Advertisement

A Hybrid MCDM Model on Technology Assessment to Business Strategy

  • Mei-Chen Lo
  • Min-Hsien Yang
  • Chien-Tzu Tsai
  • Aleksey V. Pugovkin
  • Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 10)

Abstract

The wave of globalization, and government’s policy towards joining regional market with boundary-less. The entire market becomes a fair and fully competitive market environment, and in order to develop feasible technology strategies. Technology Assessment (TA) is being increasingly viewed as an important tool to aid in the shift towards technology development. The paper aims at to reflect different aspects of technology assessment and their relative importance for future business strategy. We adopt the hierarchical model with multiple criteria to evaluate the alternative concepts in approaching technology assessment process for business strategy (BS). This paper use DANP methods includes DEMATEL, and ANP to establish the investment model. The preference of strategies is demonstrated by VIKOR for selecting appropriate alternatives. The relationship of interdependence and feedback from criteria to influence the setting priority of strategies are discussed. The presented model appears to be comprehensive, flexible and easy to implement in managerial practice. The numerical example is illustrated.

Keywords

Technology Assessment Business Management (BS) Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) DEMATEL (Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory) Analytic Network Process (ANP) VIKOR (VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cetron, M.J., Connor, L.W.: A Method for Planning and Assessing Technology against Relevant National Goals in Developing Countries. In: Cetron, M.J., Bartocha, B. (eds.) The Methodology of Technology Assessment, Gordon and Breach, New York (1972)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coates, J.J.: In: Porter, A.L., Rossini, F.A., Carpenter, S.R., Roper, A.T. (eds.) A Guidebook for Technology Assessment and Impact Analysis, North Holland, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gabus, A., Fontela, E.: World problems, an invitation to further thought within the framework of DEMATEL battelle institute. Paper Presented at the Geneva Research Centre (1972)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liou, J.H., Tzeng, G.H., Chang, H.C.: Airline safety measurement using a hybrid model. Journal of Air Transport Management 13(4), 243–249 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lo, M.C., Michnik, J., Cheng, L.P.: Technology Assessment as A Guidance to Business Management of New Technologies. In: 2007 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM 2007), Singapore, December 2-5 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lo, M.C.: A Preference Relation Model for Technology Assessment in Business Management. International Journal of Information Systems for Logistics and Management (IJISLM) 6(1), 81–86 (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ou Yang, Y.P., Shieh, H.M., Leu, J.D., Tzeng, G.H.: A novel hybrid MCDM model combined with DEMATEL and ANP with applications. International Journal of Operations Research 5(3), 160–168 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pope, J., Annandale, D., Morrison-Saunders, A.: Conceptualizing sustainability assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24(6), 595–616 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pretorius, M.W., de Wet, G.: A model for the assessment of new technology for the manufacturing enterprise. Technovation 20(1), 3–10 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saaty, T.L.: The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New York (1980)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schot, J., Rip, A.: The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54(2-3), 251–268 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Smits, R., Leijten, J.: Technology Assessment, Waakhond of Speurhond?, Kerckebosch, Zeist, p. 264, p. 340 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tzeng, G.H., Chiang, C.H., Li, C.W.: Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Systems with Applications 32(4), 1028–1044 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Den Ende, J., Mulder, K., Karel, Knot, M., Moors, E., Vergragt, P.: Traditional and Modern Technology Assessment: Toward a Toolkit. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 58(1-2), 5–21 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Eijndhoven, J.C.M.: Technology Assessment: Product or Process? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54(2), 269–286 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mei-Chen Lo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Min-Hsien Yang
    • 3
  • Chien-Tzu Tsai
    • 3
  • Aleksey V. Pugovkin
    • 4
  • Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Business ManagementNational United UniversityMiaoliTaiwan
  2. 2.Institute of Project ManagementKainan UniversityLuchuTaiwan
  3. 3.Management SchoolFeng Chia UniversitySeatwenTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Control Systems and RadioelectronicsTomsk State UniversityRussia

Personalised recommendations