The Chinese government's stated ambition of turning the country into a global R&D center has aroused a fair bit of skepticism. Innovation, after all, is not something that can be conjured out of thin air at the whim of a bureaucrat. Scratch the surface of China's impressive metrics, such as patent filing data, and there is often less genuine innovation there than meets the eye.

　　中國(guó)政府宣稱(chēng)的將該國(guó)變成全球研發(fā)中心的宏偉目標(biāo)引發(fā)了不小的質(zhì)疑。畢竟，創(chuàng)新并非一個(gè)官僚能夠突發(fā)奇想、憑空而造的東西。揭開(kāi)中國(guó)令人矚目的數(shù)據(jù)（比如專(zhuān)利申報(bào)數(shù)據(jù)）表面后，真正的創(chuàng)新常常比人們看到的要少。

　　That said, there's a difference between skepticism and scoffing. A visit to a large chemical plant about an hour's drive north of downtown showed me why it would be a mistake to dismiss China's innovation ambitions out of hand.

　　盡管如此，質(zhì)疑和嘲諷是有區(qū)別的。在參觀過(guò)上海以北距離市中心約一小時(shí)車(chē)程的一個(gè)大型化工廠后，我體會(huì)到了一味忽視中國(guó)的創(chuàng)新雄心為何是個(gè)錯(cuò)誤。

　　My hosts, German chemical company BASF, are investing heavily in R&D in China. This multi-acre campus, already crowded with showrooms, manufacturing facilities and labs, is about to become more crowded with a new ￠55 million ($75 million) research facility and a new headquarters. The company expects to employ 450 professionals at the site when it opens next year.

　　我參觀的是德國(guó)化工公司巴斯夫(BASF)旗下的一家工廠。該公司正在中國(guó)大力投資研發(fā)。這個(gè)面積有數(shù)英畝的園區(qū)已經(jīng)建滿了展示廳、制造設(shè)施和實(shí)驗(yàn)室，再加上一個(gè)造價(jià)5,500萬(wàn)歐元（合7,500萬(wàn)美元）的新建研究設(shè)施和一個(gè)新總部，園區(qū)將變得更加擁擠不堪。巴斯夫預(yù)計(jì)這個(gè)中心明年啟用后，將招聘450名專(zhuān)業(yè)人士。

　　Even before the new facility comes online, research is already underway. The company manufacturers both high-tech plastics and polymers─chemical additives that make cement more water-resistant, say, or paint dirt-resistant─here. White-coat-clad Chinese technicians fine-tune chemical mixtures based on customer requests, making incremental tweaks to existing products. This is the “development” in R&D.

　　即便在新的設(shè)施上線之前，研究已經(jīng)在進(jìn)行中了。該公司在這里制造高科技塑料和聚合物（比如可以提高水泥防水性能的化學(xué)添加劑或防塵油漆）。身穿白色工作服的中國(guó)技術(shù)人員根據(jù)客戶的要求微調(diào)化學(xué)混合物，對(duì)現(xiàn)有產(chǎn)品進(jìn)行細(xì)小的調(diào)整。這就是“研究開(kāi)發(fā)”中所指的“開(kāi)發(fā)”。

　　But what of the “research”? That's where Stefan Dreher comes in, as BASF's scientist-cum-manager tasked with establishing the new innovation center. We speak on the phone after my factory visit because he happens to be in India at the time I'm in Shanghai.

　　那么“研究”又是什么呢？這正是德雷爾(Stefan Dreher)負(fù)責(zé)的工作。他是巴斯夫的一位科學(xué)家兼管理者，負(fù)責(zé)設(shè)立這個(gè)新的創(chuàng)新中心。我在參觀完工廠后，和他通電話聊了聊，因?yàn)槲以谏虾r(shí)他正好去了印度。

　　The first question is, Why, given the challenges, China? Mr. Dreher says it's because “you need to do R&D where the customers are.” Old-fashioned proximity is a crucial way of collecting market intelligence and responding quickly to customer demands. Similar considerations are driving an uptick in BASF's R&D investment in India, Malaysia and even Indonesia. Projecting strong economic growth here, BASF and other companies conclude they can't not do research in China.

　　我提出的第一個(gè)問(wèn)題是，鑒于存在的挑戰(zhàn)，為何選擇中國(guó)？德雷爾說(shuō)，這是因?yàn)槲覀冃枰诳蛻羲诘牡胤竭M(jìn)行研發(fā)。靠近客戶這種老式做法是收集市場(chǎng)情報(bào)、對(duì)客戶需求迅速做出反應(yīng)的一個(gè)重要途徑。出于類(lèi)似的考慮，巴斯夫增大了在印度、馬來(lái)西亞的研發(fā)投資，甚至是印尼的研發(fā)投資。由于預(yù)測(cè)中國(guó)會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)強(qiáng)勁的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)，巴斯夫等公司斷定他們不能不在這里進(jìn)行研究。

　　Meanwhile, what of the costs (Mr. Dreher might prefer the word “challenges”) of doing so?

　　與此同時(shí)，這樣做的代價(jià)（或德雷爾可能更愿意用“挑戰(zhàn)”這個(gè)詞）是什么呢？

　　Some of Mr. Dreher's worries sound familiar. China produces a much-vaunted army of science grads, but the education system often leaves them unprepared to work in a modern research center. Mr. Dreher notes that despite recent improvement, too many grads still focus too narrowly on one branch of chemistry, for instance, depriving themselves of the broader scope successful research requires. Lack of English fluency is a big problem, especially for foreign companies whose China-based researchers must be able to collaborate with scientists around the world.

　　德雷爾的一些顧慮聽(tīng)起來(lái)很耳熟。中國(guó)培養(yǎng)了大量?jī)?yōu)秀的理科大學(xué)畢業(yè)生，但中國(guó)的教育體系往往沒(méi)有讓這些學(xué)生做好在一家現(xiàn)代化研究中心進(jìn)行工作的準(zhǔn)備。德雷爾指出，盡管最近有所改善，但還是有太多畢業(yè)生仍然只關(guān)注化學(xué)的一個(gè)分支，這令他們喪失了成功的研究所需要的廣泛視野。另外，英語(yǔ)不夠流利也是個(gè)大問(wèn)題，尤其對(duì)于外資企業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)，其中國(guó)研究人員必須能和世界各地的科學(xué)家共同合作。

　　Then there's personnel management. High staff turnover plagues many companies and will not be easily fixed. It's not only salary competition. Mr. Dreher cites fundamental differences in corporate culture as a big culprit.

　　接下來(lái)則是人事管理。員工流失率較高的問(wèn)題困擾著許多企業(yè)，這一問(wèn)題也不會(huì)輕易得到解決。造成這一現(xiàn)象的原因不僅僅是薪酬競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，德雷爾認(rèn)為企業(yè)文化的根本差異才是“罪魁禍?zhǔn)?rdquo;。

　　In the West, a researcher measures career progress not only in terms of job title but also with less tangible metrics such as whether he's able to take on greater levels of informal leadership responsibility over time. Chinese hires tend to be much more concerned about prospects for rapid promotion up a well-defined hierarchy. Western companies struggle to accommodate that mentality.

　　在西方國(guó)家，研究員在考量職業(yè)路徑的時(shí)候，不僅關(guān)注職稱(chēng)，還很在意一些不太有形的指標(biāo)，比如隨著時(shí)間的推移，他是否能承擔(dān)更高層次的非正式領(lǐng)導(dǎo)責(zé)任。中國(guó)職員往往更加關(guān)注在一個(gè)層級(jí)明晰的企業(yè)里能否快速升遷。西方企業(yè)正在努力適應(yīng)中國(guó)員工的這種心態(tài)。

　　This in turn is the main source of concern over intellectual-property protection─the fear of what inside knowledge workers take with them when they leave. Mr. Dreher notes that China is better at protecting intellectual property today than it was five years ago. And staff turnover is an IP danger anywhere in the world. But Mr. Dreher says he has to be more careful in China simply because of the high volume of turnover. The design of the new innovation center has included consideration of how to manage workers' access to various kinds of information to limit the leakage when any one worker leaves.

　　這繼而成為企業(yè)擔(dān)憂知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的主要原因：企業(yè)擔(dān)心員工離職時(shí)可能帶走什么樣的內(nèi)部信息。德雷爾指出，和五年前相比，中國(guó)如今的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)做的更好。人員流動(dòng)在全球任何一個(gè)地方都會(huì)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)構(gòu)成威脅，但德雷爾說(shuō)，他在中國(guó)得更加小心，因?yàn)橹袊?guó)的人員流動(dòng)率很高。在設(shè)計(jì)新的創(chuàng)新中心時(shí)已經(jīng)考慮到如何設(shè)置員工接觸各類(lèi)信息的權(quán)限，這樣當(dāng)任何一位員工離職時(shí)，能降低信息泄漏的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。

　　Mr. Dreher raises one other challenge, and it's the most surprising one of all: the government. Despite Beijing's stated support, Mr. Dreher notes that at a practical level building the innovation center has been challenging simply because of the red tape involved in building anything in China. He points to the hassle of securing building permits and other licenses from various levels of local government.

　　德雷爾提出的另一大問(wèn)題則是所有顧慮中最令人驚訝的：政府。德雷爾指出，盡管有中國(guó)政府的明確支持，但在實(shí)際操作中建設(shè)創(chuàng)新中心仍頗具挑戰(zhàn)，這是因?yàn)樵谥袊?guó)建造任何東西都要涉及繁瑣的審批。他指出，為了從地方政府的各個(gè)部門(mén)獲得建設(shè)許可和其它牌照，他們費(fèi)了不少周折。

　　This implies that Beijing's message on innovation-encouragement hasn't always filtered down to the local level, or that local officials haven't always understood the relationship between “supporting innovation” and seemingly unrelated issues such as building permits. Indeed, in Mr. Dreher's telling government pro-innovation policy has been less significant than some might think. While BASF, like any rational company, won't argue with tax breaks or other benefits, Mr. Dreher insists market forces are driving the company's China research push.

　　這意味著中央政府鼓勵(lì)創(chuàng)新的指示并不能總是下達(dá)到地方政府，或是地方官員并不總是能理解“支持創(chuàng)新”和建筑許可這類(lèi)看上去無(wú)關(guān)的事情之間的聯(lián)系。事實(shí)上，從德雷爾的講話中我們得知，政府支持創(chuàng)新的政策可能不如一些人想象的重要。盡管同任何一家理性的公司一樣，巴斯夫不會(huì)去極力爭(zhēng)取稅收減免或其它好處，但德雷爾堅(jiān)持說(shuō)是市場(chǎng)力量推動(dòng)該公司的中國(guó)研究。

　　Despite the challenges, “there is no way around doing R&D in China,” Mr. Dreher tells me as we conclude our chat. He's almost certainly right, which might explain much of the run-up in R&D work multinationals are shifting to China. China will presumably get a lot of mileage out of that fact even without any further reforms. But this case study─and BASF is by all accounts not unique─suggests that the change from necessary innovation center to desirable R&D hub will take more than a couple of five-year plans.

　　當(dāng)我們結(jié)束談話時(shí)，德雷爾告訴我，盡管面臨挑戰(zhàn)，但在中國(guó)進(jìn)行研發(fā)就是這個(gè)情況。他說(shuō)的基本沒(méi)錯(cuò)，這或許能解釋跨國(guó)企業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)移至中國(guó)的研發(fā)工作大量激增的原因?；谶@一事實(shí)，即使沒(méi)有任何進(jìn)一步改革，中國(guó)仍將可能獲得大量好處。但這個(gè)案例（普遍認(rèn)為巴斯夫絕非個(gè)案）告訴我們，中國(guó)想要從一個(gè)企業(yè)不得不在此設(shè)立創(chuàng)新中心的國(guó)家變身令人向往的創(chuàng)新樞紐，不是幾個(gè)“五年計(jì)劃”就能實(shí)現(xiàn)的。