Cutbacks on R&D Threaten Growth of Rotational Molding
by Robert Dunne
No one sat down and decided to come up with an adhesive-backed pad of paper. And nobody set out to replace baking by cooking with invisible rays when the ovens in use worked just fine, thank you. But today, you would be hard-pressed to find an office in America without a Post-it note or a home without a microwave oven. Whether the product came about from a researcher being asked to study a given field of interest in hopes of coming up with marketable ideas - like the Post-it - or as an accidental discovery from research funded to solve another problem - like the microwave oven - these present-day essentials are among the thousands of products that came about as a direct result of commitments to R&D. Their financial returns continue as an annuity to this day.
Yes, we manufacturers enjoy talking about the importance of R&D. But only those who invest in it financially or who personally contribute time and expertise to expanding the pool of knowledge truly demonstrate the depth of their commitments. Sometimes, it seems the importance placed on R&D among manufacturers and the belief in its results go only as far as speeches and PowerPoint presentations. This needs to be addressed. Streamlining processing, reducing energy consumption, cutting material waste and developing new materials or uncovering applications for existing materials all yield tangible returns that contribute to profitability for the entire rotomolding industry. Saving energy and material even contributes to the conservation of precious resources and has a positive impact beyond our industry. And by involving students in the process, we help groom the next generation of engineers, designers and mold makers.
Yet when times get tough, investments in R&D often don't get going. In fact, R&D is usually one of the first line items to go. The annual budget of the Association of Rotational Molders International (ARM) perennially serves as a telling example. However, it's during these lean times that funding R&D offers the greatest promise for substantial returns. I'm convinced there must be a better way for us to pool our resources to boost or at least maintain funding for R&D without causing the flurry of membership cancellations that many people fear.
How R&D Gets Funded
At ARM International, funding for R&D has historically been based on earmarking a portion of the annual membership dues to sponsor research projects conducted at a variety of academic institutions. Results are made available to all association members. Research involving the use of ABS, for example, yielded important results that saved us from what would have been fruitless efforts at processing a material that's largely incompatible with rotomolding. The R&D budget varies from year to year based on the percentage of the dues to be earmarked to R&D vs. conferences, publications, administrative expenses and other areas. On the surface, this system provides flexibility to accommodate the membership but in fact, it hampers the long-term focus on R&D required to yield the most consistent results.
At the Society of Plastics Engineers (SPE), awards upwards of $70,000.00 annually are provided in scholarships, thousands more in grants to purchase equipment and still more in grants from its foundation to fund projects that support the organization and promote the plastics industry. Funding comes from membership dues, sales of technical publications, event fees and by soliciting contributions from the industry. At the Akron Society of Plastics Engineers International, rotomolding education is funded by relying on rotomolders and other companies allied to the industry to contribute the funds. Companies are invited to provide $30,000.00 donations, which are used to setup scholarships for students interested in pursuing careers in rotomolding.
I find the most interesting model to be in action at the Plastics Manufacturing Center at Pennsylvania College of Technology, a special mission affiliate of The Pennsylvania State University. As covered by Paul Nugent in a recent RotoWorld column, the academic institution involves plastics companies and students interested in careers in plastics yet also taps into the vast array of available government funds. The Plastics Manufacturing Center at Penn College seeks to help individuals and companies often utilizing the state's Workforce Development and Continuing Education program along with annual membership fees to businesses at $4,000.00 per company in exchange for access to the center's design, molding and testing services. Fees for online courses and ancillary services add to the revenue needed to sustain this technology center.
The Plastics Manufacturing Center works with state and local funding agencies to fund both R & D projects and Workforce training for the plastics industry. This includes national seminars like the Hands-on Rotational Molding Seminar to be held at Penn College in June. The PMC also partners with national organizations like ARM International and the Society of Plastics Engineers. The PMC is setup to be self-sustaining and provides valuable technology services to industry through memberships, partnerships, workforce training opportunities, and national seminars and projects.
Non-Profit
By working directly with state and local funding agencies, Penn College has secured nearly $500,000.00 in grants in the past year alone for workforce development incumbent worker training. Even more is available at the federal level. However, ARM International is not currently eligible to tap this funding. To become eligible to tap into this funding (and recover a portion of our own taxes paid), I recommend considering the formation of the ARM Associaton Research and Education Foundation. Setup as a 501(c)3 non-profit organization for scientific research, this foundation would enable ARM International to become eligible to participate in a wide range of government programs, apply for federal, state and local grants to fund research and even to apply for grants from private organizations, endowments and foundations such as that of Newell Rubbermaid and other corporations.
Once the foundation is setup as a 501(c)3, member contributions to R&D become deductions for federal income tax purposes. This setup actually creates a financial incentive for us to fund R&D that is likely to result in an increase in total funding. It may also help to maintain a consistent level of support year to year without risk of outright cancellation during lean times. In fact, it is exactly during these lean times when new applications, markets, materials and cost-saving ideas are most in demand that this setup is likely to funnel the needed support to R&D.
This foundation would operate on a perpetual basis and may be chaired by past presidents on a rotating basis. Each year, members may vote by secret ballot to allocate a percentage of revenues to the foundation. Managing educational programs such as the Annual Student Design Competition under the auspices of the foundation also creates opportunities to secure grants for education and yet suppliers may continue to sponsor the program and encourage its growth.
Future Results of R&D
Beyond training and inspiring young rotomolding engineers, nobody can accurately predict the results of funding R&D over time with any certainty. Yet most of us can tell a tale of a project that resulted solely from thinking about R&D. My team had invested years in the development of a perfectly round, balanced, rotomolded sphere, for example, and we were able to apply it to a project for a major sporting goods manufacturer. It demanded extreme weight tolerances, exotic materials, bulk density loading considerations and performance testing plus the cost specification required running 256 parts per arm. It was a huge success overseas - until the the plant was nationalized. The payoff in profits didn't materialize as anticipated but we learned a lot about designing and molding spherical parts and products that we can apply to this day.
We may not have Post-it notes and microwave ovens to our credit, but with the Association's R&D funding setup as a 501(c)3, I think we'll all have more profitable tales to tell. I'd like to hear your tales of R&D - successful or not.
Send comments to Bob Dunne at rdunne1@usa.net or see www.Rotomolding.com/bobdunne.shtml. Meese Orbitron Dunne Co. is the first rotomolder in North America to invest in the Leonardo system. Its parent company, Tingue, Saddle Brook, New Jersey, has a history of bold moves since 1902 that include pioneering the use of plastics for rotomolding laundry handling products.
|
