ROADMAPPING FOR DYNAMIC AND UNCERTAIN ENVIRONMENTS

Transcription

1 Maagig ad maitaiig the maps: Keepig the roadmaps live ad up-to-date is a key challege. The ability to reuse commo compoets (such as exteral drivers or specific techology developmets) across differet maps was also recogized. This is best addressed by havig a flexible software tool to capture, maage, maitai, ad allow reusability betwee maps. Further work will idetify a suitable tool. Presetatio of roadmaps: The maps created ca quickly become complex ad some form of filterig ad hierarchy is required to reduce the complexity. I additio, the way people assimilate iformatio ad are comfortable with differet presetatio methods varies widely ad is highly subjective. The eed for further work o how to preset the rich iformatio from roadmaps has bee recogized. A umber of key beefits have bee realized from usig roadmappig withi the Royal Mail, i the cotext of research plaig: Mutual uderstadig: The Logistics roadmap was used to help commuicate the pla for the research theme with sposors i the busiess. It was particularly useful for providig a shared view that took ito accout the busiess ad research/techology drivers, eablig the Research Group to gai a better uderstadig of the most importat exteral drivers for the busiess. Also, the roadmap helped the busiess to gai a better uderstadig of whe research activity ad techology developmets are likely to be available ad deployable. Focus ad prioritizatio: The roadmap helped to idetify what the focus of the research activity should be, which areas of research were the highest priority for the busiess, ad where there were gaps i the pla i.e., ew areas for research. Framework for expert kowledge: The roadmaps have also bee useful as a framework to uderstad where expert kowledge will be required i the future, ad to help focus Research Group techology scaig activities, as show i Figure 3 for the E-commerce theme. C Refereces 1. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P. ad Probert, D. F. T-Pla: the fast start to techology roadmappig plaig your route to success. Istitute for Maufacturig, Uiversity of Cambridge, Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., Mitchell, R. ad Probert, D. Startig-up roadmappig fast. Research z Techology Maagemet, Vol. 42, No pp Kostoff, R. N. ad Schaller, R. R. Sciece ad techology roadmaps. IEEE Trasactioso EgieerigMaagemet.Vol. 48 No. 2, 2001 pp Bray, O. H. ad Garcia, M. L. Techology roadmappig: the itegratio of strategic ad techology plaig for competitiveess. Proceedigs of the Portlad Iteratioal Coferece o Maagemetof Egieerigad Techology(PICMET), July 27 31, Nauda, A. ad Hall, D. L. Strategic techology plaig developigroadmaps for competitive advatage. Proceedigsof the Portlad Iteratioal Coferece o Maagemet of Egieerig ad Techology (PICMET), Willyard, C. H. ad McClees, C. W. Motorola s techology roadmap process. Research Maagemet, Sept. Oct., 1987 pp Groeveld, P. Roadmappig itegrates busiess ad techology. Research z Techology Maagemet, Vol. 40, No. 5, 1997, pp Barker, D. ad Smith, D. J. H. Techology foresight usig roadmaps. Log Rage Plaig, Vol. 28, No. 2, 1995, pp EIRMA. Techology roadmappig: deliverig busiess visio. Europea Idustrial Research Maagemet Associatio, Paris, Kappel, T. A. Perspectives o roadmaps: how orgaizatios talk about the future. Joural of Product Iovatio Maagemet, Vol. 18, 2001, pp Albright, R. E. ad Kappel, T. A. Roadmappig i the corporatio. Research z Techology Maagemet, Vol. 42, No. 2, 2003, pp McMilla, A. Roadmappig aget of chage. Research z Techology Maagemet, Vol. 42, No. 2, 2003, pp Brow, R. ad Phaal, R. The use of techologyroadmappig as a tool to maage techologydevelopmetsad maximise the value of research activity. ImechE Iteratioal Coferece o Mail Techology: Evolutio to e-revolutio, April 24 25, Brighto, ROADMAPPING FOR DYNAMIC AND UNCERTAIN ENVIRONMENTS A carefully desiged ad implemeted bled of sceario plaig ad roadmappig ca offer the best of both worlds. Jeffrey D. Strauss ad Michael Rador Top-performig compaies recogize that success will deped o their ability to create ad apply kowledge i ways that fit their icreasigly complex ad dyamic market ad corporate eviromets. Two valuable but still relatively idepedet maagemet tools have evolved: sceario plaig ad roadmappig. The ehaced visio, flexibility ad evirometal moitorig stregths of sceario plaig whe married to the clarity, itegratio ad attetio to detail iheret i March April

2 roadmappig ca help overcome curret limitatios i each. Ideed, whe properly implemeted, either tool ca claim to merge ito the other. Rarely is this the case, however, ad particularly i dyamic ad volatile eviromets, either approach achieves its potetial idepedetly. The challege of marryig the geerally high level ad macro thikig of sceario plaig with the micro plaig of roadmappig, though dautig i practice, is possible ad appears worth the effort. This paper highlights the limitatios commoly experieced i applyig roadmappig ad sceario plaig idepedetly ad the itroduces a ew approach that itegrates the two tools. Our empirical-based observatios derive from a large-scale, o-goig study beig carried out i a collaboratio that liks the MATI cosortium with the Kellogg School ad Northwester Uiversity Ce ter fo r T ech olo gy a d I ov atio Maagemet (CTIM). Although approached from a somewhat differet perspective, the presetatio relates to ad complemets several core cocepts i kowledge maagemet. Icluded here is Noaka s view of the challege i kowledge creatio withi corporatios to maitai a holistic perspective while covertig tacit to explicit kowledge ad creatively recombiig these to make a more desirable ad usable whole (1). Our focus here, however, is o how such cocepts ad others ca be applied through practical admiistrative ad operatioal toolsets, with cosideratio of uderlyig fuctios, maagemet processes ad their iterrelatioships. Techology ad Product Roadmappig Typically based o strategic pla requiremets, roadmaps icorporate product attributes ad lay out steps over time to achieve defied goals, related developmet requiremets, allocatio priorities, ad defied evolutio plas for flagship or core products ad platforms. The roadmap is a visual tool that idetifies ad describes specific customer requiremet-drive techology clusters ad specifies potetial discotiuities ad critical requiremets related to techology decisios. The process of developig the roadmaps itself ecourages thikig ad cross-orgaizatioal commuicatio. As well described by Albright ad Kappel i Part 1 of this roadmappig special report, roadmaps are the base for corporate techology plaig, idetifyig eeds, gaps, stregths ad weakesses i a commo laguage across the corporatio (2). McMilla i this same collectio similarly discusses how i Rockwell Automatio, roadmaps became kowledge-capture ad commuicatio tools (3). Ideally, this creates a dialogue of aligmet, as oted by Albright ad Kappel, with customers ad suppliers as well. Roadmappig Limitatios I-depth cosideratio of the above cited experiece ad our research poit to a umber of commo costraiig issues: Roadmappig may be viewed as a stad-aloe deliverable that is ofte iitiated i respose to a specific perceived crisis or eed ad may ot become iculcated ito o-goig maagemet. Eve whe the desired shared uderstadig is achieved i the process of developig the roadmaps, such uderstadig must be cotiually reewed to maitai the proper foudatio for decisios. This is particularly so uder dyamic ad volatile coditios. Whe the perceptio is that policy or assigmets chage suddely ad arbitrarily, there may be little icetive to desig or implemet roadmaps. A major cause of the frustratio that R&D ad other persoel expressed i our iterviews stems from what appeared to them to be arbitrary ad sudde policy chages. They claimed that they could prepare for a rage of possible requiremets had they oly bee alerted to the potetial eed i advace. Roadmappig ca become uwieldy whe plaig is challeged by chage that is volatile ad rapid, systemic ad uaticipated. Compaies may the attempt to over-pla details. The effort to make the complex maageable ca the draw operatioal plaers ito a overly arrow, liear focus that limits the soughtafter iovative ad effective respose to chage. Although roadmappig icorporates techology trajectories ad competitive eviromet iputs, as typically implemeted it effectively assumes a straight-lie projectio or sigle sceario (see 4). Lack of explicit assumptios cocerig future eeds may shift the focus from the eeds of the customers to the eloquece of the techology i.e., the comfort zoe of the techical commuity. Critical gaps surface i kowledge ad foresight cocerig future coditios ad evets. Maagers ofte lack experiece ad may be ucomfortable workig i such ucostraied space. Stregths ad opportuities may also be overlooked due to lack of iformatio or iadequate evirometal moitorig ad aalysis, particularly uder the pressures of itese global competitio. Importat, but ofte subtle, uderlyig ad cotextual factors related to the roadmap may require presetatios by, or discussios with, the roadmap developers i order to be commuicated. Sceario Plaig I the volatile eviromets of high-growth, kowledgebased idustries ad of firms operatig i, for example, ustable emergig ecoomies, the maagemet tool of 52 Research z Techology Maagemet

3 sceario plaig is sometimes used to ehace strategic plaig. The tool s fuctio is to highlight the implicatios of possible future systemic discotiuities, thereby helpig maagers idetify the ature, timig ad implicatios of, ad prepare for, a rage of chages. It does this by developig detailed, ofte proprietary, pictures of alterative futures. Correspodig idicators icludig weak sigals are also specified to help the compay recogize ad respod to a emergig situatio before the competitio ad to avoid the dager of beig blidsided. Scearios are typically derived from a future perspective rather tha projectig from preset situatios, thereby facilitatig cosideratio of systemic chage. Sigificat value derives from the process of workig out the scearios. Ideed, sceario plaig ca be properly viewed as a learig process for the idividuals ivolved ad for the orgaizatio. I developig ad aalyzig scearios, compaies are ecouraged to cosider optios beyod their traditioal operatioal ad coceptual comfort zoes. Properly doe, sceario plaig forces compaies to make explicit their tacit assumptios o product features, fuctios ad price poits, competitio, market structure ad regulatio, ad cost factors. Ofte, this highlights sigificat, but perhaps urecogized, uderlyig differeces i perspective betwee ad amog divisios, fuctios ad maagers. It is critical to the successful applicatio of this tool that the scearios be appropriately chose. This requires a sophisticated idetificatio of compay respose tedecies ad relevat evirometal, competitive ad corporate drivers. After scearios are defied ad assessed, the ofte complex, uexpected ad cascadig impacts the scearios might have o the orgaizatio ad its approaches eed to be reviewed carefully ad thoroughly, fuctio by fuctio ad process by process. Fially, step-by-step strategies ad cotigecy plas must be worked out that fit the scearios ad compay capacities ad weakesses, eablig the compay to prepare for ad work toward meetig all possible developmets. Commo Sceario Plaig Limitatios Several factors ca hider successful desig ad use of scearios. These iclude poor focus ad isufficiet commitmet to the process ad ivolvemet by seior maagemet (resultig i poor participatio ad poor evetual acceptace by lower-level maagemet.) Buy-i from lower levels ca also be critical ad is facilitated by their direct participatio i the sceario desig process be they macro or micro scearios). Simpso has suggested that sceario plaig be doe by lie maagers rather tha left, as it ofte is, to staff from the corporate plaig departmet (5). Sceario plaig is a tool rather tha a distict orgaizatioal fuctio ad sice, at least i priciple, its philosophy ad assumptios are already part of good strategic plaig, it could be (but ofte is ot) utilized at differet levels throughout the compay. Schreifer oted a variety of other hiderig factors icludig: too much focus o the sceario itself ad too little attetio to commuicatig the decisio cotext i which it developed (where the relevace is clear); ruffled feathers as scearios challege curret skills, kowledge ad expertise; ad, the time ad effort required to develop ad assess scearios (6). Toward a More Comprehesive Approach Doe properly, roadmappig ca serve as a foudatio that eables a compay to respod to varyig customer demads for ew product features, fuctios ad price poits. Similarly, sceario plaig output should iclude: specificatio of resource requiremets ad specific actios appropriate to each sceario; the elemets for a robust strategy capable of addressig the rage of scearios evisaged; ad details of likely variatios i the strategy whe idicators show a specific sceario occurrig. Rarely, however, does either approach achieve this potetial. Sceario plaig could ehace the flexibility ad visio of roadmappig, capture ad covey the full cotext of decisios, ad eable aticipatio of a broader rage of possible chages. But it is ofte poorly received by operatioal maagers ad R&D persoel who see it as too soft, lackig i hard data ad ot relevat to clearly pressig cocers. As already oted, sceario plaig has geerally bee performed as part of corporate plaig ad is rarely packaged to be readily applied with the detailed strategies, steps ad directios desired by operatioal maagers. Likig to the itegrative ad operatioal capabilities of roadmappig could address this weakess. (Relatedly, a lik to strategic bechmarkig ad/or portfolio maagemet could also be valuable, although a firm set of iteral metrics is eeded.) A carefully desiged ad implemeted combiatio of these two kowledge maagemet tools could offer the best of both worlds i.e., more robust ad dyamic product techology architectures desiged to fit a rage of quite differet scearios. These could feature flex poits where adjustmets i techology ca be aticipated ad forks i the road where alterative scearios may require ew products or approaches. However, bledig these tools is ot easy. Not oly are the two tools distict from each other i thikig, scope ad the type of learig that occurs but also i the orgaizatioal level at which they are developed ad implemeted. Formal sceario plaig is geerally part of corporate strategic plaig while roadmappig falls i the domai of operatioal busiess March April

4 uit maagers. Our observatio at several of the large firms collaboratig i our studies was that the two processes were performed i relative isolatio from each other. Also, while both roadmappig ad sceario plaig processes are geerally carried out by workig teams (eve sometimes virtual workig teams), these ted to be differet, with the task of desigig a give sceario ofte assiged to a ad hoc team. This team may iclude customers, suppliers ad other outside experts ad costituecies. The ratioale for teams is ofte differet i the two approaches. I the case of sceario plaig,a key goal is to obtai a richess of kowledge ad creative thikig ad perhaps buy-i facilitatio. Some rotatio of persoel through temporary teams is ofte see as desirable to sustai freshess. Ideed, as oted, it is commo to iclude people from outside the orgaizatio o sceario developmet teams. Yet, buy-i by upper ad, implicitly, operatioal maagers is importat if scearios are to have the desired impact o orgaizatioal plaig ad thikig. I roadmappig, although kowledge ad creativity are still critical, buy-i by stakeholdig operatioal players is crucial ad explicitly recogized; achievig a pervasive cosistecy over time is importat, whereas the issue of team member turover may be secodary. There are also commo shortcomigs to be overcome. Particularly i volatile ad ucertai eviromets, both (ad still relatively ew) approaches ted to suffer from isufficiet recogitio ad credibility. Specificatio of compay vulerabilities, stregths ad drivers, as well as sophisticated aalysis of orgaizatioal processes, is required but rarely doe adequately. Cosequetly, there is a tedecy to uder-cosider, systematically ad comprehesively, the effects chage may have ad to fail to idetify vulerabilities that may be evidet o a process level. Both tools ofte have isufficiet leverage due to their relative ewess ad limited usage. Iroically, we were told this teds to be especially true whe, i a time of crisis, compay vulerabilities ad weakesses are highlighted ad traditioally accepted stregths, market drivers ad the adequacy of curret processes are challeged. With both tools, the use of teams is fouded o a essetially extra-orgaizatioal project team approach rather tha oe embedded i the essetial fabric of the orgaizatio, with all the attedat problems of legitimacy, resposibility ad the like. Ultimately, if a orgaizatioal routie is to succeed i pervadig orgaizatioal thikig ad practice, everyoe who is ivolved should participate, may o a o-goig basis. Thus, bledig requires resolvig a umber of classical structural, strategic/operatioal ad macro/ Multi-sceario roadmappig ca ecourage ew ad deeper dialogue amog stakeholders. micro perspective ad time-horizo variatios. Differeces i icetive ad recogitio systems must also be cosidered. Moreover, the task will preset a spectrum of challeges i eviromets that vary i ucertaity, legth ad shape of life cycles ad life-cycle positios. Also importat are the requiremets for developig ad applyig the ew approach, cosiderig product variatios ad complexity ad the eed to itegrate across a compay s multiple techology, product, maufacturig, ad other roadmaps. As this approach requires time ad resources beyod the already-ofte-sigificat requiremets of either sceario plaig or roadmappig, it is recommeded that it be used whe operatig coditios are particularly volatile ad ucertai ad whe the cosequeces of poor decisios will be severe ad likely difficult to reverse. The approach proposed here icludes a series of aalyses to eable recogitio (ad shared uderstadig ad acceptace) of precisely where ad how orgaizatios are vulerable to chage. Guidace is also provided to determie o a plaig level the compay s stress poits (weakesses, gaps) ad opportuity poits (competitive stregths ad skills), drivers ad growth egies as idetified by Thouati, Rador ad Levi (7), gaps, ad other critical blid-spots. Itegratig the Tools: Multi-sceario Roadmappig Buildig o our field observatios ad requiremet cosideratios, the followig illustrates how the tools could be itegrated. We emphasize that although preseted as a sequece, the steps are highly iterative ad several activities may occur cocurretly. Thus, prelimiary idetificatio of target issues iterates back to the idetificatio of corporate drivers, stress ad opportuity poits ad uderlyig cocers, allowig refiemet ad focus o relevat eeds. How a compay would actually use this approach would vary accordig to curret practices icludig the extet to which roadmaps already exist or are i the pipelie, 54 Research z Techology Maagemet

5 ad the orgaizatioal structure ad culture. The followig assumes roadmappig ad sceario plaig will be developed cocurretly i a phased approach covergig toward ad iteratig with each other ad supported by the other tools discussed. For simplicity, oly macro-level sceario plaig ad a idividual roadmap are cosidered. I actual practice, it is likely that developmet of, ad itegratio betwee (i the ew cotext), multiple roadmaps ad micro-scearios at the busiess uit level will be desirable. It is also recommeded that sceario plaig ad roadmappig teams overlap i membership, facilita tig iteratio ad exchage of isights as they surface, ad that sceario developmet be carried out with roadmappig i mid. Key goals of the approach iclude ecouragig ew ad deeper dialogue amog stakeholders withi the orgaizatio ad recogitio of uderlyig issues ad potetially limitig perspectives. Frequetly throughout the process of developig ad refiig the multi-sceario roadmaps, the compay should, questio: Is this a over-ridig cocer? What is required or assumed? Is there a uderlyig issue? What else (e.g., other processes) relates to this? What chage would sigificatly impact? What could cause this chage or accetuate it? How would this chage impact my orgaizatio? How could I prepare for or prevet such a chage? Would this ope up ew opportuities? What would takig related actio mea for my orgaizatio (e.g., create other stress poits)? Does this chage my thikig related to aother part of the heuristic? Such questios should be iterated, root cause aalyzed ad, as issues are iitially selected for the composite process, developmet teams should seek iput o them from relevat stakeholders. The output of the approach is illustrated i the overly simplified PERT charts o the ext page. This illustratio shows at a glace how strategy ad associated key tasks (umbered poits) could vary i differet scearios. (For simplicity, oly two scearios are show): Flex poits are desigated where chagig coditios require adjustmets but do ot warrat a fullfledged chage of strategy. A widow is defied durig which the compay, based o assessmet of its stregths, resources, limitatios ad risk propesity, may cotiue to advace alog the roadmap most appropriate for the cetral sceario while watchig chagig coditios to see if a ew sceario (sceario B) is actually emergig. The fork idicates where a trasitio to a ew strategy must be made. Notably, preparatio for trasitio is a explicit task. Checkpoits are specified based o idicators defied i sceario plaig, icludig aticipated evets, ad o the timig ad ature of key decisios (i the illustratio, a sigle sigificat ad irreversible decisio is icluded.) At each checkpoit, subsequet checkpoits may be rescheduled ad flex poits ad forks may be revised based o assessmet of coditios. The approach cotiues to be refied. Fudametally, multi-sceario roadmappig builds o iput from the followig steps: 1. Idetify corporate drivers ad compay profile relative to its idustry, icludig: Defie characteristics (a complex cocept which may iclude core competecies but goes further i specifyig what the compay believes defies itself). Idetify risk tolerace, eed for cotrol (ad over what). Idetify depedecies (resources, icludig key persoel ad other strategic assets, but also suppliers, parters or others upo whose actios the compay may deped). Determie competitive ad strategic positio (iovator/leader, follower i terms of techology developmet or follower of a key customer, cost/retur expectatios). Recogize costraits (resource limitatios, fudametal requiremets, where a compay draws the lie ). Specify objectives (icludig time-frame cosideratios). Iclude i drivers what fudametally determies compay activity (quality, costs, techology superiority, service, uique market chaels, etc.) It is recommeded that the compay cosider similar factors for its idustry ad key competitors. 2. Specify uderlyig assumptios, compay stress poits, opportuity poits, ad flag items that may require further research or thought. 3. Assess drivers of chage i the eviromet (iterate with above.) 4. Assess strategic implicatios of the above. 5. Defie iitial issues for composite approach (iterate back through above aalysis ad refie issue selectio.) 6. Develop scearios (from issues but buildig o/challegig specified assumptios, stress/opportuity poits ad chages evisioed above.) 7. Create bareboes roadmaps for each sceario: March April

6 Defie time frame, specify key tasks (idicated by umbers i the illustratio), task sequece ad iterdepedecy. (Does a task require aother task to be completed first? Which tasks does it, i tur, affect?) Specify critical decisios (illustrated key decisios are idicated by a diamod shape). Assess the relative level of resources required for each task (resource developmet, if required, icluded as a task.) This is all idicated o a PERT chart with lies likig iterdepedet tasks. rece of exteral developmets ad sceario idicators (specified i sceario developmet) as well as progress toward task completio. Go/o go decisios (dealbreakers) would be reflected. For the cetral/curret sceario, as the project is implemeted, a log is kept for each checkpoit summarizig results ad aticipated impact o the overall project ad task completio. The frequecy of checkpoits should ot be arbitrary, but rather based o whe importat decisios must be made ad aticipated volatility. This would be adjusted as chagig circumstaces warrat. 9. Cosider sigificat variatios i tasks, decisios, resource requiremets, ad resource availability i the other scearios. 10. Based o assessmet of project deadlies, key decisio poits ad requiremets, compay capacities ad costraits, ad the extet ad itesity of variatio betwee the cetral ad other scearios, defie the widow i which oe ca trasitio to a strategy fittig the emergig sceario. Defie as a explicit task(s) preparatio for trasitio to other scearios (specify Specify key decisio poits (e.g., whe commitmets to make major ivestmets must be made.) Idicate curret status of tasks e.g., doe, i progress with resources committed, ot yet begu. (Colors are suggested for the task odes o the PERT chart.) Determie critical exteral developmets, particularly oes beyod the compay s cotrol. 8. Defie checkpoits (with detailed descriptios.) Items to be checked iclude the cotiuig validity of assumptios (idetified throughout toolset applicatio), occur- I this simplified presetatio of multi-sceario roadmappig, variatios i key tasks are show as umbered poits. A widow durig which a compay ca wait to see if a differet sceario is evolvig is desigated, alog with a flex poit where mior adjustmets may be warrated ad a fork where a full-fledged shift to the strategy implicit i sceario B must be made. 56 Research z Techology Maagemet

7 Cotiually refie scearios ad adjust roadmaps accordigly as they come closer to reality. scearios) ad related resource requiremets. Idicate a fork betwee the scearios (ad associated PERT charts) as eeded. 11. Specify potetial flex poits where adjustmets may be made based o idividual chages or recogitio of a accumulatio of mior chages. The flex may modestly affect subsequet tasks. 12. Traslate the tasks, decisio poits, checkpoits, idicators, ad exteral developmets ito a GANTTtype chart (agai for each sceario ad strategy.) 13. For the sceario deemed to be iitially most likely, flesh out the roadmap (PERT ad GANTT charts), addig detail o tasks, sub-tasks, resource allocatio, aticipated obstacles, competitor activity, ad evirometal developmets ad respose. 14. Cotiually refie scearios ad adjust roadmaps accordigly as they come closer to reality. 15. With the frequecy dictated by the itesity of chage, regularly re-evaluate scearios ad repeat sceario ad multi-sceario roadmap developmet process. bee aalyzed. We welcome collaboratio with others cocered with the issues discussed ad able to add additioal empirical iputs. C Ackowledgemet Appreciatio is expressed to Joh Peterso of Bell Labs, who assisted i the early stage of this study. Summig Up The twi roadmappig ad sceario plaig toolsets that firms have bee usig recetly have the potetial to provide operatioal ad strategic-level maagers with substatial assistace. But their iheret limitatios are also evidet, especially whe the tools are ot well implemeted or well liked, ad especially uder highly fluctuatig coditios. The applicatio of such a approach ca eable teams ad compaies to achieve the ituitive shared experiece of meaig critical to true uderstadig. We have made the case for a more robust ad dyamic approach ad, hopefully, take a step i that directio. The research o which the thikig ad fidigs have bee based is o-goig ad ca be expected to result i further developmets. Compaies are just begiig to apply the approach discussed ad results have ot yet Refereces 1. Noaka, Ikujiro. The Kowledge-Creatig Compay. Harvard Busiess Review, Nov. Dec. 1991, pp Albright, R. ad T. Kappel. Roadmappig i the Corporatio. Research z Techology Maagemet, March April 2003, pp McMilla, A. Roadmappig Aget of Chage. Research z Techology Maagemet, March April 2003, pp Kappel, T., M. Rador, ad J. W. Peterso. Maagemet of Techology through Roadmappig Tools. Product Strategy Summit 97. Maagemet Roudtable. Waltham, MA Simpso, D. Key Lessos for Adoptig Sceario Plaig i DiversifiedCompaies. Plaig Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp , Schreifer, A. Gettig the Most Out of Scearios: Advice from Experts. Plaig Review, Vol. 23, No. 5, 1995, pp Thouati, M., M. Rador ad D. Z. Levi. Corporate Growth Egies: Drivig to Sustaiable Strategic Advatage. Iteratioal Joural of Maufacturig Techology ad Maagemet, Vol. 3, No. 1/2, 2001, pp Reprits KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IN THE INNOVATION PROCESS Eightee RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT articles o this subject are ow available i paperback. To order, see iside back cover. Kowledge Maagemet: Fad or Need Iformatio Techology Will Chage Everythig Kowledge Maagemet i Research ad Developmet Implemetig a Kowledge Strategy for Your Firm Buildig Cross-Fuctioal Capability: What It Really Takes March April 2004 Kowledge Maagemet Is a Perso-To-Perso Eterprise The Challege of Fifth Geeratio R&D Iovatio for Busiess Growth Visualizig, Measurig ad Maagig Kowledge... AND MORE 57

8 About the Authors helped build ad chairs the MATI (Maagemet of Accelerated Techology Iovatio) idustry cosortium. His Northwester doctorate was o R&D maagemet, with uder- ad post-graduate egieerig studies at Imperial College ad i busiess admiistratio at LSE i the UK. He has worked i productio with Lucas Idustries, Israel Aircraft Idustries ad Westighouse; he has bee COO of a high-tech start-up, ad is a active cosultat. m-rador@kellogg.orthwester.edu Clare Farrukh is a seior research associate i the Egieerig Departmet of the Uiversity of Cambridge i the Uited Kigdom, where she coducts applied research i busiess processes ad strategic techology maagemet. She joied the Uiversity Cetre for Techology Maagemet i 1995, where she coordiates the Cambridge Techology Maagemet Network. She has a backgroud i chemical egieerig, with idustrial experiece i process plat ad composites maufacturig. cjp2@eg.cam.ac.uk Mary Griell was a project maager with Motorola s Eterprise Roadmap Maagemet System group i Phoeix, Arizoa whe she co-authored this article. I this role, she was resposible for the developmet of the global traiig solutios that support the best practices of roadmappig ad the roadmappig tools Visio Strategist ad Visio Syergy. She was also istrumetal i istitutioalizig the roadmappig efforts throughout the corporatio. She received her B.A. i educatio from Wester Michiga Uiversity ad M.A. i orgaizatioal maagemet from the Uiversity of Phoeix. David Grossma is the fouder ad pricipal of the Dyamic Strategy Group LLC, a Rochester Hills, Michiga cosultig firm specializig i strategic plaig, roadmappig, busiess model developmet, ad product ad process developmet. Prior to that, he was director of Global Techology Plaig for Geeral Motors Corporatio located i Warre, Michiga. I his 32 years at GM, he held umerous domestic ad iteratioal executive positios i plaig, egieerig ad maagemet. He is a MATI Fellow ad has a degree i mechaical egieerig from Drexel Uiversity i Philadelphia, Pesylvaia. dsgrossma@comcast.et Robert Phaal is a seior research associate i the Egieerig Departmet of the Uiversity of Cambridge i the UK, where he coducts applied research i busiess processes ad strategic techology maagemet. Followig six years at the W eldig Istitute i Cambridge, he joied the Uiversity Cetre for Techology Maagemet i 1997, located withi the Istitute for Maufacturig. He has a backgroud i mechaical egieerig ad a Ph.D. i computatioal mechaics. rp108@eg.cam.ac.uk David Probert is a seior lecturer i the Maufacturig ad Maagemet Divisio of the EgieerigDepartmet of the Uiversity of Cambridge ad heads the Cetre for Techology Maagemet withi the Istitute for Maufacturig. He had a idustrial career with Marks ad Specer ad Philips for 18 years before returig to Cambridge i He has a backgroud i mechaical ad maufacturig egieerig. drp@eg.cam.ac.uk Michael Rador is professor at Northwester Uiversity s Kellogg School, Evasto, Illiois, where he fouded ad, for seve years, chaired its Maagemet ad Orgaizatios Departmet. He is ow director of the Ceter for Techology ad Iovatio Maagemet (CTIM). He James Richey is the director of strategic techology plaig for Motorola compay-wide. I this role, he directs a group that facilitates ad forecasts critical techologies. His missio is to develop processes ad Visio Maagemet tools that facilitate the sharig ad uderstadig betwee key techology ad busiess scearios. His past experiece icludes: techology maagemet for the Satellite Commuicatios Group (Iridium), developmet of the first microcomputer-based trasactio processig system; developmet of the first dataflow parallel computer; creatio of a Motorola Research Ceter at MIT; chair of the Motorola System Customer Symposium. He curretly teaches techology maagemet for the Uiversity of Phoeix Graduate Programs. He received a B.S. i computer sciece from Arizoa State Uiversity ad MBA/techology maagemet from the Uiversity of Phoeix. He is curretly workig o his Doctorate i techology leadership. Jim.Richey@motorola.com Jeffrey Strauss is associate director ad director of idustry programs at Northwester Uiversity s NSF Idustry Uiversity Ceter for Techology ad Iovatio Maagemet (CTIM) where he desigs ad maages idustry outreach ad academic activities ad programs, develops materials, icludig dyamic o-lie simulatios, ad creates ad co-teaches traiig programs ad courses related to iteratioal busiess ad techology maagemet. He is particularly active i pushig ew busiess areas ad attetio to key corporate tools such as roadmappig, sceario plaig ad strategic stadards maagemet that are relatively ew to idustry. He is also active i coordiatio with the MATI idustry cosortium. He also has may years experiece i cosultig, marketig, egotiatios, ad traiig ad maagemet of multiatioal persoel. He has degrees i sociology, psychology ad East Asia Studies, ad a M.B.A. from Kellogg. It-dev@orthwester.edu Rachel Wells joied the Royal Mail i 1998 as a research maager i the Future Techologies team, to idetify how ew ad emergig techology ca be applied to beefit the busiess. With degrees i geography ad busiess admiistratio, she has previously worked i software developmet ad systems aalysis at IBM, together with research, geographical iformatio systems, project maagemet, marketig, ad ew product developmet at the Ordace Survey, Britai s atioal mappig agecy. Wells is curretly leadig a major techology upgrade for the Royal Mail s customer relatioship maagemet system. Rachel.a.wells@royalmail.com 58 Research z Techology Maagemet