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.2002.1038421
M. Lepasaar, T. Makinen
Software process improvement (SPI) is motivated by the need to increase the quality and productivity of software work. It is a widely accepted fact that the quality of the software product is largely determined by the quality of the process used to develop and maintain it. SPI requires knowledge of what is needed, awareness of what is feasible, and a long-term commitment to its investment. Software process assessment helps software organizations improve themselves by identifying their critical problems and establishing improvement priorities. The assessment takes place by comparing the state of the organization's software process against the model and the improvement scale. An assessment is usually based on a software process model and an improvement roadmap. The interest in software process improvement has created dozens of international software process models and standards. CMMI and SPICE are two most widely used process assessment models in the SPI work today. In order to help software companies, a SPI support tool is currently being developed. The SPI support tool guides the users through software process improvement, diminishing the need for continuous external consultations and assessors. Software process models form the central part of this support tool. In order to implement various process models into the support tool, the structure of the models should be analyzed and integrated into one common meta model. We have previously conducted conceptual analyses of SPICE and CMMI where the structure of both models has been studied. In this paper we describe the result of the conceptual synthesis of these process models-integration of SPICE and CMMI through a meta model. The integrated meta model contributes to a more complete process assessment, since it includes elements of various process models.
{"title":"Integrating software process assessment models using a process meta model","authors":"M. Lepasaar, T. Makinen","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038421","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038421","url":null,"abstract":"Software process improvement (SPI) is motivated by the need to increase the quality and productivity of software work. It is a widely accepted fact that the quality of the software product is largely determined by the quality of the process used to develop and maintain it. SPI requires knowledge of what is needed, awareness of what is feasible, and a long-term commitment to its investment. Software process assessment helps software organizations improve themselves by identifying their critical problems and establishing improvement priorities. The assessment takes place by comparing the state of the organization's software process against the model and the improvement scale. An assessment is usually based on a software process model and an improvement roadmap. The interest in software process improvement has created dozens of international software process models and standards. CMMI and SPICE are two most widely used process assessment models in the SPI work today. In order to help software companies, a SPI support tool is currently being developed. The SPI support tool guides the users through software process improvement, diminishing the need for continuous external consultations and assessors. Software process models form the central part of this support tool. In order to implement various process models into the support tool, the structure of the models should be analyzed and integrated into one common meta model. We have previously conducted conceptual analyses of SPICE and CMMI where the structure of both models has been studied. In this paper we describe the result of the conceptual synthesis of these process models-integration of SPICE and CMMI through a meta model. The integrated meta model contributes to a more complete process assessment, since it includes elements of various process models.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"3 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":"114422058","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.2002.1038369
A. Jonason, B. Holma
Addresses the pricing challenge facing mobile operators as a result of technical developments in the transition from the second to the third generation of mobile telephony. A central issue in such a varied and differentiated service architecture is the charging structure for providing such services to end-users. Users must be given the right incentives to satisfy their needs. Pricing new services too high will result in a low take-up rate of the service, whereas pricing the service too low could result in low and unsatisfactory revenues. This study presents the results of a consumer study in the UK consisting of more than 2000 interviews with potential end-users of third-generation services. It presents a theoretical approach to the practical pricing problem at hand, and suggests some solutions. The principal conclusion is that the previously accepted price-optimization theory of charging per megabyte is insufficient for the introduction of wireless broadband services. Before simply applying the strict mathematical maximization principle of mainstream economics and marketing it is of critical importance that operators decide which set of parameters to maximize. This presents an open opportunity to set prices and involves an element of innovation. A strategic pricing decision needs to be taken at a service-specific level, thus producing a considerably broader and more complex pricing problem that requires a completely different set of theoretical tools.
{"title":"Pricing for profits on the mobile Internet","authors":"A. Jonason, B. Holma","doi":"10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038369","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMC.2002.1038369","url":null,"abstract":"Addresses the pricing challenge facing mobile operators as a result of technical developments in the transition from the second to the third generation of mobile telephony. A central issue in such a varied and differentiated service architecture is the charging structure for providing such services to end-users. Users must be given the right incentives to satisfy their needs. Pricing new services too high will result in a low take-up rate of the service, whereas pricing the service too low could result in low and unsatisfactory revenues. This study presents the results of a consumer study in the UK consisting of more than 2000 interviews with potential end-users of third-generation services. It presents a theoretical approach to the practical pricing problem at hand, and suggests some solutions. The principal conclusion is that the previously accepted price-optimization theory of charging per megabyte is insufficient for the introduction of wireless broadband services. Before simply applying the strict mathematical maximization principle of mainstream economics and marketing it is of critical importance that operators decide which set of parameters to maximize. This presents an open opportunity to set prices and involves an element of innovation. A strategic pricing decision needs to be taken at a service-specific level, thus producing a considerably broader and more complex pricing problem that requires a completely different set of theoretical tools.","PeriodicalId":355841,"journal":{"name":"IEEE International Engineering Management Conference","volume":"79 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":"114457329","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}
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：