Black Hole

Of Bean-Counters

We are making bean-counting work in New Zealand science. Initially, the scientists were far too busy with their science to notice, let alone protest, when we sneaked our bean-planning systems past them. A number have since been complaining loudly, but others have decided they want to be bean-planners. They see its value. They see it has a more secure future than science.

Some people argue that really effective science projects need a mix of skills, and that some important discoveries in biology happened only when a physicist, chemist or engineer got involved. We think the big gap has been in bean-counting skills. Scientists complain that they cannot plan a career. They should give up career planning and get into bean-planning instead.

Bean planning works this way. Everyone has to set their quota of beans well in advance, say 18 months. Scientists wait on tenterhooks until they get the go-ahead and then off they go. If they have a better idea in the meantime, they are wise to forget it -- beans are what they promised and beans they must deliver.

This prevents surprises. It prevents bad surprises, like not getting all the beans you expected. It prevents good surprises, too, but this is not entirely bad. Who wants to end up with kiwifruit or pineapples when you know you want beans?

You do have to be careful what kind of beans you ask for. The great benefit of bean-planning is that even if you ask for the wrong thing, you are reasonably sure to get it.

It is really important to check all science thoroughly before it starts, to make sure we get the right kind of science. We insist that all scientists can tell an open and shut story, which is pretty much impossible when new research is starting. Otherwise anything might happen. In situations where anything can happen, it probably will.

You may have heard of the problems that Cardinal Bellarmine had because he had not checked Galileo's project carefully enough. Our bean checks put the stoppers on anyone who has the temerity to be some modern New Zealand version of a Wegener or Semmelweiss or Ohm.

You also have to make sure that the scientists put the right number of beans into the right boxes -- 40 designated output areas. Scientists whose work has bits and pieces in more than one box complain like mad. They may have difficulty getting funds because they do not have a big enough stake in any one box, or may get dropped out of someone else's box. It is amazing how much trouble they can get over not finding a box and sticking to it.

Donald Entity is a plain-clothes scientist with a Pythagorean aversion to beans.

Bean-Points for Our Times

1. Do not count the time or cost of counting beans. You could easily end up counting the time spent counting beans, and there is no end to it. It is best not to start down that path.

2. Costs from the time and effort of other people that we cause to count beans have been greatly exaggerated. They need to learn to do it quickly and efficiently. The real problem is that they want to do what they think is important, rather than count beans.

3. It is unwise to look at all deeply into problems that people say they have with our requirements. That puts you at risk of "capture", doing what they think sensible instead of using your own judgment.

4. Arguments that there are better ways of counting beans, such as counting trucks of beans, avoid the issue. Some people have wanted to reduce effort still further by taking samples of trucks, arguing that this should improve accuracy. It is obvious that the only way to get an accurate result and to see that everyone does their job is to work through the beans individually.

5. Even rubbishy information has its uses. If you bury the valuable information deep enough in the rubbish, no-one will ever find it. It is great for confidentiality.

6. Bean counting changes with the times. We now see that bean-planning is just as important.