Tony Gorschek: “We live and breathe there, with the companies!”

Tony and his colleagues take more time for dialogue with companies than their resources perhaps allow, because doing so also frees up time. Taking the time to redefine a problem can often save time later in the process or be utilised in another project. One leads to another. We also experience this when meeting Tony. He takes the time to explain the technology in simple terms and is keen for us to understand the many possibilities of software technology. He personifies the dedicated teacher to whom anyone interested – whether students, researchers, people from a company – would like to talk to. His commitments are broad, extending well beyond the core of his research. Tony’s interest in film and music is present in our conversation, not least through his many references to popular culture.

Making research understandable – and relevant to many

When we meet Tony in Karlskrona, we are not only given a tour but also the story of the idea behind the area where the researchers are based – popularly known as Badtunnan, ‘the hot tub’. The tour further takes us past the podcast room where he also spends time communicating research and making it understandable. All research is about, and requires, a burden of proof. Research is not about having many opinions, says Tony, it’s about knowing. A researcher should develop knowledge that can be proven – until the day when new research findings show otherwise. Researchers must always be prepared to reconsider established knowledge – research is a never-ending journey.

“Root cause analysis!” Tony exclaims several times during our conversation, suggesting that instead of fixating on a symptom of a problem, it is important to conduct basic analysis to find its root. When this is done, most things become researchable, because root problems are almost always long term.

Perhaps it is the habit of being close to various companies and collaborating across professions that explains why Tony is so good at describing what software engineering is all about. He explains passionately how everything we consume – whether products or services – is comprised of software. Software is today what electricity was in the early twentieth century. 

Between theory and practice

With great enthusiasm, Tony shares his experiences of collaboration and explains that it is ultimately about mutual learning. What Tony and his research colleagues learn from one collaborative project is carried with them into other contexts, thus continuously developing knowledge. It works the same way for companies.

Half the benefit for companies is the indirect transfer of knowledge and expertise, and the other half is the solution. At the same time, we can only measure the solution objectively. But we often see that the companies associate much of the benefit, or at least 50 percent, with the journey. And then there’s knowledge transfer from us to them and from them to us.

The research team is driven by their ability to cross boundaries, understand challenges faced by different companies and find new, smart ways to develop software-driven products and services. The knowledge domain involved is not really important, i.e. whether they are contributing to the defence industry, a service company such as Spotify, or a traditional industrial company like Tetra Pak. Quality and functionality requirements may of course vary, and are for example higher in an aeroplane than in a music streaming service. Yet broadly speaking, the process remains the same. 

Together with the companies, the real problem is identified and then a solution is devised to allow the most efficient quality development of products and services possible. Time is needed to problematise and find the root of the problem. Quick-fix solutions could be developed more speedily by consultants.

The challenge is that there are currently not many funders who are firmly committed to collaboration at the interface between theory and practice, despite the fact that there are many funders that require and advocate collaboration. In this way, the Knowledge Foundation may be unique in the world. There are few countries in which academia has the same relationship with industry as we do in Sweden, and this enables us to perform a balancing act: becoming neither all too theoretical nor adapting too much to the companies.

Explaining and defending your role 

Tony is careful to stress that we have different roles in society, and that researchers are and must be allowed to be different. Both researchers interested in theory development and those interested in applying research to solve practical problems are needed. Tony describes sometimes not only needing to explain his role but also having to defend it to researchers with other backgrounds:

I take it more as a badge of honour. I generxally argue as much with people in industry as with theoreticians. That’s fine, because my job is to try to figure out how to use good theoretical research to make things work in the real world. And when I’m working between them, I’m always going to be annoying to both sides. But if they both dislike me equally, then I’m pretty successful, I think. And I don’t mean dislike in a bad way.

In a way, the role of a collaborative researcher involves “being difficult” for both theory and practice. To collaborate, a researcher needs to be able to ask the right kind of questions about what the real problem is, while still respecting the company. The task is to make the theory applicable, or in some cases to demonstrate that the theory does not work in practice, but also to understand and get to know the business and to build trust. This in itself requires time and interest.

Both researchers and entrepreneurs aim to contribute to solving problems. For the researcher, however, it does not stop there – scientific publications must also be written and accepted. For Tony and his fellow researchers, publications offer an opportunity to be scrutinised and to verify and develop their own analysis.

When I say publish, I don’t really care about the publication itself. For me, it’s just a tool allowing the whole world to criticise the way I solved a problem and measure the relevance and effectiveness of the solution.

By having their research scrutinised, Tony and his colleagues are challenged and can develop ways of getting closer to the problem and refining their practical solution. Applied research requires the researcher to both deliver some form of benefit to the company and at the same time make scientific contributions. 

Waiting list!

There is a sense of pride and gratitude towards the companies that initially invested in Blekinge Institute of Technology and this research field. Today the situation is different; companies are queuing to join new collaborative projects. This may be deemed a luxury problem, but it vexes Tony. According to him, nothing is worse than having to say no.

The fact that the research group does not have the capacity to accept more companies at present is partly due to a conscious strategy and the desire to “cultivate” the professors of the future instead of “picking them up” on the side. For collaboration to be successful, both a well-established structure and a culture that rewards and promotes long-term learning and development are needed. Tony describes this in terms of the importance of constantly sticking to the craft.

The craft is everything from how you collaborate with companies, to how you get them to be interested in working with you, to how you sell ideas about research. Why should they engage in research, why can’t they just hire consultants? The human aspect is important. You can talk as much as you like, and you can be as good as you like, but if you don’t open the door, it just doesn’t matter. It’s partly selling, but the most important thing is organising your work in a way that’s relevant both to science and business, while at the same time keeping it humanly possible.

So, it is not either or for Tony, it is both and. The fun and value lie precisely at the intersection of the theoretically sophisticated – able to withstand the research community’s scrutiny – and the practical solution. To remain successful and develop innovations of the future in Sweden, all these aspects must be nurtured and supported: “We need theoretical research, we need research between theory and practice, and we need people in companies who can work on these issues.”

Text: Maria Grafström & Anna Jonsson. Photo: Sebastian Borg