IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v198y2024ics0040162523006121.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Failed technology management: Introducing ‘future technology myopia’ and how to address it

Author

Listed:
  • van der Duin, Patrick
  • Trott, Paul
  • Ortt, Roland

Abstract

The management of technology is increasingly fuelled by societal challenges and user problems. For effective technology development and implementation, it is important that both are relevant not only in the present, but also in the future. Technological development and implementation take time which means that a technology originally meant to address a particular societal challenge, may be no longer relevant at the time it is implemented because the challenge or problem may no longer exist. We call this ‘future technology myopia’. This myopia implies that while analysing the possible future development of a technology, sufficient vigilance should be given to the persistence of i). the technical challenge and ii). the development of the societal problem, and of alternative ways to deal with both. In view of the increasing interdependence between technology and society, broadening the technology management and analysis is therefore relevant for the effective development of technology to address future societal and user problems and for developing relevant strategic technology policies. In this paper we develop a Technology Management Ailment Matrix that identifies imbalances that might arise during the technology development process. It enables firms to identify and compare different technology management ailments collectively; it also identifies a further new ailment: future technology myopia.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Duin, Patrick & Trott, Paul & Ortt, Roland, 2024. "Failed technology management: Introducing ‘future technology myopia’ and how to address it," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:198:y:2024:i:c:s0040162523006121
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162523006121
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122927?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. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    3. David J. Teece, 2008. "Firm organization, industrial structure, and technological innovation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 11, pages 265-296, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Slater, Stanley F. & Narver, John C., 2000. "The Positive Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability: A Balanced Replication," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 69-73, April.
    5. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1976. "On Technological Expectations," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 86(343), pages 523-535, September.
    6. Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
    7. Mowery, David & Rosenberg, Nathan, 1993. "The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-108, April.
    8. Ortt, J. Roland & Kamp, Linda M., 2022. "A technological innovation system framework to formulate niche introduction strategies for companies prior to large-scale diffusion," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    10. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    11. Wydra, Sven, 2015. "Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 76-90.
    12. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    13. Heracleous, Loizos & Papachroni, Angeliki & Andriopoulos, Constantine & Gotsi, Manto, 2017. "Structural ambidexterity and competency traps: Insights from Xerox PARC," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 327-338.
    14. Giovanni Dosi, 2000. "The Research on Innovation Diffusion: An Assessment," Chapters, in: Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics, chapter 3, pages 115-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Freeman, Christopher & Soete, Luc, 2009. "Developing science, technology and innovation indicators: What we can learn from the past," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 583-589, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Park, Inchae & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2022. "Tracing the emergence of new technology: A comparative analysis of five technological domains," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    3. Nemet, Gregory F. & Zipperer, Vera & Kraus, Martina, 2018. "The valley of death, the technology pork barrel, and public support for large demonstration projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 154-167.
    4. Klimczuk-Kochańska, Magdalena, 2016. "Rola innowacji miękkich w badaniach innowacyjności przedsiębiorstw z sektorów niskotechnologicznych na przykładzie sektora spożywczego [The Role of the Soft Innovation in the Research of Low-Tech S," MPRA Paper 84757, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. 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.
    6. Magdalena Klimczuk-Kochanska, 2016. "The Role of the Soft Innovation in the Research of Low-Tech Sectors on the Example of Food Industry (Rola innowacji miekkich w badaniach innowacyjnosci przedsiebiorstw z sektorow niskotechnologicznych," Research Reports, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 2(22), pages 23-32.
    7. Susanna Mancinelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti, 2009. "Innovation, networking and complementarity: evidence on SME performances for a local economic system in North-Eastern Italy," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 43(3), pages 567-597, September.
    8. Tischler, Joachim, 2014. "Characteristics of technological base, pace of technological development, and growth of young technology-based firms," EconStor Preprints 96156, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Nemet, Gregory F., 2009. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and government-led incentives for non-incremental technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 700-709, June.
    10. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Mary J. Benner, 2010. "Securities Analysts and Incumbent Response to Radical Technological Change: Evidence from Digital Photography and Internet Telephony," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 42-62, February.
    12. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. Hötte, Kerstin, 2023. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and the direction of technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    14. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Mancinelli, Susanna, 2007. "SME Performance, Innovation and Networking Evidence on Complementarities for a Local Economic System," Knowledge, Technology, Human Capital Working Papers 9554, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    16. Dario Guarascio & Mario Pianta & Francesco Bogliacino, 2017. "Export, R&D and New Products: A Model and a Test on European Industries," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 393-432, Springer.
    17. Massimo Colombo & Liliana Doganova & Evila Piva & Diego D’Adda & Philippe Mustar, 2015. "Hybrid alliances and radical innovation: the performance implications of integrating exploration and exploitation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 696-722, August.
    18. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    19. Iferd, Younes & Plötz, Patrick, 2018. "External search strategies: The role of innovation objectives and specialization," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S02/2018, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    20. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(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:tefoso:v:198:y:2024:i:c:s0040162523006121. 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/00401625 .

    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.