The Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) in Nes Ziona is considered one of the leading scientific research institutes in Israel. In recent years, however, the institute has faced a crisis that has left its very existence in question and serious claims made by a group of leading researchers there exposes the extent of the crisis.
According to the researchers, the crisis stems for the most part from what they define as professional failures on the part of IIBR Director Professor Shmuel Shapira. The extensive budget cuts currently hovering over the institute – something it has faced before – only increase the uncertainty regarding its future.
The researchers expressing concern come from all walks of science and represent a large group of veteran researchers with extensive experience.
"There are many excellent researchers at the institute," explains one. "It's the management's job to channel the staff's unique research capabilities in productive directions and that's exactly what's not happening.
Shapira's management, he says, leads to a "haphazard dispersion of scientific resources. He jumps from one thing to another with no direction and things just don't come together. Science cannot be undertaken under these conditions."
The researchers describe an institute that has lost its way and fails to work toward clear, central objectives. According to them, the director expects that good things will just "fall out of the sky."
Another veteran researcher said, "The institute has extensive capabilities and high-quality individuals who can make a real contribution to the country. But due to the unprofessional leadership, the institute cannot fulfill their commitments. And that's actually the worst part – that a large portion of the things they say about us are true."
The institute was established in 1952 to handle research into defenses against biological and chemical warfare. It operates under the auspices of the Prime Minister's Office, much like the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center in Dimona, and works closely with the Defense Ministry.
Some of its research has led to developments with commercial applications. Researchers from the IIBR have helped develop the polio vaccine; kits to identify explosives and a drug to treat Sjogren's syndrome. The IIBR also operates Life Science Research Israel, a government company that provides services and marketing for the products that result from its cooperation with the institute.
The institute employs 350 people, a large portion of whom hold doctorates in their respective fields, along with technicians and administrative staff. Its activities are classified and only rarely is the public made aware of what goes on. According to the institute's scientists, however, this secrecy is what allows the facility to operate in a bubble of sorts, without close scientific control, creating significant dependence on the administration in a manner that allows projects to fall apart with insufficient warning.
"Not long ago, Shapira convened the institute's staff and declared that we were under attack from a thousand different directions," reports one senior researcher. "He has been in this role for six years, he has full authority. The institute today is an exact reflection of his image. And he stands in front of all of us, tells us how much the state of the institute is getting worse and worse, that we are failing and have problems, that they're cutting our budget, that they're trying to trip us up – and not only does he not offer a solution, he presents it as if he feels no responsibility for the situation."
A crisis of trust
Shapira, an anesthesiologist by training, has headed the institute since 2013, after serving as the deputy CEO of the Hadassah Medical Center. According to the researchers with whom we spoke, a large portion of the failures exposed at the institute stem from the fact that Shapira does not come from a discipline that is central to the institute's research and may not be sufficiently familiar with the fields in which it operates. As a result, they claim, Shapira has failed during his tenure to create a satisfactory scientific agenda at the institute.
"Not long ago, Shapira announced his future plans for the institute," says one senior researcher. "The scientists sat there pulling their hair out from sheer frustration. He presents things he seems to have found on Google with all kinds of buzzwords from areas of technology that are entirely unrelated to the things being done at the institute. We all came out of there mortified."
"Essentially, every new researcher that begins working with us understands more about research than the institute's director," adds another researcher. "Research centers around the world are headed by leading scientists. The IIBR somehow managed to invent a way of managing a scientific entity that entails no understanding of science and this is what it looks like."
One of the most important functions of the institute's director is to create a responsible and professional leadership structure. According to the researchers, appointments at Nes Ziona have become a farce.
"Shapira approaches appointments in a non-scientific manner, too. He approaches it like it's a technical and political issue, appointing people who are close to him," says a senior researcher.
"It looks like Shapira is trying to keep weak and obedient people under him, people who spend most of their time complimenting him," says another. "If he had appointed our best scientists to cover his own misgivings, the institute might have a chance. But he prefers granting leadership positions to subordinate scientists with very little experience. Maybe that's how a political party operates, but not a research institute. He can't accept feedback or be overshadowed, so he appoints the most political people in the most professional positions. There is a serious breakdown of trust between the researchers and leadership."
Dr. Avigdor Shafferman, the previous director, resigned in protest over planned budget cuts. According to institute staff, Shapira approached them in an entirely different manner. In an attempt to minimize the financial damage, they claim, their work has been compromised.
"In order to close the deficit created during his time there, Shapira requires us to provide paid services to the industry and commercial entities. This comes at the price of our scientific research, which is necessary for national security," say the researchers.
"He is forcing us to provide our services to anyone with money, including commercial companies."
The institute's scientists are paid by the government to provide national security research services and selling these services to commercial companies raises difficult questions regarding supervision of funds, possible conflicts of interest, the ability to meet objectives set forth by the country and other security issues.
'It feels like a liquidation sale'
The immediate effect of the external projects is to undermine the institute's government research. "It's a destructive cycle," said one of the researchers. "To get the institute out of the budget crisis, we have to undermine our own research objectives. And then they tell us that we're not meeting goals and expectations and we're punished with additional budget cuts. So the institute is left with less money and we need to take on more external projects, then the cycle begins again. It looks like Shapira will eventually just privatize the institute entirely and list us on the stock exchange as a commercial company. After all, we're lost anyway."
Shapira discussed his financial strategy for the institute in an interview with Maariv two years ago.
"I took it upon myself to open this place up to the outside world as much as possible in order to expand our sources of income and scientific collaborations. We will continue with this open approach without hesitation," he said.
The researchers cited another problem. The institute is not a financial entity and no one there is in charge of business development.
"Our collaborations with external entities and the industry are done amateurishly. The pricing is arbitrary; the agreements are capricious. No one understands what's going on. It's all subject to Shapira's whims. We are operating in complete chaos. What do we know about pricing for industries? We aren't a business, a factory or a company. It feels like a liquidation sale," one said.
The researchers also take issue with the director's management style and methods. "As it stands, there is no real long-term plan," said one of the researchers. "There's no systematic decision-making."
Due to the approach described by the researchers and in light of the deepening crisis, many projects at the institute have been put on hold or are in danger of being shut down. And under Shapira's leadership, the number of scientists at IIBR continues to drop. "Shapira has hired far more administrative and executive staff and far fewer scientists," says a veteran scientist at the institute. "Good scientists won't be interested in working at the institute in the state it's in today."
Looking to the future
Shafferman, Shapira's predecessor, was known among the institute's scientists as a difficult director, focused and outspoken, whose conduct led to a media-hyped work conflict involving allegations of employee abuse. That said, no one doubted the scientific quality under his leadership. As one researcher put it: "Shafferman was a tough director and not an easy man, but he was a top scientist and he had a scientific vision and a scientific approach. Under his leadership, the science was at the heart of our operations."
"Shapira can't work alongside the entity that oversees us," explains a veteran researcher, who is familiar with the chain of command. "That's the reason for the budget cuts and crises and that's what has sent the institute into a spiral."
"It's true that Avigdor [Shafferman] was a tough man and he stayed on for too long," said another researcher. "But no one doubted the direction of the institute when he was in charge. There was clear direction and a lot of real achievements. Shapira fights with everyone and then claims the institute is under attack."
One of the institute's most prominent projects and among the only ones that have been made public is the environmental wind tunnel laboratory. Housed in a dedicated structure three stories tall, it includes a 14-meter-long tunnel and a huge, 32-meter-long system that pumps wind in under controlled conditions for the purpose of various experiments in civil engineering and other industries. However, the construction of the tunnel and the circumstances of its operations are under audit by the state comptroller and his conclusions have yet to be published. Perhaps the audit is the source of Shapira's claims that the institute is "under attack."
According to one senior source, the review's findings were very poor and corroborate the researchers' claims of problematic management. Recently, a special committee was established to examine the institute's future operations. Researchers say there is real concern that the findings will lead to additional budget cuts.
"It's hard to find a serious researcher at the IIBR who respects Shapira," say the institute's employees. "There's a sense of disappointment and a feeling of gloom and despair in the air. The director only cares about ceremonies, activities and events. … He has lost our trust."
The researchers are clear on what went wrong. "After years of dragging their feet and letting [the institute] fall to pieces, they appointed an external committee to oversee us," they say. "It's fair, though. No one needs to tell us that we're not delivering the goods. We know that. But we're also not a failing municipality and no one can operate us remotely."
"The writing is on the wall," says a senior researcher, reflecting on the situation. "There's no reason for the entire institute to be hurt and for Israel's scientific security be undermined by further budget cuts and external intervention. We don't need committees, we need the system that appointed Shapira to admit its error and replace him someone who will offer three things that currently don't exist: leadership, scientific rigor and management skills. When the institute goes back to providing high-quality scientific security services, we'll be able to stabilize it again. I just hope that enough of the institute remains after Shapira leaves to be able to rehabilitate it. It's critical to the state of Israel."
The IIBR issued a statement in response to the allegations made in this article:
"The Institute for Biological Research is a professional, leading research institute respected in Israel and abroad. Contrary to these claims, there is no crisis and in fact the opposite is true; the committee of experts that includes senior members from the health care system and academia was appointed with a focus on the future and with the objective of progressing in a direction that is right for the institute and the State of Israel, focusing decades ahead and with the goal of updating the institute's tasks to meet any future challenges that may arise. The institute and its employees will continue to serve as a hub of national knowledge and its innovative scientific work will serve the citizens of the State of Israel in a wide and diverse range of fields. Any other interpretation is false and misleading."
The State Comptroller's office responded: "We are indeed conducting an audit at IIBR regarding the Environmental Wind Tunnel Laboratory. The audit is in progress. The findings will be published according to the provisions of the State Comptroller's Law and the binding rules therein. Until publication, we cannot provide any details regarding the audit."
