of KIST's transition to a mission-oriented research paradigm, pursued over the past two years, lies in innovative evaluation and operation methods beyond mere organizational restructuring.

Outcomes From Failure Are Still Assets... PM Decides Whether to Continue

The performance evaluation criteria put forth by Director Osangrok focus not only on technological performance, but also on the timing of development and industrial value. Specific quantitative goals and end dates are set for each mission, and progress toward these milestones is checked at each stage. The rationale is that even the most outstanding technology becomes meaningless if it misses its market window.

For example, the Next-Generation Semiconductor Research Institute is working to develop a Random Processing Unit (RPU) that improves computational performance by a factor of 1,000 and reduces power consumption to one one-hundredth compared to existing computing technology. The Clean Hydrogen Convergence Research Institute aims to lower the hydrogen production cost to 1 dollar per kilogram by 2033.

The PM reviews the achievement of each stage’s objectives to determine whether to continue, halt, or revise the goals of the research. If another research team has developed the same technology first, or the original necessity of the goal has disappeared, the project may be discontinued.

However, not all failures are tolerated without criteria. Vice President Joonyeon Jang emphasized, "We must clearly distinguish between cases where someone fails despite their best efforts and cases due to a researcher's negligence." He further explained, "Honest failures are important assets and can serve as a foundation for producing other achievements." The intent is that technologies and experiences gained from sincere failures would become assets for other research projects.

Osangrok, director of the Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) (center), is conducting a roundtable with the PMs of seven research organizations at the 'KIST Mission-Oriented Research Institute Public Report Meeting' held on the 17th at the main office in Seongbuk-gu, Seoul. Provided by KIST

"Of 850 Projects, 85% Were Under 500 Million Won"... The Reason for Changing the Research Approach

The driving force behind KIST’s shift in research paradigm lies in its existing research structure, which had many small-scale, short-term projects. According to Director Osangrok, KIST undertook approximately 850 government-commissioned projects last year, of which 85% were under 500 million won. Even when researchers produced papers and patents within the typical three-year project duration, there were limits to verifying the technology and achieving industrialization.

Since 2024, KIST has focused its capabilities on problems of national significance, rather than individual researchers’ specialized fields. Currently, KIST operates seven research organizations: next-generation semiconductors, AI and robotics, climate and environment, clean hydrogen, brain science, natural substance-based drugs, and composite materials for space applications.

During the transition, some researchers questioned why changes were necessary when the existing approach was already productive. Director Osangrok explained that rather than denying the past achievements, the aim was to link them to the resolution of larger problems and sought consensus through this approach. He cited revived teamwork among researchers as the most significant change he has experienced over the past two years.

KIST plans to share the experience and knowledge gained from its transition to a mission-oriented research system with other government-funded research institutes. However, Director Osangrok cautioned against simple imitation that neglects organizational differences between institutions.

He stressed, "A national agenda is not itself a mission," and added, "Each research institute must set missions that include specific targets and timelines for achievement."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.