대한산업공학회지 (Journal of Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers)

  • 제36권1호
  • /
  • Pages.22-31
  • /
  • 2010
  • /
  • 1225-0988(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-6457(eISSN)
대한산업공학회 (Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers)
권호 표지

효율적인 R&D과제평가를 위한 기술대체모듈 설정모형의 개발 및 적용

Development and Application of Technology Modular Alternatives Setting Model for Evaluating R&D Project Effectively

  • 권철신 (성균관대학교 시스템경영공학과 R&D공학) ;
  • 김기찬 (성균관대학교 시스템경영공학과 R&D공학) ;
  • 안기현 (한국반도체산업협회 연구지원팀)
  • Kwon, Cheol-Shin (R&D Engineering, Department of System Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Kim, Ki-Chan (R&D Engineering, Department of System Management Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Ahn, Ki-Hyun (Korea Semiconductor Industry Association R&D management Team)
  • 투고 : 2009.10.20
  • 심사 : 2010.02.02
  • 발행 : 2010.03.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

In R&D project evaluation, we consider the technical couple. And we set technology modular alternatives, after evaluating technical group based on technical couple. So we solve the problem extracted from existing research of R&D project evaluation. We use Conjoint Analysis(CA) for this research. CA is usually used for confirming customers' preference. However we use it for researchers' preference in the side of technology. This research is followed by the next 4 steps. (1) Hierarchical model of goal technology (2) Composition model of modular alternatives (3) Evaluation model of modular alternatives (4) Setting model of technology modular alternatives.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Mok, Hak Soo and Yang, Tae Il (2002), Systemization of module design of a product, Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers/Korea Management Engineers Society Spring Joint Scholarship Conference, 625-628.
  2. Yoo, Pil Hwa (1994), Modern Marketing Research, Bubmoonsa, 123- 134.
  3. Kwon, Cheol Shin and Jung, Kil Hwan (1994), Design of the modified AHP model for strategic evaluation of technology alternatives, Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers Fall Joint Scholarship Conference.
  4. Kalish, Shlomo and Paul Nelson (1991), A comparison of ranking, rating and reservation price measurement in conjoint analysis, Marketing Letters, 2(4), 327-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00664219
  5. Cho and Kwon (2004), Hierarchies with dependence of technological alternatives: A cross-impact hierarchy process, European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 420-432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00907-4
  6. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New-York.
  7. Saaty, T. L. (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw-Hill, New-York.
  8. Saaty, T. L. (1986), Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Science, 32(7).
  9. Saaty, T. L. and Vargas, L. G. (1980), Hierarchical Analysis of Behaviour in Competition: Prediction in Chess, Behavior Science, 25.