An analysis of factors improving technology roadmap credibility: A communications theory assessment of roadmapping processes

In recent years, many industrial firms have been able to use roadmapping as an effective process methodology for projecting future technology and for coordinating technology planning and strategy. Firms potentially realize a number of benefits in deploying technology roadmapping (TRM) processes. Roadmaps provide information identifying which new technologies will meet firms' future product demands, allowing companies to leverage R&D investments through choosing appropriately out of a range of alternative technologies. Moreover, the roadmapping process serves an important communication tool helping to bring about consensus among roadmap developers, as well as between participants brought in during the development process, who may communicate their understanding of shared corporate goals through the roadmap. However, there are few conceptual accounts or case studies have made the argument that roadmapping processes may be used effectively as communication tools. This paper, therefore, seeks to elaborate a theoretical foundation for identifying the factors that must be considered in setting up a roadmap and for analyzing the effect of these factors on technology roadmap credibility as perceived by its users. Based on the survey results of 120 different R&D units, this empirical study found that firms need to explore further how they can enable frequent interactions between the TRM development team and TRM participants. A high level of interaction will improve the credibility of a TRM, with communication channels selected by the organization also positively affecting TRM credibility. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.

Maturity grids as tools for change management

One method to assess organizational capabilities is a maturity grid. MATURITY GRIDS AS TOOLS FOR CHANGE MANAGEMENT A maturity grid assessment is typically structured around a matrix or a grid. It consists of a series of cells where ...

A framework for clarifying the meaning of Triple Bottom-Line, Integrated, and Sustainability Assessment

Terms such as Integrated Assessment and Sustainability Assessment are used to label 'new' approaches to impact assessment that are designed to direct planning and decision-making towards sustainable development (SD). Established assessment techniques, such as EIA and SEA, are also widely promoted as SD 'tools'. This paper presents the findings of a literature review undertaken to identify the features that are typically promoted for improving the SD-directedness of assessments. A framework is developed which reconciles the broad range of emerging approaches and tackles the inconsistent use of terminology. The framework comprises a three-dimensional space defined by the following axes: the comprehensiveness of the SD coverage; the degree of 'integration' of the techniques and themes; and the extent to which a strategic perspective is adopted. By applying the framework, assessment approaches can be positioned relative to one another, enabling comparison on the basis of substance rather than semantics. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.