Can R&D Save GE?

I surely hope GE can commercialize these innovations. If they don't do it quickly, someone else would. Innovation is now done all over the globe and to stay on top GE and American companies must now work harder and faster than ever before. Good luck

I surely hope GE can commercialize these innovations. If they don't do it quickly, someone else would. Innovation is now done all over the globe and to stay on top GE and American companies must now work harder and faster than ever before. Good luck GE

I will check out the latest trends in consumer and industrial product research and development on the Net...

http://www.ge.com

Excuse me, but the GE upstate NY “research laboratory” is a well known joke. They “playoff” one scientist against another in order to determine who’s productive and who isn’t. They got this idea years ago from Bell Labs (now Lucent) and the technique was later prevalent at Enron. This is the one policy which guarantees that nothing gets accomplished, as most commercial technologies are too complicated for one person.
They also expect scientists to solicit their own funds to perform research. (Yes, that’s right, scientists performing telemarketing.) Most scientist aren’t exactly enamored (or adept) at fund raising. This also takes away any time available for performing useful science. GE was underperforming long before it’s ’07-08 collapse. To explain that, you don’t have to look any further than “GE Research.”

This sounds so familiar to anyone who worked for IBM in the 60's. GE will be THE company of the 21st century if people can just get by the next quarter mentality.

There's an old common sense lesson I learned many years ago working at GE. If a business is making money stay with it. If it's not and you can't turn it around, get out of it and try something else or it will destroy your company. GE made money in the credit business but those days are long gone. It's clearly too stubborn to admit the error. Immelt has had 8 yrs. to turn the company around and he hasn't. Among other public misstatements, he said, "we stand by our dividend". It's time for him to turn the reins over to a more practical CEO.

I am a 12 year employee at GE Research. I work hard to bring new ideas to life. Our leadership challenges us to vet our ideas through a business oriented evaluation process. Much the same way a VC would evaluate several opportunities when placing bets. At GE Research we keep a line of sight to the end customer and we trust the process to maximize our R&D investment.
Gone are the good old days of "open ended" research and sand-box funding.
Also gone are all the other "research labs" which didn't adjust thier operating mode in the 1970's and 80's.
GE is more than 100 years strong and we are always looking for new ways to serve our customers in an ever changing world.

As if this weren’t enough, GE “research” patents are a well hidden waste of money. Most GE patents are "lousy ideas" issued to low and mid-level managers who want to appear technically productive (and also want a few extra bucks in their paychecks). GE should reveal how many of it’s flaunted research patents make the company money and compare that with industry averages. Then send a letter of apology to the stockholders.

To Retiredge76, you are really being to harsh on the R&D department of GE. "A well known joke" you say? I presently work at the R&D and yes you do have to earn your keep and sell your idea. Isn't that a life rule in general? The way this place was run in the 1970's was a joke and GE changed that quick to keep up in the global market. Gone are the days when GE would just through money at you and hope you produce. Yes you do have to sell your idea to get funding. Who better than the person who knows it inside and out? As Herman stated the 1970's and 1980's way of doing things does not work in this day and age. You must produce and speak up! Even if an individual is not the best with giving a presentation or 'selling' it really isn't a big deal. I have seen many times were the presenter did not speak the best english but the idea was good and it sold itself practically. There are alot of great ideas and good things going on here that can make a big difference in this company's future and life in general. Being a disgruntled ex employee who is overly negative and dreaming of a time past is not one of them. Please just stay retired. Calling a company you worked for, provided you a pay check, and most likely have stock in a joke is just not a good idea I would fund.

To Retiredge76, you are really being to harsh on the R&D department of GE. "A well known joke" you say? I presently work at the R&D and yes you do have to earn your keep and sell your idea. Isn't that a life rule in general? The way this place was run in the 1970's was a joke and GE changed that quick to keep up in the global market. Gone are the days when GE would just through money at you and hope you produce. Yes you do have to sell your idea to get funding. Who better than the person who knows it inside and out? As Herman stated the 1970's and 1980's way of doing things does not work in this day and age. You must produce and speak up! Even if an individual is not the best with giving a presentation or 'selling' it really isn't a big deal. I have seen many times were the presenter did not speak the best English but the idea was good and it sold itself practically. Just read the above article! They just vastly inproved the light bulb! There are alot of great ideas and good things going on here that can make a big difference in this company's future and life in general. Being a disgruntled X-employee who is overly negative and dreaming of a time past is not one of them. Please just stay retired. Calling a company you worked for, provided you a pay check, and most likely have stock in a joke is just not a good idea I would fund.

Please, no hard feelings! I just thought the investing public might like to know the truth.

I usually do not post comments to blogs, but I have questions for "retiredge76". Did you actually work at CRD back then (assuming you retired in 1976) and exactly what did YOU do? I have been at Global Research for 37 years. I have a fairly good perspective of the Center and it's history. Research today is not the Research of the 70's. I won't try to explain it to you because I do not think you will listen. No organization is perfect and all of them have plus and minus characteristics. Put simply, you're wrong. Get the correct information before you put your thoughts into words.

As a GE Global Research employee I agree that senior managers try to add their names in the patents files. Further, in the Imaging Technologies group I wonder if proper documentations practices are followed as required by the FDA. If FDA raids the GE Global Research center and finds out that the records for the medical systems designed there are not up to the mark then they could end up shutting the whole of GE - Healtcare. Couple of years back FDA had shut down the unit in SLC, Utah and it costed GE a lot. The Imaging Technologies group is well aware of the drawbacks of the GE scanners sold in the market. Documenting the flaws and rectifying them is a requirement by law. If GE-GRC is not documenting the research done there properly then senior managers like Mark Little show do something about it before it is too late.

I am glad GE is down in price. I am a new investor with 30+ years to retire and I am putting capital at risk investing in GE and its people.

I think The stock will stay depressed for a while but that is fine, At these 17 and under prices its nice. I was able to grab 3100 shares to add to my long term investment portfolio. (I reinvest dividends and covered call premiums as well back into GE)

As if that weren’t enough, a number of the “high profile” GE Research scientists over the years have been frauds. (The thing works in the laboratory, but not when the company tires to make and sell it.) This is small potatoes, right? Wrong! Because of the way the place is run (competitively), many (hundreds of) honest scientists have left for greener pastures because they couldn’t compete “with the big boys.” These people could’ve and should’ve been making money for GE instead of their new employers. It never happened and the now shareholders have been paying for it!