This paper addresses the issue of increasing the effectiveness of national IT R&D planning through the adoption of the technology roadmapping process. As a needs-driven technology Planning tool, technology roadmapping can help identify and select technology alternatives to meet a set of market needs. Thus, it allows increasingly limited R&D investments to be used more efficiently. From this point of view, the Ministry of Information and Communication is considering introducing technology roadmapping to support its annual technology planning activity. In this contribution we explore how a technology roadmap could be integrated into IT technology planning and suggest some guidelines to successful technology roadmapping, on the basis of literature review, case survey and our experience, for organizations due to employ the roadmapping process in the future.

This study tries to testify that how much knowledge sharing behavior affects organizational effectiveness and is affected by the supervisory trust empirically. The results show that the higher the supervisory trust was the higher the level of knowledge sharing behavior and ultimately, organizational effectiveness is improved. Specially, the supervisory trust affects job-related knowledge sharing behavior and knowledge sharing system behavior. The knowledge sharing culture, however, is no relation with the supervisory trust. Job-related knowledge sharing behavior influenced both job satisfaction and organizational commitment. But knowledge sharing system influenced only job satisfaction and knowledge sharing culture influenced only organization at commitment. The implication from this paper is that knowledge sharing improves the organizational effectiveness and the supervisory trust is important for knowledge sharing in R&D organization.

Many advanced scholars and policy makers say that biotechnology is and will be the most important technology in 21th century. And biotechnology has a lots of character which are new and high tech industry, costing too much on early R&D stage and so on. One of them is that it can't be developed all seater by one single firm. So effective and efficient way to solve this generic problem is using the infrastructure which is given by government for flourishing the bio industry, especially, Knowledge infrastructure. The purpose of this study is to understand and give the information about which knowledge infrastructure affects biotechnology firms to obtain competitive advantage in technological improvement. To develop this object, I made 5 variables about infrastructure in biotechnology such as high-skilled researchers infrastructure, R&D policy infrastructure, industrialization infrastructure that supports the biotechnology industry, networking infrastructure between firms, universities, research centers, and finally bio-safety infrastructure. According to this study, to obtain technological competitive advantage for Korean bio firms, all main actors those are government, industry, university, research center they try to develop bio sector at the same time. After this cooperated effort, Korean bio firms and industry can get a international competitiveness in the global society which no one conquer the market.

최근 급진전되고 있는 인터넷의 광대역화와 다양한 멀티미디어 컨텐츠의 수요확대 그리고 인터넷 이용자의 급증 등으로 인터넷 트래픽은 기하급수적으로 증가하고 있다. 그러나 최선형 패킷교환방식인 현 인터넷은 급증하는 네트워크 수요를 감당하기에 이미 기술적 한계를 드러내고 있을 뿐 아니라, 네트워크 확장을 통하여 급증하는 트래픽을 수용하는 것도 경제적으로 한계수위에 도달하고 있다. 따라서 네트워크 수요 대비 공급량의 불균형으로 인터넷망에서의 혼잡(congestion)문제가 점차 중요한 이슈로 제기되고 있으며, 이런 문제의 해결방안으로 네트워크공급을 늘리거나, 초과수요를 줄이는 방안에 대한 논의와 구체적인 노력이 이루어지고 있다. 이에 본 고에서는 간단한 기술 경제학적 모형을 이용하여 혼잡의 원인과 이에 대한 해결방향에 대하여 분석적인 설명을 시도하였다. 특히 본 고에서는 인터넷 혼잡의 원인이 '부정적 네트워크 외부성' 이 존재하기 때문이며, 실무적으로 혼잡문제 해결의 대표적인 대안으로 적용되고 있는 네트워크의 용량확대는 혼잡해결의 근본적인 대안이 되지 못하고, 반면 실무적으로 별로 주목받고 있지 않는 네트워크 투자를 최소화하고 트래픽을 통제할 수 있는 '혼잡세'를 부과할 수 있는 요금제 도입이 효율적인 혼잡 해결방안 임을 밝히고 있다.

In Korea, Public Research Institutes(PRIs) are today faced with the challenges of creating values by transferring technologies in store within themselves to private commercial sector. Recently, It has been increasingly pointed out that PRIs have the poor capability to valuate prospective technologies of their own, and don't run the reasonable technology transfer mechanism in terms of establishing royalty rate and initial payment, designing remuneration to inventor, screening qualified licensee, and controlling the moral hazard. This paper develops an enhanced mathematical model of technology transfer from a PRI to a private industrial firm with including the inventor as an important player. The model is made up of the main part which derives the optimal royalty rate by maximizing the social welfare and sharing risk fairly between players and some sub-parts. The one sub-part is a principal-agent model which makes it possible to control the moral hazard of inventors, and the other part provides the criteria for screening appropriate licensees. Moreover, the moral hazard between inventor and licensee is addressed by introducing the cost reduction function of efforts exerted by them. The model is able to relate the optimal royalty rate to the parameters that represent the environments under which the concerned parties operate. Especially, the ratio of initial payment over the value of transferred technology is calculated from the binding relation with the royalty rate. The paper shows that the model suggested here is more enhanced by comparing with the existing technology transfer mechanism. Finally, the paper allows us to find better strategies for effective technology transfer and further develop more sophisticated technology transfer model.

The term "Strategic Alliance" which is not exactly defined in legal sector can apply to a wide variety of collaborative activities between firms, In spite of the vague conception Strategic Alliance, it has many benefit in the market. Especially, cooperation in R&D may reduce duplicative and unnecessary costs, lead to significant exchange of ideas and experience and thus result in products and technologies being developed more rapidly than would otherwise be the case. As a general rule, R&D cooperation tends to increase overall R&D activities. However, R&D agreements may cause competition problems such as restrictives effects on prices, output, innovation and variety or quality of products, To prevent its problems, competition authorities set out guidelines. The antitrust analysis of strategic alliances including R&D cooperation will vary according the substance of the actual agreement.

Competitiveness of a nation can be explained by the concept of national innovation systems(NIS). As components of NIS, industry clusters become the issue in analysing innovative activity of an economy. Innovative clusters can be identified by the innovation survey or other economic activity data. Input-output Table was used widely as a tool for quantitative analysis, This paper classifies seven clusters in Korean industry based on inter-industries trade of intermediary goods and services, Maximizing procedure method is used in analysing input-output table. Identified clusters are Textiles/chemicals, Construction/Material, Instrument/Equipment, Automobile, Services, Energy, and Agriculture/Food cluster, Among these clusters, some different characteristics in R&D portfolios are detected. R&D investment characteristics of each cluster give us significant implications in understanding innovative dynamics of Korean industry.

Korean mobile communications industry has been a main locomotive of the drastic development of Korean IT industry and became one of core industries in national economy. To secure strong competitiveness of mobile communications industry, smooth cooperation should be reconsidered among government, universities, research institutions, and private companies. Future mobile communications technology will be evolved from IMT-2000 to system upgrade, 3.5G and 4G. And the goals of technology development are provision of mobile multimedia services based on better mobility and higher data speed rates. Therefore, Korea's technology development strategies of mobile communications should be focused on intensifying bondage of international cooperation, strengthening standardization activities, and enhancing core technology development capability to secure IPR.