No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

A portfolio can be defined as “a purposeful combination of items” (Chien and Sainfort 1998). As the topic relates to research and development (R&D) the items in question are technologies, projects or products under consideration for inclusion in a given portfolio. As described by surveys from Cooper et al (1998), companies have widely varying practices for portfolio selection. This thesis examines existing literature to determine the key characteristics of good portfolio and portfolio method. The approach needs to handle multiple objectives, account for project interactions, and address the social aspect of decision making. The resulting portfolio should be aligned with business strategy, balanced, and of maximum value. It introduces general concepts that have been used to select single projects and reviews five specific applications and assesses them against the key characteristics from the literature. After identifying gaps in the current approaches, a comprehensive approach is proposed. This approach would (1) apply multi-attribute decision analysis at the portfolio level, (2) apply constraints for common inputs to cost such as resources, and (3) apply probabilistic methods to account for project interaction. This approach incorporates successful elements from existing approaches and addresses the two areas that are not adequately addressed with current approaches.

Thesis (M.B.A.)--Boston University / PLEASE NOTE: Boston University Libraries did not receive an Authorization To Manage form for this thesis or dissertation. It is therefore not openly accessible, though it may be available by request. If you are the author or principal advisor of this work and would like to request open access for it, please contact us at open-help@bu.edu. Thank you. / 2031-01-01

Governments in both advanced and emerging markets invest heavily into joint R&D projects to facilitate inter-firm collaboration and scientific productivity. As a science-based cluster, nanotechnology is a highly R&D-intensive field with very complex interdisciplinary features that enables multiple interactions between scientists from diverse cultural backgrounds working for multi-faceted organizations across public and private sectors and through internationally regulated borders. In this thesis, I examine the main determinants of the dimensions of inter-firm collaboration in high-tech industries particularly among nanotechnology R&D organisations across Europe. Also, I investigate the key factors that influence the innovation, financial and exit performance of nanotech companies during the commercialisation period and across 15 developed and developing countries, taking into consideration the involvement of venture capital (VC) firms. In order to methodically integrate the qualitative and quantitative features of my research study, I employed mixed method to analyse primary and secondary data collected via survey instruments and comprehensive databases; to gain valuable insights into the complexities around nanotech R&D organisations. The regression results show that a predictable legal system; a high level of tolerance for uncertainty; the proximity to key partners; a high level of export demand for high-tech products; and expansionary economic policies, leads to highly valuable and long-term relationships which produces optimal partnership size with an effective organizational structure. I find that a high financial status of nanotech firms equips R&D project managers with sufficient tangible and intangible resources to engage into complex collaborative partnerships which yield innovative performing outcomes. Also, I find that nanotech R&D firms that exit venture capital investments via IPO are more likely to have their head offices in a big city; and access foreign capital to expand manufacturing operations. I conclude that the successful commercialisation of nanotechnology industries across the globe has been due to the substantial R&D public expenditures and private investments into the application and proliferation of nanotechnologies in key converging scientific fields which require robust inter-firm collaborative partnerships to rapidly develop and promote several portfolios of high-tech products that continually satisfy consumer needs in disruptive ways and secure long-term profitability for nanotech R&D organisations.

Os investimentos em Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento têm se constituído como fonte importante de vantagem competitiva, especialmente com o aprofundamento das decorrências da globalização dos mercados. A soma dos investimentos em P&D que os 27 países-membros da Comunidade Européia fizeram em 2007 superou EUR227 bilhões, ao passo que no mesmo ano os EUA investiram US$368 bilhões em P&D. Dados da OCDE e UNESCO apontam para um aumento do investimento global em P&D de US$525 bilhões em 1996 para mais de US$1 trilhão em 2006. Tendo em vista o cenário de franca expansão das funções de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento e do já consolidado movimento de descentralização do P&D em direção às subsidiárias da empresa multinacional, emerge a necessidade de coordenação global de esforços e uso racional dos recursos, de modo a tornar os investimentos e a gestão de P&D mais eficazes. A eficácia à qual se refere está na base da competitividade, na medida em que pode facilitar a flexibilidade da organização para fazer frente à dinâmica do mercado, auxiliar na economia de recursos e maximizar o retorno sobre os investimentos em infraestrutura e capacitação da mão-de-obra. Essa pesquisa se debruça sobre a questão da coordenação dos esforços de P&D em uma empresa multinacional de base tecnológica que tem centros de P&D em diversos países. São tratados temas relativos aos mecanismos de coordenação, sua implementação dada a estratégia de internacionalização de P&D adotada pela empresa, assim como é discutido em que medida as tecnologias de informação e comunicações podem auxiliar a empresa na missão de coordenar e integrar os esforços de todo seu P&D. Por fim, são identificados os aspectos críticos para a coordenação global dos centros de P&D, por meio da discussão sobre seus fatores facilitadores. / Investments in Research and Development have constituted an important source of competitive advantage, especially with the deepening of globalization of markets and its consequences. The sum of investments that the 27 member countries of the European Community did in 2007 exceeded EUR227 billion, while in the same year U.S. had invested $368 billion in R&D. UNESCO and OECD data show an increase in overall investment in R&D from $525 billion in 1996 to more than $1 trillion in 2006. Given the scenario of increasing business impact of Research and Development and the movement towards its decentralization towards the subsidiaries of multinational company, arises the need for global coordination and synergic use of resources in order to make investment and management of R&D more effective. This effectiveness lies on the basis of competitiveness, as it can facilitate the organization\'s flexibility to cope with market dynamics, can help save resources and maximize return on investments in infrastructure and training of the workforce. This research focuses on the issue of global R&D coordination in a multinational company that has geographically dispersed R&D centers. The scope encompasses issues related to coordination mechanisms implementation, the relationship between R&D internationalization and coordination mechanisms, to what extent information technologies and communications can help the company in the mission to coordinate and integrate efforts of all its R&D facilities. Finally, it is identified critical issues for the global R&D coordination, through the discussion of coordination facilitators.

This thesis centres around the issue of R&D, investment and growth: it is mainly concerned with the rationale which shapes the optimal investment pattern defined by a firm over time in a growing economy. We start considering the economy as a whole in order to evaluate how its actual functioning (interaction between research labs, risk of failure in innovating, patent laws and so on) shapes firms' specific investment policies. More precisely, we focus on the R&D process as it really develops in the market, and examine what is the optimal investment policy for firms involved in research and whether the selected investment policy in turn sustains the growth path of the economy. After analysing how the economic environment may affect firms' investment plans, we propose to identify the decision mechanism, as it develops inside the firm, through which an investment policy is defined over time. Thus, we move to an in-depth analysis of the process through which a profit-maximizing entity selects a specific investment policy when it is required to expand its production plant in order to satisfy a growing economy. / Cette thèse porte sur les questions de recherche et développements, d'investissement et de croissance : elle concerne principalement les raisons qui définissent au cours du temps l'investissement optimal dans une économie en croissance. Dans un premier temps, on considère l'économie dans sa globalité pour évaluer dans quelle mesure son fonctionnement actuel (interaction entre les laboratoires de recherches, risques d'échecs de innovations, licences, etc…) détermine les politiques d'investissement spécifiques des firmes. Plus précisément, l'analyse porte sur le processus de R&D qui se développe sur le marché et sur la politique d'investissement optimal pour des firmes impliquées dans la recherche. A son tour est analysée si la politique d'investissement sélectionnée soutient la croissance de l'économie. Dans un second temps, suite à l'analyse des effets de l'environnement économique sur les plans d investissement des firmes, nous proposons d'identifier le mécanisme décisionnel qui se développe a l'intérieur de la firme à partir duquel une politique d'investissement est définie dans le temps. Ainsi, nous présentons une analyse détaillée du processus à partir duquel une entité poursuivant la maximisation de son profit sélectionne une politique d'investissement particulière lorsqu'elle doit accroître sa production dans le but de satisfaire à l'économie en croissance.

Firms obtain new technology either through internal R&D or through acquisitions. These two approaches are usually labeled as "make" and "buy" strategies. In this paper, I examine the relation between a firm's choice of "make" or "buy" and the performance measures used in the firm's CEO compensation contract. I focus on the two major differences between "make" and "buy" strategies: the risk levels and accounting treatments. I then examine the differential implications of accounting-based and stock-based performance measures on managers' incentive in choosing between the two strategies. Using data from US high tech industries, I find that, firms relying on "buy" approach to obtain technology tend to depend more on the accounting-based performance measures, while those firms who innovate through R&D activities skew toward stock-based pay especially stock options

Abstract The purpose of this study is to use Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to find out success factors of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) R&D alliances and relative importance of these factors, and then to get the key successful factors (KSFs) to discuss why these KSFs have important influence on SMEs R&D alliances. AHP and case study are used in this research. Through literature review, the researcher develops 4 criteria and 16 successful factors which are arranged in hierarchical structure chart. Next, case study is used to make this chart reflect better the conditions of Taiwanese SMEs R&D alliances. Finally, to find out the KSFs, AHP is used to design the questionnaire and do questionnaire survey. The results of this study are: 1. The relative importance of the 4 criteria is: business strategy (0.386), the mechanism of R&D alliance management (0.283), partners¡¦ relationship (0.207), and government policy (0.124). 2. The 6 KSFs are: identifying market demand (0.137), clearly defining roles and responsibilities (0.101), establishing mechanism of communication and mutual trust (0.091), using complementary resources and technology (0.079), routinely assessing and adjusting (0.074), and emphasizing the degree of commitment (0.074).