The Langer Lab
THE LANGER LAB CASE written by Stefano Cioccari (matricola RM11246)
After reading the case in question, in my point of you, I can underline three main key points. First of all, it is instrumental to emphasize the figure of Robert Langer. He’s able to attract to himself very successful people, as Edwards said: “he attracts stars”. Himself is a successful man both on academic and in the scientific and commercial field, not forgetting he has received a dozen of rejected on his career. A recommendation I can do: everyone needs to believe in what we do because only few new ideas are completely unsuccessful. In our life we’ll receive many rejection, like Langer got by the two Stanford professors (Kornberg and Flory). That doesn’t mean our way is not worthy. Maybe it just needs to be revised and/or crossed more intensely. Second point on where I want to put my attention is the meaning of multidisciplinary, that is multiple disciplines to redefine problems outside of normal boundaries and reach solutions based on a new understanding of complex situations. Langer knew the importance of this concept, not only on his job, but to be creative in general, to develop big ideas. I also want to focus on the right mix between science and technology. His Lab developed technology but it’s just technology integrated with creativity that makes start the biggest idea, so it is innovation that makes change the world, as often repeated in the text. In this framework, multidisciplinary becomes an add value, an exchange of ideas and information between collaborators in several different sectors. In my point of view, in the globalized era, the key to create add value is to mix creativity with technology. Maybe Langer understood that researching this mix, putting his best attention on all kind of people to increase his knowledge. In few words, he looked to colleagues in other science to broaden his approaches to research. This affected also what problems he chose to investigate. Last but
After reading the case in question, in my point of you, I can underline three main key points. First of all, it is instrumental to emphasize the figure of Robert Langer. He’s able to attract to himself very successful people, as Edwards said: “he attracts stars”. Himself is a successful man both on academic and in the scientific and commercial field, not forgetting he has received a dozen of rejected on his career. A recommendation I can do: everyone needs to believe in what we do because only few new ideas are completely unsuccessful. In our life we’ll receive many rejection, like Langer got by the two Stanford professors (Kornberg and Flory). That doesn’t mean our way is not worthy. Maybe it just needs to be revised and/or crossed more intensely. Second point on where I want to put my attention is the meaning of multidisciplinary, that is multiple disciplines to redefine problems outside of normal boundaries and reach solutions based on a new understanding of complex situations. Langer knew the importance of this concept, not only on his job, but to be creative in general, to develop big ideas. I also want to focus on the right mix between science and technology. His Lab developed technology but it’s just technology integrated with creativity that makes start the biggest idea, so it is innovation that makes change the world, as often repeated in the text. In this framework, multidisciplinary becomes an add value, an exchange of ideas and information between collaborators in several different sectors. In my point of view, in the globalized era, the key to create add value is to mix creativity with technology. Maybe Langer understood that researching this mix, putting his best attention on all kind of people to increase his knowledge. In few words, he looked to colleagues in other science to broaden his approaches to research. This affected also what problems he chose to investigate. Last but