Approaches to strategic research and technology (R&amp;T) analysis and road mapping

Mankins, John C.

doi:10.1016/s0094-5765(02)00083-8

Cited by 76 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If the constant altitude option is adopted, the mass of the spacecraft at any time t during the pulling maneuver can be computed assuming a mass consumption linearly proportional to the pulling (45) and by using Eq. (45) in the system of equations (42) (46) which has to be solved to determine the hovering distance d. Fig.…”

Section: Fig 12 Geometric Diagram Of the Gravity Tug And Asteroid Comentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicriteria Comparison Among Several Mitigation Strategies for Dangerous Near-Earth Objects

Sanchez

Colombo

Vasile

et al. 2009

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This version is available at https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/15828/ Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Unless otherwise explicitly stated on the manuscript, Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Please check the manuscript for details of any other licences that may have been applied. You may not engage in further distribution of the material for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute both the url (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/) and the content of this paper for research or private study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge.Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to the

show abstract

Section: Fig 12 Geometric Diagram Of the Gravity Tug And Asteroid Comentioning

confidence: 99%

Multicriteria Comparison Among Several Mitigation Strategies for Dangerous Near-Earth Objects

Sanchez

Colombo

Vasile

et al. 2009

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Readiness of technology is a significant part in the decision being made; if the technology has not reached a sufficient readiness level, it will pose a risk to the company to take forward into a car programme. There is an interesting parallel to be made with the most widely adopted framework for assessing technology readiness, or technology maturity, the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) (Mankins, 2002) tool developed by NASA and used by many more companies in several sectors. One of the main advocates for using the TRL framework, the US General Accounting Office (GAO), reports on cost and schedule overruns when technologies are transferred into programmes too early (i.e., at too low maturity) showing the severity of this issue (Schinasi, 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision making in gates: based on formal basis or gut feeling?

Kastensson

Johansson

2011

IJTIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Manufacturing companies continuously deal with development of innovations. Many of these are cancelled on the way, in gate meetings. This paper investigates why technologies are cancelled, and on which basis managers make decisions. The paper is based on a study from the automotive industry with interviews with different stakeholders in the gates. The most common reasons for stopping projects were time, cost and technology readiness. Gut feeling is found to be an important factor when evaluating projects. This paper concludes that managers need to understand the role of intuition and query for this subjective information in addition to objective measures.

show abstract

“…The TRL descriptions are tailored specifically toward UAV (Moorehouse 2002in Azizian et al 2009). Advancement Degree of Difficulty (AD 2 ) Leveraging the concept of R&D 3 , the AD 2 augments TRLs by assessing the difficulty of advancing a technology from its current level to a desired level on a 9-tier scale (Bilbro 2002(Bilbro , 2006(Bilbro , 2007 The R&D 3 is a 5-level scale intended to supplement the TRL by conveying the degree of difficulty involved in proceeding from the current TRL state to desired level, with 5 being very difficult and 1 being least difficult to mature the technology (Mankins 2002). Quantitative Maturity Assessment Techniques System Readiness Level (SRL)…”

Section: Technology Assessment Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The TRRA expands the concept of the risk matrix by integrating "probability of failure" on the y-axis and "consequence of failure" on the x-axis (Mankins 2009 ITAM is a quantitative mathematical model that integrates various system metrics to calculate the cumulative maturity of a system based on the readiness of its constituent technologies. The system metrics include TRLs, ∆TRL, R&D Degree of Difficulty (R&D 3 ), and TNV (Mankins 2002).…”

Section: Technology Assessment Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextual role of TRLs and MRLs in technology management.

Fernández¹

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) have been used extensively from the 1970s, especially in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Their application was recommended by the General Accounting Office in 1999 to be used for major Department of Defense acquisition projects. Manufacturing Readiness Levels (MRLs) have been proposed for improving the way manufacturing risks and readiness are identified; they were introduced to the defense community in 2005, but have not been used as broadly as TRLs. Originally TRLs were used to assess the readiness of a single technology. With the emergence of more complex systems and system of systems, it has been increasingly recognized that TRLs have limitations, especially when considering integration of complex systems. Therefore, it is important to use TRLs in the correct context. Details on TRLs and MRLs are reported in this paper. More recent indices to establish a better understanding of the integrated readiness state of systems are presented. Newer readiness indices, System Readiness Levels (SRLs) and Integration Readiness Levels, are discussed and their limitations and advantages are presented, along with an example of computing SRLs. It is proposed that a modified SRL be considered that explicitly includes the MRLs and a modification of the TRLs to include the Integrated Technology Index (ITI) and/or the Advancement Degree of Difficulty index proposed by NASA. Finally, the use of indices to perform technology assessments are placed into the overall context of technology management, recognizing that factors to transition and manage technology include cost, schedule, manufacturability, integration readiness, and technology maturity. 4This page is intentionally left blank.5

show abstract

Approaches to strategic research and technology (R&T) analysis and road mapping

Cited by 76 publications

References 0 publications

Multicriteria Comparison Among Several Mitigation Strategies for Dangerous Near-Earth Objects

Multicriteria Comparison Among Several Mitigation Strategies for Dangerous Near-Earth Objects

Decision making in gates: based on formal basis or gut feeling?

Contextual role of TRLs and MRLs in technology management.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About