Decision-makers (DMs) are not sufficiently exposed to concepts such as efficiency and risk in innovative activities from the perspective of organizational strategy. The challenges become even greater when these DMs lack expertise in technology and deal with uncertain circumstances. In this sense, exchanging expert knowledge between DMs and technical teams will strengthen the link between technology planning and strategic management. The purpose of this study is to bridge the knowledge gap between these two groups. It introduces a framework to translate the organization’s strategy into technological decisions at an acceptable innovation risk level. This framework considers aspects such as knowledge, type of innovation, and innovation process. This study focuses on determining whether activities should be accepted or rejected by examining the uncertainty and efficiency of innovation. It also introduces a novel perspective on the hybrid "success-failure" uncertainty of innovation, and a new measure called "efficiency probability," which DMs and technology developers can use to intuitively engage in the innovation process. This paper seeks to propose a practical strategy map for new product development under uncertain conditions. To achieve this goal, the Fuzzy Front-End (FFE) concept, fuzzy data envelopment analysis (FDEA) model, and adjustable possibilistic programming (APP) approach are applied. The results of this study indicate that innovative activities typically have low efficiency and high uncertainty. Therefore, the decision to implement or abandon them requires reviewing and balancing the goals and strategic approach of the organization with technological and business features.
PurposeNew business practices and the globalization of markets force firms to take innovation as the fundamental pillar of their competitive strategy. Research and Development (R&D) plays a vital role in innovation. As technology advances and product life cycles become shorter, firms rely on R&D as a strategy to invigorate innovation. R&D project portfolio selection is a complex and challenging task. Despite the management's efforts to implement the best project portfolio selection practices, many projects continue to fail or miss their target. The problem is that selecting R&D projects requires a deep understanding of strategic vision and technical capabilities. However, many decision-makers lack technological insight or strategic vision. This article aims to provide a method to capitalize on the expertise of R&D professionals to assist managers in making informed and effective decisions. It also provides a framework for aligning the portfolio of R&D projects with the organizational vision and mission.Design/methodology/approachThis article proposes a new strategic approach for R&D project portfolio selection using efficiency-uncertainty maps.FindingsThe proposed strategy plane helps decision-makers align R&D project portfolios with their strategies to combine a strategic view and numerical analysis in this research. The proposed strategy plane consists of four areas: Exploitation Zone, Challenge Zone, Desperation Zone and Discretion Zone. Mapping the project into this strategic plane would help decision-makers align their project portfolio according to the corporate perspectives.Originality/valueThe new approach combines the efficiency and uncertainty dimensions in portfolio selection into an integrated framework that: (i) provides a complete representation of the stochastic decision-making processes, (ii) models the endogenous uncertainty inherent in the project selection process and (iii) proposes a computationally practical and visually unique solution procedure for classifying desirable and undesirable R&D projects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.