R&amp;D priority-setting for global catastrophic risks: The case of the NASA planetary defense mission

Janzwood, Scott

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2021.104225

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Modeling innovative activities into decision-making units with distinct input-outputs has gained merit in recent innovation efficiency research (Namazi and Mohammadi, 2018). R&D priority-setting involves systematically estimating costs and benefits (Janzwood, 2021). Hence, to model the process of an R&D project, we consider required human resources in terms of person-hour and fixed costs such as equipment, software licenses and laboratory costs.…”

Section: Methodology and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

A new strategic approach for R&D project portfolio selection using efficiency-uncertainty maps

Namazi

Tavana

Mohammadi

et al. 2023

BIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Methodology and Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

A new strategic approach for R&D project portfolio selection using efficiency-uncertainty maps

Namazi

Tavana

Mohammadi

et al. 2023

BIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Initially, the literature was reviewed to survey methodologies used in similar problems to choose the decision support algorithm. The defense sector, driven by the growing need to use increasingly advanced systems in an environment of budgetary constraints, requires the use of a project prioritization tool, based on technical criteria to efficiently employ scarce resources (Arnaut et al, 2012;Stromgren et al, 2018;Janzwood, 2021). In fact, the purpose of the research is to apply a method of decision support to prioritize flight simulators of the Air Force Command.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing flight simulators of the brazilian air force by the analytic hierarchy process and hypothesis tests

Assis¹,

Gavião²,

Kostin³

et al. 2022

BJO&PM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Goal: The purpose of the research is to apply a method of decision support to prioritize flight simulators of the Air Force Command in view of the country”s budget constraints in the defense sector. Methodology: The research was performed with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), associated with hypothesis tests to define the preference or equivalence relationships between the simulators. Data collection involved the support of 32 Air Force specialists with extensive experience in the chosen simulators. Results: The T-27 Tucano simulator was preferred, followed by the C-95M Bandeirantes and the C-105 Amazonas, which obtained statistical similarity to each other. In fourth place was the A-29 Super Tucano simulator. The two simulators that had the least preference were the F-5M Tiger II and the A-1 AMX, which achieved results that were statistically close to each other. Limitations: Any multicriteria decision aid technique embeds its features and limitations. This is not exclusive to AHP, although the consistency ratio is a differential in relation to other methods. The expert sample also reflects the preferences of a group, with reservations to the generalization of the results. Practical implications: The findings of this research can be used in practice, by assisting the Brazilian Air Force in applying its scarce financial resources to prioritize flight simulators. Originality / Value: The research is unique to the Brazilian Air Force, in particular to the Center that oversees flight simulators, and is also relevant in including hypothesis testing to AHP results.

show abstract

“…R&D priority‐setting describes the process of allocating finite resources to systematically reduce uncertainties that are impeding strategic decision making. Determining which uncertainty reduction activities should be funded and which ones should not requires complex cost–benefit calculations and ex ante estimates of the relative importance and reducibility of different uncertainties that are impeding decision making (Janzwood, 2021).…”

Section: Conclusion: Implications For Decision Making Under Condition...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Confidence deficits and reducibility: Toward a coherent conceptualization of uncertainty level

Janzwood

2022

Risk Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Outside of the field of risk analysis, an important theoretical conversation on the slippery concept of uncertainty has unfolded over the last 40 years within the adjacent field of environmental risk. This literature has become increasingly standardized behind the tripartite distinction between uncertainty location, the nature of uncertainty, and uncertainty level, popularized by the “W&H framework.” This article introduces risk theorists and practitioners to the conceptual literature on uncertainty with the goal of catalyzing further development and clarification of the uncertainty concept within the field of risk analysis. It presents two critiques of the W&H framework's dimension of uncertainty level—the dimension that attempts to define the characteristics separating greater uncertainties from lesser uncertainties. First, I argue the framework's conceptualization of uncertainty level lacks a clear and consistent epistemological position and fails to acknowledge or reconcile the tensions between Bayesian and frequentist perspectives present within the framework. This article reinterprets the dimension of uncertainty level from a Bayesian perspective, which understands uncertainty as a mental phenomenon arising from “confidence deficits” as opposed to the ill‐defined notion of “knowledge deficits” present in the framework. And second, I elaborate the undertheorized concept of uncertainty “reducibility.” These critiques inform a clarified conceptualization of uncertainty level that can be integrated with risk analysis concepts and usefully applied by modelers and decisionmakers engaged in model‐based decision support.

show abstract

R&D priority-setting for global catastrophic risks: The case of the NASA planetary defense mission

Cited by 8 publications

References 29 publications

A new strategic approach for R&D project portfolio selection using efficiency-uncertainty maps

A new strategic approach for R&D project portfolio selection using efficiency-uncertainty maps

Prioritizing flight simulators of the brazilian air force by the analytic hierarchy process and hypothesis tests

Confidence deficits and reducibility: Toward a coherent conceptualization of uncertainty level

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About