Production
https://www.prod.org.br/article/doi/10.1590/0103-6513.110212
Production
Article

Research and development project assessment and social impact

Fernández, Ana; Cunha, Jorge; Ferreira, Paula; Araújo, Madalena; Goméz, Enrique Ares

Downloads: 0
Views: 129

Abstract

Nowadays, organisations increasingly need to adapt to the fast evolution of markets and societies in our globalised world in order to be competitive. Therefore, it is essential to take the right decisions when it comes to invest in research and development (R&D) projects. However, an issue that has not been given much attention is how to measure the social impact (or return) of R&D projects. In this exploratory study, the findings of an analysis of how R&D projects are assessed and selected, including this social perspective, are presented. The methodology which has been used in this research includes both interviews and analysis of the data obtained through them. The major finding is that in the current situation the social impact is not taken into account, but is growing the awareness of this perspective among different types of organizations dealing with R&D activities.

Keywords

R&D projects. Social impact. Survey analysis.

References

Adler, R. (2000). Strategic investment decision appraisal techniques: the old and the new. Business Horizons, 43(6), 15-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0007-6813(00)80017-8

Ares, E., Dominguez, A. P., Quintela, E., Fernández-López, F. J., & Sancho, M. (2008). Análisis del “Retorno Social” de la financiación pública de la I+D+i. Vigo: Observatório Industrial del Sector del Metal, Área de Ingenieria de los Processos de Fabricación, Universidade de Vigo. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://mcaugt.es/documentos/0/doc2985.pdf

Barreiro, J. B. (2012). El modelo de gestión de la superficie forestal en galicia y su repercusión en la crisis incendiaria del año 2006. Revista Galega de Economía, 21(2), 1-28. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://www.usc.es/econo/RGE/Vol21_2/castelan/art1c.pdf

Barroso, M., & Iniesta, J. (2013). Valuation of projects for power generation with renewable energy: A comparative study based on real regulatory options. Energy Policy, 55, 335-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.019

Bitman, W. R., & Sharif, N. (2008) A conceptual framework for ranking R&D projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(2), 267-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2008.919725

Brownell, P., & Merchant, K. A. (1990). The budgetary and performance influences of product standardization and manufacturing process automation. Journal of Accounting Research, 28(2), 388-397. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2491156 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2491156

Carroll, A. B., & Buchholtz, A. (2009). Business and society: ethics and stakeholder management. Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing.

Carvalho, M., Ferreira, P., Ares, E., & Araújo, M. (2010, March). The socio-economic return of the Research and Development (R&D) support programmes. In 2nd Conference on corporate R & D, Seville, Spain. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://hdl.handle.net/1822/19565

Chiesa, V., Frattini, F., Lazzarotti, V., & Manzini, V. (2009). Performance measurement in R&D: exploring the interplay between measurement objectives, dimensions of performance and contextual factors. R & D Management, 39(5), 487-519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00554.x

Chan, F., Chan, M., Lau, H., & Ip, R. (2001). Investment appraisal techniques for Advanced Manufacturing Technology (AMT): a literature overview. Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 12(1), 35-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576060110361528

Chang, H.-F., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2010). A causal decision making model for knowledge management capabilities to innovation performance in taiwan’s high-tech industry. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 5(4), 137-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242010000400011

Duch-Brown, N., García-Quevedo, J., & Montolio, D. (2012). Assessing the assignation of public subsidies: do the experts choose the most efficient R&D projects? World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 9(2-4), 149-168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/WRSTSD.2012.047686

Ghasemi, E., Tajadod, M., & Naderi, A. (2011). A combined method based on integration of fuzzy analytical network process and stochastic dominance degree for R&D project selection in the electrical distribution company. In International Conference on Advances in Electrical and Electronics Engineering (ICAEE’2011), Thailand. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://psrcentre.org/images/extraimages/1011269.pdf

Hassanzadeh, F., Collan, M., & Modarreset, M. (2012). A practical R&D selection model using fuzzy pay-off method. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 58(1-4), 227-236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3364-9

Henig, M., & Katz, H. (1996). R&D project selection: a decision process approach. Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis, 5(3), 169-177. http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1360(199609)5:3<169::AID-MCDA94>3.0.CO;2-V

Leite, L., Teixeira, J., & Samanez, C. (2012). Ex-ante economic assessment in incremental R&D projects: technical and development time uncertainties addressed by the real options theory. Pesquisa Operacional, 32(3), 617-641. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-74382012005000025

Moñux, D., Aleixandre, G., Gómez, F. J., Cáceres, S., Miguel, L. J., & Velasco, E. (2006, June). Evaluación del impacto social de proyectos de Investigación y Desarrollo tecnológico (I+D): una aplicación en el sector de las comunicaciones industriales. In I Congresso Iberoamericano de Ciencia, Tecnología, Sociedad e Innovación, México. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://www.oei.es/memoriasctsi/mesa6/m06p17.pdf

Nigro, G., Morreale, A., & Enea, G. (2014). Open innovation: a real option to restore value to the biopharmaceutical R&D. International Journal of Production Economics, 149, 183-193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.02.004

Olaz, A. (2007). La entrevista en profundidad: en la encrucijada del debate metodológico de lo cuantitativo frente a lo cualitativo. In IX Congreso español de sociología: poder, cultura y civilización (Sesion 2o. Articulación metodológica: teoría y práctica), Barcelona, Spain.

Olaz, A. (2008). La entrevista en profundidad: justificación metodológica y guía de actuación práctica. Oviedo: Septem Ediciones. PMid:17638596.

Rip, A., & Kemp, R. (1998). Technological change. In S. Rayner & L. Malone. Human choice and climate change (Vol. 2: resources and technology). Washington: Batelle Press. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://kemp.unu-merit.nl/Rip%20and%20Kemp.pdf

Vandaele, N., & Decouttere, C. (2013) Sustainable R&D portfolio assessment. Decision Support Systems, 54(4), 1521-1532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.054

Xunta de Galicia (2007). Plan Galego de investigación, desenvolvemento e innovación tecnolóxica 2006- 2010. Retrieved in 21 November 2012, from http://economiaeindustria.xunta.es/plans-idi

Zopounidis, C., & Doumpos, M. (2002). Multi-criteria decision aid in financial decision making: methodologies and literature review. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 11(4-5), 167-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mcda.333
5883a4607f8c9da00c8b48d2 production Articles
Links & Downloads

Production

Share this page
Page Sections