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.

　　中国政府宣称的将该国变成全球研发中心的宏伟目标引发了不小的质疑。毕竟，创新并非一个官僚能够突发奇想、凭空而造的东西。揭开中国令人瞩目的数据（比如专利申报数据）表面后，真正的创新常常比人们看到的要少。

　　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.

　　尽管如此，质疑和嘲讽是有区别的。在参观过上海以北距离市中心约一小时车程的一个大型化工厂后，我体会到了一味忽视中国的创新雄心为何是个错误。

　　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.

　　我参观的是德国化工公司巴斯夫(BASF)旗下的一家工厂。该公司正在中国大力投资研发。这个面积有数英亩的园区已经建满了展示厅、制造设施和实验室，再加上一个造价5,500万欧元（合7,500万美元）的新建研究设施和一个新总部，园区将变得更加拥挤不堪。巴斯夫预计这个中心明年启用后，将招聘450名专业人士。

　　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.

　　即便在新的设施上线之前，研究已经在进行中了。该公司在这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学添加剂或防尘油漆）。身穿白色工作服的中国技术人员根据客户的要求微调化学混合物，对现有产品进行细小的调整。这就是“研究开发”中所指的“开发”。

　　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？这正是德雷尔(Stefan Dreher)负责的工作。他是巴斯夫的一位科学家兼管理者，负责设立这个新的创新中心。我在参观完工厂后，和他通电话聊了聊，因为我在上海时他正好去了印度。

　　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.

　　我提出的第一个问题是，鉴于存在的挑战，为何选择中国？德雷尔说，这是因为我们需要在客户所在的地方进行研发。靠近客户这种老式做法是收集市场情报、对客户需求迅速做出反应的一个重要途径。出于类似的考虑，巴斯夫增大了在印度、马来西亚的研发投资，甚至是印尼的研发投资。由于预测中国会实现强劲的经济增长，巴斯夫等公司断定他们不能不在这里进行研究。

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

　　与此同时，这样做的代价（或德雷尔可能更愿意用“挑战”这个词）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.

　　德雷尔的一些顾虑听起来很耳熟。中国培养了大量优秀的理科大学毕业生，但中国的教育体系往往没有让这些学生做好在一家现代化研究中心进行工作的准备。德雷尔指出，尽管最近有所改善，但还是有太多毕业生仍然只关注化学的一个分支，这令他们丧失了成功的研究所需要的广泛视野。另外，英语不够流利也是个大问题，尤其对于外资企业来说，其中国研究人员必须能和世界各地的科学家共同合作。

　　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.

　　接下来则是人事管理。员工流失率较高的问题困扰着许多企业，这一问题也不会轻易得到解决。造成这一现象的原因不仅仅是薪酬竞争，德雷尔认为企业文化的根本差异才是“罪魁祸首”。

　　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.

　　在西方国家，研究员在考量职业路径的时候，不仅关注职称，还很在意一些不太有形的指标，比如随着时间的推移，他是否能承担更高层次的非正式领导责任。中国职员往往更加关注在一个层级明晰的企业里能否快速升迁。西方企业正在努力适应中国员工的这种心态。

　　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.

　　这继而成为企业担忧知识产权保护的主要原因：企业担心员工离职时可能带走什么样的内部信息。德雷尔指出，和五年前相比，中国如今的知识产权保护做的更好。人员流动在全球任何一个地方都会对知识产权构成威胁，但德雷尔说，他在中国得更加小心，因为中国的人员流动率很高。在设计新的创新中心时已经考虑到如何设置员工接触各类信息的权限，这样当任何一位员工离职时，能降低信息泄漏的风险。

　　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.

　　德雷尔提出的另一大问题则是所有顾虑中最令人惊讶的：政府。德雷尔指出，尽管有中国政府的明确支持，但在实际操作中建设创新中心仍颇具挑战，这是因为在中国建造任何东西都要涉及繁琐的审批。他指出，为了从地方政府的各个部门获得建设许可和其它牌照，他们费了不少周折。

　　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.

　　这意味着中央政府鼓励创新的指示并不能总是下达到地方政府，或是地方官员并不总是能理解“支持创新”和建筑许可这类看上去无关的事情之间的联系。事实上，从德雷尔的讲话中我们得知，政府支持创新的政策可能不如一些人想象的重要。尽管同任何一家理性的公司一样，巴斯夫不会去极力争取税收减免或其它好处，但德雷尔坚持说是市场力量推动该公司的中国研究。

　　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.

　　当我们结束谈话时，德雷尔告诉我，尽管面临挑战，但在中国进行研发就是这个情况。他说的基本没错，这或许能解释跨国企业转移至中国的研发工作大量激增的原因。基于这一事实，即使没有任何进一步改革，中国仍将可能获得大量好处。但这个案例（普遍认为巴斯夫绝非个案）告诉我们，中国想要从一个企业不得不在此设立创新中心的国家变身令人向往的创新枢纽，不是几个“五年计划”就能实现的。