Working on risky R&D proposals requires a balance between innovation and due diligence. When someone insists on an untested solution, I recommend conducting a feasibility study to assess technical, financial, and operational viability. After this, piloting the solution in a controlled environment mitigates risk while demonstrating its potential. For example, during my work on a micronutrient fertilizer still undergoing testing, we piloted it on small, monitored plots. This allowed us to collect essential data, address uncertainties, and refine the product before scaling. By combining analysis with practical testing, we aligned stakeholder vision with scientific rigor, ensuring a calculated approach to innovation.

When there is an external desire to implement or use an untested solution, the first step is to communicate clearly so that everyone is aware that this approach is being taken. After that, we can still take steps that provide insight into whether the results of the untested solution are suitable and desired, and implement additional scale-up steps that help gather sufficient data and build trust in the solution. As a long-term goal, we can set the objective of systematically testing such an untested solution at a later point in the future, when the opportunity arises.

Navigating the push for an untested R&D solution requires a balanced approach. 🧭 I engage the stakeholder with data-driven insights, highlighting potential risks and benefits. This transparent dialogue ensures informed decision-making and aligns expectations. 📊 By proposing a phased testing approach, I mitigate risks while exploring the solution's viability. 🔄 Continuous feedback and adaptation keep the project on track, fostering innovation without compromising quality. 🚀 #RiskManagement #InnovativeSolutions

Navigating a stakeholder’s push for an untested solution in R&D requires tact, analysis, and collaboration. Begin by acknowledging their input to maintain rapport and explain the potential risks objectively. Propose a compromise, such as running a pilot or feasibility study to evaluate the solution on a smaller scale. Present data-driven comparisons of tested and untested options, emphasizing implications for timelines, costs, and outcomes. Involve the stakeholder in risk mitigation planning to foster shared accountability. Throughout, communicate transparently, showing how the proposed path aligns with project goals while safeguarding innovation and reliability.

R&D by itself is a risky activity. Also, by nature R&D is an activity to invent or create or improve something that never been done before. Some elements of "untested" solutions may be there. Things to consider in this situation are: - Make sure the untested solution is not implemented in the critical aspect of the project that cannot be compromised. - Make sure the untested solutions has enough improvement or benefits to justify the risk of implementing it. - If the untested solution may degrade the uncompromised aspects of the project. we should say no but we need to give detailed explanation to the stake holder why we cannot implement the untested solutions. - Keep continuous communication with stakeholders during the project course.

Tested solution = possibly patented Untested solution = potential for innovation, but only research part of R&D practices can determine if it really is untested. If proposed solution aligns with vision of the purpose of the product it should be tested. This is R&D, everything we do is to find and manage the risk associated with proposals. I never understand why are we still doing stupid exercise of risk/benefit feasibility study for R&D projects: Potential benefits: gaining a competitive edge, or at very least expand knowledgebase of what works and what does not. Potential risk: learn nothing new. The only useful feasibility study for R&D is: "What makes this solution possible to implement?" And "Do we have resources to make it happen?"