IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v115y2022ics0166497222000098.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptation of the MIVES method for the strategic selection of new technologies at an R&D centre. Focus on the manufacturing sector

Author

Listed:
  • Lizarralde, Rafael
  • Ganzarain, Jaione
  • Zubizarreta, Mikel

Abstract

The key role of R&D Centers for technological development in industrial companies is undeniable and clearly impacts on the competitive strategies of industry. R&D Centers assume responsibility for the identification, selection, acquisition, development, and transfer of technology. Among their activities, the successful selection of new technologies is becoming a highly critical and complex challenge in the Technology Management Process. The problem underlying the right selection of new generations of technologies is, from a methodological perspective, linked to key heterogeneous (technological, economic, human, and organizational) factors. Even though previous research has focused on the selection of technologies within the industrial sector, there is little research on the selection of technology at R&D Institutions and, in particular, at R&D Centers. In this research, a Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM)-based evaluation model for decision-making (MIVES), adaptable to one or several technologies, is therefore, employed. In such complex scenarios, MCDM models are a suitable approach to decision-making. The model is then applied to a real case study, in which the evaluation of a new technology at a Spanish R&D Center specializing in manufacturing is analyzed.

Suggested Citation

  • Lizarralde, Rafael & Ganzarain, Jaione & Zubizarreta, Mikel, 2022. "Adaptation of the MIVES method for the strategic selection of new technologies at an R&D centre. Focus on the manufacturing sector," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:115:y:2022:i:c:s0166497222000098
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102462
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497222000098
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102462?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sara Sadat Mortazavi Ravari & Ehsan Mehrabanfar & Audrius Banaitis & Nerija Banaitienė, 2016. "Framework for assessing technological innovation capability in research and technology organizations," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 825-847, November.
    2. Torkkeli, Marko & Tuominen, Markku, 2002. "The contribution of technology selection to core competencies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 271-284, June.
    3. Segarra-Blasco, Agusti­ & Arauzo-Carod, Josep-Maria, 2008. "Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1283-1295, September.
    4. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    5. Kleindorfer, Paul R. & Partovi, Fariborz Y., 1990. "Integrating manufacturing strategy and technology choice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 214-224, July.
    6. Sarkis, Joseph & Talluri, Srinivas, 2004. "Evaluating and selecting e-commerce software and communication systems for a supply chain," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(2), pages 318-329, December.
    7. Eilat, Harel & Golany, Boaz & Shtub, Avraham, 2008. "R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 895-912, October.
    8. Oriol Pons & Albert De la Fuente & Antonio Aguado, 2016. "The Use of MIVES as a Sustainability Assessment MCDM Method for Architecture and Civil Engineering Applications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-15, May.
    9. Eko Budi Leksono & Suparno Suparno & Iwan Vanany, 2019. "Integration of a Balanced Scorecard, DEMATEL, and ANP for Measuring the Performance of a Sustainable Healthcare Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1, July.
    10. Safar Fazli & Reza Kiani & Mohammadali Vosooghidizaji, 2015. "Crude oil supply chain risk management with DEMATEL–ANP," Post-Print hal-02327343, HAL.
    11. Chen, Hongyi & Kocaoglu, Dundar F., 2008. "A sensitivity analysis algorithm for hierarchical decision models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(1), pages 266-288, February.
    12. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    13. Huang, Chi-Cheng & Chu, Pin-Yu & Chiang, Yu-Hsiu, 2008. "A fuzzy AHP application in government-sponsored R&D project selection," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1038-1052, December.
    14. Bongo, Miriam F. & Alimpangog, Kissy Mae S. & Loar, Jennifer F. & Montefalcon, Jason A. & Ocampo, Lanndon A., 2018. "An application of DEMATEL-ANP and PROMETHEE II approach for air traffic controllers’ workload stress problem: A case of Mactan Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 198-213.
    15. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    16. Ma, Daw & Chang, Chia-Chin & Hung, Shiu-Wan, 2013. "The selection of technology for late-starters: A case study of the energy-smart photovoltaic industry," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Meesapawong, Pawadee & Rezgui, Yacine & Li, Haijiang, 2014. "Planning innovation orientation in public research and development organizations: Using a combined Delphi and Analytic Hierarchy Process approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 245-256.
    18. Ethem Duygulu & Emir Ozeren & Demet Bagiran & Andrea Appolloni & Muge Mavisu, 2015. "Gaining insight into innovation culture within the context of R%D centres in Turkey," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 19(1/2), pages 117-146.
    19. Athanasios Kolios & Varvara Mytilinou & Estivaliz Lozano-Minguez & Konstantinos Salonitis, 2016. "A Comparative Study of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods under Stochastic Inputs," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-21, July.
    20. Hung, Chih-Young & Lee, Wen-Yi, 2016. "A proactive technology selection model for new technology: The case of 3D IC TSV," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 191-202.
    21. Mohanty, R. P. & Deshmukh, S. G., 1998. "Advanced manufacturing technology selection:A strategic model for learning and evaluation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 295-307, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dexiang Yang & Qin Yang & Lei Zhang, 2023. "Operational Decisions on Remanufacturing under the Product Innovation Race," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute & Harbo Frederiksen, Marianne, 2024. "Consumer flash fiction: A methodology to support the early sensing of far-future innovation opportunities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    3. S. M. Amin Hosseini & Rama Ghalambordezfooly & Albert de la Fuente, 2022. "Sustainability Model to Select Optimal Site Location for Temporary Housing Units: Combining GIS and the MIVES–Knapsack Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Gupta, Rohit & Rathore, Bhawana & Biswas, Baidyanath & Jaiswal, Mahadeo & Singh, Raunak Kumar, 2024. "Are we ready for metaverse adoption in the service industry? Theoretically exploring the barriers to successful adoption," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Xi, Xi & Ren, Feifei & Yu, Lean & Yang, Jing, 2023. "Detecting the technology's evolutionary pathway using HiDS-trait-driven tech mining strategy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    6. Rivero-Iglesias, Jose M. & Puente, Javier & Fernandez, Isabel & León, Omar, 2023. "Integrated model for the assessment of power generation alternatives through analytic hierarchy process and a fuzzy inference system. Case study of Spain," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 563-581.
    7. Parolin, Giácomo & McAloone, Tim C. & Pigosso, Daniela C.A., 2024. "How can technology assessment tools support sustainable innovation? A systematic literature review and synthesis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rafael Lizarralde & Jaione Ganzarain & Mikel Zubizarreta, 2020. "Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    3. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Sheng-Long Lee & Ping-Chuan Chen & Wu Chiang Chan & Shiu-Wan Hung, 2015. "A three-stage decision-making model for selecting electric vehicle battery technology," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(7), pages 761-776, October.
    5. Vlachokostas, Ch. & Michailidou, A.V. & Achillas, Ch., 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    6. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    7. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    8. Karasakal, Esra & Aker, Pınar, 2017. "A multicriteria sorting approach based on data envelopment analysis for R&D project selection problem," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 79-92.
    9. Saeed Nosratabadi & Gergo Pinter & Amir Mosavi & Sandor Semperger, 2020. "Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models," Papers 2003.13423, arXiv.org.
    10. Nasrollahi, Sadaf & Kazemi, Aliyeh & Jahangir, Mohammad-Hossein & Aryaee, Sara, 2023. "Selecting suitable wave energy technology for sustainable development, an MCDM approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 756-772.
    11. Alaa Khadra & Mårten Hugosson & Jan Akander & Jonn Are Myhren, 2020. "Development of a Weight Factor Method for Sustainability Decisions in Building Renovation. Case Study Using Renobuild," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-15, September.
    12. Shen, Yung-Chi & Chou, Chiyang James & Lin, Grace T.R., 2011. "The portfolio of renewable energy sources for achieving the three E policy goals," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 2589-2598.
    13. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.
    14. May, Jerrold H. & Shang, Jennifer & Tjader, Youxu Cai & Vargas, Luis G., 2013. "A new methodology for sensitivity and stability analysis of analytic network models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 180-188.
    15. Çolak, Murat & Kaya, İhsan, 2017. "Prioritization of renewable energy alternatives by using an integrated fuzzy MCDM model: A real case application for Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 840-853.
    16. Saeed Nosratabadi & Gergo Pinter & Amir Mosavi & Sandor Semperger, 2020. "Sustainable Banking; Evaluation of the European Business Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-19, March.
    17. Tang, Yong & Sun, Honghang & Yao, Qiang & Wang, Yibo, 2014. "The selection of key technologies by the silicon photovoltaic industry based on the Delphi method and AHP (analytic hierarchy process): Case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 474-482.
    18. Kajal Chatterjee & Sheikh Ahmed Hossain & Samarjit Kar, 2018. "Prioritization of project proposals in portfolio management using fuzzy AHP," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 55(2), pages 478-501, June.
    19. Sergio Domínguez & María Carmen Carnero, 2020. "Fuzzy Multicriteria Modelling of Decision Making in the Renewal of Healthcare Technologies," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-42, June.
    20. Aloini, Davide & Dulmin, Riccardo & Mininno, Valeria & Pellegrini, Luisa & Farina, Giulia, 2018. "Technology assessment with IF-TOPSIS: An application in the advanced underwater system sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 38-48.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:115:y:2022:i:c:s0166497222000098. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.