~eechnoioKyInSoczety,Vol.9,pp. l-17(1987) Prmted m the USA. All rights reserved. 0160-791X/87$3.00 + .OO Copyright F 1987 Pergamon Journals Ltd zyxwvutsr Evaluating Industrial Competitiveness at the Office of Technology Assessment John A. Ah ABSTRACT. When the Ofice of Technology Assessment (OTA) began to study the corn- petitive standing of US ina’ushes in zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK 1978, no one bad a very c/ear idea of bow to do this. Economists tended to rely on output-side indicators - trade balances and market shares, em- pioyment andproj2 levels. In OTA’s view, these were often no more than symptoms. The need was to get at causes - to grasp the dynamics of change in industries as varied as micro- electronics and steel and to sort long-run competitive trends from short-term fluctuations. This means understanding the internal workings offirms and industrh: bow business deci- sions are made, where investment capital comes from, bow new products are developed. While retaining an overall comparative advantage framework, OTA has therefore stressed factors that affect competitiveness as inputs. Among these are product andprocess tecbnol- ogles, choice of business strategies, and labor force cbaracteerirtics. To some extent, al/ are sector-specific andjrm-specific. Direct and indirect impacts offederalpolicies - trade mea- sures, taxes, regulations- have also been central concerns, along with foreign industriizl policies. OTA ‘s studies of competitiveness have been subject to extensive externJ reviews. In the end, bowever, the criticalstep has been the development of an independent capa- bihty within OTA for weighing the factors that affect competitiveness. Staff members associated with several programs at the Office of Technology Assess- ment, an analytical arm of Congress, have carried out assessments of the com- petitive standing of US industries at the request of House and Senate committees. 1 Sometimes the focus has been international (electronics, biotechnology), some- times domestic (automobiles, steel). Other OTA studies, including several now in progress, require a grasp of competitive dynamics-domestically, internationally, or both-even where industrial competition has not been the primary subject of a Congressional request. This paper describes the approach OTA has taken to competitive assessments in electronics, automobiles, and steel-specifically, the second and third reports listed in Note zyxwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA 1. OTA’s approach to competitiveness, like its approach to technology as- sessment in general, has been more eclectic than generic. Just as an engineer devel- oping a new product must take account of circumstances-the people available for the project, the technology base that forms a starting point, dollar and time bud- John A. Ahc has been a Pm&t Director with the Ofice of Technology , Assessment of the US Congress since 1979. Current/y in the Industry, Technology , and Emplbyment Pro- gram, he is at present directing a study entitled “International’ Competition in the Ser- vice Industrk. ”