Browse > Article

Design of Structural Models for Constructing a Goal Alternatives Disposition System in Large-Scale R&D Projectsr  

Kwon, Cheol-Shin (School of Systems Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University)
Cho, Keun-Tae (School of Systems Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University)
Publication Information
IE interfaces / v.15, no.4, 2002 , pp. 460-473 More about this Journal
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to design a Goal Alternatives Disposition System having three main subsystems for setting, evaluating and selecting goal alternatives. For setting of goal alternatives, System Alternatives Tree(SAT) structure will be developed, which has a computation algorithm for setting decision alternatives by the concept of System Priority Number(SPN). For evaluating and selecting of goal alternatives; First, Normative and Exploratory Priority Indices which consider technical performance to the goal, cost and feasibility are developed respectively. Second, Integrated Priority Index is built up to determine the total priority of the Goal Alternatives Disposition(GAD) system. For the design and verification of the GAD system, technological forecasting structure theory, systems engineering methodology will be used.
Keywords
R&D project management system; goal alternatives disposition system; system priority number;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Jantsch, E. (1968), Technological Forecasting in Perspective, OECD
2 Roberts, E. B.(1969), Explolatory and Normative Technological Forecasting: A Critical Appraisal, Appendix B in technological forecasting(By Cerron, M. J., Gordon and Breach, Science Publishers)
3 Goodwin, P. G. (1972), A Method for Evaluation of System alternate Designs, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 19(1), Feb
4 Malchow, H. I. and Croopnick, S. R (1985), A Methodology for Organizing Performance Requirements for Complex Dynamic Systems, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-32(1), Feb.
5 North, Q. H. and Pyke, I. D.(1969), 'Probes' of The Technological Future, Havard Business Review; May-June
6 Yamada, K.(1972), Systems Analysis on R&D Goal Setting, Tokyo Institute of Technology
7 Nakamura, S. (1987), Problem Solving, Development Publication Company
8 Sigford, J. V. and Parvin, R H (1965), Project PATTERN - A Methodology for Determining Relevance in Complex Decision-Making, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-12(1), Mar
9 Kwon, C.S. (2000), R&D Management Theory, Development Engineering Society
10 Kwon, C.S., Hong, S.W. (1990), Construction of an Estimates Aggregation Model for Designing Feasibility Estimate System of R&D Project, The Korean Operations Research and Management Society,15(1)
11 Kwon, C.S. (1982), Construction of RDPPUSAFE based on the Quantification of Feasibility Function, Journal of the Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers, 8[2]
12 Kwon, C.S. (1982), Optimal Strategic Solution for Evaluation and Selection of R&D System Alternatives, SKKU
13 White, D. R J. et al. (1963), POED-A Method of Evaluating System Performance, IEEE Transaction on Engineering Management, EM-10(4),Dec
14 Schoman, C. H., et al. (1969), Relating Organization Goals and Techno logical Forecasting For Research and Development Resource Allocation, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-16(4), Nov