Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice pp 123–153Cite as

Operations Research Contributions to Evaluation of R&D Projects

  • Chapter

Abstract

Over the past forty years, the field of Operations Research has applied the “scientific method” towards the solution of practical problems faced by modem organizations. Operations Research has developed techniques for analyzing and prescribing actions in a wide array of problems areas. The core of these techniques include a series of model which focus on resource allocation, scheduling and selection decisions. Many of these models have been applied to the management of R & D projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aaker, D., and Tyebjee, T. 1978. “A model for the selection of interdependent R and D projects.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 25, pp. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albala, A. 1975. “Stage approach for the evaluation and selection of R and D projects.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 22, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, J.M., 1970. “A survey into the RandD evaluation and control procedures currently used in industry.” Journal of Industrial Economics. Vol 18, pp. 161–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anonymous, 1978. “Top-down and bottom-up approaches to project selection,” Research Management, March, 22–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asher, D.I., 1962. “A linear programming model for the allocation of R and D efforts.” IRE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-16, pp. 2–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A.C., and Bobis, A.H. 1969. “A mathematical basis for the selection of research projects.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16, pp. 1:2–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Augood, D.R., 1973. “A review of R and D evaluation methods.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol EM-20., pp. 4., pp. 114–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayers, R.U., 1969. Technological Forecasting and Long-Range Planning. ( New York: McGraw Hill. )

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N. 1974. “R and D project selection models: An assessment.” IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N., and Freeland, J. 1976. “Recent advances in R and D benefit measurement and project selection methods.” Management Science. 21, pp. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N.R., Siegman, J.,and Larson, J., 1971. “The relationship between certain characteristics of industrial research proposals and their subsequent disposition.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol EM-18, pp. 118–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L.T., “Planning an independent research and development program,” Proceedings of IEEE Aerospace Electronics Conference, Dayton, OH May 1969, 507–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N.R. and Pound, W.H. 1964. “R and D project selection: Where we stand.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 11, pp. 4:124–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N.R., Souder, W.E., Shumway, C.R.,Maker, P.M, and Rubenstein, A.H. 1976. “A budget allocation model for large hierarchical R and D organizations.” Management Science. 23, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D., Channes, A., Cooper, W.W., And Schinnar, A.P. 1981. “A biextremal principle for frontier estimation and efficiency evaluations.” Management Science. 27, pp. 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, P. 1977. “Assessment of alternative management forms in academic interdisciplinary research projects.” Management Science. 24, pp. 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D., Chames, A., and Cooper, W.W. 1984. “Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis.” Management Science. 30, pp. 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banker, R.D., Conrad, R., and Strauss, R., 1986. “A comparative application of data envelopment analysis and translog methods: An illustrative study of hospital production,” Management Science. 32, pp. 1, pp. 30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J. 1985. “Parallel funding of R and D tasks with probabilistic outcomes.” Management Science. 31, pp. 7, 814–828

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J., and Feinberg, A. 1989. “A Two phase methodology for technology selection and system design.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 36, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J. 1986. “A Multobjective methodology for selecting subsystem automation options.” Management Science. 32 Iss:12: 1628–1641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, J., Balachandra, R., and Kaufmann, P. 1988. “An interactive approach to R and D project selection and termination.” IEEE transactions on Engineering Management. 35 Iss: 3: 139–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beged-Dov, A.G., 1965. “Optimal assignment of research and development projects in a large company using an integer programming model,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-12 Iss:12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D.C., et al., 1967. “Application of a research project selection method in the northern region scientific services department,” Central Electricity Generating Board (UK).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessent, A., Bessent, W., Kennington, J., and Reagan, B. 1982. “An application of mathematical programming to assess productivity in the Houston independent school district.” Management Science. 28, pp. 12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, P. 1979. “A theory of academic interdisciplinary research performance: a contingency and path analysis approach.” Management Science. 25, pp. 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, P. 1981. “Contingencies for interdisciplinary research: matching research questions with research organizations.” Management Science. 27, pp. 11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanning, R. 1983. “A sensitivity analysis of variable-base budgeting.” Management Science. 29, pp. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooley, S., Hehmeyer, J., Sweeney, P. 1986. “Modeling R and D resource allocation.” Research Management. 29 Iss:1:40–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cetron, M.J., Martins, J., and Roepoke, L. 1967. “The selection of R and D Program content: Survey of quantitative method.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 14, pp. 1:4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Z. 1985. “The characteristics of Industrial R and D: A study of major manufacturing industries in Hong Kong.” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 13, pp. 6:501–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., and Rhodes, E. 1981. “Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: and application of data envelopment analysis to program follow through.” Management Science. 27, pp. 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A. and Stedry, A.C., 1966. “A chance-constrained model for real-time control in research and development management.” Management Science. Vol. 12, pp. 8, pp. B353–B362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A. and W. Cooper, 1961. Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming, Vol. 1, John Wiley and Son.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, M.A., Pyle, E.B., Greene, L.C., Clymer, H.A., and D. Bender, 1971. “Investment model for RandD project selection and evaluation.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-18, pp. 89–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Jared, 1978. Multiobjective Programming and Planning, Academic Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, W.D. and L.M. Seifford, “ R and D Project Selection in a Multidimensional Environment: A Practical Approach,” Journal of the Operations Research Society, Vol. 33, 1982, 397–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M.J., 1978. “An evaluation system for project selection,” Research Management, Vol. 21, 29–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. 1981. “An empirically derived new product project predicate selection model.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 28, pp. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costello, D., 1983. “A practical approach to R and D project selection,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Vol. 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, R.H. and B.E. Smith, 1964. “Decision models for the selection of research projects,” The Engineering Economist. Vol. 9:2, January-February, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cranston, R. 1974. “First experiences with a ranking method for portfolio selection in applied research.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, R. 1978. “The role of team and task characteristics in R and D team collaborative problem solving and productivity.” Management Science. 24, pp. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danila, N. 1989. “Strategic evaluation and selection of R and D Projects.” R and D Management. 19 Iss:1:47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, G., and Pearson, A. 1980. “The application of some group problem-solving approaches to project selection in Research and Development.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 27, pp. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E.W., 1966. “Resource allocation in project network models-a survey.” Journal of Industrial Engineering. Vol. 17, pp. 4, pp. 177–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, B.V., and S.S. Sengupta, 1962. “Research budgeting and project selection,” IRE Transaction on Engineering Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, B.V. and M.J. Nishry, 1965. “Scoring and profitability models for evaluating and selecting engineering projects.” Operations Research. Vol. 13, pp. 4, pp. 550–570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, L.W., The Financial Side of Industrial Research Management, John Wiley and Son, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, B., and Roepoke, L. 1969. “Cost effectiveness in R and D organizational resource allocation” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16, pp. 4:222–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahrni, P., and Spatig, M. 1990. “An application oriented guide to R and D project selection and evaluation methods.” R and D Management. 20 Iss:2:155–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, G. 1969. “Some antecedents and consequences of scientific performance.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16, pp. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, I. 1980. “Managerial response to technological innovation in public sector organizations.” Management Science. 26, pp. 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, E., and Baker, N. 1985. “Project selection decision making linked to a dynamic environment.” Management Science. 31 Iss:10:1272–1285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, G., Baker,N., and Bryant, J. 1984. “Economic models for R and D project selection in the presence of project interactions.” Management Science. 30, pp. 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goretsky, E. 1987. “When to bid for government contracts.” Industrial Marketing Management. 16 Iss:1:25–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaver, D.P., and Srinivasan, V. 1972. “Allocating resources between research and development: A macro analysis.” Management Science. 18, pp. 9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gear, A.E., Lockett,A.G., and Pearson, A.W. 1971. “Analysis of some portfolio selection models for R and D.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 18, pp. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gear, A.E. 1974. “A Review of some recent developments in portfolio modelling in applied research and development.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, R. 1971. “A Survey of current project selection practices.” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golabi, K., Kirkwood, C., and Sicherman, A. 1981. “Selecting a portfolio of solar energy projects using multiattribute preference theory.” Management Science. 27, pp. 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golabi, K. 1985. “Selecting a portfolio of nonhomogeneous R and D proposals.” European Journal of Operational Research. 21 Iss:3:347–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, P., and Singer, H. 1986. “A note on economic models for R and D project selection in the presence of project interactions.” Management Science. 32, pp. 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, S. 1989. “The time cost tradeoff in research and development: a review.” Engineering Costs and Production Economics. 16 Iss:1:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, D., and Gupta, S. 1974. “Dynamic time staged model for R and D portfolio planning: A real world case ” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, D.H., G.K. Pai and G.C. Kramer, 1971. “ A weighted aggregate approach to R and D project selection,” AIIE Transactions. Vol. 3, pp. 1, 22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, G., 1963. Linear Programming, Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall,D., and Nauda, A. 1988. “A strategic methodology for IR and D project selection.” IEEE Engineering Management Conference Engineering Leadership in the 90’s. Oct. 24. Dayton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helin, A., and Souder, W. 1974. “Experimental test of a q-sort procedure for prioritizing R and D projects.” IEEE Transaction Engineering on Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillier, F. and G. Lieberman, 1986. Introduction to Operations Research, Holden-Day: San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hertz, D. 1964. “Risk analysis in capital investment.” Harvard Business Review. 3: 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hespos, R.F. and P.A. Strassman, 1965. “Stochastic decision trees for the analysis of investment decisions,” Management Science. Vol. 11, pp. 10, 244–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, S.W., 1962. “A dynamic programming approach to R and D budgeting and project selection.” IRE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-9, pp. 170–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J.C., and Watts, K.M. 1986. “Some perspectives on the use of management science techniques in R and D management.” R and D Management. 16 Iss:4:291–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R., Chambers, J., and Johnston, R. 1977. “New product planning decisions under uncertainty.” Interfaces. 8, pp. 1 Part 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Izuchukwu, J. 1990. “Project management: Shortening the critical path.” Mechanical Engineering. 112 Iss: 2:59–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, B. 1983. “Decision methods for selecting a portfolio of R and D projects.” Research Management. 26, pp. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, X., Porter, A., Rossini, F., and Anderson, E.D. 1987. “R and D project selection and evaluation: A microcomputer based approach.” R and D Management. 17 Iss:4:277–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keefer, D. 1978. “Allocation planning for R and D with uncertainty and multiple objectives.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 25, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keown, A.J., B.W. Taylor, and C.P. Duncan, “Allocation of Research and Development Funds: A Zero-one Goal Programming Approach,” Omega, Vol. 7, 1979, 345–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kepler, C., and Blackman, A. 1973. “The use of dynamic programming techniques for determining resource allocations among R and D projects: An example.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 20, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khorramshahgol, R., Azani, H., and Gousty, Y. 1988. “An Integrated approach to project evaluation and selection.” IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management. 35, pp. 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawiec, F. 1984. “ Evaluating and selecting research projects by scoring.” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krogh. L, Prager,J., Sornsen, D., and Tomlinson, J. 1988. “How 3m evaluates its R and D programs.” Research and Technology Management. 31, pp. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuwahara, Y., and Yasutsugu, T. 1988. “an empirical view of a managerial evaluation of overall R and D cost effectiveness.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuwahara, Y., and Takeda, Y. “A contribution to the managerial view on R and D cost-effectiveness evaluation at a large industrial organization.” Presented at: 1988 International conference on strategic R and D Management. Sunshine City Prince Hotel, Ikebukuro, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, L. 1985. “Project management evaluation techniques for research and development: a high-tech version of the old shell game.” Project Management Journal. 16 Iss:3:47–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.M., 1971. “Decision Analysis through Goal Programming, Decision Sciences, pp. 2,: 172–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. 1982. “On the Reswitching property of R and D.” Management Science. 28, pp. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. 1985. “On the joint decisions of R and D and Technology adoption.” Management Science. 31, pp. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, M., and Titus, G. 1983. “The practice of management science in R and D project management.” Management Science. 29, pp. 8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, M. 1988. “A decision support system linking research and development project selection with business strategy.” Project management Journal. 19 Iss:5:14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liberatore, M. 1987. “ An extension of the analytic hierarchy process for industrial R and D project selection and resource allocation.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 34, pp. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., and Gear, A. 1972. “Program selection in research and development.” Management Science. 18, pp. 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, G., and Stratford, M. 1987. “Ranking of research projects: experiments with two methods.” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 15, pp. 5:395–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., and Gear, A.E. 1973. “Representation and analysis of multi-stage problems in R and D.” Management Science. 16, pp. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. 1982. “How economists see R and D.” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madey, G., and Dean, B. 1985. “Strategic planning for investment in R and D using decision analysis and mathematical Programming.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 32, pp. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandakovic, T., and Souder, W. 1985. “An interactive decomposable heuristic for project selection.” Management Science. 31 Iss:10:1257–1271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., 1980. “Basic Research and Productivity Increases in Management,” American Economic Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. and Rapoport, J. S. “The Cost of Industrial Product Innovation, Management Science. Vol. 21, pp. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGuire, P.E., Evaluating New Product Proposals, New York Conference Board, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehrez, A. 1988. “Selecting R and D projects: A case study of the expected utility approach.” Technovation. 8 Iss:4:299–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkes, A.C. and Samuels, J.M. 1966. “Allocation of resource and development expenditures in the firm.” Journal of Management Atud. 3: 62–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. L. 1974. “Methods of determining priorities in a programme of research.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J.R. and N.R. Baker, 1967. “An analytical approach to scoring model design - Application to research and development project selection.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, J, and Baker, N. 1969. “Computational analysis of scoring models for R and D project selection.” Management Science. 16, pp. 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, L., and Taylor, B. 1977. “Multiteam, multiproject research and development planning with gert.” Management Science. 24, pp. 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naslund, B. and Sellstedt B., 1974. “An evaluation of some models for determining the R and D budget.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol EM-21, pp. 1., pp. 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naslund, B. and Sellstedt B., 1974. “Budgets for R and D: An empirical study of 69 Swedish firms.” R and D Management. Vol. 4, pp. 2, pp. 67–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D., and Stengel, D. 1982. “Decision analysis of program choices in magnetic fusion energy development.” Management Science. 28, pp. 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt, A. 1969. “Testing TORQUR: A quantitive R and D Resource Allocation system.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16, pp. 4:243–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolini, A., and Glaser, M. 1977. “Project selection methods that pick winners.” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oral, M., Malouin, J., and Rahn, J. 1981. “Formulating technology policy and planning industrial R and D activities.” Management Science. 27, pp. 11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, A.W. 1974. “Project selection in an organizational context.” IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pessemier, E.A., and N.R. Baker, 1971. “Project and program decisions in research and development.” RandD Management. Vol. 2, pp. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pham, T.G. 1985. “The elusive budgeted cost of work performed for research and development projects.” Project Management Journal. 16 Iss:1:76–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plebani, A. Jr. and Jain, H. 1981. Evaluating research proposals with group techniques,“ Research Management, Vol. 24, 34–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, J.E., Research and Development: Project Selection Criteria, UMI Research Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, P., Taylor, A.J., and Gordon, J. 1985. “a strategic approach to evaluating manufacturing performance.” Interfaces. 15 Iss:6:15–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringuest, J.L. and S.B. Graves, 1989. “A Linear Multi-Objective RandD Project Selection Problem, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 36, pp. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, E.M., and Souder, W. 1965. “A Method of Allocating RandD Expenditures,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. EM-12, 8793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, A., and Schroder, H. 1977. “Managerial differences in assessing probabilities of technical success for R and D projects.” Management Science. 24, pp. 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubenstein, A.H., 1957. “Setting criteria for R and D.” Harvard Business Review. pp. 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, Thomas, 1986. “Axiomatic foundation of the analytic hierarchy process,” Management Science, 32, pp. 7: 841–855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahal, D. 1984. “The innovation dynamics and technology cycles in the computer industry.” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 12, pp. 2:153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W. 1975. “Achieving organizational consensus with respect to R and D project selection criteria.” Management Science. 21, pp. 6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W., and Freland, J. 1992. “Recent Progress in Modeling RandD Project Selection Process,” IEEE Transactions onEngineering Management, Vol. 39, 189–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.L., and Vertinsky, I. 1977. “Multiattribute investment decision: A study of R and D project selection,” Management Science. Vol. 24, pp. 3, 285–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherlekar, B., and Dean, D. 1980. “ An evaluation of the initial year of zero-base budgeting in the federal government.” Management Science. 26, pp. 8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, B. 1981. “Project appraisal methodology: a multidimensional R and D benefit/cost assessment tool.” Management Science. 27, pp. 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silverman, B. 1983. “ Project appraisal methodology: Market penetration elements.” Management Science. 29, pp. 2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, Herbert, 1969. Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singhal, J., Singhal, K., and Weeks, J. 1988. “Long range process design and compatibility among operations.” Management Science. 34 Iss:5:619–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sunder, W.E. 1969. “The validity of subjective probability of success forecast by R and D project manager.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16: 35–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W.E., 1972. “Comparative analysis of R and D investment models.” AIIE Transactions. Vol. 4, pp. 1, pp. 57–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W.E., 1972. “A scoring methodology for assessing the suitability of management science models.” Management Science. Vol. 18, pp. 10, pp. B526–B453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W.E., 1973. “Utility and perceived acceptability of R and D project selection models.” Management Science. Vol. 19, pp. 1, pp. 1384–1394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W. 1973. “Analytical effectiveness of mathematical models for R and D project selection.” Management Science. 19, pp. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souder, W., Mandakovic, T. 1986. “R and D Project selection models.” Research Management. 29 Iss:4:36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, M.J., and Harrell, A. 1975. “Identifying operative goals by modeling project selection decision in research and development,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol. Em-30, pp. 4, February, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, L. 1988. “ What we’ve learned selecting R and D programs and objectives, Research and Technology Management. 31, pp. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stumpe, W.R., 197g. “What the research manager should know about new product psychology,” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swoveland, C., and Cawdery, J. 1989. “ Liquefied petroleum gas transport: analyzing R and D options for improved safety.” Interfaces. 19 Iss:2:34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szakonyi, R. 1988. “Dealing with a nonobvious source of problems related to selecting R and D to meet customers’ future needs: Weaknesses within a marketing organization’s individual operations.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 35, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B., and Moore, L. 1980. “R and D project planning with q-gert network modeling and simulation.” Management Science. 26, pp. l.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B., Moore, L., and Clayton, E. 1982. “R and D project selection and manpower allocation with integer nonlinear goal programming.” Management Science. 28, pp. 10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Themelis, N.J. 1975. “Evaluation and selection of projects in industrial research.” Journal of Management. January, 1976, 15–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. and Delbecq, A. 1971. “Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision making effectiveness.” Academy of Management Journal. 203–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vepsalainen, A., and Lauro, G. 1988. “Analysis of R and D portfoliostrategies for contract competition.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 35, pp. 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verschuur, J., and Potjer, A. 1974. “Maximization of the economic value of research through quantifying the relations between research and the market.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 21, pp. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Neuman, J. and O. Morgenstern, 1947. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, N.K., and Philips, C.P. 1969. “The need for allocating resource to combat effectiveness measurements from initial R and D to obsolescence.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. Vol 16, pp. 4: 173–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watters, L.D., 1967. “Research and development project selection: independence and multi-period probabilistic budget constraints.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watts, K.M.,and Higgins, J.C. 1987. “The use of advanced management techniques in R and D.” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science. 15, pp. 1:21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whaley, W., and Williams,R. 1971. “A profits-oriented approach to project selection.” Research Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D.J., “A Study of a Decision Model for RandD Project Selection,” Operational Research Quarterly, Vol. 20, pp. 3, 1969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkofsky, E.P., Baker, N.R., and Sweeney, D.J. 1981. “A decision process model of R and D resource allocation in Hierarchical organizations.” Management Science. 27, pp. 3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winkofsky, E.P., Mason, R.M. and Souder, W.E., 1980. “RandD budgeting and project selection: A review of practices and models.” Management of Research and Innovation, B. V. Dean and J.L. Godhar (eds.) (Amsterdam: North Holland Press. )

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaidman, B., Cevidalli, G. 1987. “Project evaluation:Externalities must not be disregarded.” R and D management. 17 Iss:4:269–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Technology and Information Policy The Maxwell School, Syracuse University, USA

    Stuart Bretschneider

Authors
  1. Stuart Bretschneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, USA

    Barry Bozeman

  2. University of Alaska Southeast, Syracuse, New York, USA

    Julia Melkers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bretschneider, S. (1993). Operations Research Contributions to Evaluation of R&D Projects. In: Bozeman, B., Melkers, J. (eds) Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5182-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-5182-6_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-5135-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-5182-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation