Abstract
Traditional economic evaluation techniques are often used to rank the technology alternatives for adoption purposes. However, the results of such evaluations are somewhat misleading since these techniques ignore the intangibles. Intangibles are factors that cannot be quantified for inclusions in the economic evaluation techniques but have great impact on the evaluation and adoption process. The current research addresses this issue by first identifying the intangible costs or risks of adopting a new technology and then developing a mechanism for their inclusion in the evaluation process. Taguchi loss functions are used as a tool for quantifying the intangible costs. The loss functions are developed based on the risks’ specification limits set by the decision maker. These loss functions are used to calculate a loss score for each technology candidate. The technology alternatives are then ranked based on their loss scores, and the technology with the lowest loss score is selected for adoption. The proposed methodology offers a powerful tool for evaluation of alternative technologies by complementing the traditional economic evaluation techniques.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chan FTS, Chan MH, Tang NKH (2000) Evaluation methodologies for technology selection. J Mater Process Technol 107:330–337
Georgakellos DA (2005) Technology selection from alternatives: a scoring model for screening candidates in equipment purchasing. Int J Innov Technol Manage 2(1):1–18
Ordoobadi S, Mulvaney N (2001) Development of a justification tool for advanced manufacturing technologies: system-wide benefit analysis. J Eng Tech Manage 18:157–184
Thomas AJ, Barton R, John EG (2008) Advanced manufacturing technology implementation: a review of benefits and a model for change. Int J Prod Perform Manage 57(2):156–176
Liang T-P, Huang C-W, Yeh Y-H, Lin B (2007) Adoption of mobile technology in business: a fit-viability model. Ind Manage Data Syst 107(8):1154–1169
Christenson CM (1997) The innovator’s dilemma when new technologies cause great firm to fail. Harvard Business School, Boston
Clarke-Hill JP, Hillier D, Comfort D (2005) The benefits, challenges and impacts of RFID technology for retailers in the UK. Mark Intell Plann 23(4):395–402
Ennew Ch, Fernandez-Young A (2006) Weapons of mass instruction? the rhetoric and reality of online learning. Mark Intell Plann 24(2):148–157
Woodside AG (1996) Theory of rejecting superior, new technologies. J Bus Ind Mark 11(3):25–43
Dey PK, Kinch J, Ogunlana SO (2007) Managing risk in software development projects: a case study. Ind Manage Data Syst 107(2):284–303
Maguire S (2002) Identifying risks during information system development: managing the process. Inf Manag Comput Secur 10(3):126–134
Vehovar V, Lesjak D (2007) Characteristics and impacts of ICT investments: perceptions among managers. Ind Manage Data Syst 107(4):537–550
Au AK, Enderwick P (2000) A cognitive model on attitude towards technology adoption. J Managerial Psychol 15(4):266–282
Ryan SD, Harrison DA (2000) Considering social subsystem costs and benefits in information technology investment decisions: a view from the field on anticipated payoffs. J Manage Inf Syst 16(4):11–40
Hitt LM, Brynjolfsson E (1996) Productivity, business profitability, and consumer surplus: three different measures of information technology value. MIS Q 20(2):121–142
Abdul-Gader AH, Kozar KA (1995) The impact of computer alienation on information technology investment decisions: an exploratory cross-national analysis. MIS Q 19(4):535–560
Ordoobadi S (2007) Opportunity costs of risks in evaluation of advanced technologies. Int J Innov Technol Manage 4(3):305–321
Cannon A, Reyes PM, Frazier GV, Prater E (2008) RFID in the contemporary supply chain: multiple perspectives on its benefits and risks. Int J Oper Prod Manage 28(5):433–454
Love PED, Ghoneim A, Irani Z (2004) Information technology evaluation: classifying indirect costs using the structured case method. J Enterprise Inf 17(4):312–325
Steward R, Mohamed S (2002) IT/IS projects selection using multi-criteria utility theory. Logist Inf Manag 15(4):254–270
Barreau D (2001) The hidden costs of implementing and maintaining information systems. The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances. MCB University 14(4): 207–212
Irani Z, Love PED (2001) The propagation of technology management taxonomies for evaluating investments in information systems. J Manage Inf Syst 17(3):161–177
Lewis WG, Pun KF, Lalla TRM (2006) Exploring soft and hard factors for TQM implementation in small and medium-sized enterprises. Int J Prod Perform Meas 55(7):539–544
Park Y, Chen J (2007) Acceptance and adoption of the innovative use of smart phone. Ind Manage Data Syst 107(9):1349–1365
Han S, Mustonen P, Kallio M (2006) Physicians’ acceptance of mobile communication technology: an expletory study. Int J Mobile Commun, vol. 4, no. 2
Harkke V (2006) Impacts of physicians’ usage of a mobile information system. Int J Electron Healthc 2(4):345–361
Taguchi G, Hsiang TC (1989) Quality engineering in production systems. McGraw-Hill, New York
Besterfield DH, Besterfield-Michna C, Besterfield GH, Besterfield-Sacre M (2003) Total quality management. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ordoobadi, S. Inclusion of risk in evaluation of advanced technologies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 54, 413–420 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2938-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-010-2938-2