In this paper the software industry scenario of Guangdong province, China (GD) in 2000-2005 is first analyzed. Then a model, which is based on an industry scenario method and analytical hierarchy analysis (AHP) and about the strategy choice of enterprises under highly uncertain conditions, is raised.
{"title":"A study to software industry scenario of Guandong, China and model for choosing competitive strategy","authors":"Jianmei Yang, Zhiwei Zeng, Zheng He, J. Wan","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872519","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper the software industry scenario of Guangdong province, China (GD) in 2000-2005 is first analyzed. Then a model, which is based on an industry scenario method and analytical hierarchy analysis (AHP) and about the strategy choice of enterprises under highly uncertain conditions, is raised.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125880951","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}
Universities are often the sources of breakthrough science and technology but the exact nature of their role in industrial innovation is often contested. This paper empirically explores university industry alliances in radical innovation. We find that as a focus of activity in RI, universities were the most frequently mentioned sites external to the firm, yet their role was often discussed as an afterthought. Our results lead us to several hypotheses and suggested opportunities for more effective exploitation of academic research in RI.
{"title":"The role of the research university in MNC radical innovation (RI)","authors":"L. Peters","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872586","url":null,"abstract":"Universities are often the sources of breakthrough science and technology but the exact nature of their role in industrial innovation is often contested. This paper empirically explores university industry alliances in radical innovation. We find that as a focus of activity in RI, universities were the most frequently mentioned sites external to the firm, yet their role was often discussed as an afterthought. Our results lead us to several hypotheses and suggested opportunities for more effective exploitation of academic research in RI.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123717471","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}
Various studies have recommended the following reforms to improve US education: deregulate and stimulate competitive learning systems; redefine learning to instill concepts of teamwork and critical thinking in students; embrace global education standards; develop new performance scoring systems; reinvent academic research to include interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary learning; reduce the publish-or-perish paradigm; emphasize experimental learning; make more use of cyberspace; use the best new educational technologies; make higher education more relevant to current societal needs; and create an environment that enables learning as an ongoing, lifelong process. These reforms can be achieved through two policy steps: (1) introduce a much higher level of competition into education by shifting public subsidization from educational institutions to individual students; and (2) focus accreditation from the process or institution that provides the traditional setting for learning toward student outcomes.
{"title":"Two policies that will achieve engineering education reform","authors":"J. Gover, P. Huray","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872584","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872584","url":null,"abstract":"Various studies have recommended the following reforms to improve US education: deregulate and stimulate competitive learning systems; redefine learning to instill concepts of teamwork and critical thinking in students; embrace global education standards; develop new performance scoring systems; reinvent academic research to include interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary learning; reduce the publish-or-perish paradigm; emphasize experimental learning; make more use of cyberspace; use the best new educational technologies; make higher education more relevant to current societal needs; and create an environment that enables learning as an ongoing, lifelong process. These reforms can be achieved through two policy steps: (1) introduce a much higher level of competition into education by shifting public subsidization from educational institutions to individual students; and (2) focus accreditation from the process or institution that provides the traditional setting for learning toward student outcomes.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122418758","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}
The enormous and constantly growing potential of technology innovations have promoted governments around the world to actively explore the best way and means to realize its economic and social benefits. One of the key approaches is the establishment and practices of science and technology (S&T) policy on collaborative R&D among industry, academic and government sectors. Similarly, collaborative R&D among researchers in Japanese universities, industries and government labs are increasingly advocated recently in the global competitive market place. Various policies/systems have been established and enforced so far by MONBUSHO (The Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japanese government) aiming at promoting economic and technological progress through collaborations at the nationwide scale. Among these government-led efforts, "The Joint Research with the Private Sector System" was mostly widely accepted by both industries and universities, and more than 8700 projects were enforced during 1983-1994. The richness of the empirical data provides base to explore the complete examinations to nowadays university-industry innovation network in Japan. While these systems have been enforced for more than a decade, it is valuable to examine and assess their impacts on the nation's innovations. The study aimed at identifying the key features of recent complex university-industry web, and describing the network on relational dimensions. The results disclose the changes and structure of the network, and points out the structural outcomes seem to have qualitative changes, beyond on-going Japanese S&T policy framework. Moreover, the results will provide some new observations for debates and discussions on this emerging dimension to policy makers in Japan and abroad.
{"title":"Policy and practice in Japan: an empirical study on university-industry collaboration","authors":"J. Wen, S. Kobayashi","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872482","url":null,"abstract":"The enormous and constantly growing potential of technology innovations have promoted governments around the world to actively explore the best way and means to realize its economic and social benefits. One of the key approaches is the establishment and practices of science and technology (S&T) policy on collaborative R&D among industry, academic and government sectors. Similarly, collaborative R&D among researchers in Japanese universities, industries and government labs are increasingly advocated recently in the global competitive market place. Various policies/systems have been established and enforced so far by MONBUSHO (The Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture of Japanese government) aiming at promoting economic and technological progress through collaborations at the nationwide scale. Among these government-led efforts, \"The Joint Research with the Private Sector System\" was mostly widely accepted by both industries and universities, and more than 8700 projects were enforced during 1983-1994. The richness of the empirical data provides base to explore the complete examinations to nowadays university-industry innovation network in Japan. While these systems have been enforced for more than a decade, it is valuable to examine and assess their impacts on the nation's innovations. The study aimed at identifying the key features of recent complex university-industry web, and describing the network on relational dimensions. The results disclose the changes and structure of the network, and points out the structural outcomes seem to have qualitative changes, beyond on-going Japanese S&T policy framework. Moreover, the results will provide some new observations for debates and discussions on this emerging dimension to policy makers in Japan and abroad.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122535315","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}
Base closure is an example of technology transfer in a complex environment. A conceptual model of the process has been developed which was used to examine the key relationships in the technology transfer process. This study shows that the process appears to be similar to that expected for transferring mature technologies in an international environment.
{"title":"Technology transfer in a complex environment: exploring key relationships","authors":"W. Flannery, G. Dietrich","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872591","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872591","url":null,"abstract":"Base closure is an example of technology transfer in a complex environment. A conceptual model of the process has been developed which was used to examine the key relationships in the technology transfer process. This study shows that the process appears to be similar to that expected for transferring mature technologies in an international environment.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114179252","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}
The three fundamental types of information/knowledge needed to support a best-in-class technology management capability are: (1) the business, marketing and customer requirements driving your business; (2) the decision planning needed to frame the strategic direction of your company; and (3) the roadmaps that identify the decision alternatives (business scenarios) over time. Today, most companies are focusing on one or two of these essential ingredients, leaving a major gap in their ability to understand how change will impact their business in what is now an explosive period of technological and sociological change. They need to better leverage their strategic knowledge in order to dramatically improve their technology management capability. However, this knowledge is either missing, localized to a few experts, hidden in documents, or is untrustworthy since it is out of date, of questionable quality or has no clear accountable source. This paper describes work that Motorola Labs is pioneering in providing an integrated, strategic decision-making, requirements management and roadmapping process. To make this process realizable within a large enterprise, a set of methods and tools have been developed to support the process. While this paper focuses on technology management, this approach can and is being applied across other processes such as strategy development, research management, system architecture and platform development as well as market and product planning.
{"title":"Technology management via a set of dynamically linked roadmaps","authors":"G. DeGregorio","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872498","url":null,"abstract":"The three fundamental types of information/knowledge needed to support a best-in-class technology management capability are: (1) the business, marketing and customer requirements driving your business; (2) the decision planning needed to frame the strategic direction of your company; and (3) the roadmaps that identify the decision alternatives (business scenarios) over time. Today, most companies are focusing on one or two of these essential ingredients, leaving a major gap in their ability to understand how change will impact their business in what is now an explosive period of technological and sociological change. They need to better leverage their strategic knowledge in order to dramatically improve their technology management capability. However, this knowledge is either missing, localized to a few experts, hidden in documents, or is untrustworthy since it is out of date, of questionable quality or has no clear accountable source. This paper describes work that Motorola Labs is pioneering in providing an integrated, strategic decision-making, requirements management and roadmapping process. To make this process realizable within a large enterprise, a set of methods and tools have been developed to support the process. While this paper focuses on technology management, this approach can and is being applied across other processes such as strategy development, research management, system architecture and platform development as well as market and product planning.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129189552","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}
Virtual reality (VR) technology seems to offer huge potential, however the VR market not growing rapidly? The reasons for this are discussed. Some suggest that VR has been hyped beyond what it can possibly deliver, and disappointed users are rejecting it. Others point to the technical and ergonomic issues that still have to be solved. Yet others say that the market is now, at last, showing signs of steady growth. Our interpretation of the experience in the VR market is different again. We argue in this paper that the market has not taken off because VR remains in what we shall call a pre-paradigmatic stage. Different vendors and users have contrasting, and often incompatible, visions of where the technology is heading and sometimes, indeed, where it is now. The lack of a clear paradigm makes for a confusing picture in which users find it too risky to invest in applying the technology, and vendors are too dispersed to build up a critical mass around some leading implementations of VR. The paper shows that when we try to describe what VR is and where it is heading we encounter a considerable diversity of views amongst practitioners. The paper describes what we mean by a pre-paradigmatic stage in the development of a technology, and why we think VR is still in such a stage. It is briefly explained why diffusion is at best slow during this pre-paradigmatic stage. In conclusion, the paper argues that "visualization needs vision" if the VR market is to take off in earnest.
{"title":"Virtual reality? When visualization needs vision","authors":"T. Watts, G. Swann, A. Pearson","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872540","url":null,"abstract":"Virtual reality (VR) technology seems to offer huge potential, however the VR market not growing rapidly? The reasons for this are discussed. Some suggest that VR has been hyped beyond what it can possibly deliver, and disappointed users are rejecting it. Others point to the technical and ergonomic issues that still have to be solved. Yet others say that the market is now, at last, showing signs of steady growth. Our interpretation of the experience in the VR market is different again. We argue in this paper that the market has not taken off because VR remains in what we shall call a pre-paradigmatic stage. Different vendors and users have contrasting, and often incompatible, visions of where the technology is heading and sometimes, indeed, where it is now. The lack of a clear paradigm makes for a confusing picture in which users find it too risky to invest in applying the technology, and vendors are too dispersed to build up a critical mass around some leading implementations of VR. The paper shows that when we try to describe what VR is and where it is heading we encounter a considerable diversity of views amongst practitioners. The paper describes what we mean by a pre-paradigmatic stage in the development of a technology, and why we think VR is still in such a stage. It is briefly explained why diffusion is at best slow during this pre-paradigmatic stage. In conclusion, the paper argues that \"visualization needs vision\" if the VR market is to take off in earnest.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132209763","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}
A growing body of evidence suggests that distinctive technological competence provide the basis for superior firm performance. However, few, if any, firms possess all the prerequisite competencies required for a given technology-product-market paradigm as they enter that market. This paper explores the different ways in which existing firms develop and intensify competence in response to the changing requirements of industry standard products over time. This paper discovers that technology is an important factor in determining which learning strategies should be employed for competence development.
{"title":"The effect of technology on learning during the acquisition and development of competencies","authors":"J. Linton, S. Walsh","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872537","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872537","url":null,"abstract":"A growing body of evidence suggests that distinctive technological competence provide the basis for superior firm performance. However, few, if any, firms possess all the prerequisite competencies required for a given technology-product-market paradigm as they enter that market. This paper explores the different ways in which existing firms develop and intensify competence in response to the changing requirements of industry standard products over time. This paper discovers that technology is an important factor in determining which learning strategies should be employed for competence development.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"28 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132390142","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}
Since technology can be a vital source of competitive advantage, any method of developing a technology strategy should focus on the creation of competitive advantage. Although there is a sizeable literature on technology strategy in general, relatively few contributions directly address the subject from the perspective of achieving competitive advantage. However, within the manufacturing strategy field, there are several models which focus on achieving competitive advantage through consideration of order winning criteria. This paper presents a model for technology strategy development based on one of the most successful manufacturing strategy models. The paper introduces the conceots and describes the manufacturing strategy model. It then presents a new model for technology strategy development based upon the manufacturing strategy model. A case study illustrating the usefulness of the suggested model is presented.
{"title":"Adapting manufacturing strategy models to assist technology strategy development","authors":"A. Carrie, T. Durrani, S. Forbes, A. Martowidjojo","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872484","url":null,"abstract":"Since technology can be a vital source of competitive advantage, any method of developing a technology strategy should focus on the creation of competitive advantage. Although there is a sizeable literature on technology strategy in general, relatively few contributions directly address the subject from the perspective of achieving competitive advantage. However, within the manufacturing strategy field, there are several models which focus on achieving competitive advantage through consideration of order winning criteria. This paper presents a model for technology strategy development based on one of the most successful manufacturing strategy models. The paper introduces the conceots and describes the manufacturing strategy model. It then presents a new model for technology strategy development based upon the manufacturing strategy model. A case study illustrating the usefulness of the suggested model is presented.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130227048","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}
The aim of this paper is to introduce and check a new statistical process control technique that, integrating known theory, is able to improve its performance in presence of processes with only one real tolerance limit. The authors have implemented their proposal in a productive process for electrical cables, in a plant of a very important holding placed in the Southern Italy.
{"title":"Improving SPC up to a one tolerance limit driven methodology","authors":"M. Nenni","doi":"10.1109/EMS.2000.872472","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EMS.2000.872472","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to introduce and check a new statistical process control technique that, integrating known theory, is able to improve its performance in presence of processes with only one real tolerance limit. The authors have implemented their proposal in a productive process for electrical cables, in a plant of a very important holding placed in the Southern Italy.","PeriodicalId":440516,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE Engineering Management Society. EMS - 2000 (Cat. No.00CH37139)","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2000-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130765035","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：