Exploring the relationship between project selection and requirements analysis: an empirical study of the new millennium program

Bergman, Mark; Mark, Gloria

doi:10.1109/icre.2002.1048535

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Methodologies similar to those used by private firms, such as cost-benefit analysis and option pricing, have also been used for government-sponsored activities (Bergman and Mark, 2002;Henriksen and Traynor, 1999;Vonortas and Hertzfeld, 1998). However, a government-sponsored project differs from that of the private sector in two major aspects: (1) government-sponsored R&D is by nature a strategic and long-term investment.…”

Section: Background On Randd Project Selectionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of government‐sponsored frontier technology R&D projects

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selection of government-sponsored frontier R&D projects is made difficult by the coexistence of the conflicting participating parties, the availability of experts for new frontier technology review, and the ambiguity of new frontier technology. This paper presents a model that includes (1) using the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method to integrate various expectations from different interest groups into evaluating objectives/criteria, (2) the groupdecision method by technical experts based on the predetermined objectives/criteria, and (3) the fuzzy approach in scoring the subjective judgments of the experts. The results reveal that differences of weights toward each criterion exist among various groups. The government and academia care more about social benefits, the researchers are more concerned about intellectual properties, and the experts from industry emphasize the importance of feasibility. The method presented in this paper was applied at a national research institute in Taiwan. The results reveal that: (1) the approach can solve the disparity between the profound knowledge required for evaluation and the different expectation from various interest groups, (2) the fuzzy approach is suitable to frontier technology R&D project selection because of the vagueness of the nature of frontier technology and the difficulties in evaluating quantitatively and accurately.

show abstract

Section: Background On Randd Project Selectionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of government‐sponsored frontier technology R&D projects

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a comprehensive, nonconflicting requirements specification conveys an agreement among stakeholders (Lamsweerde, 2000, Lamsweerde et al, 1998. In contrast, competing design proposals (Bergman and Mark, 2002) or a requirements specification that never settles outstanding conflicts (Bergman et al, 2002b) conveys increasing disagreements among competing social worlds.…”

Section: Dbo Features In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Boundary Objects in Design: An Ecological View of Design Artifacts

Mark

Lyytinen²,

Bergman

2007

JAIS

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traditionally, Systems Analysis and Design (SAD) research has focused on ways of working and ways of modeling. Design ecology -the task, organizational and political context surrounding design -is less well understood. In particular, relationships between design routines and products within ecologies have not received sufficient attention. In this paper, we theorize about design product and ecology relationships and deliberate on how design products -viewed as boundary objects -bridge functional knowledge and stakeholder power gaps across different social worlds. We identify four essential features of design boundary objects: capability to promote shared representation, capability to transform design knowledge, capability to mobilize for action, and capability to legitimize design knowledge. We show how these features help align, integrate, and transform heterogeneous technical and domain knowledge across social worlds as well as mobilize, coordinate, and align stakeholder power. We illustrate through an ethnography of a large aerospace laboratory how two design artifacts -early proto-architectures and project plans -shared these four features to coalesce design processes and propel successful movement of designs across social worlds. These artifacts resolved uncertainty associated with functional requirements and garnered political momentum to choose among design solutions. Altogether, the study highlights the importance of design boundary objects in multi-stakeholder designs and stresses the need to formulate sociology-based design theories on how knowledge is produced and consumed in complex SAD tasks.

show abstract

“…the Technology Selection and Project Formulation process Erom Figure 1, is explained in detail in [14] and is beyond the Due to the sensitive nature of the principals' meeting, the details of the meeting cannot be directly discussed. The details of the meeting were reported from secondhand sources, i.e.…”

Section: Concept Selection For the St8 Nramentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing an inadequacy in quantitative analysis: examining NMP technology selection

Bergmann¹,

Buehler²

2003 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.03TH8652)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In its early years, NASA's New Millennium Program (NMP) applied quantitative analysis methods in making complex decisions in selecting technology for flight validation. In 1997, the quantitative approach showed serious signs of weakness in the selection of technologies for DS3. In response to this, the N M P began to explore new methods to select its technologies. To understand this inadequacy in applying quantitative methods and how it has been subsequently addressed, a field study was performed of the current NMF' technology selection processes used for ST8. The goal of this study is to capture and analyze the processes and issues surrounding the formation and selection of technology using ethnographic methods. The study found 1) setting high-level, break-through technological requirements leads to flight concepts that can potentially address a significant application domain, 2) creating and using technology concept areas was key in performing the selection process, 3) producing multiple technology concept areas is necessary to address disparate science interests, 4) promoting competitive choices fosters innovation, while not prejudging the outcome, and 5) obtaining prioritization of flight concepts by the science community balances their interests. These results lead to a deeper finding that the selection processes are not well represented by quantitative analysis methods alone because they do not capture the 1) design understanding and insight and 2) sensemaking and negotiations outcomes needed for the decision process to reach consensus.

show abstract

Exploring the relationship between project selection and requirements analysis: an empirical study of the new millennium program

Cited by 9 publications

References 21 publications

Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of government‐sponsored frontier technology R&D projects

Fuzzy multiple criteria selection of government‐sponsored frontier technology R&D projects

Boundary Objects in Design: An Ecological View of Design Artifacts

Addressing an inadequacy in quantitative analysis: examining NMP technology selection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About