|
by International Centre for Science and High Technology (ICS) Technology Assessment Technology Selection Definition of Portfolio of Technological Projects The process of technology strategy formulation has three main phases:
These steps are fundamental to definition of the content of a technology strategy i.e. the technological areas where investment should be made, and the technological projects to be selected. Identification of technologies involved Analysis of the competitive impact of technologies Technological capability assessment The process of technology assessment aims to collect information on the current and future state of technology development, to evaluate the importance of each technology in the competitive arena and the strength of the enterprise in each technology. The key tasks encompassed in the technology assessment are:
1.1. Identification of the technologies involved The technologies are the set of technological knowledge and skills that have an impact on the overall competitive position of the enterprise in the marketplace, currently and in the future. Criteria to be followed in order to identify the technologies are the following:
This process leads to identification of the technologies that will form the unit of analysis of the formulation of enterprise technology strategy. The following table could be used to present a comprehensive summary of the assessed information concerning the enterprise's technologies, and also includes information on external sources of each technology. TABLE 1. Identification of the technologies involved
The result of this step is a detailed list of the technologies relevant to the enterprise's business. 1.2 Analysis of the competitive impact of technologies This analysis aims to evaluate the competitive importance of each technology and its relevance in sustaining the market competitive factors. The analysis should take into account:
A useful tool could be the matrix shown in Table 2, where competitive factors are shown in relation to each. In the cells of the matrix, a score is given reflecting the impact of the specific technology on a specific competitive factor. A value scale from 1 to 5 where 1 means that the technology has no impact on the specific competitive factor, while 5 means that it is a critical input to meeting that factor. To obtain representative results, it is important to involve in this analysis personnel from different division and with different functions (sales, technical assistance, technicians, engineers, production, etc.) and, if possible, suppliers and customers. TABLE 6. The competitive factors
As a result of this analysis, it will be possible to detect the critical technologies (CT). These are the technologies with the strongest impact on the competitive factors. The competitive impact analysis provides an overall assessment of the competitive importance of each technology, supports the selection of the critical technologies for the business, and prioritizes them. The output of this exercise will be a list of critical technologies. 1.3 Technological capability assessment The technological capability assessment aims at defining the strength of the enterprise in each critical technology. This is achieved by evaluating an enterprise's technological capabilities for each critical technology against its major competitors. The variables to be considered are:
The evaluation can be carried out using a matrix that takes into account the strength and dimensions of the different variables in relation to the relevant technologies. The cells record a score value from 1 to 5, where 1 means very weak, 2 weak, 3 on the average, 4 mildly strong, and 5 strong. The evaluation of the strength of the enterprise in a specific technology can be then obtained qualitatively or by constructing a merit table as a weighted average. The managing director/top management, assisted by the enterprise's technical managers should lead this phase. TABLE 3. Technology capability assessment
The internal analysis provides an overall assessment of the strength of the enterprise in each technology. The result of this exercise is to identify strengths and weaknesses in the critical technologies. Technologies where the enterprise is found to be strong and not critical for competitiveness can be licensed out. The technology selection aims at identifying the critical technologies which the enterprise should concentrate its interest on, and thus prioritize its investments. On the basis of the analysis, the importance-strength matrix can be constructed. The rows of the matrix show the critical technologies identified above. The columns show a scale from 1 to 5 where the strength in each technology is reported. This mirrors the evaluation of the enterprise's capability in that technology given in the previous step. In the matrix, the current and desired position of each critical technology is assessed. This provides the basis for formulating the technology strategy, i.e. identifying the effort needed to achieve the desired competitive position. To this end, the technology capability assessment also allows identification of the areas in which a certain technology needs to be improved (equipment, human resources and level of expenses). The importance-strength matrix also reveals whether a technological leadership strategy (being first on the market, developing new technologies, keeping a position on the leading edge) or a follower strategy (imitate leaders, bring new products on the market later) should be adopted. If in the most important technologies the enterprise appears to be weaker than competitors, a leadership strategy is not viable. However, as the enterprise accumulates resources in a certain technological area and covers the gap with competitors, the situation may change. Since this is the key matrix according to which decisions are taken, it should be constructed and used by top management with the support of the enterprise's technical managers. TABLE 4. Importance/strength matrix
The output of this stage is the list of priorities in technological actions. 3. Definition of Portfolio of Technological Projects List of technology innovation projects Selection of the R&D projects Definition of the form of acquisition Technology projects can be classified in two main types:
This guide shows how this can be carried out for R&D&E projects. Additional comments are made at the end of each topic in terms of adjustments needed to apply the concepts to investment projects. The UNIDO "Manual on technology transfer negotiation" covers the aspects related to capital investments projects and how to absorb technology in these cases. The definition of a technology R&D project portfolio has three phases: list of the technological innovation projects; selection of the R&D projects; and definition of the form of acquisition (internal development vs. external sourcing). 3.1. List of technology innovation projects Technological project generation is both a strategy pull and technology push process, the result of two processes. On the one hand, projects can be generated under the pressure of the strategic analysis that has indicated that a certain technology to be relevant to support the firm's strategy. Technical personnel submitting their project proposals can also generate technology projects. For each technological project (investment or R&D), a short form should be completed, giving:
Table 5 shows the technology projects (investment projects and R&D projects), the related critical technology, and the costs and benefits for each projects. TABLE 5. Critical technologies, R&D projects, costs and benefits
* Total cost of the project, including materials, infrastructure, personnel, and R&D contracts ** Expected benefits for next five years, considering increase of sales (present sales minus future sales) 3.2. Selection of R&D projects At this stage, selection of R&D projects may be necessary, since the funds available may be less than those required for the whole set of projects generated. Benefits and costs should not be limited to financial aspects but should include subjective and non-quantitative factors:
By assigning a weight to each criterion, a merit table for each project can be constructed (as shown by Table 6), evaluating each project against each criterion, and multiplying weights by scores. Projects are thus prioritized according to the merit table obtained. The projects are undertaken until the budget is used up, starting from the top of the list. At this stage, the portfolio obtained is revised to check the balance against parameters such as risk, reward and time horizon. This procedure ensures a balanced portfolio as regards a certain variable. For example, projects are all highly promising but very risky or long term. If the portfolio is not satisfactory i.e. unbalanced in certain parameters, projects are redefined and the process repeated. Redefinition of a project means that for example two projects might be combined and the objectives modified slightly to exploit the synergies and common areas of the projects. Alternatively, a project may be assigned a larger amount of funding to reduce the time to completion, and so on. The final project portfolio definition is the result of this iterative process. TABLE 6. R&D project selection matrix
High - 5 and Low - 1 with the exceptionn of criterion number 3. In this case, the actual values would be more adequate when available. The wight reflects the relevance of the criterion. When investment projects are evaluated, the same criteria can be used but the weights will be different. Emphasis is given to benefit and cost factors. Probability of technical and commercial success tends to have lower importance. 3.3. Internal versus external sources for R&D At this stage, once the technological project priorities are defined, the implementation strategy for each should be defined. These guidelines deal mainly with identification of technology needs, but some comments regarding the strategies for project implementation are useful. For R&D&E projects, this essentiality means deciding whether to develop internally or resort to external sources. There are various ways of acquiring technology from external sources. Pros and cons should be evaluated. The main alternatives are the following:
The variables usually considered for choosing a certain mode of acquisition are:
Table 7 shows the results of the R&D&E selection process, including the technology sources for each case. TABLE 7. R&D projects and sources
|