Does “Pre-Competitive” Even Exist?

Heat Treat Today publishes twelve print magazines annually and included in each is a letter from the publisher, Doug Glenn. This letter from the August 2026 Annual Automotive Heat Treating print edition questions whether “pre-competitive” cooperation between industry and academia is a meaningful concept or simply a rebranding of ordinary competitive advantage.

Feel free to contact Doug at doug@heattreattoday.com if you have a question or comment. 

---

Between 1994 and 1999, there was a movement, sponsored largely by the Department of Energy (DOE), to encourage pre-competitive cooperation between industry players, academics, and research institutes to figure out ways to save energy or maximize efficiency. The program was part of the DOE’s Office of Industrial Technology (OIT) and their Allied Partner Program (APP) where the DOE targeted industry and technical societies to cooperate in vision casting and pre-competitive R&D.

I forget what the drivers were back in the ’90s that created the urgent need for the DOE to financially encourage this effort, nor is it germane to this column. I do remember, however, that ASM International, the Industrial Heating Equipment Association (IHEA), and, to a lesser degree, the Metal Treating Institute (MTI) were all actively engaged in this effort. More importantly for this column, there were a handful of industrial partners — manufacturers of thermal processing equipment, components, and supplies.

As publisher of Industrial Heating magazine at the time, I remember attending several of the meetings, more as a Will Rogers-esque skeptic keeping my eye on the players, specifically the DOE, and the money.

An Odd Term

This column is simply on the term “pre-competitive.” I had never heard that term used before and have only heard it sparingly since. What exactly does it mean, and what does it actively look like when you get competitors in a room?

Defining this term was one of the first obstacles that the DOE and OIT had to overcome with the APP formation. While a number of industrial companies got involved, many did not participate for various reasons. Whatever the reason for not participating, it is obvious that those not participating would not benefit directly from the APP.

Let’s assume that there was a tangible benefit for those partners that joined the APP with the DOE. It is especially easy to assume the benefit was tied to the large purse of money the DOE was using to help fund the organization’s activity. Yet this begs the question: If being an allied partner with the DOE brings tangible benefits, is it true that this activity is pre-competitive when non-allied partners are put at a tangible disadvantage?

The other big question that needs to be asked is how is it pre-competitive when a taxpaying company is supporting DOE-funded pre-competitive activities that benefit some of that taxpaying company’s competitors and not them because they were not able to participate for some reason? How is that right or in any sense pre-competitive?

This term implies that there is a point when competition begins — “pre” meaning before. The phrase certainly sounds good, even altruistic, but reality says that any activity that gives one player an advantage over another player is a competitive advantage.

I bring this up simply to knock down the word “pre-competitive.” I don’t believe pre-competitive cooperation is a real thing.

Benefits from Industry-Academia Cooperation

That is not to say that there is anything wrong with technical societies and industry partners cooperating to advance their own common interests or even working together to improve the industry and/or world. That type of activity is the prerogative of each company and should not be restricted, as long as it is lawful activity, which it has been in every case I’m aware. All the industrial allied partners that I knew were all very civic-minded and invested heavily in the industry.

In fact, while the DOE’s APP never obtained any of the goals it established in its 1999 Vision 2020 publication (which may still be available from ASM International), one solid benefit from the process was the establishment of the Center for Heat Treat Excellence (CHTE) at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI). This organization is still up and running under the leadership of Thomas Christiansen.

Another industry-academic cooperative organization very similar to CHTE is the Purdue Heat Treat Consortium (PHTC) under the leadership of Mark Gruninger. Both industry-academic partnership organizations have been helpful to both the academic institutions wherein they exist, as well as the industrial partners who are members.

Heat Treat Today has been loosely affiliated with both CHTE and PHTC including attending meetings. During those meetings, there has not been much (or any) talk about pre-competitive cooperation, which is good. If the term does come up, I’ll be interested to know what they think they are doing that is not of some competitive advantage. If the activity does give them a competitive advantage, it isn’t pre-competitive.