“Lead life jacket” is what they call it at Law School: that last question a professor asks when trying to pass a student in extremis, but which, if answered badly, sinks them for good. The life jacket is a simple question, some fact found in the law, because the real question comes next: “and why?”. “Because the law says so” is the only answer that can save the day. There is no need to dig into the reasons behind the rule; the certainty and security the law provides is enough, and lawyers learn to convey that to their clients.
Now imagine a scientist. He is in bed and wakes up suddenly. The alarm clock is ringing and the clock reads, as always, 6:30. You think, “he is awake because of the alarm clock.” But the scientist, trained in systematic doubt about the facts that seemingly support a hypothesis, cannot be sure that this is the cause until he has repeated the experiment a statistically representative number of times, with placebo alarm clocks, with insomniac test subjects, and at different times and in different beds. Only then does he develop a theory about the causes of his wakefulness, which lasts until someone else, or he himself with more data, comes up with a better explanation that may contradict the previous one.
Next, think of an entrepreneur. Without any evidence whatsoever, and even against all verifiable data, she knows her idea is good, and that it is only a matter of time before the rest of the world realizes it. And while she thinks about how she will change the world, she mortgages the family home to finance the last part of her business plan, peering into uncertainty with a tightrope walker’s knowing smile and butterflies in her stomach.
These are the main personalities that usually have to work closely together to turn scientific results into products and services on the market. With such different languages and cultures, an intermediary becomes indispensable: an interpreter who is also able to channel different visions, capabilities and motivations through the many difficulties they will encounter on the long road from a good idea to real innovation. This is the job of the technology manager, a person who usually combines experience and knowledge in intellectual property, applied science and technology business and who, given the focus and length of university degrees, is not a professional built in the classroom, but in day-to-day work and in collaboration with peers.
It is precisely as a way to foster this collaboration and share best practices, and with the good excuse of rewarding those who have stood out in this complex work, that the trade association that brings these professionals together (RedGT) manages to gather the entire national science, technology, knowledge and innovation ecosystem.
Read the original column at https://opinion.cooperativa.cl/opinion/ciencia-y-tecnologia/el-gestor-tecnologico-esa-bestia-mitologica-de-tres-cabezas/2025-01-13/165831.html
