The percentage of that type of research that can be pursued is certainly smaller now that we are competitive in every aspect of our business than it was in previous years, when we had a monopoly and only had to worry about how best to spend money. So we depend on the best scientists to make those decisions and to pursue them.
Lawrence H. Dubois, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency: As a former Bell Labs employee, I can say this is a radical change from the way things used to be done. Have you taken the criteria and the concepts that you talked about here and gone back 5, 10, 15 years and applied them to some of the developments there to see if they really work? That is, would these criteria and concepts have identified in the past those technologies that proved to be important to the corporation in the future?
James W. Mitchell: No, we've not gone back in the past and looked at case studies. When you apply these approaches, you can easily pick out the winning projects and the losing projects. In the middle, there are going to be a number of projects that will be closely rated, and then you have to use managerial judgment to prioritize those.
So let me also make it clear that we do not apply this process across the board in every phase of the research organization. I have applied this approach to certain projects, for example, in one particular area where we had many, many projects and wanted as rational an approach as possible to determine which one of those to deemphasize. But no, we have not gone back in the past and applied the process. That would be an interesting project to undertake.