Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038463
E. Geisler
Summary form only given as follows. This paper examines the process by which we can measure the impacts of technology on business companies. The paper considers the state of knowledge in this area. It starts with a discussion of what business companies want and what technology can deliver. Needs, expectations and goals are examined as they relate to actors in the company. A model is then suggested of what companies want, what technology can deliver, and the value that is thus created. The paper also proposes a model that allows for computations of the value companies create with technology. Eight propositions are then advanced on how industrial companies exploit technology to create business value. The paper discusses several issues such as the link between technological innovation and market disposition, and offers a model that explains the advantages and disadvantages to industrial companies from radical technological innovations and hyper competition. The paper concludes with suggestions for companies to consider the generation of value from technology as a complex and multidimensional process, rather than a simple link between investments in R&D and strategic objectives.
{"title":"How companies create value with technology","authors":"E. Geisler","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038463","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038463","url":null,"abstract":"Summary form only given as follows. This paper examines the process by which we can measure the impacts of technology on business companies. The paper considers the state of knowledge in this area. It starts with a discussion of what business companies want and what technology can deliver. Needs, expectations and goals are examined as they relate to actors in the company. A model is then suggested of what companies want, what technology can deliver, and the value that is thus created. The paper also proposes a model that allows for computations of the value companies create with technology. Eight propositions are then advanced on how industrial companies exploit technology to create business value. The paper discusses several issues such as the link between technological innovation and market disposition, and offers a model that explains the advantages and disadvantages to industrial companies from radical technological innovations and hyper competition. The paper concludes with suggestions for companies to consider the generation of value from technology as a complex and multidimensional process, rather than a simple link between investments in R&D and strategic objectives.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132864229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038460
A. Rowe, P. Smart, J. Corley, D. Tranfield, R. Levene, P. Deasley
The impact of the "New Economy" can be seen in the development of new business models and in the associated learning and cultural change implications. The authors have explored the impact of novel procurement strategies on a variety of construction related businesses, noting how the effective management of networked organizational forms is a crucial factor in ensuring project success. The overall findings of this research indicate that the UK Construction Industry is experiencing rapid transformation in project and organizational forms triggered, in part, by government-led programmes such as the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Public Private Partnerships (PPP). The result appears to be an emergent cultural change in the industry. Traditionally, construction projects were "Asset Delivery Focused" (ADF); based on delivering an asset (e.g. hospitals), in the shortest period of time and at least cost. Instead, PFI and PPP projects can be seen as "Service Delivery Focused" (SDF), prioritizing design for operability and whole-life management (e.g. education). SDF projects place even greater emphasis upon networked organizational forms in order to achieve improved project performance. Often they are led by a multi-disciplinary project team (a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)). This effectively acts as a "virtual organization", embedded within a network of business relationships. The findings suggest that a major challenge to the industry is how to manage these relationships effectively in order to facilitate alignment between the SPV and its socio-technical "environment". No such change can take place without some degree of (organization and individual) learning taking place. This paper begins to explore such ideas through a better understanding of management technologies like "communities of practice". This empirical study attracted an inductive research methodology deploying semi-structured interviews, focus group sessions and interactive workshops. The data collected were analyzed qualitatively using the principles of grounded theory and presented in a series of historical timelines and mind map formats. The subsequent findings were integrated with those from a review of the relevant literature, both within construction as well as other industries in order to articulate a view of learning within the SPV's environment and indicate an agenda for further research into networked organizational forms.
{"title":"New management forms for construction projects","authors":"A. Rowe, P. Smart, J. Corley, D. Tranfield, R. Levene, P. Deasley","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038460","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038460","url":null,"abstract":"The impact of the \"New Economy\" can be seen in the development of new business models and in the associated learning and cultural change implications. The authors have explored the impact of novel procurement strategies on a variety of construction related businesses, noting how the effective management of networked organizational forms is a crucial factor in ensuring project success. The overall findings of this research indicate that the UK Construction Industry is experiencing rapid transformation in project and organizational forms triggered, in part, by government-led programmes such as the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Public Private Partnerships (PPP). The result appears to be an emergent cultural change in the industry. Traditionally, construction projects were \"Asset Delivery Focused\" (ADF); based on delivering an asset (e.g. hospitals), in the shortest period of time and at least cost. Instead, PFI and PPP projects can be seen as \"Service Delivery Focused\" (SDF), prioritizing design for operability and whole-life management (e.g. education). SDF projects place even greater emphasis upon networked organizational forms in order to achieve improved project performance. Often they are led by a multi-disciplinary project team (a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)). This effectively acts as a \"virtual organization\", embedded within a network of business relationships. The findings suggest that a major challenge to the industry is how to manage these relationships effectively in order to facilitate alignment between the SPV and its socio-technical \"environment\". No such change can take place without some degree of (organization and individual) learning taking place. This paper begins to explore such ideas through a better understanding of management technologies like \"communities of practice\". This empirical study attracted an inductive research methodology deploying semi-structured interviews, focus group sessions and interactive workshops. The data collected were analyzed qualitatively using the principles of grounded theory and presented in a series of historical timelines and mind map formats. The subsequent findings were integrated with those from a review of the relevant literature, both within construction as well as other industries in order to articulate a view of learning within the SPV's environment and indicate an agenda for further research into networked organizational forms.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126423852","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038379
S. Fixson, J. Clark
Modularity has received renewed interest as a product design strategy to accommodate the competing goals of low cost and high levels of variety and flexibility. Modularity has been associated with numerous advantages for firms and customers, including faster product development, greater product variety, and allowing customers to customize products. However, there is a lack of clear understanding of the cost implications of modularity. One reason for this gap is the use of the term 'modularity' for similar, yet often slightly different, phenomena in different contexts, disciplines, and industries. Consequently, modularity is very difficult to operationalize. This paper presents a methodology to address this problem. Arguing that modularity is actually a bundle of product characteristics rather than a single dimension, the method proceeds in three steps. First, unbundling modularity into multiple dimensions of the product architecture allows one to comparatively measure the differences among products along the individual dimensions. Second, building on process-based cost modeling tools, a cost estimation procedure calculates the product costs for the selected life cycle or supply chain phases. The third step links the cost differences to individual product architecture differences. These links can improve the understanding of how individual dimensions of the product architecture affect different costs along the supply chain. A case study of automotive doors is used to demonstrate the methodology.
{"title":"On the link between modularity and cost-a methodology to assess cost implications of product architecture differences","authors":"S. Fixson, J. Clark","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038379","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038379","url":null,"abstract":"Modularity has received renewed interest as a product design strategy to accommodate the competing goals of low cost and high levels of variety and flexibility. Modularity has been associated with numerous advantages for firms and customers, including faster product development, greater product variety, and allowing customers to customize products. However, there is a lack of clear understanding of the cost implications of modularity. One reason for this gap is the use of the term 'modularity' for similar, yet often slightly different, phenomena in different contexts, disciplines, and industries. Consequently, modularity is very difficult to operationalize. This paper presents a methodology to address this problem. Arguing that modularity is actually a bundle of product characteristics rather than a single dimension, the method proceeds in three steps. First, unbundling modularity into multiple dimensions of the product architecture allows one to comparatively measure the differences among products along the individual dimensions. Second, building on process-based cost modeling tools, a cost estimation procedure calculates the product costs for the selected life cycle or supply chain phases. The third step links the cost differences to individual product architecture differences. These links can improve the understanding of how individual dimensions of the product architecture affect different costs along the supply chain. A case study of automotive doors is used to demonstrate the methodology.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114103255","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038366
L. Martinich
Innovations and new product development provide the fuel for economic growth and the source for competitive advantage. Managing software innovation requires one set of organizational capabilities at the innovative, entrepreneurial phase and another set at later phases. Some early phase capabilities, such as flexibility, inherently conflict with some later phase capabilities, such as repeatability. The capability to manage both discontinuous, disruptive innovations and continuous, incremental innovations provides a sustainable competitive advantage. Technology managers who understand the phases of innovation, the critical role of standards and the various and sometimes conflicting capabilities needed to manage both new and mature product development, can better compete in today's rapidly changing environment. This paper describes a capability framework for managing both innovations and mature technology, grounded in both the literature and in the experience of successful and unsuccessful practices in start-up and mature software companies.
{"title":"Managing innovations, standards and organizational capabilities","authors":"L. Martinich","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038366","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038366","url":null,"abstract":"Innovations and new product development provide the fuel for economic growth and the source for competitive advantage. Managing software innovation requires one set of organizational capabilities at the innovative, entrepreneurial phase and another set at later phases. Some early phase capabilities, such as flexibility, inherently conflict with some later phase capabilities, such as repeatability. The capability to manage both discontinuous, disruptive innovations and continuous, incremental innovations provides a sustainable competitive advantage. Technology managers who understand the phases of innovation, the critical role of standards and the various and sometimes conflicting capabilities needed to manage both new and mature product development, can better compete in today's rapidly changing environment. This paper describes a capability framework for managing both innovations and mature technology, grounded in both the literature and in the experience of successful and unsuccessful practices in start-up and mature software companies.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127685676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038403
G. Reger, C.-E. Zafrane-Bravo
In the last few years there has been a significant stream of research on multinational companies (MNCs) and centers of excellence (CoEs). Scholars recognize the critical role of subsidiaries for the success of the whole corporation. Centers of excellence are organizational units which have strong competencies and which are recognized by other units of the corporate network The research on CoEs has been focused on: (1) the definition of the concept of CoEs; (2) the determinants enabling their development; (3) the earning path of the CoE status; (4) the life-cycle of a CoE; (5) various typologies of CoEls; as well as (6) the effects of CoEs on the MNC and on the external environment. However, not much information about the issues that managers have to face concerning the concept of CoEs can be found in the literature. This paper wants to add some considerations to this gap and is built around two main questions: (1) what should be managed in a CoE; and (2) how can these issues be managed.
{"title":"Managerial implications of the research on centers of excellence - a conceptual view","authors":"G. Reger, C.-E. Zafrane-Bravo","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038403","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038403","url":null,"abstract":"In the last few years there has been a significant stream of research on multinational companies (MNCs) and centers of excellence (CoEs). Scholars recognize the critical role of subsidiaries for the success of the whole corporation. Centers of excellence are organizational units which have strong competencies and which are recognized by other units of the corporate network The research on CoEs has been focused on: (1) the definition of the concept of CoEs; (2) the determinants enabling their development; (3) the earning path of the CoE status; (4) the life-cycle of a CoE; (5) various typologies of CoEls; as well as (6) the effects of CoEs on the MNC and on the external environment. However, not much information about the issues that managers have to face concerning the concept of CoEs can be found in the literature. This paper wants to add some considerations to this gap and is built around two main questions: (1) what should be managed in a CoE; and (2) how can these issues be managed.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128081200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038446
Nathalie Cassaigne
This paper focuses on tacit and explicit knowledge conversion as conceptualized by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). They consider knowledge conversion process as a four-step spiral that consists of socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. These concepts are used to present the Dashboard, a decision support tool, that supports the conversion of multi-domain expert knowledge in such a way that nondomain experts (e.g. top managers) can understand, internalize, combine explicit expert knowledge to inform their decisions. The Dashboard approach to knowledge conversion supports (1) the representation of domain expert knowledge targeted for nondomain experts; (2) the integration of domain expert explicit knowledge with (formalized) tacit knowledge of nondomain expert; (3) complex problem modeling and solving by nondomain experts; and (4) the reuse of the newly generated tacit knowledge.
{"title":"The Dashboard: a knowledge conversion tool","authors":"Nathalie Cassaigne","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038446","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on tacit and explicit knowledge conversion as conceptualized by Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). They consider knowledge conversion process as a four-step spiral that consists of socialization, externalization, combination and internalization. These concepts are used to present the Dashboard, a decision support tool, that supports the conversion of multi-domain expert knowledge in such a way that nondomain experts (e.g. top managers) can understand, internalize, combine explicit expert knowledge to inform their decisions. The Dashboard approach to knowledge conversion supports (1) the representation of domain expert knowledge targeted for nondomain experts; (2) the integration of domain expert explicit knowledge with (formalized) tacit knowledge of nondomain expert; (3) complex problem modeling and solving by nondomain experts; and (4) the reuse of the newly generated tacit knowledge.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"51 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132602220","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038471
D. Popovic, F. Fahrni
This paper describes a funding alternative of Swiss high-tech start-ups. What resulted from interviews with fourteen Swiss high-tech start-ups is that funding high-tech start-ups through cooperations is a valid alternative mechanism to venture capital, if the product is small and intended for a niche market. Venture capital dominates where complex products afford fast realization. Acquiring new cooperation partners requires more time. Venture capital is not favourable where time, establishment and client confidence are key success factors for the company. Communication between a cooperation partner and the founder is more natural and smooth than between the founder and a venture capitalist. The key factors of success and failure regarding the funding of high-tech start-ups through cooperations are presented in a case study based on a Swiss example.
{"title":"Funding a high-tech start-up company through cooperations","authors":"D. Popovic, F. Fahrni","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038471","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038471","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes a funding alternative of Swiss high-tech start-ups. What resulted from interviews with fourteen Swiss high-tech start-ups is that funding high-tech start-ups through cooperations is a valid alternative mechanism to venture capital, if the product is small and intended for a niche market. Venture capital dominates where complex products afford fast realization. Acquiring new cooperation partners requires more time. Venture capital is not favourable where time, establishment and client confidence are key success factors for the company. Communication between a cooperation partner and the founder is more natural and smooth than between the founder and a venture capitalist. The key factors of success and failure regarding the funding of high-tech start-ups through cooperations are presented in a case study based on a Swiss example.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122056103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038475
B. W. Manning
Lockheed Martin Tactical Systems (LMTS) in Eagan, MN, recently defined a new process to establish a common systematic approach to identifying and managing supplier/partner relationships required to support the needs of the business. Strategic sourcing applies strategic decision-making at the front end of the supply chain to identify the key technologies to be procured for future programs. These technologies become the focus for intensive marketplace analysis to identify the key suppliers with whom we should develop strategic relationships. These strategic relationships can range from preferred pricing and information sharing to collaborative R&D investments and shared product lines. The fundamental activities of strategic sourcing discussed in this paper occur early in the business cycle in order to position LMTS to win programs. Strategic sourcing activities parallel the R&D planning activities which most businesses use for this purpose, but they occur on the "buy" side of the equation rather than the "make" side. They are based on the US defense contracting business model, which is a little different from that of a commercial company. We believe that this approach will provide value to both models. These front-end strategic sourcing process activities include: identification of key enterprise level technologies based on data developed through the strategic planning process; funding of internal cross-functional enterprise teams to perform marketplace analysis and identify key suppliers within each technology area; assignment of responsibility for relationship development at the appropriate level, from executives to implementers, depending on the size and type of supplier; initiating and tracking relationship development activities and making adjustments as required; initiation of other activities (e.g. collaborative R&D) where appropriate; plus promotion and tracking of technology adoption by programs (a potential success metric). This paper provides an overview of our approach and current status in implementing the front-end activities in the LMTS Strategic Sourcing process. We share lessons learned in the development and implementation of the process and an evaluation of its utility to date.
{"title":"Strategic sourcing in the defense marketplace","authors":"B. W. Manning","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038475","url":null,"abstract":"Lockheed Martin Tactical Systems (LMTS) in Eagan, MN, recently defined a new process to establish a common systematic approach to identifying and managing supplier/partner relationships required to support the needs of the business. Strategic sourcing applies strategic decision-making at the front end of the supply chain to identify the key technologies to be procured for future programs. These technologies become the focus for intensive marketplace analysis to identify the key suppliers with whom we should develop strategic relationships. These strategic relationships can range from preferred pricing and information sharing to collaborative R&D investments and shared product lines. The fundamental activities of strategic sourcing discussed in this paper occur early in the business cycle in order to position LMTS to win programs. Strategic sourcing activities parallel the R&D planning activities which most businesses use for this purpose, but they occur on the \"buy\" side of the equation rather than the \"make\" side. They are based on the US defense contracting business model, which is a little different from that of a commercial company. We believe that this approach will provide value to both models. These front-end strategic sourcing process activities include: identification of key enterprise level technologies based on data developed through the strategic planning process; funding of internal cross-functional enterprise teams to perform marketplace analysis and identify key suppliers within each technology area; assignment of responsibility for relationship development at the appropriate level, from executives to implementers, depending on the size and type of supplier; initiating and tracking relationship development activities and making adjustments as required; initiation of other activities (e.g. collaborative R&D) where appropriate; plus promotion and tracking of technology adoption by programs (a potential success metric). This paper provides an overview of our approach and current status in implementing the front-end activities in the LMTS Strategic Sourcing process. We share lessons learned in the development and implementation of the process and an evaluation of its utility to date.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117150184","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038423
N. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya
The economic downturn has led us to think in a different way in bringing out new consumer-oriented products. Within an innovative product development environment, our requirements have changed. We are forced to bring out new products with high performance at lower costs in a shorter time window (reduced time to market). We have a new challenge ahead of us. We have to work harder as well as optimize our focus between quality and technology to survive as an organization. We have to shift from busy-ness to business. This paper proposes a framework utilizing Tom DeMarco's theory (2001) of an agile organization towards practical management of market dynamics through analysis and prevention-driven competence management.
{"title":"Creating an agile software development organization: a key factor for survival in today's economy","authors":"N. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038423","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038423","url":null,"abstract":"The economic downturn has led us to think in a different way in bringing out new consumer-oriented products. Within an innovative product development environment, our requirements have changed. We are forced to bring out new products with high performance at lower costs in a shorter time window (reduced time to market). We have a new challenge ahead of us. We have to work harder as well as optimize our focus between quality and technology to survive as an organization. We have to shift from busy-ness to business. This paper proposes a framework utilizing Tom DeMarco's theory (2001) of an agile organization towards practical management of market dynamics through analysis and prevention-driven competence management.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"110 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116073845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2002-08-18DOI: 10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038457
C. Temponi, R. Malhotra
The paper presents the challenges encountered during the planning and control of product development projects in high technology environments. We reviewed the available techniques for project planning and highlight its fundamental limitations for these types of projects. To detail the unique attributes of high technology projects, we studied several classification schemes and selected a hybrid framework based on technology uncertainty. A typical microchip development project illustrates the identified challenges.
{"title":"Project management challenges of high technology product development","authors":"C. Temponi, R. Malhotra","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038457","url":null,"abstract":"The paper presents the challenges encountered during the planning and control of product development projects in high technology environments. We reviewed the available techniques for project planning and highlight its fundamental limitations for these types of projects. To detail the unique attributes of high technology projects, we studied several classification schemes and selected a hybrid framework based on technology uncertainty. A typical microchip development project illustrates the identified challenges.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"85 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116347206","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：