Communication between science and management.
Four methods of communication between science and management are conceivable: (1) authoritative science, which provides results without explanation or justification; (2) authoritative management with imposition of a preconceived management decision on science, which destroys independence and credibility of the scientist; (3) usurpation or mutual invasion of both science and management into each other's territory, which is detrimental to the integrity of both; and (4) interaction between scientist and manager, in which the different tasks of both are recognized and respected. For the latter it is important to accept that the commitment of the scientist is to science only and that managers are committed to other considerations besides science. The role of the scientist is easier because of their commitment, and the results of their work are less likely to be questioned, when they succeed in communicating their working methods, treatment of (missing) data, deductions, and results in a comprehensible and logical form. The manager, however, will be in a difficult position, if these results take the form of advice which, for whatever reasons, they cannot follow. Managers may be tempted to avoid advice or, if unavoidable, to doubt its correctness or to modify its meaning, instead of justifying their decision. The major problem in communication between science and management is probably in semantics: the wording of the task of the scientist and of the scientific result in unambiguous language which is understood by the assessor and the manager, respectively.
Przyrembel
Hildegard
H
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, Thielallee 88-92, D-14195 Berlin, Germany.
D003142:Communication; D003657:Decision Making; D006801:Humans; D011361:Professional Competence; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012586:Science / Q000592:standards*