What do we do here?
How do we make decisions? How do we work together? What principles do
we follow? What are our motivations?
On this page we'll
explain how we've organized CRN. We hope that this will give
you an inside look at our day-to-day operations.
Our job is to learn as much as possible about how to use molecular nanotechnology responsibly,
and to tell as many people as possible about what we've learned. This
means we have to gather information, think about it, check our conclusions,
and write down the results. Then the fun begins: Should we write an article
or a book? Should we work with other organizations? Should we charge money
for our information? How do we decide, and how do we resolve disagreements?
INTERNAL OPERATIONS
WORKING WITH OTHERS
INTERNAL OPERATIONS
Planning
Since we have a clear organizational identity, it's usually not too hard
to set goals. Our major, long-term objective is to exert a positive influence
on the development and use of advanced nanotechnology. To accomplish this,
we have selected shorter-term goals, such as publishing papers and a book. Our short-term
goals are open to change, and we will keep looking for new goals as our
current goals are met (or occasionally discarded) and our resources and
skills increase. Long-term goals must lead directly to our vision;
short-term goals must lead directly to long-term goals.
To work toward our goals, we set tasks for ourselves—with aggressive due
dates. We keep ourselves flexible by keeping the tasks as short-term and
specific as possible; most tasks have a deadline of just one or two weeks.
A longer-term task probably needs some subtasks to be defined, with short
deadlines. Tasks and subtasks are chosen to work directly toward meeting
our goals. Our intention is not to complete artificial milestones, but
to work as fast and efficiently as possible; this system of specific goals
and short-term tasks works well to keep us focused.
We do not set milestones to evaluate our progress. We don't need them;
at all times, we know that we are working as fast as we can toward achievable,
well-chosen goals. A milestone, such as having raised a total of $1 million
in funding, is an artificial measure of progress toward an undefined goal.
Milestones are an attempt to define an arbitrary path, and since the path
is arbitrary, it is probably not the optimum path. We plan by setting
goals and subgoals, tasks and subtasks. If we can't translate a milestone
into either a task or a goal, we probably don't know why we want it—and
we shouldn't be focusing on it.
Making Decisions
When Mike and Chris began
working together, even before we decided to found CRN, we knew we would
be co-authoring papers. We quickly drafted and agreed to a few intellectual
property rules. This
is typical of our style: we are continually self-examining, checking our
assumptions, making sure that our actions are consistent with our goals
and will not lead us into trouble later. (This also means that we are
always ready to hear advice.)
We work together well; we both work very fast, and we're comfortable with
aggressive schedules. In writing, one of us writes a first draft, and
then we bounce it back and forth until it's done. Other tasks are more
or less divided according to each of our skills: Mike does more of the
PR and fundraising, and Chris does more of the technical research. But
we both make sure we understand every aspect of operations, and we make
decisions jointly; two heads are better than one.
Since there are only two of us, we work by consensus. We don't expect
the CRN leadership to grow beyond us anytime soon. It won't be easy to
find someone who can work with us as smoothly as we work with each other.
We listen to lots of advice, and give it careful consideration—but there
is a world of difference between advice and co-leadership. We're also
happy to delegate—but again, final responsibility must rest with the leader.
We do not currently plan to experiment with structured semi-co-leadership
such as steering committees or advisory boards.
Writing
Writing is a major part of our operation. We pick something from the inbox
or the list of tasks, work on it until we're ready for the other to check
it, then email it and wait—usually less than a day—for a response. We bounce
it back and forth like that until it's mostly polished, with occasional
phone calls for the most interactive discussions or difficult questions.
When we both agree it's ready for publication, we publish it. In the polishing
process, we may spend half an hour on a title, and ten minutes selecting
a key word—but usually we end up liking each other's suggestions almost
immediately. Did we mention that we work together well?
WORKING WITH OTHERS
Any organization must work with other organizations and people. We are
still learning, and probably always will be learning, about all the possible
ways there are to interact; this section, even more than the last, is
a work in progress. But we have set a few basic policies.
Co-Authors
We research, prepare, and
publish a steady stream of serious, academic papers, as well as shorter articles
for the popular media, both print and online. Because CRN is only two
people (Mike and
Chris), we are always open to assistance in researching and writing
papers and articles to be published by CRN. To avoid misunderstandings
in how these collaborations work, we've prepared a statement of Co-Authoring Principles.
Check it out, and then let us know if you'd like to help. Please note,
however, that we have a need to be very selective about deciding with
whom we will work.
Reprint Policy
The Center for Responsible Nanotechnology™ (CRN) maintains copyrights for
all material, articles, and papers published on this website, except where
otherwise noted. We grant permission, however, for anyone to republish
our stuff, provided that CRN is attributed as the source, and that
you let us know if you're
doing it, so we can track down copies and make changes if necessary.
We're not in this to get
rich; our mission is to raise awareness of the issues presented
by advanced nanotechnology; our inclination, then, is to want to see our
writings disseminated as widely as possible. You're also welcome to link
to any of the pages on our site, and if you contact us,
we might add a reciprocal link to your site.
Funding
Our basic business model is to accept money for doing things that we would
have done anyway. We are very cautious about taking money for something
that's not directly in line with one of our goals (short-term or long-term).
We will listen to suggestions, whether or not money is attached to the
proposal. But we will generally only take the suggestions that we would
have taken if the money had already been waiting in our account. There's
a lot to do, and not much time to do it in; we can't afford to get distracted—even
by proposals that wouldn't compromise our principles.
The same is true of grants: we will only solicit grants for things we
want to do anyway. Our goal is not to grow, or to make money; it is to
accomplish certain things. If we can find a way to convince someone to
pay for those things, great; if not, we'll do them anyway.
Advice
We are actively cultivating a few sources of good advice. In addition,
we will listen to unsolicited advice from anyone; it's usually clear pretty
quickly whether we should take it. (So far we have not needed to save
time by imposing a filtering mechanism.) We have several tests. First,
and most important, is the suggestion consistent with our organizational
identity? Second, is it likely to work as planned? Third, do we have the
resources—money, time, skills, and people—to do it? Fourth, is it an efficient
use of those resources? If it passes these tests, we will add it to our
list of goals.
Other Organizations
We believe that our purpose and niche are unique. As such, we're inventing
ourselves as we go, and trying to avoid cloning any other group. When
we work with another group, the idea is not to join with them; it's to
help us, or help them, or coordinate with them to avoid duplication of
effort. If we are doing the same thing as another group, we are probably
duplicating effort inefficiently; the same is probably true if we find
that we have the same type of resource to share. Trying to trade different
types of service or benefit is probably also a bad idea. Trade is about
linking two proposals: win-lose, lose-win. Although theoretically this
sort of quid pro quo can be mutually beneficial, it is frequently distracting
and sometimes corrosive. In general, we will only adopt single proposals
that both groups see clear benefit in: win-win. Our policy could perhaps
be summarized as: "Fiercely independent, but willing to cooperate if it
helps everyone."
People
Assistance - Anyone is welcome to contact us and
offer advice or money, or volunteer to help. If you've read this far,
you know that we are very focused, and we may not take your advice, your
help, or even your money if doing so would distract us. Please don't take
it personally.
Membership - We do not currently plan to maintain a membership.
Membership has some benefits—we get to brag to politicians about how many
members we have, and we get to charge you money, and you probably get
some perks. But for now we don't want the hassle. You can join our mailing list for free, however.
If you want to contribute money, please
do so. If you really want to be a member, tell us why membership is good;
if you convince us, we'll announce it on the mailing list.
