Mel Horwitch

The Emergence of Technology Strategy: A New Dimension of Strategic Management

This article deals with the rise and character of modern technology strategy. The current elevation of technology to a strategic variable is discussed, and the key forces behind this trend are identified. The cunent blending of two previously distinctive privatesector modes of innovation—small high-technology firm entrepreneurialism and large corporate industrial R&D—is highlighted. A conceptual framework, consisting of decisions and trade-offs along the three dimensions of competitive strategy, domain and structure, is given. Empirical support, based on both industry-level and firm-level data and analysis, is presented. It is agued that, over the past few years, the approaches used by corporations for developing and acquiring technology have become more numerous and varied with the relative significance increasing for internal decentralized entrepreneurial units and external approaches. A stabilization or consolidation of technology strategy approaches, however, may take place in the near future. Still, the emergence of modern technology strategy has permanently changed the landscape of the strategic management field.

The emergence of technology strategy

This article deals with the rise and character of modern technology strategy. The current elevation of technology to a strategic variable is discussed, and the key forces behind this trend are identified. The cunent blending of two previously distinctive privatesector modes of innovation—small high-technology firm entrepreneurialism and large corporate industrial R&D—is highlighted. A conceptual framework, consisting of decisions and trade-offs along the three dimensions of competitive strategy, domain and structure, is given. Empirical support, based on both industry-level and firm-level data and analysis, is presented. It is agued that, over the past few years, the approaches used by corporations for developing and acquiring technology have become more numerous and varied with the relative significance increasing for internal decentralized entrepreneurial units and external approaches. A stabilization or consolidation of technology strategy approaches, however, may take place in the near future. Still, the emergence of modern technology strategy has permanently changed the landscape of the strategic management field.

Managing large-scale programs: The managerial dilemma

Abstract Modern large-scale programs create new challenges for management. During the 1960s and 1970s, the whole field of macro-projects experienced a fundamental transformation that made many of the traditional approaches, methods and tools for administering large-scale programs no longer completely appropriate. Instead, successful implementation now requires the convergence of at least four elements: a positive societal cost/benefit calculation; a supportive bureaucratic-political context; appropriately broad managerial capabilities; and a favorable corporate strategic environment. The American synfuels experience exhibits a pattern of implementation failure that can take place when such a convergence does not exist. Modern macro-projects need a set of top-level managers who are comfortable with the traditional set of project management skills and with purely technological and economic matters, while also being at least equally as strong in the other more ambiguous domains of politics, bureaucracy, general management, and corporate strategy.

From unitary to distributed objectives: The changing nature of major projects

Abstract This article focuses on an important trend in the major-project field. A previous emphasis on unitary types is shifting to encompass also distributed forms. These latter types may indicate a potentially reinvigorated and new role for major projects in worldwide economic and social development. Examples include the Channel Tunnel connecting England and France, a proposed high-speed rail network for northern Europe, the EC ESPRIT, BRITE, RACE, and EUREKA programs the US Strategic Defense Initiative, the Human Genome Initiative, and various MITI-sponsored programs in Japan, such as the Fifth Generation Project. Key attributes of distributed major projects, such as the locus of support, missions and objectives, and managerial requirements, are often dispersed and not precisely centered on an easily pinpointed institution. Such elusive and generalized objectives as enhanced competitiveness, regional revitalization, technological innovation, and building state-of-the-art telecommunication/information systems are often aims. Distributed endeavors tend to be more knowledge-driven. Even in such traditional areas as physical infrastructure and aerospace, knowledge content accounts for a growing proportion of the overall value of large-scale undertakings. Critical resources, such as financing, technical and managerial expertise, and political support, must be sought globally. In such a distributed condition, Major Project Simultaneity — the concurrent application of highly diverse elements — is often required.

Deep-draft dredging of U.S. coal ports: A cost-benefit analysis

This article discusses whether U.S. society should invest in large-scale coal port development and examines specifically financing the deep-draft dredging of coal ports on the East and/or Gulf Coasts (Baltimore, Hampton Roads, Mobile, and New Orleans) so that fully loaded, large coal-carrying colliers can export coal to Western Europe. By assuming a society-wide perspective, no costs and benefits are attributed to various parties. Although the multifaceted nature of the coal port issue is acknowledged, the core of this study is a large number of different simulations. Each simulation “optimizes” the United States-Western Europe coal trade for a given demand, ocean transportation cost structure, and cost of capital. This relatively simple model focuses on the key tradeoff: the cost of dredging versus lower ocean transportation costs. The study supports those recommending caution in coal port development. The most striking conclusion is the robustness of two solutions - no dredging or dredge only Hampton Roads - depending on the assumptions. Our conclusions also generally do not support simultaneously dredging all deep-draft options, the concurrent dredging of more than one port, or dredging either of the Gulf ports before the two East Coast ports.