IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v98y2020ics0166497218306874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic approach to prioritizing R&D projects based on customer-perceived value using opinion mining

Author

Listed:
  • Yoon, Byungun
  • Jeong, Yujin
  • Lee, Keeeun
  • Lee, Sungjoo

Abstract

As product development has recently emphasized user innovation, it should necessarily reflect customer-perceived value, as well as technological value itself. However, while previous studies for technology planning have focused on analyzing the potential of technology, they have not considered the customer-perceived value that technology can create in a new product. Therefore, this research suggests a new approach to assessing the level of technology and evaluating R&D projects, by investigating customer-perceived value on technology through the use of the structural equation model and opinion mining. For this, the assessment framework is developed in terms of technology, product quality, and customer satisfaction, respectively, by investigating a variety of databases on each factor. The relationship between technology level and customer satisfaction is analyzed, using structural equation model and opinion mining. Based on the results, a strategy for technology development is established through gap analysis and simulation, after selecting and evaluating technologies that need to be developed. The proposed approach is applied to the real case of a moving system, in particular an automobile door, and we obtained that an R&D project for hinge-related technology would be promising, enhancing the customer satisfaction. It can suggest a future direction for new technology development. This paper contributes to enhancing the efficiency of technology planning based on the customer-perceived value, enabling the launch of new R&D projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Yoon, Byungun & Jeong, Yujin & Lee, Keeeun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2020. "A systematic approach to prioritizing R&D projects based on customer-perceived value using opinion mining," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:98:y:2020:i:c:s0166497218306874
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102164
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497218306874
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102164?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. Fabry, Bernd & Ernst, Holger & Langholz, Jens & Köster, Martin, 2006. "Patent portfolio analysis as a useful tool for identifying R&D and business opportunities--an empirical application in the nutrition and health industry," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 215-225, September.
    2. Janssen, Marijn & van der Voort, Haiko & Wahyudi, Agung, 2017. "Factors influencing big data decision-making quality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 338-345.
    3. Nicholas Bloom & Raffaella Sadun & John Van Reenen, 2012. "Americans Do IT Better: US Multinationals and the Productivity Miracle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 167-201, February.
    4. Lu, Wen-Min & Kweh, Qian Long & Nourani, Mohammad & Huang, Feng-Wen, 2016. "Evaluating the efficiency of dual-use technology development programs from the R&D and socio-economic perspectives," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 82-92.
    5. Sarstedt, Marko & Ringle, Christian M. & Smith, Donna & Reams, Russell & Hair, Joseph F., 2014. "Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): A useful tool for family business researchers," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 105-115.
    6. Olinsky, Alan & Chen, Shaw & Harlow, Lisa, 2003. "The comparative efficacy of imputation methods for missing data in structural equation modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(1), pages 53-79, November.
    7. Zhang, XiaoLi & Liu, ChenGuang & Li, WenJuan & Evans, Steve & Yin, Yong, 2017. "Effects of key enabling technologies for seru production on sustainable performance," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 66(PB), pages 290-307.
    8. Grimaldi, Michele & Cricelli, Livio & Di Giovanni, Martina & Rogo, Francesco, 2015. "The patent portfolio value analysis: A new framework to leverage patent information for strategic technology planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 286-302.
    9. Block, Jörn H. & Henkel, Joachim & Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Stiegler, Annika, 2016. "Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: The user–manufacturer innovator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 244-259.
    10. Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe, 1997. "University Versus Corporate Patents: A Window On The Basicness Of Invention," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 19-50.
    11. El-Adly, Mohammed Ismail & Eid, Riyad, 2016. "An empirical study of the relationship between shopping environment, customer perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty in the UAE malls context," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 217-227.
    12. Kim, Jeeeun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2015. "Patent databases for innovation studies: A comparative analysis of USPTO, EPO, JPO and KIPO," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 332-345.
    13. Gardial, Sarah Fisher, et al, 1994. "Comparing Consumers' Recall of Prepurchase and Postpurchase Product Evaluation Experiences," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(4), pages 548-560, March.
    14. Van Acker, Veronique & Witlox, Frank, 2010. "Car ownership as a mediating variable in car travel behaviour research using a structural equation modelling approach to identify its dual relationship," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 65-74.
    15. Liu, John S. & Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Lu, Wen-Min, 2016. "Research fronts in data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 33-45.
    16. Nikolay Archak & Anindya Ghose & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2011. "Deriving the Pricing Power of Product Features by Mining Consumer Reviews," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1485-1509, August.
    17. Darren W. Dahl & Christoph Fuchs & Martin Schreier, 2015. "Why and When Consumers Prefer Products of User-Driven Firms: A Social Identification Account," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1978-1988, August.
    18. Lois, David & López-Sáez, Mercedes, 2009. "The relationship between instrumental, symbolic and affective factors as predictors of car use: A structural equation modeling approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(9-10), pages 790-799, November.
    19. Farley, John U & Katz, Jerrold & Lehmann, Donald R, 1978. "Impact of Different Comparison Sets on Evaluation of a New Subcompact Car Brand," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 138-142, Se.
    20. Giacomo Zanello & Xiaolan Fu & Pierre Mohnen & Marc Ventresca, 2016. "The Creation And Diffusion Of Innovation In Developing Countries: A Systematic Literature Review," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 884-912, December.
    21. Magotra, Irbha & Sharma, Jyoti & Sharma, Supran Kumar, 2018. "Investigating Linkage Between Customer Value And Technology Adoption Behaviour: A Study Of Banking Sector In India," European Research on Management and Business Economics (ERMBE), Academia Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa (AEDEM), vol. 24(1), pages 17-26.
    22. Haupt, Reinhard & Kloyer, Martin & Lange, Marcus, 2007. "Patent indicators for the technology life cycle development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 387-398, April.
    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. 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).
    2. Wu, Aiqi & Song, Di & Liu, Yihui, 2022. "Platform synergy and innovation speed of SMEs: The roles of organizational design and regional environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 38-53.
    3. Nataliya Chukhray & Nataliya Shakhovska & Oleksandra Mrykhina & Lidiya Lisovska & Ivan Izonin, 2022. "Stacking Machine Learning Model for the Assessment of R&D Product’s Readiness and Method for Its Cost Estimation," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-28, April.
    4. Lee, Keeeun & Kim, Sunhye & Yoon, Byungun, 2022. "A systematic idea generation approach for developing a new technology: Application of a socio-technical transition system," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(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. Song, Kisik & Kim, Kyuwoong & Lee, Sungjoo, 2018. "Identifying promising technologies using patents: A retrospective feature analysis and a prospective needs analysis on outlier patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 118-132.
    2. Moaniba, Igam M. & Lee, Pei-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2020. "How does external knowledge sourcing enhance product development? Evidence from drug commercialization," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    3. Klein, Daniel & Ludwig, Christopher A. & Nicolay, Katharina, 2020. "Internal digitalization and tax-efficient decision making," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-051, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Jun Hong Park & Hyunseog Chung & Ki Hong Kim & Jin Ju Kim & Chulung Lee, 2021. "The Impact of Technological Capability on Financial Performance in the Semiconductor Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Jan M. Gerken & Martin G. Moehrle, 2012. "A new instrument for technology monitoring: novelty in patents measured by semantic patent analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(3), pages 645-670, June.
    6. Alptekin Durmuşoğlu, 2017. "Effects of Clean Air Act on Patenting Activities in Chemical Industry: Learning from Past Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, May.
    7. Song, Haoyang & Hou, Jianhua & Zhang, Yang, 2023. "The measurements and determinants of patent technological value: Lifetime, strength, breadth, and dispersion from the technology diffusion perspective," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1).
    8. Cheng-Wen Lee & Budi Hasyim & Jan-Yan Lin, 2024. "Digital Technology for Supply Chain Management- marketing Integration," Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 14(1), pages 1-4.
    9. Barbieri, Nicolò & Marzucchi, Alberto & Rizzo, Ugo, 2020. "Knowledge sources and impacts on subsequent inventions: Do green technologies differ from non-green ones?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    10. Trautrims, Alexander & MacCarthy, Bart L. & Okade, Chetan, 2017. "Building an innovation-based supplier portfolio: The use of patent analysis in strategic supplier selection in the automotive sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 228-236.
    11. Schmidt, Arne & Walter, Sascha G. & Walter, Achim, 2010. "Contingency Factors and the Technology-Performance-Relationship in Start-ups," EconStor Preprints 37082, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    12. Munari, Federico & Toschi, Laura, 2014. "Running ahead in the nanotechnology gold rush. Strategic patenting in emerging technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 194-207.
    13. Francesco Paolo Appio & Luigi de Luca & Robert Morgan & Antonella Martini, 2019. "Patent portfolio diversity and firm profitability: A question of specialization or diversification?," Post-Print halshs-02292360, HAL.
    14. Leila Tahmooresnejad & Catherine Beaudry, 2019. "Capturing the economic value of triadic patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 127-157, January.
    15. Huang, Kenneth Guang-Lih & Huang, Can & Shen, Huijun & Mao, Hao, 2021. "Assessing the value of China's patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    16. Donghyun Choi & Bomi Song, 2018. "Exploring Technological Trends in Logistics: Topic Modeling-Based Patent Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-26, August.
    17. Ardito, Lorenzo & Ernst, Holger & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2020. "The interplay between technology characteristics, R&D internationalisation, and new product introduction: Empirical evidence from the energy conservation sector," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 96.
    18. Chen, Xi & Mao, Jin & Ma, Yaxue & Li, Gang, 2024. "The knowledge linkage between science and technology influences corporate technological innovation: Evidence from scientific publications and patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    19. Ardito, Lorenzo & Natalicchio, Angelo & Appio, Francesco Paolo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2021. "The role of scientific knowledge within inventing teams and the moderating effects of team internationalization and team experience: Empirical tests into the aerospace sector," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 701-710.
    20. Huang, Ying & Li, Ruinan & Zou, Fang & Jiang, Lidan & Porter, Alan L. & Zhang, Lin, 2022. "Technology life cycle analysis: From the dynamic perspective of patent citation networks," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    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:98:y:2020:i:c:s0166497218306874. 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.