Analysis, ranking and selection of R&D projects in a portfolio

A method for the analysis, ranking and selection of R&D projects from a portfolio is outlined and demonstrated. It is proposed that an objective multi-criteria decision making method, Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), be used to split a portfolio of projects into accept, consider further and reject sub-groups. Next, the 'consider further' group is examined using a subjective method, the Value Creation Model. Such an approach allows for obvious decisions to be automated and complex decisions to be given careful consideration, an approach that is more consistent with how practising managers actually make select/reject decisions. DEA allows for comparison of variables without requiring weights or conversion factors. The relation between research strategy and consideration of categorical data is considered in relation to the research portfolio of the Advanced Technology Division of Bell Laboratories.     

Using mean-Gini and stochastic dominance to choose project portfolios with parameter uncertainty

Although a variety of models have been studied for project portfolio selection, many organizations still struggle to choose a potentially diverse range of projects while ensuring the most beneficial results. The use of the mean-Gini framework and stochastic dominance to select portfolios of research and development (R&D) projects has been gaining attention in the literature despite the fact that such approaches do not consider uncertainty regarding the projects’ parameters. This article discusses, with relation to project portfolio selection through a mean-Gini approach and stochastic dominance, the impact of uncertainty on project parameters. In the process, Monte Carlo simulation is considered in evaluating the impact of parametric uncertainty on project selection. The results show that the influence of uncertainty is significant enough to mislead managers. A more robust selection policy using the mean-Gini approach and Monte Carlo simulation is proposed.     

An option approach to the new product development process: a case study at Philips Electronics

The paper considers the product development process as a series of (real) options with reducing uncertainty over time. Criteria are developed to decide on speeding up or delaying the development process. The paper demonstrates how, in the R&D phase, any particular project may be assigned within a 2 × 2 matrix of uncertainty versus R&D option value. A similar matrix can be established for the product launch phase. The matrices support portfolio management throughout the different phases of development and enable management to decide on an appropriate point at which to abandon individual projects. The approach originates from applying real options insights into the product development process at Philips Electronics. The paper is illustrated with some actual R&D projects.     

A portfolio–evaluation framework for selecting R&D projects

This study aims to form the basis for constructing a framework for evaluating alternative portfolios of R&D projects. This study provides an extensive literature review on portfolio selection. Most of the existing studies deal with the portfolio selection problem by evaluating individual projects and then seeking ways to combine them for an R&D portfolio. However, the combination of individually good projects unnecessarily constitutes the optimal portfolio. In particular, this study discusses three portfolio effects: (1) the difference between the preference for the portfolio as a whole and the preference for the projects, (2) the interrelation among projects, (3) the size of portfolio selection problems. This study develops a three–phase framework for evaluating R&D portfolios and proposes a new taxonomy of the portfolio attributes (i.e. independent, interrelated, and synergistic). This study concludes with a discussion of future research, directed toward increasing the applicability of portfolio–selection approaches for managing R&D portfolios.     

Principal researcher and project manager: who should drive R&D projects?

In this paper, it is analyzed the hypothesis that in R&D the principal researcher (PR) is accepted as the coordinator or project manager (PM), carrying out the search for financing and to manage contracts, resources, cost, time, scope, risk and uncertainty, communication, stakeholders and so on, in addition to internal research activities. Thus, this study tries to verify this hypothesis through a major literature review in different types of projects developed by university, but also with a look to industry and industry-university cooperation. Two case studies are also analyzed, centered in its R&D project management maturity level. It is concluded that there is an important issue in projects’ success and in the time spent by PR in management, work for which they are under trained; while at the industry there is a greater approach to project management by the proximity of the innovation projects to other industrial projects. Following these initial findings and according to the case study results, it is proposed that R&D Projects in universities would be separated into two synergistic knowledge areas: R&D Management and Project Management. It is also recommended to allocate them to two distinct roles, where they could add value to R&D through their better knowledge and skills.     

How entrepreneurial orientation can leverage innovation project portfolio management

Innovation project portfolio management (IPPM) is a key task in R&D management because this decision‐making process determines which R&D projects should be undertaken and how R&D resources are allocated. Previous research has developed a good understanding of the role of IPPM in R&D strategy implementation and of successful IPPM practices. But the fundamental orientations that drive the strategy formation and implementation process have never been investigated in the context of IPPM, and it is unclear whether successful practices are equally valid for different strategic orientations. This study, therefore, investigates the moderating impact of a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation on the relationship between strategic portfolio management practices and portfolio success. An empirical analysis of 257 firms shows that both innovativeness and risk taking as entrepreneurial orientation’s dimensions positively moderate the relationship between managerial practices and performance. Specifically, we find that firms high in innovativeness profit more from stakeholder engagement compared to firms low in innovativeness. Firms high in risk‐taking profit more from a clearly formulated strategy. With increasing innovativeness and risk‐taking propensity, firms also profit more from business case monitoring and agility in portfolio steering. The results suggest that a firm’s entrepreneurial orientation can leverage the effect of IPPM practices. Vice versa, a lacking entrepreneurial orientation can render these practices ineffective. Strategic orientation and IPPM practices should, therefore, be aligned with each other to enable firms to better implement their strategy and generate competitive advantage.     

Strategies for Linking Vertical Cooperative R&D to Commercialization in Korea

Since 1982, the government of Korea has actively promoted vertical cooperative R&D programs between government-sponsored research institutes (GRIs) and private firms. A number affirms participated in the programs because cooperative R&D could lower the risk and could contribute to rapid commercialization of many technologies. In this article, Chulwon Lee, Zong-Tae Bae, and Jinjoo Lee examine the effectiveness of participant firms' strategies for commercial utilization of cooperative R&D results, from the viewpoint of technology sourcing at the project level. The data have been obtained from 162 cases of vertical cooperative R&D projects from a diverse group of industries in Korea. Three different commercialization strategies are empirically derived through cluster analysis of the relative usage rates of cooperative R&D and of other supplementary technology acquisition methods. They find that the effectiveness of these strategy clusters varies significantly according to the types of innovation, that is, project-business relatedness. If the project belongs to an existing business area, in-house development augmented cooperative R&D strategy is the most effective. On the other hand, licensing-in supplemented cooperative R&D strategy is the most successful, if the project belongs to a new business area. Findings suggest that firms participating in cooperative R&D projects should try to utilize other supplementary technology acquisition methods in order to achieve commercial utilization of cooperative R&D results.     

Stakeholder analysis for R&D project management

R&D projects affect the interests of different stakeholders in different ways. Understanding the stakeholders and analysing their interests helps in the better management of R&D projects. In this paper we discuss a methodology to systematically analyse the stakeholders of R&D projects. This methodology includes Freeman's (1984) three levels of analysis: rational, process and transactional. Based on these three levels, the stakeholder management capability of an R&D project is determined. The final stage is based on Mitchell et al . (1997) approach to analysing the dynamics of stakeholders. This methodology is illustrated using a New Zealand case relating to a road pricing R&D project.     

R&D projects in the science sector

The purpose of this research was to determine and analyse diversity in various features of R&D projects implemented in the science sector in Poland, financed mostly from public funds. More exactly, the following aspects of R&D projects implemented in the science sector in Poland were examined: the relation between the actually achieved and the initially set goal, the project management methodologies and project time management methods used, features of the project team, the relation between the plan and the actual project realisation and management difficulties encountered in practice. These aspects and their diversity were examined in the context of the whole country, of various fields of science and various research units implementing pure research (the ‘R’ area) or applied research and experimental development (the ‘D’ area). The research was conducted by means of survey methodology covering a sample of participants of R&D projects in the science sector in Poland. The results were analysed by means of statistical methods (which constitutes a clear novelty with respect to the existing literature on R&D projects) and statistically significant phenomena gave rise to several important conclusions on how R&D projects implemented in the science sector are managed and what their realisation looks like in various fields of science and various institutions, in a relatively new EU members state and a former communist country like Poland. These conclusions may be the basis for important hypotheses (which require further research) on the project management quality in the science sector in Poland and in similar countries, which is closely linked to the problem of public money allocation, its efficient spending and control. Also, practical suggestions on improvement measures in the science sector with respect to R&D projects, limited not only to countries like Poland, but of a more general nature, are formulated.     

International R&D project evaluation by multinational corporations in the electronics and IT industry of Singapore

This paper explores a number of variables associated with the evaluation of international R&D projects by multinational corporations (MNCs) in the electronics and IT industry of Singapore. Empirical analysis of the data collected from R&D managerial executives suggests a series of considerations in relation to their R&D investments. It is desirable if R&D can create a potential impact on the growth of their regional and international businesses. In considering the risks associated with an R&D project, a balance approach would be appropriate when demanding a return on investment. In particular, the consistence with customer demands, the achievement of time‐based competitiveness, the training of R&D manpower and the development of conducive innovation environments are fundamental to the success of international R&D projects.     

PREPAYMENT OF INCOME TAX: A “SPREADSHEET” ANALYSIS

In their recent paper ( D. Asquith &; J.E. Bethel, “Using Heuristics to Evaluate Projects: The Case of Ranking Projects by IRR,” The Engineering Economist, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Spring 1995, pp. 287-294) ), the authors propose a project ranking procedure that is supposed to mitigate the impact of cash flow overvaluation by project managers. In the current contribution, it is indicated that this procedure is based upon a project ranking approach that employs the IRR criterion in a theoretically inadequate way. The correct, incremental approach to the IRR-based project ranking is reiterated, and it is shown that if this approach is applied, then its very design reduces the impact of CF-biases on project ranking. It is also demonstrated that even if competing projects are of equal scale, they must still be ranked by incremental comparison. Finally, it is pointed out that the incremental project ranking is the proper approach regardless of which NPV-compatible profitability measure is applied.     

Development and application of a new methodology of evaluating industrial R&D projects

This paper proposes a new methodology of evaluating industrial R&D projects to assess the effectiveness of future R&D in terms of financial credibility, to prioritize them efficiently by clear criteria to reduce the time and burden consumed by both project leaders and management staffs. A new methodology has been developed and applied to all Sumitomo Electric Industries (SEI) R&D projects, and is recognized as a useful system for evaluating many R&D projects in a short period, such as 150 projects per month.     

How well did the new Sumitomo Electric project ranking method predict performance?

The development and implementation of a new R&D project scoring method (NS-method) within Sumitomo Electric Industries was introduced in a previous report. This paper evaluates the NS-method's effectiveness by comparing the information generated by application to 146 projects in 1997 with the project achievements in 2000. The test results revealed that the NS-method's evaluation scores were correlated to the performance indicators such as the gross profit and R&D productivity. It also showed that, when projects are classified into three groups (i.e., Top, Middle, Bottom) according to the forecast data generated by the NS-method, the projects in the Top category had higher actual productivity ratios and success rates than those in the Bottom category.     

R&D project selection for promoting the efficiency of energy use

Screening criteria for selecting energy R& D projects are discussed and applied to a dozen projects currently underway. The impact on energy balance and environmental quality cannot be seen as the only, nor even the dominating, attribute. In the cases studied, the R&D portfolio seeks to achieve a balance between these factors and the other criteria related to technology and the market. In the event the development work is carried out at an independent R&D centre, it will be necessary to have a committed industrial partner from an early stage onwards in order to ensure objectivity, market perception and provide the best chance of commercialisation.     

The roles of R&D team leaders in Korea: a contingent approach

This study empirically examines the relationship between the role of R&D project leaders and their team performance using data from 87 project teams in 6 R&D organizations in Korea. The results reveal that:
(1) R&D project leaders played five different roles in performing their jobs – strategic planner, team builder, gatekeeper, technical expert, and champion;
(2) All but the champion role of a leader is positively related with project team performance;
(3) However, this relationship between the role of leader and project team performance varies according to the characteristics of R&D project teams and their tasks.
Specifically, it becomes important for a leader to focus less on the team building role as the team gets older. The team building role of a leader, however, is more important for higher performance of relatively certain R&D projects, while for uncertain R&D projects, the strategic planning role appears to be more crucial. Based on these results, this study discusses several managerial and theoretical issues related to the role of a leader in R&D project teams.     

Networks and the Decision to Persist with Underperforming R&D Projects

Drawing on aspiration level theory and the networks literature, this paper develops a model toward decision makers' persistence with underperforming R&D projects based on the perceived properties of their personal network. The assumption is that positive feedback from network partners motivates persistence, and that this effect is multiplied when the decision makers' network is larger and denser, when network ties are predominantly strong, and when communication frequency within the network is high. The model is tested by a field experiment and conjoint methodology. Analysis of 1632 persistence decisions nested within 51 scientists responsible for R&D projects reveals that more positive feedback enhances persistence of underperforming R&D projects, and that this effect becomes stronger with increasing network size, network density, and communication frequency. These findings extend the project management literature by focusing on the social environment of the decision maker as one so far neglected factor in empirical studies on persistence decisions. Moreover, this study is among the first to investigate contingency relationships between feedback received from network partners and network structure. Finally, while most studies have emphasized that individuals and organizations can profit from their engagements in social networks, this paper suggests a potential dark side of networks by showing that networks can encourage decision makers to persist with their investment in an underperforming—and potentially failing—project. These results can help project managers involved in networking activities to better understand the effects of these activities on their decision policies, and thus draw better and more accurate decisions. Second, this study provides insights into how organizational strategy with respect to dissemination of R&D results and involvement of the organization's R&D managers in the scientific community influences the persistence of underperforming R&D projects, and thereby the organization's R&D expenditures. This can assist top managers to design financial controls and allocate financial resources to managers of underperforming R&D projects in line with the organization's networking strategy.     

A structural analysis of process development in process industry: A new classification system for strategic project selection and portfolio balancing

A research project on the development of process technology in process industry led to recognition of the importance of a better classification of different types of process development. A new classification system and matrix have consequently been developed, using the dimensions 'newness to the world' and 'newness to the company'. The distribution of annual company expenditures for process development in the matrix and the estimated usability of the matrix have been tested as part of a larger survey conducted among R&D managers in European process industry. In view of the favourable response from industry, it is argued that the matrix could facilitate company portfolio balancing of process development projects, and that it is also necessary to distinguish between different types of process development in academic research.     

The use of ranking formulae in R & D projects

Abstract . Numerous ranking formulae have been proposed in the literature for use in the evaluation and selection of R& D projects, but their rate of adoption has been relatively slow. This situation appears to be changing in the U.K. and a considerable amount of effort is being expended to improve the methods of obtaining estimates for the variables which appear in the formulae. This paper argues that the most commonly quoted formulae do not adequately represent the practical situation and are likely to introduce bias into the system as well as tending to make estimating more difficult. A modified ranking index derived from a decision tree type of analysis is suggested as a more useful estimate of the worth of a project, but it is concluded that any such formulae will always have serious limitations because they must inevitably ignore important characteristics of the research process.     

Strategic Project Leadership ® Toward a strategic approach to project management

Strategic Project Leadership ^® (SPL) is a new approach to project management that is focusing projects on creating competitive advantage and winning in the marketplace. This approach is particularly relevant to strategic projects that are initiated to create the company's future, including almost all R&D projects. In the traditional approach, project managers and teams were typically focused on getting the job done, and meeting time and budget goals. SPL , provides a modern view. It suggests that projects are initiated for business reasons, and that just 'getting the job done' is not enough. This paper presents a mindset, a framework, and a practical, step-by-step approach on how to connect project management to business results and how to turn projects into powerful competitive weapons. The paper is based on extensive case research, of which we present six cases – three successes and three disappointments – to demonstrate the value of the SPL approach to project management.¹     

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

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 group-decision 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.