Commercializing New Technology—II

Eldred, Emmett W.; McGrath, Michael E.

doi:10.1080/08956308.1997.11671114

Cited by 46 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Clark and Fujimoto, 1991;Eldred and McGrath, 1997;Drejer, 2002;Markham andKingon, 2004, Vandevelde andVan Dierdonk, 2003;Fabricius, 1994). Drawing upon empirical studies in different organizational settings, this paper argues that such general guidelines provide insufficient support for effective management.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eldred and McGrath (1997, Nobelius (2004), and Drejer (2002. Technology development should be performed outside the product development project and only verified technologies must be taken into the project.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also factors related to interface transfer management emerge as most important (cf. Eldred and McGrath, 1997;Nobelius, 2004;Drejer, 2002). Transfer must take place in a clear hand-over.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Focusing on the technology development/product development interface, Eldred and McGrath (1997) view the transfer of technology from technology development to product development as consisting of a number of sequential stages in which the new technology has to pass a number of senior management reviews. They argue that there are three key elements in a technology transfer process: program synchronization, technology equalization, and technology transfer management.…”

Section: The Technology Development -Product Development Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Interfaces between technology development, product development and production: critical factors and a conceptual model

Lakemond

Johansson

Magnusson

et al. 2007

IJTIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to avoid misfits between technology and product concepts and prevent problems related to the fit of the product design and the production process, the interfaces between technology development, product development and production must be managed. In this paper the critical challenges related to these interfaces are analysed and discussed and a tentative model is formulated. The study builds on in-depth case studies of ten product development projects at five manufacturing firms, two workshops and a questionnaire. Results indicate that in the technology development/product development interface factors related to the synchronization (i.e. timing) and transfer management are ranked as most important. For the product development/production interface factors related to transfer management seem to be most important. The tentative interface management model includes a risk assessment of six contextual factors; the complexity and degree of change in the product, the complexity and degree of change in the production process, the degree of technological novelty, the geographical and organizational dispersion between technology development and product development, the organizational and geographical dispersion between product development and production and the market uncertainty in the project, and appropriate recommendations are devised to handle the specific risks related to these factors.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also factors related to interface transfer management emerge as most important (cf. Eldred and McGrath, 1997;Nobelius, 2004;Drejer, 2002). Transfer must take place in a clear hand-over.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Technology Development -Product Development Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interfaces between technology development, product development and production: critical factors and a conceptual model

Lakemond

Johansson

Magnusson

et al. 2007

IJTIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In response, several highly structured, normative product development models have been proposed. These include the well-known Stage-Gate model (Cooper, 1993(Cooper, , 2001, the PACE process (McGrath, 1996), and a number of Stage-Gate variations that have a more technological orientation (Eldrid and Shaprio, 1996;Eldred and McGrath, 1997;Ajamian and Koen, 2002). Although the true benefit, and appropriate design, of such structured technology development processes is still largely unascertained, most large technology-based firms and government R&D laboratories have now established some type of a formal technology review and funding support process (Ozer, 1999;Linton et al, 2002).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Technology Success: Identifying Key Predictors and Assessing Expert Evaluation for Advanced Technologies

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. This study investigates a set of precursor factors that appear related to future technology success, and whether or not expert evaluators can a priori provide useful information during the technology review process. Sixty-nine highly advanced post 9-11 technologies are tracked over time. Based upon the results of this study, we conclude that a reasonably good predictive model can be constructed from organizational and technology factors, such as firm size, stage of development, and strategic partnerships. The results also indicate that the incremental value of expert reviewers and technology evaluators to predict future technology success is relatively small. Reviewers that provided the greatest predicative power, however, had current scientific responsibilities. These results raise important issues regarding the capability of developing predictive models of technology success.

show abstract

The impact of micro‐ and macroergonomics considerations on appropriate technology transfer decisions in developing countries: The case of Turkey

Erensal¹,

Albayrak²

2006

Hum Ftrs & Erg Mfg Svc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research presented in this paper aims to support the decision process of appropriate technology transfer to industrially developing countries by improving a broader understanding of relationships between the key micro-and macroergonomics factors and the technology alternatives. The methodology involves knowledge acquisition, identifying and categorizing a holistic set of key criteria about technology transfer with respect to ergonomics. This work attempts briefly to identify factors affecting the success of technology transfer in order to reduce the potential of incompatibilities with respect to micro-and macroergonomics and to optimize the decision process of managers. The objective of the decision model, based on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), determines the global priority weights for different technology alternatives and examines the critical factors and benefits, which affect the appropriateness of technology transfer.

show abstract

Commercializing New Technology—II

Cited by 46 publications

References 0 publications

Interfaces between technology development, product development and production: critical factors and a conceptual model

Interfaces between technology development, product development and production: critical factors and a conceptual model

Predicting Technology Success: Identifying Key Predictors and Assessing Expert Evaluation for Advanced Technologies

The impact of micro‐ and macroergonomics considerations on appropriate technology transfer decisions in developing countries: The case of Turkey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About