Internationales Projekt „TRIFOLD“ zum Thema Technologietransfer

Abstract

Internationales Projekt „TRIFOLD“ zum Thema Technologietransfer

Full text

Technology roadmapping in the TRIFOLD-project –
technology transfer through customized capacity development
measures in Tunisian research centers
Ralf Isenmann1, 2 – Martin Moehrle1- Aida Bouajila3- Michael Boronowsky1–
Martina Schwarz-Geschka2-Tanja Woronowicz1
1Universität Bremen | 2Wilhelm Büchner Hochschule Darmstadt/Mobile University
of Technology | 3CBBC (Tunisia)

2
Technology roadmapping in TRIFOLD – capacity development for technology
transfer in Tunisian Research centers
Methodologies and research design
Implications and results
Conclusions
Agenda

3
Technology roadmapping in TRIFOLD – capacity development for technology
transfer in Tunisian Research centers
Methodologies and research design
Implications and results
Conclusions
Agenda

4
low cooperation RC-companies
foster cooperation with companies and learn more about
market driven needs
interface education-science-economy not sufficiently equipped
through incentives
develop incentive systems for research valorization
role models and responsibilities in RC not established and defined
define role models
need for capacity development, i.e. development of: skills,
training, coaching, learning by doing, supervision etc. for more
professional research valorization
improve research valorization, i.e. transfer of science &
research to innovations
structural barriers in Tunisian innovation systems impede higher
socio-economic value
elevate the actors’ effectiveness in Tunisian innovation
ecosystem
TRIFOLD addresses findings & recommendations of FETRIC …
Future European Tunisian
Research Innovation Cooperation
www.fetric.eu

5
TRIFOLD technology transfer in Tunisian Research centers
TRIFOLD – capacity development measures for technology transfer in Tunisian Research centers
Contractor Subcontractor & Serviceprovider

6
Institute Pasteur, Tunis (www.pasteur.tn)
CERTE, Borj Cedria (www.certe.rnrt.tn)
CRTEn, Borj Cedria (www.crten.rnrt.tn)
CBBC, Borj Cedria (www.cbbc.rntn.tn)
CBS, Sfax (www.cbbc.rntn.tn)
IRA, Medenine (www.ira.agrinet.tn)

7

8

9
Technology roadmapping in TRIFOLD – capacity development for technology
transfer in Tunisian Research centers
Methodologies and research design
Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA) +
Service Process Capability Determination approach “innoSPICE” +
IPMI technology roadmapping approach +
Customized capacity development measures, e.g. (i) “innovation manager”,
(ii) “market analysis: technologies, customers, competitors”, (iii) business case
development”
Implications and results
Conclusions
Agenda

10
A mixed-methods approach was applied: PDIA + innoSPICE + technology roadmapping
Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA)
Service Process Capability
Determination Approach
“innoSPICE”
IPMI Fast Start Technology Roadmapping
Customized Capacity Development Measures

11
Content
What is Innovation
Management?
What are the tasks of an
Innovation Manager?
The Innovation Funnel:
Overview
Idea Generation
Idea Assessment
Conclusion and Planning
Workshop “Innovation Manager” & “Business Case Development”
Customized Capacity Development Measures are arranged as “satellites”.

12
Content
Methods and Data-Sources
Analyzing Technologies
Analyzing Customers
(technology users)
Analyzing Competitors
(substitutional technologies and
technology providers)
Combining Methods:
Technology Canvas,
SWOT-Analysis
Workshop “Market Analysis: Technologies, Customers, Competitors”
Example 2: Customized Capacity Development Measures

13
TR – sound methodology identifying business opportunities and addressing risk & uncertainty.
Significant number of scholarly publications around TR
Increasing body of academic literature in the last years
Contributions to theory building and development
(e.g. Simonse 2017; Carayannis et al. 2016; Vishnevskiy et al. 2016; Cuhls et al. 2016; Simonse et al. 2015; Carvalho et al. 2013; Moehrle et al. 2013; Kerr et
al. 2012; Lee et al. 2011, 2012; Ahlquist et al. 2012; Caetano and Amaral 2011; Choomon et al. 2009; Phaal et al. 2004a; 2004b; 2009; Eppler and Platts 2009;
Kajikawa et al. 2008; Moehrle and Isenmann 2008; De Laat and McKibbin 2003)

14
(S i
bi l /
d
/f t h t df)

15
A roadmap provides a structured visualization of future developments of technologies over
time, i.e. in a short-, medium-, and long-term perspective.
Develop industry
guidelines on how to
per v er t mel t l o ss
Opti mize vacuum or
inert gas to prevent
oxidat ion
Low co st i n cl u si on
meter
Research t o dev elo p
cavity-free sows
Develop university and
i nd u st r y co n sor t i u m t o
exami n e in t egr at ed
p
roduction s
y
st em
Means t o rem ove Mg,
U f r o m m el t
From a cooperati ve
continuous casting
consortium
Develop improved
fil tration mechanisms
Deve l o p n ew
secondary alloys
Develop continuous
micro scalpi ng
Develop a melting &
casti ng pl ant f or t h e
future
Develop an NMP outl et
Develop a process for
bet t er separ at io n o f
met al f r om d r o ss an d
sal t cak
e
Conti nuous high
productivi ty thi n strip
cast i n g p r o cess
Non-contact sensors
t hat m easure shel l
t hi ckness and surf ace
tem
p
erat ur e
Deve l op me an s f o r
removing specific
impuri ties from melt
Fun d am en t a l s o f
solidfloation modeling
Develop a non-contact
sensor and method to
id ent i f y an d sep arat e
scr a
p
Low co st pr o cess f o r
alloy / scrap purif y-
catio n and upgrade
Improve under-
standing of oxidation
pr even ti n g
mechanism
s
Modi f y fu rnaces t o
improve fuel efficiency
and red uce NOx
emi ssi on s
Develop high capacity
fu rn ace p ro t ot ype fo r
the future (pilot)
Detector f or moi sture
and non-metallic
impurit ies in charge to
furnace
Determine/understand
mechanisms causing
A
l-water explosions
IN-HOUSE
COM PA N Y R& D
INDUSTRY COLLABORATIVE GOV `T – INDUSTRY PART NERSHI P
NEAR (0-3 YEA RS) LONG (> 10 YEARS)MID (3-10 YEARS)
Top priorit y area
s
time scale
development path
single
developments
planning
perspectives
relations
(Source: The Aluminium Association 1997)

16
However: limited research on “TR for technology transfer”!
Journal of Technology Transfer, Special Issue “Accelerating the
conversion of science to technology” (1997): Usefulness & benefits of
TR for technology transfer:
Zurcher and Kostoff (1997): Graphical modeling system supporting
TR activities and processes
Burnett et al. (1997): TR as proper tool for cooperation in pre-
competitive research enabling industry-wide efficiencies in R&D
Gyungmi et al. (2015): TR used for identifying new product and market
opportunities
Cho et al. (2016): TR supporting public R&D planning
Aguirre-Bastos and Weber (2013, 2018): TR as anchor instrument to
shape innovation systems and support policy-making processes,
even in developing countries.

17
A number of issues around “TR for technology transfer” have not been addressed, so far:
Potential of TR to support technology transfer, e.g. when research
centers identify applicability and evaluate maturity of technologies?
Which process model of TR might be suitable to facilitate technology
roadmapping organizational implementation?
Which capacity building measures need to be taken in terms of
HRM and organizational learning to accelerate TR, finally providing a
quick start approach of TR in Tunisian research centers?
Design and customization of TR to support establishment of new
role models needed in Tunisian research centers, like “innovation
manager”, “key account manager”, or “business case developer”
resp.?

18
IPMI fast start technology roadmapping approach
Appealing & hands-on approach:
flexibility, i.e. customization for
technology development and
business applications
integrative potential, i.e. linking
different system levels:
personal: make immediately
use of TR
organizational: stage model
of TR implementation
innovation system: linking
single roadmaps to large-
scale ones - collaboration or
whole industry roadmap (Moehrle and Isenmann 2017)

19
Personal level: A fast start approach to apply and make use of technology roadmapping
includes …
1. introduction to technology roadmapping and its basic principles
3. case study to technology roadmapping
2. project-oriented process model to start & implement technology roadmapping
4. project management for technology roadmapping by good practice examples

20
Organizational level: Technology roadmapping implementation has certain objectives & requires
different measures.
(Source:Gerdsi 2013)

21
Innovation system level: Case study „Hydroponic Cultivation at CBBC“ –
from a single roadmap to a national platform on hydroponic culture…

22

23
National Tunisian platform
„Hydroponic Cultivation“

24
TRIFOLD – Capacity development for technology transfer in Tunisian Research
centers
joint project: BMBF + Universität Bremen | Wilhelm Büchner Hochschule
project description, objective & overall architecture
Methodologies and research design
Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA) + Service Process Capability
Determination approach “innoSPICE” + IPMI technology roadmapping approach
Implications and results
Innovation projects + roadmapping, among others: “Hydroponic Cultivation”
Conclusions
Agenda

25

26

27

28
IPMI Fast Start Technology Roadmapping Approach
5 Roadmap generation
Arrange technologies according to
drivers out from the technology
complex and schedule their
developments.
6 Strategy
Derive a sound technology strategy
based on the roadmaps generated.
1 From
Technology Roadmapping
to Strategy 4 Technology path
evaluation
Develop a technology complex and
develop technology paths.
3 Driver evaluation
Identify influencing factors and evaluate
these as technology drivers.
2 Targeting
Define a technological field and its
corresponding/competing subsystems
& surrounding environment.

29

30

31

32
IPMI Fast Start Technology Roadmapping Approach
5 Roadmap generation
Arrange technologies according to
drivers out from the technology
complex and schedule their
developments.
6 Strategy
Derive a sound technology strategy
based on the roadmaps generated.
1 From
Technology Roadmapping
to Strategy 4 Technology path
evaluation
Develop a technology complex and
develop technology paths.
3 Driver evaluation
Identify influencing factors and evaluate
these as technology drivers.
2 Targeting
Define a technological field and its
corresponding/competing subsystems
& surrounding environment.

33

34

35
Wild cards are events that are not likely
happening, rather they eventually could happen.
They have a significant influence in the develop-
ment and in how the futures may look like
(disruptive, non-linear development).
for further developing the
hyproponic cultivation
for further developing the
hyproponic cultivation

36
IPMI Fast Start Technology Roadmapping Approach
5 Roadmap generation
Arrange technologies according to
drivers out from the technology
complex and schedule their
developments.
6 Strategy
Derive a sound technology strategy
based on the roadmaps generated.
1 From
Technology Roadmapping
to Strategy 4 Technology path
evaluation
Develop a technology complex and
develop technology paths.
3 Driver evaluation
Identify influencing factors and evaluate
these as technology drivers.
2 Targeting
Define a technological field and its
corresponding/competing subsystems
& surrounding environment.

37
Technology Path Evaluation: Assessing the development of technology paths corresponding
to the technology complex
…
…

38

39
To be sure that selection covers all relevant technologies, you may cross check whether
technologies involved are actually corresponding to required features.
e.g. high productivity –
isolation technology, layout optimization,
casing, maintaining, water supply, energy
supply…

40
In a meta-roadmapping, any source (document) of relevance for hydroponic cultivation is
worth to be analyzed, at least it should be screened.
Foresight studies, e.g.
roadmaps, scenarios
Scientific publications,
e.g. papers, technical
reports
Websites, e.g. roadmap
archives, businesses,
newsletter, blogs & social media
…

41
IPMI Fast Start Technology Roadmapping Approach
5 Roadmap generation
Arrange technologies according to
drivers out from the technology
complex and schedule their
developments.
6 Strategy
Derive a sound technology strategy
based on the roadmaps generated.
1 From
Technology Roadmapping
to Strategy 4 Technology path
evaluation
Develop a technology complex and
develop technology paths.
3 Driver evaluation
Identify influencing factors and evaluate
these as technology drivers.
2 Targeting
Define a technological field and its
corresponding/competing subsystems
& surrounding environment.

42
Roadmap Generation: The insights gained from (1) Targeting, (2) Driver Evaluation, and (3)
Technology Path Evaluation fuel designing the roadmap architecture.
(1) TARGETING(1) TARGETING (2) DRIVER EVALUATION(2) DRIVER EVALUATION (3) TECHNOLOGY PATH EVALUATION(3) TECHNOLOGY PATH EVALUATION
(4) CHARTING & DRAFTING A SUITABLE ROADMAP ARCHITECTURE(4) CHARTING & DRAFTING A SUITABLE ROADMAP ARCHITECTURE

43

44

45
TRIFOLD – capacity development for technology transfer in Tunisian Research
centers
Methodologies and research design
Implications and results
Conclusions
Agenda

46
novel setting - conceptually promising and
methodologically sound:
PDIA + innoSPICE + IPMI fast start technology
roadmapping approach + customized capacity
development measures:
shift in technology transfer, in particular focused
on research valorization:
“experience research valorization just by starting to
do it in reality – now” instead of
“learn how to master complexity of research
valorization now, for the sake of applying
sophisticated knowledge in practice later”.
Conclusions (i)

47
IPMI fast start technology roadmapping approach = enabler methodology:
hands-on & appealing,
scalable & flexible, i.e. addressing all three levels
(individual, organizational, innovation system)
integrative potential
various innovation projects initiated, even four roadmapping
procedures launched:
Commerzialization of wind tunnel services roadmap
South Tunisian cooperative Biotech roadmap
Reverse osmosis from deepwater sources for irrigation roadmap
CBBC Hydroponic Cultivation Roadmap National Tunisian Platform
Conclusions (ii)

48
Challenges:
keep technology roadmapping alive!
encourage individuals integrating technology
roadmapping in daily routines
motivate labs and entire research centers to spend
time for technology roadmapping acitivities
initiate cooperation between research centers even
across responsibilites of certain ministries,
… e.g. foster National Tunisian Platform for
Hydroponic Cultivation
Conclusions (iii)

49
Prof. Dr. Ralf Isenmann
Universität Bremen | Wilhelm Büchner University
ralf.isenmann@innovation.uni-bremen.de
Prof. Dr. Martin G. Möhrle
Universität Bremen
moehrle@uni-bremen.de
Tanja Woronowicz
Universität Bremen
worono@tzi.de
Dr. Michael Boronowsky
Universität Bremen
mb@tzi.de
Martina Schwarz-Geschka
Wilhelm Büchner University
Martina.Schwarz-Geschka@wb-fernstudium.de

(Source: www.schnaeppchenfuchs.com)

51
Expertise in projects, publications, education & training helps to become future proof!
projects for
various industries
publications
education &
training
Guest Edit ors:
M artin G. M oehrle, Ralf Isenmann
Special Issue Vol. 4(2) 2008
From Technology Roadmapping
to O peration al Innovatio n Planning
Guest Edit ors:
M artin G. M oehrle, Ralf Isenmann
Special Issue Vol. 4(2) 2008
From Technology Roadmapping
to O peration al Innovatio n Planning
Wilhelm Büchner University: Management of Technologies & Innovation
Munich University of Applied Sciences: Sustainable Future Management
Universität Bremen: Advanced Project Management
Universität Kassel: Innovation and Technology Management

52
Further reading in technology transfer, innovation planning and technology roadmapping
Guest Edit ors:
Martin G. M oehrle, Ralf Isenmann
Special Issue Vol. 4(2) 2008
From Technology Roadmapping
to Operational Innovation Planning
Guest Edit ors:
Martin G. M oehrle, Ralf Isenmann
Special Issue Vol. 4(2) 2008
From Technology Roadmapping
to Operational Innovation Planning