TEchNOLOGy TRaNSFER MODEL - Javna agencija

5
Technology Management
the (now only marginal) performance improvement
of the current, obsolete technology T o
or rather used
for development of the new, promising substitution
technology T n
, which however requires a technology
change and therefore a technology leap to the
S-curve of T n
. Sure, at a point in time t as seen in figure
5, an investment in the substitution technology T n
would entail a performance decrease due to current
predominance of T o
, but with continuous investment
in the new technology the viability limit and maximum
potential of T o
can be greatly exceeded in the
long term, as the technological potential of T n
turns
out to be much higher than with T o
in the big picture.
Figure 5: S-curve concept and the shaping of a potential technology change
(According to: Tiefel, 2007)
5.4.4 Continuous technological development vs. disruptive technological changes
As figure 6 points out, continuous technological development typically evokes incremental innovations which lead to an up-shift on
the respective S-curve. Once a technology change is intended, a leap in technology from T o
to T n
takes place. However, such a ‘disruptive’
change to T n
is not in practice as easy as may be assumed and, furthermore, entails the following risks:
• The current corporate technological basis is partly going to be devaluated, possibly even irrelevant for competition
• There are no reliable instruments to predict the necessity of a change from one technological paradigm to another
• Not the present capability but the potential capability of T n
should be assessed for decision making – Attention: T n
is often underestimated!
• Discontinuous technology leaps are often evoked by companies outside a particular sector of industry – they are, compared to direct
competitors, more dangerous for the competitive position, as these company’s technologies often remain „blind spots“ despite
precautions
• Appearance of phenomena like INCUMBENT INERTIA, INNOVATOR’S DILEMMA or SAILING-SHIP-EFFECT resulting from management
problems
Info Box:
T o
T n
• INCUMBENT INERTIA: technological
change is interpreted primary as a
threat, reacting on it with rigidness
• INNOVATOR’S DILEMMA: business is
still going strong with current technology,
thus exists ‘no reason’ for
a technology change. Organization
is set up for steady-state innovation
and is not able to respond well
to weak signals about disruptive
change
• SAILING-SHIP-EFFECT: desperate attempt
to once again notably improve
the performance of an obsolete
technology
Figure 6: Disruptive technological change and potential management problems (According to: Voigt, 2008)
5.5 Technology Assessment
5.5.1 Detection of technological potentials
In order to detect technological potentials, corporate analysis has to be focused on both technologies and markets (compare chapter
5.3.1). In doing so, previously established as well as newly established, potential technologies and markets have to be taken into
account. In addition, the current and prospective general framework affected by the political, economic, ecological and legal environment
is an integrated part of the analysis.
Proceeding for detection of technological potentials is composed of three phases: TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS, APPLICATION ANALYSIS
and POTENTIAL DETERMINATION (see fig. 7), which is explained briefly as follows.
57