with the scientists sharing our vision of developing indigenous missile technology and explaining the different aspects of the IGMDP . After prolonged discussions , we decided to reorganize the laboratory into a technologyoriented structure . We needed to accommodate a matrix type of structure for the execution of various activities needed for the projects . In less than four months , four hundred scientists began to work on the missile programme .
During this period , the most important task before me was the selection of the Project Directors to lead individual missile projects . We had a very large pool of talent . In fact , it was a market of plenty . The question was whom to pick — a go-getter , a planner , a maverick , a dictator or a team man ? I had to get the right type of leader who could clearly visualize the goal , and channelise the energies of his team members who would be working at different work centres in pursuit of their own individual goals .
It was a difficult game , some rules of which I had learnt while working on ISRO ’ s high priority projects for two decades . The wrong choice would jeopardise the entire future of the programme . I had a detailed discussion with a large number of prospective scientists and engineers . I wanted these five Project Directors to train another twentyfive project directors and team leaders of tomorrow .
Many of my senior colleagues — naming them would be unfair , because it could be only my imagination — tried to befriend me during this period . I respected their concern for a lonely man , but avoided any close contacts . Through loyalty to a friend one can be easily led into doing something that is not in the best interests of the organization .
Perhaps the main motive behind my isolation was my desire to escape from the demands of relationships , which I consider very difficult in comparison to making rockets . All I desired was to be true to my way of life , to uphold the science of rocketry in my country and to retire with a clean conscience . I took quite some time and did a lot of hard thinking to decide who should lead the five projects . I examined the working styles of many scientists before making my decision . I think some of my observations may interest you .
A basic aspect of a person ’ s working style is how he plans and organizes tasks . At one extreme is the cautious planner , who carefully spells out each step before making any move . With a sharp eye for what can possibly go wrong , he tries to cover all contingencies . At the other end is the fast mover , who weaves and dodges without a plan . Inspired by an idea , the fast mover is always ready for action .
Another aspect of a person ’ s working style is control — the energy and attention devoted to ensuring that things happen in a certain way . At one extreme is the tight controller , a strict administrator with frequent checkpoints . Rules and policies are to be followed with religious fervour . At the opposite end are those who move with freedom and flexibility . They have little patience for bureaucracy . They delegate easily and give their subordinates wide latitude for movement . I wanted leaders who tread the middle path , those who could control without stifling dissent or being rigid .
I wanted men who had the capability to grow with possibilities , with the patience to explore all possible alternatives , with the wisdom to apply old principles to new situations ; people with the skill to negotiate their way forward . I wanted them to be accommodating , to be willing