Technology management is an underlying influence in strategic operations management in accordance to Walters. In compare to operation/manufacturing strategy, it is broader in scope. To address the operational, development and planning objectives of a combination of organizations or an organization, it is the integration of product and process technology (Betz, 1993). The value delivered by planning manufacturing responses can be enhanced by the technology management and the service, product and market volume delivery characteristics are delivered by planning manufacturing responses.
Customer value specification and plant and cost utilizations goals are met by an asset structure developed by it. The decisions undertaken upon the combined logistics, and manufacturing support required to meet market demand drive the technology strategy. Within the clearly defined ownership and responsibilities and value chain, a shared and clear understanding of the role of innovation and R&D are required by technology management. The other issues are the economics of integration, technology transfer and the implication of shortening technology life cycles.
Over the technology life cycle, there is a relationship between technology development and evaluation of performance improvements of consumers. In advance of a performance trajectories of technology, when consumer demand for performance matures, the innovation incentives of firms, the competitive threats’ nature, and the character of life cycle maturity all change, in a demand-based perspective (Kim, 2003). Through the commercialization of new technologies, a new lens for assessing the prospects of achieving superior performance of firms is offered. Rather than towards improving the technology itself, if resources are directed towards affecting the demand environment, in innovation there may be higher return to investments, when demand for performance matures.
Similar to that of the product lifecycle, different forms of technology go through a life cycle in accordance to Walters. The reliance of corporate capabilities on market demand is displayed by the lifecycle which is paralleled by a capability lifecycle. In comparison to the use of certain technology to deliver a value, the capability to deliver a certain outcome tends to become obsolescent (Rainbird, 2004). The core need is the basic function of calculation in accordance to the concept of the technology lifecycle. The amount of value-delivered offered by the value proposition and required by the market demand is illustrated by the upward trajectory of successive lifecycles.
With increasing performance, the willingness to pay increases, it happens due to the decreasing marginal utility and the effect of DMU from performance improvement is eventually plateaus by a willingness to pay which takes the form of a demand S-curve. Over time, the increasing willingness to pay is served by demand maturity or technology maturity. However, for performance improvements the effect of declining returns of performance to declining WPT and innovation effort. For the interpretation of the scope and incentives of further innovation activities, the nature of competitive threats, and the different stages of the maturity of technology, they hold distinct implications.
To create additional value the main barriers are the constraints on technology development that are often treated by discussion of technology evolution. Many settings are characterized by this treatment, and the maturity of technology trajectory before demand is assumed (Agarwal & Audretsch, 2001). For example, the rate at which resolution has improved has been out spaced by the printing equipment that enables complex and faster circuits and is used in the demand for increasingly finer resolutions and in the manufacture of semiconductors in the marketplace for photolithographic production apparatus. In the marketplace, the top presentation levels products are more expected to flourish, and the competitive priority is the maintenance of continued forward progress in such settings along the technology trajectory.
For the evaluation of technology through its life cycle, the implications of the demand S-curve can be considered. Since in the relevant choice, the criteria for inclusion is set, consumer evaluation is focused on performance and the issue of price is relevant, before the threshold requirement is sufficiently met by the performance at early stages. In the choice set, the selection and consumer evaluation will shift to focus on the relative performance/price of competing offers, with improvement of performance (Adner, 2004). The performance requirements of consumers are further exceeded with further technology development, as an effect of decreasing marginal utility, the evaluation’s basis will move to the area where price will be heavily emphasized, and their WTP for supplementary presentation developments is reduced. In accordance to the comparative demands’ level of maturity, the basis for firm competition, and the basis of consumer evaluation will vary.
Along the technology life cycle, as an additional metric of progress the demand maturity is suggested by the focus on consumer value. Possibly using changes in the following amount of the related characteristic and in the product price to performance improvement, the responsiveness of willingness to pay will be considered for a given R&D investment by this metric in comparison to the presentation improvements’ supply intensive metric. Because for the emergence of competition between offers and for which customers discontinue prizing the dissimilarities of performance between suggestions, the demand maturity is a meter. The cognitive challenge of recognizing the onset of demand maturity can be confronted by managers through the adoption of a formal metric.
Because of convergence in perception of the efforts of consumers, which is the emergence of substitution, the effects of decreasing marginal utility on the erosion of firm heterogeneity might be considered by scholars, as the well studies replication’s effects on the destruction of heterogeneity of the firm is suggested additionally by the demand maturity due to convergence in production and routines systems.
An innovative reasoning for considering experimental interpretations of improvement outlines over the life cycle of technology is offered by the increasing willingness to pay that in compare to technology maturity considers the potential for demand maturity. The industry maturity accompanied by a shift from product to process innovation, and with the maturity of technologies the decline of the intensity of innovation is questioned by the recent examinations of the product-process life cycle patterns.
The diverse features of construction of demand, such as, DMU, preferences, performance thresholds and their variances across segments of the market have been examined by this discussion so far with their interaction with development of technology to lead the technology competition and the technology evolution (Adner & Levinthal, 2001). This has been done by taking fixed extent of decreasing marginal utility and preferences and thresholds, by consuming a comparatively stationary assessment of structure of demand itself. For the probability of the demand structure to transform over a period, a fully articulated demand-based view must be accounted. In reaction to variations in the comprehensive setting in which the suggestion of changes in complements and changes in regulations and standards are used, the performance improvements derive the value consumers.
Through direct actions, the demand environment can be influenced by firms. The engagement in increased advertising and branding is one of the obvious stages. To grow the significance of their suggestion, active steps can be taken by firms, further than from old methods of marketing to intense the perceptions and awareness of the assessment. This can be done by essentially positioning themselves as performance bottlenecks and by constructing it more crucial to the consumers of value which are derived by the offers of others. Such attempts can be made through the support of others and diversification.
Through shifting the characteristics’ set over which presentation is assessed and through making their offers value innovating, attempts can also be made by firms to rejuvenate mature demand. Such examples include attempts to combine product with services and attempts to introduce intelligence and programmability to white goods. Without introducing new attributes through changing evaluation metrics of consumers, attempts can be made by firms to affect consumer preferences.
The cost to customers of buying the equipment was constituted by the price component of performance/price for decades. The buyers were convinced to concentrate on the final cost of proprietorship as the related quantity of structure price, by mainframe manufacturers in answer to pressures from considerably inexpensive servers in the era of mid-90s. In evaluating the original value of their equipment systems, the consumers were also encouraged to include the costs of support and service which in compare to servers were lower for mainframes.
The External & Interval Environmental Factors
Through the connection of demand S-curves and technology S-curves, the economic pressures vary to which current technologies are subjected. The extent to which the superior performance is offered determined the threat posed by a new technology and the rate of performance improvements constrained the increase in willingness to pay, when the technology curve flattens. This dominance might be in the shape of larger attacks, and immediate, in which superior performance moving down the cost curve is offered by advanced technologies and for the established technologies become more substitute and affordable. The development of the new competences and capabilities are the primary challenges for incumbents in such cases and are required to participate in the technology.
The form of emergent attacks might be taken by threats alternatively in which the inferior performance progress is initially offered by the technologies besides their curves to ultimately exceed current positions of the performance (Chien & Et.al, 2010). An emphasis of much of the effort on curves of technology had been the task of identifying such evolving pressures before they matured to suggest greater presentation.
The decreased valuation of performance improvements of consumers’ constraints the increases to willingness to pay as when the demand S-curve first flattens the nature of threats is quite different. By means of below lower outbreaks, in which to the presentation of the incumbents the performance remains inferior and begins, the trajectory-based criteria can be displaced and disrupted, although it serve so well in performance-constrained settings. In such settings, the disruptive factor that will remain inferior is the challenge by the distinguishing technologies.
A better consideration of the interaction amongst the demand environment and technology is required by the resource allocation choices of individual firms and a better consideration of evolution of technology at the extensive level of developments of business. New insights as the assessment of technology maturity, the prioritization of innovation opportunities and the nature of competitive threats and a new approach to consider these interactions are offered by a demand-based perspective. Furthermore, attention is called to a rich set of demand-side revolutionary strategies by the demand-based perspective in relational to focus on the ways in which the consumer value is impacted by the activities of the firm.
The main focus of innovation research that has been the process and the product innovation choices are complemented by these strategies. Additional investigation is called by the conceptual challenges exposed by this extended set of revolutionary choices.
Within the value chain, as an essential factor to capture and delivery of value is technology management. Depending upon the adoption, the cost and the ability to deliver value, a lifecycle is passed by the individual technologies in a similar way like products. Because of the prevalence of new technologies the technology led organizations are increasing in number. An attractive method of knowledge management is offered by enterprise systems. Both as an output and input, the technology heavily influence the research and development.
With the increasing importance of time-based competition, rather than the marketplace with the use of market space and with greater reach and richness, a new competitive environment has been led by technological innovation. The supply and demand factors and corporate and internal factors govern the adoption of new technology.
Adner, R. (2004). A demand-based perspective on technology life cycles.Advances in Strategic management, 21, 25-43. Retrieved from:
Adner, R., & Levinthal, D. (2001). Demand heterogeneity and technology evolution: implications for product and process innovation. Management Science, 47(5), 611-628. Retrieved from:
http://mansci.journal.informs.org/content/47/5/611.short paper writing service