Scenario Planning + MCDA Procedure For Innovation Selection Problem

Jerzy Michnik

doi:10.2478/fcds-2013-0010

.blurhash-client-img { display: none !important; }

Scenario Planning + MCDA Procedure For Innovation Selection Problem

Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences

Volume 38 (2013): Issue 3 (September 2013)

By: Jerzy Michnik

Open Access

|Sep 2013

Abstract

Selecting the proper set of innovation projects is the vital point of the innovation management in a firm. To make a good decision, managers have to consider many conicting objectives in a highly uncertain environment. In this article, the comprehensive decision procedure based on scenario planning and multiple criteria analysis is presented. The main part of the procedure is a two-step model in which Hurwicz's rule and VIKOR-S method are employed to gain the selection of alternatives. To build up the decision base, the classification of the criteria involved in the innovation project selection into five categories is proposed.

References

[1] R. J. Calantone, C. A. Benedetto, and J. B. Schmidt. Using the analytic hierarchy process in new product screening. An International Publication of The Product Development & Management Association, 16(1):65-76, 1999.10.1111/1540-5885.1610065
Search in Google Scholar
[2] Jui-Kuei Chen and I-Shuo Chen. Aviatic innovation system construction using a hybrid fuzzy MCDM model. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(12):8387-8394, 2010.10.1016/j.eswa.2010.05.043
Search in Google Scholar
[3] R. G. Cooper, S. J. Edgett, and E. J. Kleinschmidt. New product portfolio management: practices and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(4):333-351, 1999.
Search in Google Scholar
[4] R. G. Cooper, Scott J. Edgett, and Elko J. Kleinschmidt. New problems, new solutions: Making portfolio management more effective. Research-Technology Management, 43:18-33, 2000.
Search in Google Scholar
[5] Robert G Cooper, Scott J Edgett, and Elko J Kleinschmidt. Benchmarking best NPD practices - I. Research Technology Management, 47(1):31-43, 2004.10.1080/08956308.2004.11671606
Search in Google Scholar
[6] Robert G. Cooper, Scott J. Edgett, and Elko J. Kleinschmidt. Benchmarking best NPD practices - II. Research-Technology Management, 47:50-59, 2004.10.1080/08956308.2004.11671630
Search in Google Scholar
[7] K. Cormican and D. O'Sullivan. Auditing best practice for effective product innovation management. Technovation, 24(10):819-829, 2004.10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00013-0
Search in Google Scholar
[8] E. Danneels and E. J. Kleinschmidt. Product innovativeness from the _rm's perspective: its dimensions and their relation with project selection and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(6):357-373, 2001.
Search in Google Scholar
[9] Mark Dodgson, David Gann, and Ammon Salter. The Management of Techno- logical Innovation. Oxford University Press, 2008.
Search in Google Scholar
[10] R. L. Englund and R. J. Graham. From experience: linking projects to strategy. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(1):52-64, 1999.
Search in Google Scholar
[11] Paul Goodwin and George Wright. Enhancing strategy evaluation in scenario planning: a role for decision analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 38(1): 1-16, 2001.
Search in Google Scholar
[12] Kees van der Heijden. Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation. Wiley, 1 edition, 1996.
Search in Google Scholar
[13] J. D. Linton, S. T. Walsh, B. A. Kirchhoff, J. Morabito, and M. Merges. Selection of R&D projects in a portfolio. In Engineering Management Society, 2000. Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE, pages 506-511, 2000.
Search in Google Scholar
[14] Gilberto Montibeller, Haidee Gummer, and Daniele Tumidei. Combining scenario planning and multi-criteria decision analysis in practice. Journal of Multi- Criteria Decision Analysis, 14(1-3):5-20, 2006.10.1002/mcda.403
Search in Google Scholar
[15] M. S. Morcos. Modelling resource allocation of R&D project portfolios using a multi-criteria decision-making methodology. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 25(1):72-86, 2008.10.1108/02656710810843595
Search in Google Scholar
[16] S. Opricovic, S., . Multicriteria Optimization of Civil Engineering Systems, Technical Report, Belgrade: Faculty of Civil Engineering, 1998.
Search in Google Scholar
[17] Serafim Opricovic and Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. European Journal of Operational Research, 156(2):445-455, 2004.
Search in Google Scholar
[18] A. Ravi Ravindran, editor. Operations Research and Management Science Hand- book. 2008.
Search in Google Scholar
[19] Sören Salomo, JoachimWeise, and Hans Georg Gemunden. NPD planning activities and innovation performance: The mediating role of process management and the moderating effect of product innovativeness. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(4):285-302, 2007.
Search in Google Scholar
[20] George M. Scott. Critical technology management issues of new product development in high-tech companies. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17 (1):57-77, 2000.10.1111/1540-5885.1710057
Search in Google Scholar
[21] T.J. Stewart. Dealing with uncertainties in MCDA. In J. Figueira, S. Greco, and M. Erghott, editors, Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, State of the Art Surveys., pages 445-470. Springer Science + Business Media, 2005.10.1007/0-387-23081-5_11
Search in Google Scholar
[22] Paul Trott. Innovation management and new product development. Pearson Education, 2005.
Search in Google Scholar
[23] J. Christopher Westland. Global Innovation Management. Palgrave, Macmillan, 2008.
Search in Google Scholar
[24] Hung-Yi Wu, Jui-Kuei Chen, and I-Shuo Chen. Innovation capital indicator assessment of taiwanese universities: A hybrid fuzzy model application. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(2):1635-1642, 2010.
Search in Google Scholar