While reading my peer’s blogs I came across an interesting argument he put forward in one of his blogs, India’s budget mission to Mars, that speaks about cost reduction due to advancement in technology. I agree with him on the fact that technology can be helpful and cost efficient, however researching and developing new technology is expensive. Hence research and development involves high amount of opportunity cost.

In my opinion research and development should be done in productive use. Considering this example, although it is cost effective, the mission to mars costed India a whooping $74 million. For a developing country where there is lack of basic necessities in rural regions, should the government fund such an expensive project that is not going to be productive for the full nation directly? My friend labeled the mission as a way to join the “elite club of nations” who have managed to conduct space missions to other planets, however i feel that the money could have been better invested in improving the education, living standards and infrastructure of India. Even researching on ways to build cheaper homes would have been a better option since it could be of use for a vast demographic of the population.

Similarly in the corporate world investing in productive research can prove to be very profitable if directed towards its consumer’s preferences. For example Apple have been developing products that suit the wants of its consumers like user friendly and productive, hence they have been able to maintain their position in the market. On the other hand Blackberry combined the feature of touch and type in the same product which made its products complex and resulted in a decline of its sales.

P.S. (Please click on the image to visit the image source)