Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technology Roadmapping Maturity Assessment: A Case Study in Energy Sector

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Roadmapping Future

Part of the book series: Applied Innovation and Technology Management ((AITM))

Abstract

Whether technology roadmapping (TRM) is success or failure from a perspective of maturity assessment, it may depend on how the TRM is viewed and what criteria or metrics are used for the evaluation. Therefore, before providing the cases, it seems necessary to conduct brief overview on criteria or metrics used for evaluating the success level of TRM. After reviewing key criteria or metrics, this section of chapter will cover some TRM case studies for illustrating how maturity have some influence on their consequences of success or failure.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Antunes, P. M. B. (2014). A maturity model for energy management. Instituto Superior Técnico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aron, D. (2010). Strategic planning: Key initiative overview. Gartner, Inc, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ates, S. A., & Durakbasa, N. M. (2012). Evaluation of corporate energy management practices of energy intensive industries in Turkey. Energy, 45(1), 81–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, R., & Lee, G. (2003). Organizational factors influencing the quality of the IS/IT strategic planning process. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 103(8), 622–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bigwood, M. P. (2000). Applying cost of innovation to technology planning. Research Technology Management, 43, 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonneville Power Administration. (2017, March). Bonneville power administration 2016–2021 energy efficiency action plan. Bonneville Power Administration, pp. 1–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonneville Power Administration. (2018). BPA 2018 – 2023 strategic plan. Bonneville Power Administration, pp. 5–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böttcher, C., & Müller, M. (2016). Insights on the impact of energy management systems on carbon and corporate performance. An empirical analysis with data from German automotive suppliers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 1449–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bray, O. H., & Garcia, M. L. (1997). Technology roadmapping: The integration of strategic and technology planning for competitiveness. In Innov. Technol. Manag. Key to Glob. Leadership. PICMET’97, pp. 25–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryson, J. A. (1988). A strategic planning process for public and non-profit organizations. Long Range Planning, 21(1), 73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bull, J. W., et al. (2016). Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats: A SWOT analysis of the ecosystem services framework. Ecosystem Services, 17, 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • California Public Utilities Commision. (2008). California long term energy efficiency strategic plan. California Public Utilities Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caviggioli, F., De Marco, A., Scellato, G., & Ughetto, E. (2017). Corporate strategies for technology acquisition: Evidence from patent transactions. Management Decision, 55(6), 1163–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cayir Ervural, B., Zaim, S., Demirel, O. F., Aydin, Z., & Delen, D. (2018). An ANP and fuzzy TOPSIS-based SWOT analysis for Turkey’s energy planning. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 1538–1550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, L. (2013). Developing a strategic policy choice framework for technological innovation: Case of Chinese pharmaceuticals (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkland, P. (2000). Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 17, 11–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, T.-Y. (1999). Critical success factors for various strategies in the banking industry. The International Journal of Bank Marketing, 17(2), 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H. (2007). Sensitivity analysis for hierarchical decision models (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J. (1996). The dynamics of the diversified corporation and the role of central management of technology. In Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics Working Paper No. 98–4, no. December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J. (1998). The dynamics of the diversified corporation and the role of central management of technology. In Danish Res. Unit Ind. Dyn. Work. Pap. No. 98–4, no. December, pp. 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J. F. (2002). Corporate strategy and the management of innovation and technology. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(2), 263–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, C. J. (1987). Acquisitions - techniques measuring strategic fit. Long Range Planning, 20(3), 12–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crow, S. (2016). Seventh northwest conservation and electric power plan summary brochure. NWCOUNCIL, pp. 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daim, T. U., Rueda, G. R., & Martin, H. T. (2005). Technology forecasting using bibliometric analysis and system dynamics. In Technology Management: A Unifying Discipline for Melting the Boundaries, pp. 112–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daim, T. U., Islam, N., Ozcan, S., Van Blommestein, K., Hillegas, J., & Estep, J. (2014) Integrating data mining into technology Roadmapping. In Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) proceedings, pp. 2972–2985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, G. S. (1977). Diagnosing the product portfolio. Journal of Marketing, 41(2), 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Sustainability and Environment. (2005). Book 3 The engagement toolkit (pp. 1–106). State of Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, S. A. W. (2006). Building technology foresight: Using scenarios to embrace innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 9(3), 241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastham, J., Tucker, D., Varma, S., & Sutton, S. (2014). PLM software selection model for project management using hierarchical decision modeling with criteria from PMBOK knowledge areas. Engineering Management Journal, 3, 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edler, J., Meyer-Krahmer, F., & Reger, G. (2002). Changes in the strategic management of technology: Results of a global benchmarking study. R and D Management, 32(2), 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H. (2003). Patent information for strategic technology management. World Patent Information, 25(3), 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H., & Soll, J. H. (2003). Integrating market and patent portfolios for market-oriented R&D planning. In Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, pp. 121–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H., Fabry, B., & Soll, J. H. (2004). Enhancing market-oriented R & D planning by integrated market and patent portfolios. Journal of Business Chemistry, 1(1), 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estep, J. (2016). Development of a technology transfer score for evaluating research proposals: Case study of demand response technologies in the Pacific Northwest (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University, Oregon, US.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2010). Energy 2020: A strategy for competitive, sustainable and secure energy. European Commission. European Union, pp. 4–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2017). The strategic energy technology plan. European Union, pp. 6–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018, February). Renewable energy prospects for the European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. n.d.). European Industrial Initiative on wind energy. SETIS - European Commission. [Online]. Available: https://setis.ec.europa.eu/european-industrial-initiative-wind-energy. Accessed 2 Apr 2018.

  • Federal Highway Administration U. S. Department of Transportation. (2002). Use of expert panels in developing land use forecasts. In Proc. a Peer Exch. Spons. by Travel Model Improv. Progr., vol. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fenn, J., Linden, A., & Fairchok, S. (2003). Strategic technology planning: Picking the winners. Gartner, R-20-3354(July), 9–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnerty, N., Sterling, R., Coakley, D., & Keane, M. M. (2017). An energy management maturity model for multi-site industrial organisations with a global presence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 1232–1250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garces, E., van Blommestein, K., Anthony, J., & Hillegas-Elting, J. (2016). ______Identification of experts using social network analysis (SNA). In PICMET ‘16: Technology Management for Social Innovation, pp. 1882–1896.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, M. L., & Bray, O. H. (1997). Fundamentals of technology Roadmapping. Sandia National Laboratories. [Online]. Available: http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/1997/970665.pdf.

  • Gates, L. P. (2010). Strategic planning with critical success factors and future scenarios: An integrated strategic planning framework. Softw. Eng. Inst., no. November, p. 67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, N. (2007). An analytical approach to building a technology development envelope (TDE) for roadmapping of emerging technologies. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 4(2), 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, P. (2009). A systematic approach to developing National Technology Policy and strategy for emerging technologies (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, N., & Kocaoglu, D. F. (2004). A quantitative model for the strategic evaluation of emerging technologies. In PICMET.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, N., & Kocaoglu, D. F. (2007). Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to build a strategic framework for technology roadmapping. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46(7–8), 1071–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, N., Assakul, P., & Vatananan, R. S. (2008). Applying change management approach to guide the implementation of technology roadmapping (TRM). In 2008 Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology, Technology Management for a Sustainable Economy, PICMET ’08, July 27, 20, no. c, pp. 2133–2140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerdsri, N., Vatananan, R. S., & Dansamasatid, S. (2009). Dealing with the dynamics of technology roadmapping implementation: A case study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(1), 50–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghemawat, P. (1985). Building strategy on the experience curve. Harvard Business Review, 63(2), 143–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. C. (2016). A measurement system for science and engineering research center performance evaluation (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopalakrishnan, B., Ramamoorthy, K., Crowe, E., Chaudhari, S., & Latif, H. (2014). A structured approach for facilitating the implementation of ISO 50001 standard in the manufacturing sector. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 7, 154–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grienitz, V., & Ley, S. (2007). Scenarios for the strategic planning of technology. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2(3), 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenveld, P. (2007). Roadmapping integrates business and technology. Research Technology Management, 50, 49–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. P. (2010). Strategic planning and SWOT analysis. In Essentials of strategic planning in healthcare (pp. 91–97). Health Administration Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haselkorn, A., Rosenstein, A. H., Rao, A. K., Van Zuiden, M., & Coye, M. J. (2007). New technology planning and approval: Critical factors for success. American Journal of Medical Quality, 164–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedley, B. (1977). Strategy and the ‘business portfolio’ (1). Long Range Planning, 10(1), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hervás Soriano, F., & Mulatero, F. (2011). EU Research and Innovation (R&I) in renewable energies: The role of the Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan). Energy Policy, 39(6), 3582–3590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Illinois Power Agency. (2017). Long-term renewable resources procurement plan.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Renewable Energy Agency. (2017). Renewable Energy Outlook: Thailand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Introna, V., Cesarotti, V., Benedetti, M., Biagiotti, S., & Rotunno, R. (2014). Energy Management Maturity Model: An organizational tool to foster the continuous reduction of energy consumption in companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 83, 108–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irfan, M., Putra, S. J., Alam, C. N., Subiyakto, A., & Wahana, A. (2017). Readiness factors for information system strategic planning among universities in developing countries: A systematic review. In 2nd international conference on computing and applied informatics (pp. 1–6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Iskin, I. (2014). An assessment model for energy efficiency program planning in electric utilities: Case of Northwest U. S. (PhD Dissertation). Portalnd State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iskin, I., & Daim, T. U. (2014). Technology assessment for energy efficiency programs in Pacific Northwest. in 2014 Proc. PICMET’14 Infrustructure Serv. Integr., pp. 498–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iskin, I., & Daim, T. U. (2016). An assessment model for energy efficiency program planning in electric utilities: Case of Northwest U. S. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 15, 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, H., Sedgwick, J., & Robinson, C. (2013). Technology roadmaps: An evaluation of their success in the renewable energy sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(5), 1015–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kappel, T. A. (2001). Perspectives on roadmaps: How organizations talk about the future. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(1), 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koc, T., & Mutu, Y.. (2006). A technology planning methodology based on axiomatic design approach. In PICMET 2006 Proceedings, 9–13 July, Istanbul, Turkey, no. c, pp. 1450–1456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocaoglu, D. F. (1983). A participative approach to program evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-30(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocaoglu, D. F. (1987). Hierarchical decision modeling (HDM). ETM, 530(63), 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kocaoglu, D. F. (2014). Inconsistency, disagreement and discrepancy measures in HDM. ETM 530/630 Lecture Presentation, Portland State University, pp. 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kockan, I., Yildirim, A. M., Daim, T., Ergeneman, M., & Gerdsri, N. (2009). Application of technology development envelope (TDE) approach for future powertrain technologies: A case study of ford otosan. In PICMET Portl. Int. Cent. Manag. Eng. Technol. Proc., pp. 3349–3363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, R. N., & Schaller, R. R. (2001). Science and technology roadmaps. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 48(2), 132–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, R. N., Eberhart, H. J., & Toothman, D. R. (1998). Database tomography for technical intelligence: A roadmap of the near-earth space science and technology literature. Information Processing and Management, 34(1), 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, R. N., Boylan, R., & Simons, G. R. (2004). Disruptive technology roadmaps. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(1–2), 141–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostoff, R. N., Tshiteya, R., Pfeil, K. M., Humenik, J. A., & Karypis, G. (2005). Power source roadmaps using bibliometrics and database tomography. Energy, 30(5), 709–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krawiec, F., Thornton, J., & Edesess, M. (1980, April). An Investigatin of Learning and Experience Curves. In Solar Energy Research Institute (SERI) (pp. 19–20).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, A., Anderson, T. R. (Portland S. U.), & Daim, T.. (2010). Difficulties in R & D target-setting addressed through technology forecasting using data envelopment analysis. In PICMET ‘10 Portl. Int. Conf. Manag. Eng. Technol., pp. 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langfeldt, L. (2004). Expert panels evaluating research: Decision-making and sources of bias. Research Evaluation, 13(1), 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, A. (2005). Technology strategy formation from a resource-based view: Booz-Allen & Hamilton methodology revisited. Master program thesis, Luleå University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latham, J. R. (1995). Visioning: The concept, trilogy, and process. Quality Progress, 28, 65–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, G., & Bai, R. (2003). Organizational mechanisms for successful IS/IT strategic planning in the digital era. Management Decision, 41(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., Lee, S., Seol, H., & Park, Y. (2008). Using patent information for designing new product and technology: Keyword based technology roadmapping. R&D Management, 38(2), 169–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leritz, N., Energy, N., & Alliance, E. (2014). Strategic Energy Management – It’s time to grow up! A maturity model for SEM implementation. In ACEEE Summer Study Energy Efficiency in Buildings, pp. 187–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenthaler, U. (2008). Opening up strategic technology planning: Extended roadmaps and functional markets. Management Decision, 46(1), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingga, M. M. (2016). Developing a hierarchical decision model to evaluate nuclear power plant alternative siting technologies (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingga, M. M. & Kocaoglu, D. F. (2013). Nuclear power plants alternative sitings: A literature review and research gaps. In 2013 Proc. PICMET ‘13 Technol. Manag. Emerg. Technol., pp. 382–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linstone, H. A. (1974). Technology forecasting-planning: Toy or tool? IEEE Spectr., no. April.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lizaso, F., & Reger, G. (2004). Linking roadmapping and scenarios as an approach for strategic technology planning. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 1(1), 68–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martino, J. P. (1994). A technology audit: Key to technology planning. In Proc. Natl. Aerosp. Electron. Conf., pp. 1241–1247.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. J., Haley, D. J., & Dixon, B. W. (2001). Science and technology roadmapping to support project planning. In PICMET ’01. Portland international conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, Vol. Supplement, pp. 193–194

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowall, W. (2012). Technology roadmaps for transition management: The case of hydrogen energy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(3), 530–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, A., Bharadwaj, S. G., Adidam, P. T., & Edison, S. W. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of marketing strategy making: A model and a test. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 18–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mittenthal, R. (2002). Ten keys to successful strategic planning for nonprofit and foundation leaders. TCC Gr., pp. 2–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • MOD. (2006). MOD Roadmapping guidance. no. 1.1. Ministry of Defense, UK, pp. 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohaghegh, M., & Shirazi, B. (2017). Strategic assessment of power smart grid technology capabilities and attractiveness: A case study on Iran Power Distribution Company. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 14(3), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Natalense, J., & Zouain, D. (2013). Technology roadmapping for renewable fuels: Case of biobutanol in Brazil. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 8(4), 143–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nauda, A., & Hall, D. L. (1991). Strategic technology planning - developing roadmaps for competitive advantage. In Technology Management: the New International Language, pp. 745–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ngai, E. W. T., Chau, D. C. K., Poon, J. K. L., & C. K. M. To. (2013). Energy and utility management maturity model for sustainable manufacturing process. International Journal of Production Economics, 146(2), 453–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NICT. n.d.). Quantum ICT Road Map. NICT-National Institute of Information and Communications Technology. [Online]. Available: http://www.nict.go.jp/en/quantum/roadmap.html. Accessed 2 Apr 2018.

  • Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance. (2014). Strategic plan: 2015–2019.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). (2013). Strategic energy management maturity model. Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA).

    Google Scholar 

  • NWCOUNCIL. n.d.-a). Council members. [Online]. Available: https://www.nwcouncil.org/contact/members/. Accessed 7 Apr 2018.

  • NWCOUNCIL. (n.d.-b). About the seventh power plan. [Online]. Available: https://www.nwcouncil.org/energy/powerplan/7/home/. Accessed 7 Apr 2018.

  • NWPCC. (2014). Overview of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council’s Power Plan development process. Webinar Presentation, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, pp. 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • NWPCC. (2016). Northwest power and conservation council statement of basis and purpose for the seventh power plan and response to comments on the draft seventh power plan. no. May. Northwest Power And Conservation Council, pp. 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • NWPCC. (2018). Draft seventh power plan mid-term assessment report outline. Memorandum, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, pp. 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • NWPCC. (n.d.). Fiscal year 2019 budget and 2018 revision. [Online]. Available: https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/financial-reports/2017-3/history

  • Oliveira, M. G., & Fleury, A. L. (2015). A framework for improving the roadmapping performance. In Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology, vol. 2015–Sept, pp. 2255–2263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pagani, M. (2009). Roadmapping 3G mobile TV: Strategic thinking and scenario planning through repeated cross-impact handling. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(3), 382–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passey, S. J., Goh, N., & Kil, P. (2006). Targeting the innovation roadmap event horizon: Product concept visioning & scenario building. In ICMIT 2006 Proc. - 2006 IEEE Int. Conf. Manag. Innov. Technol. (Vol. 2, pp. 604–607).

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulk, M. C. (2009). A history of the capability maturity model for software. ASQ Software Quality Professional, 1(1), 5–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1993). Capability maturity model for software – version 1.1. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, pp. 1–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (2006). The capability maturity model for software. Softw. Eng. Proj. Manag., pp. 16–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrick, I. J. (2008). Developing and implementing roadmaps – A reference guide. [Online]. Available: https://www.sopheon.com/wp-content/uploads/WhitePaper-Petrick-RoadmappingReferenceGuide.pdf

  • PGE. (2016, November). Integrated resource plan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., & Muller, G. (2009). An architectural framework for roadmapping: Towards visual strategy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping - a planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(1–2), 5–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R. Phaal, C. J. P. Farrukh, and D. R. Probert, “Developing a technology roadmapping system,” in Technology management: A unifying discipline for melting the boundaries, 2005, 1, pp. 99–111.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., & Probert, D. (2006a). Technology management tools: Generalization, integration and configuration. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 3(3), 321–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2006b). Technology management tools: Concept, development and application. Technovation, 26(3), 336–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, K. (2013). Innovation measurement: A decision framework to determine innovativeness of a company (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (2008). Strategy strategy the five competitive. Harvard Business Review, 86, 78–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahimi, N., & Koosawangsri, R. (2013). Selection of smart phone plans. In PICMET ‘13 Technol. Manag. Emerg. Technol., pp. 426–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regional Technical Forum. (2015). Roadmap for the assessment of energy efficiency measures.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saatchi, B., Pham, L., Pham, H., Pai, C. F., & Tran, Y. (2013). Decision model for selecting a sedan car. In Technol. Manag. IT-Driven Serv. (PICMET), 2013 Proc. PICMET’13, pp. 393–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Software Engineering Institute. (2010a). CMMI® for Acquisition, Version 1.3. Carnegie Mellon University. pp. 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Software Engineering Institute. (2010b). CMMI® for Services, Version 1.3. Carnegie Mellon University. pp. 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Software Engineering Institute. (2010c). CMMI for Development, Version 1.3. Carnegie Mellon University, pp. 1–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suharto, Y., & Daim, T. (2013). Methods and tools applied in strategic technology planning. In T. Daim, T. Oliver, & J. Kim (Eds.), Research and technology management in the electricity industry: Methods, tools and case studies (pp. 1–12). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tekin, I. M. J. N. (2014). Green index: Integration of environmental performance, green innovativeness and financial performance (PhD Dissertation). Portland State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trainer, J. F. (2004). Models and tools for strategic planning. In New directions for institutional research (Vol. 123, pp. 129–138). Wiley Periodicals, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Tran, T. A., & Daim, T. (2008). A taxonomic review of methods and tools applied in technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(9), 1396–1405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC. (2013). Background paper on Technology Roadmaps. Technology Executive Committee of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, pp. 11–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (n.d.). Strategic planning guide for managers. United Nations. [Online]. Available: https://hr.un.org/sites/hr.un.org/files/4.5.1.6_StrategicPlanningGuide_0.pdf.

  • United States Congress. (1980). Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act. pp. 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Energy. (2013). Guide to community strategic energy planning. no. March. US Department of Energy, pp. 1–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • US DOE. (2012). Smart grid research & development - Multi-Year Program Plan (MYPP). In U. S. Dep. Energy - Off. Electr. Deliviry Energy Reliab., no. March, pp. 1–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vishnevskiy, K., Karasev, O., & Meissner, D. (2016). Integrated roadmaps for strategic management and planning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 110, 153–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whalen, P. J. (2007). Strategic and technology planning on a Roadmapping foundation. Research Technology Management, 50, 40–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, B., & Lee, S. (2008). Patent analysis for technology forecasting: Sector-specific applications. In Eng. Manag. Conf. 2008. IEMC Eur. 2008. IEEE Int. Estoril, pp. 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, H. (2013). A SWOT analysis of successful construction waste management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 39, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA

    Chih-Jen Yu & Tuğrul U. Daim

Authors
  1. Chih-Jen Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tuğrul U. Daim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuğrul U. Daim .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Engineering and Technology Management, Portland State University, Portland, OR, USA

    Tuğrul U. Daim

Appendices

Appendix 1: Meeting Notes with Expert A, BPA

  1. 1.

    Major tools for strategic technology planning or energy planning

    • The “Resource Planning,” “Transmission Planning,” “Non-Wire Transmission,” and “Integrated Resource Planning (IRP)” studies all use “Load Forecasting” data. IRP will utilize the analysis from both the power side and transmission side of business. These planning efforts are often generated by policy requirements or direction. In other words, agency such as BPA needs to follow commission’s requirement to submit the integrated resource plan.

    • For IRP, the commission will look at the adequacy of “Load Forecast” and the arrangement of the resource supply. The issues of whether the supply meeting the demand needs to be articulated. This includes the analysis on whether adopting adequate energy efficiency or demand response technology to meet our energy target.

    • In terms of the electricity consumption, there are generally low forecast, regional forecast, seasonal forecast, peak forecast, etc. Therefore, “Transmission Planning” is utilized to make sure that the transmission teams are capable to deal with the changes of the dynamic electricity load.

    • The utility company needs to use these planning efforts to meet the future customer need while considering if the approach is the least cost, sustainability beneficial, and meeting supply reliability requirements.

    • “Non-Wire Transmission” is an alternative method for tradition transmission and looking at a more cost-effective transmission approach in the context of the whole electricity infrastructure.

  2. 2.

    Technology Forecasting, demand forecasting, or load forecasting tools

    • BPA uses “Production cost model” for transmission planning.

    • The “Probabilistic model” is also used for contingency planning.

  3. 3.

    Technology Assessment tools or decision-making tools

    • The HDM (Hierarchical Decision Model) has been presented to BPA Technology Innovation team. To my understanding, it seems that the tools have not been embraced by management team.

    • BPA is now Technology Roadmap oriented. The second layer is the Portfolio Management, which is kind of building into it. The third layer is some organizational tools for the business line and facilitating the implementation of 3–5 years of commercialization programs.

    • BPA is getting the “P3M3 (Portfolio, Program, and Project Maturity Management Model)” reevaluated again. Due to some budget limitation, the focus has been switched from long-term to short-term demonstration projects.

  4. 4.

    Strategic Planning tools

    • Strategic Planning tools are for further upstream analysis. “SWOT,” “Scenario Analysis,” or “Long-term Trend Tracking” have been adopted by BPA to identify who we are and where we are going to be.

  5. 5.

    Strategic Planning documents

    • BPA is now putting all these planning efforts into the “Integrated Resource and Transmission Plan.” BPA used to do it long time ago and then stopped doing it. But, now BPA need to follow the requirement from Northwest Power and Conservation Council (NW Council) to prepare these plans and update the plans every 5 years. Those plans are on line and accessible. In addition, there are other IRP examples published by public or private utilities.

    • To my understanding, the BPA “Strategic Plan” did not show the transparency of strategic planning process or indicate the methodologies used for developing the strategic plan. However, it is used for communicating to customers/stakeholders about the prioritization of the future implementation plan.

Appendix 2: Meeting Notes with Expert B

  1. 1.

    Major tools for strategic technology planning or energy planning

    • PGE uses “Monte Carlo simulation” method to conduct a flexible capacity analysis. The variables needed include population growth, fuel price, carbon tax, etc. After many times of simulation with all the random variables, the results can be some distribution diagrams showing the pattern or status of energy usage in different scenario or assumption.

    • PGE also use “Economic Model” to evaluate options of energy resources.

  2. 2.

    Technology Forecasting, demand forecasting, or load forecasting tools

    • PGE works with manufacturing companies to test and analyze some emerging energy efficiency technology. Generally, a “Pilot” program will be initiated to see if it is cost effective and meet the future customer value expectation. For example, the battery technology has been growing. With some R&D efforts and collaboration with manufacturing companies (via Request for Proposal), more efficient energy storage technology will be evaluated or adopted.

    • Sun or solar power is easier to predict, whereas the wind power is difficult to predict. With “Probabilistic Modelling,” the uncertainty or risk is expected to be minimized.

    • For technology development in PGE, we rely on many “Data Analysis” to see if the technology will generate more value to the existing energy mix.

  3. 3.

    Technology Assessment tools or decision-making tools

    • The decision of energy portfolio mix sometimes is attributed to the state regulation. For example, the future renewable energy target is 70%. PGE will strive for meeting the Renewable Portfolio Standards.

    • I am not sure what you mean by multi criteria decision tools such as HDM. However, PGE does review the energy portfolio and conduct some assessments on the power plants to see if the future demand can be met.

  4. 4.

    Strategic Planning tools

    • PGE use “SWOT” for business or customer analysis.

    • PGE use “Scenario Planning” together with “Simulation Method” for analyzing future demand and energy resources.

  5. 5.

    Strategic Planning documents

    • “Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)” is the main document addressing the future planning about the energy portfolio mix.

    • PGE does have a “Strategic Plan.” Generally, PGE will invite subject matter experts (SME) to provide their inputs and opinions. The focus of the strategic plan is on business matter or customer related issues. The technology planning is not emphasized in the strategic plan.

Appendix 3: Meeting Notes with Experts C and D

  • I would like to begin with introducing some of the background information on our council. The website of the council (https://www.nwcouncil.org/energy/powerplan/7/home/) posts some materials related to understanding power planning. There is a video presentation on overview of the council’s power plan development process. There are some review presentation materials in pdf format for introducing the power plan and how the plan has been developed.

  • We developed and used lots of models and simulation to help develop a better resource strategy.

  • We post most of the tools and models including excel files for the public to get access and understand how these tools can be utilized.

  • The results of tools will go to advisory group for feedback and approval.

  • We engage or educate the stakeholders to understand our tools and the results generated from using these tools.

  • The people working in the council often have working experiences in the industry such as BPA, PGE, etc.

  • During monthly council meetings, the executive’s committees review and approve the planning documents in a way to show their commitments.

  • It takes 3 years to develop the power plan and take about 2 years to implement. Power plan is a living document.

  • We put specific actions into the power plan for guiding the future efforts required to meet the common goals. This is documented in Chapter 4 and served as a strategic roadmap for other agencies/utilities to follow.

  • The action plan includes not only the recommendation for other utilities or agencies and but also the tasks for ourselves.

  • For the tasks of tools development or analysis of energy data, we have project team and project managers who conduct the monitoring and controlling the progress of all the required tasks.

  • Action plan will be reviewed periodically and constantly. Specifically, we also have mid-term assessment to monitor the progress.

  • We communicate and collaborate among departments, teams, advisory committees, and council members to make sure the action plans or analytical works have been done correctly and satisfactorily.

  • The stakeholders may include whoever is impacted by the power plan. For example, the utilities, the agency, the wind power companies, and some advocacy groups.

  • You can check on https://www.nwcouncil.org/energy/ and find the information about the advisory committee in the areas of RTF (Regional Technical Forum) policy, conservation resources, demand forecasting, demand response, generating resources, natural gas, resource adequacy, resource strategies, and system analysis.

  • For resource allocation, we have our virtual servers and use some cloud-based tools such as Amazon Web Services, and Box.com to develop our own tools or models.

  • In terms of experiences in using technology roadmapping, the council used to ask our organization to develop a technology roadmap for internal IT (Information Technology) about 3 years ago. This roadmap showed our needs and how we would update to meet future IT requirements.

  • We also use some stochastic models to predict the future prices of the natural gas under some assumptions or scenarios, for example, 800 future scenarios for evaluation.

  • Understanding the uncertainty is also shown in our website at https://www.nwcouncil.org/energy/powerplan/7/planninguncertainty.

  • We put all the energy resources into our portfolio analysis and run lots of simulation and come up with many different results. The result is documented in Chapter 3, Resource Strategy. The way we did the analysis is included in Chapter 15 Analysis of Alternative Resource Strategies.

  • We also employ cost-effective analysis to identify the least cost and the least risk options, and frequently we need to trade off or balance the both.

  • For the data collection and management, we not only store the data inside our council but also we release some of the data to the public, so that the stakeholders can have some degree of understanding on how we come up with these results or suggestions.

  • For the review, update, and change management, I think we have some regular review and update activities and tend to do change management on an ad hoc basis.

  • Sometimes, the stakeholder engagements have been done more than what we want, because we have put so many information on the web and have arranged periodical and constant meetings with stakeholders.

  • For the power planning, we do not use SWOT analysis, but we do use a lot of scenario analysis for resource planning purposes.

  • All elements in the power plan appear to be aligned with each other.

  • Our council is a government agency and is very transparent on many things such as the power plan, how it is developed, the tools and models, and others. Our council is funded by law as an independent agency and now is funded by BPA.

  • The video presentation done by Tom Eckman is highly recommended, because he is the director of the power division and has extensive experiences on the development of all the power plans.

  • There are only three kinds of agencies like us. I am initially not sure if your model is suitable to be applied to our council. However, you said that power plan is one type of strategic technology plan, because it contains some suggestions about what energy technologies are needed to be developed. Then it makes sense to me how your maturity assessment model links to our power plan.

  • The central staffs are the core team members responsible for developing the power plan.

  • We developed some tools and models specifically for the power planning. For example, the RPM (Regional Portfolio Model) tool is on line and welcome to use and give it a trial.

  • These tools mentioned in the power plan have been developed by the council and may be migrated to proprietary tools.

  • The chapter 4 “Action Plan” might be a high-level roadmap for utilities or agencies to implement resource strategy, while the whole power plan is more like a strategic power roadmap for the NW district.

  • You can check both 6th and 7th power plans to see if the previous tasks have been monitored and completed.

  • We report to our council members (https://www.nwcouncil.org/contact/members/) constantly and periodically (basically a month).

  • We give presentation to council members every single month to show our progress.

  • The council members are the eight appointees from Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana states.

  • We also communicate and collaborate with the staffs from each of the council members’ offices to make sure that the work has been done with consensus.

  • Whoever participate in the power plan are the stakeholders.

  • The stakeholders may also include advocacy groups such as environmentalist group, trade group, regulatory group, and utilities commission..

  • Some tools used for forecasting purposes may be just based on Excel spreadsheet, Excel Macro, or based on the R programming tool. For data repository, we use SQL.

  • When we presented our results of simulation or forecasts to the council members, we will also provide the context, scenario, or assumptions for them to conduct a rational decision-making.

  • In terms of technology assessment or decision-making tools, we have a RPM (Regional Portfolio Model) tool, which is used for identifying adaptive, least-cost resource strategies for the region by using a sophisticated risk analysis methodology.

  • I would say the plan itself is the guidebook for our council and the utilities or agency in NW district.

  • We are small in a sense, so we normally have team training and rely on some personal developments. Unlike the other big organizations which have some formal trainings, we tend to focus on personal needs and development and make sure that the required training has been completed.

  • Lesson learned have been shown from the comparison between 6th and 7th Power Plan.

  • The Fish and wildlife division deals with environment analysis.

  • The Northwest Power Act gives the council the mission and vision.

  • The power plan did include resource strategy and relevant goals or objectives with some quantitative metrics.

  • The action plan is clearly articulated in the power plan.

Appendix 4: RI 1-Validation of Perspective

A screenshot that displays the check boxes of Q 11 and Q 5 for the maturity assessment of two levels and a listicle of the description of perspectives that includes organization, methodology, knowledge, and documents, respectively.
A screenshot that displays a checkbox, Q 6, suggests identifying the perspectives that contribute to the maturity model by selecting the appropriate checkboxes, yes or no, below.

Appendix 5: RI 2-Validation of Criteria

A table with two columns and six rows presents 5 criteria for an organization perspective and its corresponding descriptions.
A screenshot displays a check box, Q 15, which requests validation of the criteria included in the organization perspective with yes or no checkboxes below relating to 5 aspects. Below is Q 16, which requests to add other criteria that need to be added.

Appendix 6: RI 3-Validation of Desirability Metrics

A screenshot displays a check box, Q 39, that requests to validate the metrics for executives’ commitments with yes or no checkboxes below relating to 5 few attributes.

Appendix 7: RI 4-Quantification of Perspective

A screenshot of a webpage of H D M, beta 2.0 version, displays a diagram of the strategic technology planning maturity model with a few instructions below.

Appendix 8: RI 5-Quantification of Criteria

A screenshot of a webpage from H D M, beta 2.0 version displays a diagram of the organization perspective and criteria with a few instructions below.

Appendix 9: RI 6-Quantification of Desirability Metrics

A screenshot displays a check box, Q 74, that requests to assign a value from 0 to 100 on each of the 5 metrics for executive's commitments with two measuring scales below for 1, no commitments or support from high executives, and 2, there are few informal commitments and supports from middle-level managers.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Yu, CJ., Daim, T.U. (2021). Technology Roadmapping Maturity Assessment: A Case Study in Energy Sector. In: Daim, T.U. (eds) Roadmapping Future. Applied Innovation and Technology Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50502-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation