and less immediately utilitarian studies.

Ihose closest to my own concern and experience are social, behavioral,
political and economic studies related to a great range of organizations with
implications for policy and administration under a diversity of conditions.
Ultimate applications might be in business administration, public administra-
tion, health administration, educational administration, international ad-
ministration and so on.

That is in contrast to fields of inguiry generally perceived to be
better established in their traditions of theory building, research design,
additive contributions to discipline and the rest. Examples of this class
might include at least the heartland areas of so-called laboratory sciences
and those with appropriately developed laboratory and experimental traditions.
Physics, biology and chemistry with room for inclusions and exceptions for
such as astronomy, geology and psychology would gualify.

Beyond the heartland, fowevet., which is to say at the front edges even
of the so-called hard sciences, top investigators reckon with some of the
same problems of elusiveness and softness so often thought to be a more ex-
clusive attribute of the category first cited. As others have observed,
endurance does not add truth to the canard that the intellectual demands of
one set of sciences to be called hard are much greater than for another
set to be called soft. One might argue that developing traditions of rigor
where they have not previously existed might be more rather than less demanding.

Nevertheless, something approaching effectiveness in understanding and
coping with first steps is essential if inguiry is to proceed, to reach some
point of completion, hopefully to result in some learning about matter and
method and conceivably to yield findings of some significance. Investment

in research that does not result in world-shaking findings can be more readily

-5-