A Participatory Approach to Design a Process Model of R&D Projects Management

Abstract

One of the most important strategies in order to move toward a knowledge-based economy, decreasing different kinds of managerial and non-managerial challenges that organizations are faced, and also maintaining the current competitive advantages and creating new competitive advantages, is establishment and development of effective R&D departments. Although equipment, financial, and human resources are known among the most important factors in order to evaluate the rate of R&D departments' ability, all of these factors along with procedural and managerial weakness cannot provide value for corporation. In order to investigate more about this aspect of R&D projects, case study was adopted as our research method. In this regard, through comparison of theoretical achievements and current R&D process, its challenges by participating and a structural approach were identified and by using experts' comments were prioritized. In subsequent, strategies for dealing with identified challenges through some meetings have been designed and by presenting to experts have been authenticated. At last, based on achieved strategies, R&D project management process of E organization through collaboration with experts has been designed and by joint meeting with organizational stakeholders has been improved and tailored.

Full text

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
323
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
A Participatory Approach to Design a Process Model of R&D Projects
Management
Hani Arbabi
Assistant Professorof Project Management and
Construction, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
arbabi@modares.ac.ir
Mehrdad Sarhadi
Assistant professor of Project Management and
Construction, Persian Gulf University, Bushehr, Iran
m.sarhadi@pgu.ac.ir
Sina Alidousti
MSc of Construction Engineering and Management,
Islamic Azad University South Tehran Branch Tehran,
Iran
st_s_alidousti@azad.ac.ir
Amin Zamani
PhD student of Project Management and Construction,
University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Amin.zamani@ut.ac.ir
Abstract
One of the most important strategies in order to move toward a knowledge-based economy,
decreasing different kinds of managerial and non-managerial challenges that organizations
are faced, and also maintaining the current competitive advantages and creating new
competitive advantages, is establishment and development of effective R&D departments.
Although equipment, financial, and human resources are known among the most important
factors in order to evaluate the rate of R&D departments' ability, all of these factors along
with procedural and managerial weakness cannot provide value for corporation. In order to
investigate more about this aspect of R&D projects, case study was adopted as our research
method. In this regard, through comparison of theoretical achievements and current R&D
process, its challenges by participating and a structural approach were identified and by
using experts' comments were prioritized. In subsequent, strategies for dealing with
identified challenges through some meetings have been designed and by presenting to
experts have been authenticated. At last, based on achieved strategies, R&D project
management process of E organization through collaboration with experts has been designed
and by joint meeting with organizational stakeholders has been improved and tailored.
Keywords: Project Management, R&D Process, Procedural challenges.
Introduction
Todays, empowering the research and development units is a necessity due to the rapid, multilateral, and
comprehensive changes in the external and internal environments of economic firms[1]. For this reason,
many organizations focus on research and development projects at the global level[2, 3]and consider
innovation as a value. Economists considered capital, work, and ground as fundamental factors of
production. Meanwhile, the theorists of modern economy talk about the information revolution as well as
knowledge owners. In this regard, Ermine (2010) believed that knowledge is the most significant output
of research and development centers and this knowledge should be managed. Achieving this goal in the
area of research and development is only possible through creating the efficient process of research and
development[4]. Optimizing the time pressure in research and development projects through knowledge
management mechanisms of process can convert time pressure into an appropriate opportunity to develop
creativity in these projects[5]. Sharing knowledge between the management teams of research and
development projects is significantly affected by structural factors, team dimensions, allocation of
responsibility, combination of team members, integrity, and organizational culture of the team[6].
 -Corresponding Author

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
324
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
The evolutions of the world in the last few decades led to the emergence of a trend changing the policies
of countries and leading countries as well as increasing investments on research and development[7]. For
example, the government of Canada declared its strategies and priorities in this field by releasing the
program of “science and industry for the new century” in 1996[8]. Such investments in different fields
have a different return on capital and no certain number can be determined for them. However, it can be
said that every dollar spent in this regard will enhance profitability[9]. In a general evaluation, the
research and development organizations and centers, with a history of new generation dating back to
1920, produced science and technology in an amazing and unexpected way and evolved the human life
style. It should be noted that research and development projects are considered as the activities with
multiple responsibilities in every organization requiring the cooperation of different parts of that
organization with each other[10]. For this reason, it is suggested to consider these activities as an
integrated system[11]. Research and development processes are the progresses for creating or improving
the technologies, processes, and structures which cause competition benefits in spite of its complicated
and risky nature[12]. Thus, clever design of process is critical for research and development enabling the
managers to guide the research and development activities in an organized way[13].Different models
have been developed so far at different levels for this purpose[8]. Thus, some strategies can be found in
the research literature which were considered for research and development at the national level[14] as
well as the strategies which were developed at the level of a specific industry[15]. However, research and
development processes in micro and macro levels faced some challenges. In linewith the principle of
continuous improvement, the present study focused on the managerial challenges of research and
development process in Iranian organizations and specifically in E organization. This study attempted to
use a structured approach and national-organizational variables to propose a process for dealing with
some of these important challenges in an efficient way.
In order to achieve this goal, the present study is organized as follows: first, the research literature is
presented by focusing on the most significant studies in line with the challenges of research and
development projects. Then, the theoretical foundations, research method, and procedure of research are
explained in methodology section. After that, the table resulted from the previous steps, is presented in
the finding section. This table indicates the ranked challenges and the solutions to cope with them. In
addition, this table includes the summary of the actions which were considered in the proposed process
model to cope with the challenges with the aim of determining their relations to each challenge and
solution. Then, the proposed process is introduced in brief and finally the conclusion and research
limitations are mentioned.
Deliberation on R&D challenges
Most important identified challenges of R&D project in literature can be summarized as follows:
-Not considering creativity and innovation as a significant part of the driving force of research and
development project management[8, 16]
-Presenting the general models without considering the unique nature[13] and features of research and
development projects and changing the complexity level of these projects over the project life cycle[17]
-Focusing on the development of new products and disregarding the other issues such as human resources
management[13]
-Having no communications and appropriate recognition of organization on experts and researchers in the
field of research and development[18, 19]
-Having ambiguity in the real value of the projects which are implemented[20]

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
325
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
-Understanding the required efforts for the management of technology complexities and multi-
disciplinary subjects in research and development projects[21]
-Not selecting an appropriate investment project form research and development projects[22, 23]
-Having no appropriate resource allocation such as human resources, equipment, research spaces, and
budget to the projects under implementation[3]
-Paying insufficient attention to fundamental studies due to high risks and low profit margin by
companies[24]
-Losing the knowledge obtained from research and development projects (especially implicit knowledge)
due to the short term nature of these projects and inappropriate conventional mechanisms[12, 25, 26]
-Paying no appropriate attention to quality management in the process of research and development
projects[27]
-Having the stress between temporary organization and permanent organization due to the lack of power
balance[21]
-Emphasizing the quantitative methods and ignoring the qualitative aspects and complicated human
aspects of the selection process of research and development projects[22, 28]
-One of the serious challenges in research and development projects is the stress between research and
development projects manager and the active scientists in this field. In other words, creative and
innovative freedom of scientists is placed in the limitations of time, cost, Etc.[29].
Research methodology
Theoretical foundations of research method
The approach governing the methodology of this study is participatory and qualitative[30]. This approach
is in line with the recommendation of a lot of studies emphasizing the need to establish the findings and
solutions on a practical field in the area of project management knowledge[31-37]. Thus, identifying the
challenges, developing the solutions, process model, and finally validating the process model were
conducted in a systematic way through deep interviews and aggregating the data based on the
participation of stakeholders and experts by focusing on the research and innovation unit of E
organization. For this reason, the reflection of field realities and the likelihood to implement the results as
well as its performance bond increase because everyone participated in detecting the field realities,
challenges, and development of the solutions which realize their interest and demands and that is why
they all believe and trust in it deeply.
Research procedure
As indicated in Figure 1, first the most significant challenges and achievements were studied in the
process of research and development project management. Then, the research and development process of
several Iranian companies and E organization were identified using the documents, field interviews, and
multiple meetings. After that, the challenges and distance between threshold achievements and whatever
flowing in research and development process were identified and discussed using brainstorming sessions
(N=3) where the researchers of this study and two experts of research and development attended. The
identified challenges were adjusted in form of open questionnaire and provided to the active experts and
researchers in research and development area to be ranked and to add new challenges to the list of these
challenges faced by research and development process in the country. Then, the researchers developed
some solutions for coping with the challenges based on their significance according to the theoretical
achievements on the creative process of brainstorming sessions (N=4) with the participation of
stakeholders and experts (Table 1). In order to develop and strengthen the solutions were provided to ten

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
326
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
selected researchers and stakeholders having experience and expertise in research and development area
to remake the list based on the proportion between the desired solution and challenge to present new
solutions. Then, the list of challenges and proposed solutions were analyzed to develop an optimal
process model. Then, several sessions with organizational stakeholders were held to adapt and improve
such a model. Finally, the summary of the measures conducted in line with the obtained solutions to cope
with the identified challenges were stated in column 4 of Table 1. In order to determine the relationship
and proportion between the solutions and challenges, the proposed solutions were mentioned.
The questionnaire of the first level
In order to distribute the questionnaire, first the statistical population of the study was clarified well. The
number of samples was studied to distribute the questionnaires of different methods. Since there is no
certain list of the people with knowledge and experience in the area of research and development project
as the statistical population of this study, the researcher estimated the number of these individuals as the
maximum of 80 in best status based on the field observations and the study conducted before distributing
the questionnaire. Based on this hypothesis and Cochran formula used for calculating the number of
samples for interval data with small size of population (maximum of 150), the number of required
samples was estimated as 67 to supply the least validity of the research. In order to achieve 67 samples,
90 questionnaires were distributed of which 53 questionnaires were completed (59%) which was a
relatively favorable rate. In addition, Cronbach‟s alpha coefficient was used based on the type of
questions for evaluating the questionnaire reliability. For this purpose, the coefficient of 0.726 was
achieved after analyzing the data.
Delphi method
In this step of the analysis, an attempt was made to achieve consensus between ten experts and
stakeholders having experience and expertise in the area of research and development projects using
Delphi method in relation to the development of the solutions which were selected based on previous
steps. Accordingly, Delphi method was implemented in two steps.
Figure (1) Research process(source: authors)

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
327
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
The first step of Delphi
In order to adapt the obtained solutions to the conditions of organization, the questionnaire of the first
step of Delphi was designed as open to enable the experts to reduce some solutions from the determined
list, add a new solution to the list, or state their explanation in relation to any solution. This questionnaire
including the definition of each strategy was distributed on paper among different experts to create a
shared understanding between them. in line with each solution, the respondents were asked to choose one
of the following statements .
 The proportion of solution to the challenge is very high.
 The proportion of the solution to the challenge is high .
 The proportion of the solution to the challenge is average .
 The proportion of the solution to the challenge is low.
 The proportion of the solution to the challenge is very low.
The second step of Delphi
In order to re-evaluate the results obtained from the questionnaire of the first step of Delphi, the results
obtained in the first round with the difference between online comments were provided to the respondents
one week before sending the questionnaire of this second step. The purpose of this re-evaluation was to
provide the possibility of comparing between the option selected by each expert and the option supported
by the majority and provide the contexts for creating a consensus among the experts. Then, the
questionnaire of the second step of Delphi was sent after one week by focusing on the solutions with high
difference between experts as well as increasing some solutions for each expert. The respondents were
asked to mention their reason for selection in case of selecting another option different from the option
supported by the majority. Finally, after passing the dual steps of Delphi, the results were summarized in
form of second, third, and fifth columns of Table 3 .
Meetings with Stakeholders
After presenting the model based on the identified challenges and solutions in the previous step, the
researchers held some meetings with stakeholders and provided them with a summary of the research
procedure as well as their goals and results. In addition, the stakeholders were provided with a summary
of research reports and were asked to announce their corrective options as written or verbally during three
weeks. After three weeks, the corrective comments were received and verbal comments were documented
in person. Finally, the comments were integrated by researchers due to the limitations and conflicts and
the accepted comments were applied to the model. This process was repeated in three steps with key
stakeholders and two steps by other stakeholders in order to increase the adaptability of the model and
perform its implementation with less resistance and higher performance bond.

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
328
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Table 1-The identified challenges, solutions, and features of the proposed process (source: authors)
challenges
solutions
The features of the proposed process for realizing the solutions
Percentage
of
agreement
Non-project look at
research and
development and the
non-use of project
management
knowledge
step by step and combined
implementation of project
management standards
 Using PMBOK and Prince 2 standards at project level.
 Using the MoP standard of OGC institute at the project portfolio level
 Developing the contexts of using project management methods
80
Ignoring participation
as a guiding principle
Using the IPD project system and
implementing collaborative
approach at different levels
 Developing the participation mechanisms of stakeholders in the project definition phase to
formulate the evaluation criteria for evaluating research results and implementation results
 Using a Project Integrated Project (IPD) to convert the mutual relations of employer,
executive, etc. to collaborate and participate in the project goals in line with the high level of
project uncertainty and complexity
 Participation of all stakeholders in profit and loss
 Participation of all stakeholders in the evaluation of results
 Creating a mechanism for the participation of all stakeholders in identifying the weaknesses
of the process and creating solutions
 Providing a context for defining the joint project and co-financing
80
The inefficiency of the
process of selecting
and defining research
and development
projects (strategy-
portfolio)
-Regarding the strategic
management
-Using the innovation management
-Using the feasibility studies
-Using the portfolio management
 Developing a strategic plan and research priorities of research and development unit
 Considering "project strategy" and its implementation mechanisms
 Implementing the project portfolio management standards
 Establishing a feasibility mechanism with an independent approach coordinated to project
portfolio management
85
The inefficient process
of idea creation and
The reflection of idea creation and
acquisition process regarding the
 Establishing ideas bank and developing the joint memorandum to use the vast potential of
universities, companies, employees within the organization, etc.
87.5

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
329
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
acquisition
inputs and its relationship to the
project definition phase
 Establishing a workshop on creativity and idea development with the participation of
experienced people and stakeholders in structuring the transformation of idea into a project
and considering the principle of flexibility to combine, promote and make ideas more
realistic as well as empower and encourage the employees to make ideas
The incomplete life
cycle of research and
development projects
and the lack of
realized interests
-Using the experiences and findings
of successful research and
development models
-The need to pay attention to the
realization of interests and the
appropriate definition of the project
 Establishing the process of project implementation in five steps for improving the process of
idea acquisition and transformation of ideas into a project of a specific scope, realizing the
benefits through the implementation of research results, and ultimately evaluating the extent
to which the goals are realized.
1. acquisition, creation, and feasibility of ideas
2. definition of research and development project
3. research implementation
4. implementation of research results
5. Project termination
82.5
The structure of
inefficient monitoring
and controlling of
research and
development projects
Simultaneous use of modern
theories of supervision and
motivation to increase efficiency
and decrease regulatory levels
 Structural and process reform to align the interests of stakeholders with the project to reduce
the need for regulatory mechanisms
 Establishing a project supervisor in the project team for the f continuous monitoring of Level
1
 Establishing a project portfolio management for continuous monitoring of Level 2 on the
implementation of research and development projects.
 Establishing a project evaluation committee for providing independent evaluation reports on
the implementation results of the project
75
Disregarding the
unique features of
research and
development projects
The necessity to recognize the low
level of definitions of goals and the
methodology of research and
development projects as well as
using the appropriate management
approaches
 IPD project implementation system for addressing the high level of risk and low definition of
research and development projects
 Emphasizing the OGC gateway and result-oriented controls for better addressing of the level
of uncertainty and low definition of projects.
 Creating minimum formalities and bureaucracy as well as emphasizing incentive systems.
80
Inefficiency in the
combination of
-The necessity to define the
connection structures between
 Using the MOP portfolio portfolio management mechanism to better align of more research
67.5

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
330
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
research and
development process
and the permanent
structure of the
organization
projects and the permanent structure
of the organization.
-The necessity for the deep
knowledge of e formal and informal
structures to increase the probability
of successful model implementation
and development projects as well as the permanent structure of the organization
 Adapting he proposed research and development process units and current units in the
organization for more integration.
 Determining the roles and responsibilities of the project team consistent with the roles and
responsibilities of the organization
Financing of research
and development
projects
Emphasizing the definition of joint
projects and the necessity for
collaborative financing
 Defining and implementing the joint projects with other companies through co financing
 Using the financial capacities of universities by defining a joint project while providing the
access to information and equipment aimed at more industry and university closeness.
77.5
The challenge of idea
and talent acquisition
to the research and
development process
The need to design and establish
more collaborative mechanism
between the research and
development unit , universities, and
research centres
 Developing a strategic plan and roadmap for collaboration with universities and research
institutions.
 Improving the structure and process of idea acquisition through ideas bank and specialized
committees.
 Designing and establishing the contexts. Implementing an integrated database implementation
and information management to better understand the opportunities and capacities of
research centres.
75
No comprehensive use
of information
technology
The need for the hierarchy of
management principles,
management process and a
comprehensive information
technology system based on two
previous levels
 Designing the process by considering the possibility of creating and developing an
information technology network
 Considering the current infrastructure of the organization
60
Non-use of risk
management
Establishing the risk management
mechanism at portfolio level and
promoting it to the project level
 Establishing a risk management mechanism in the framework of portfolio management of
research and development projects
 Developing the techniques and methods of management at the project level
80

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
331
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Disregarding
knowledge
management
The need for creating and
developing knowledge management
system
 Establishing the knowledge storage and management system for using the knowledge gained
from research and development projects
 Integrating the knowledge management system and the process of project implementation to
use the capacity of all
70
Research findings
In the first part of this study, the challenges found in the R&D project management process and the solutions to cope with them, obtained in the research
method section, are stated in form of Table 1. In addition, the process model of research and development project management which is recognized as the
main output of the research is presented in Figure 2 and its different aspects are briefly explained. The most significant measures considered in the model to
cope with challenges were mentioned separately in column 3 of Table 1 to make it easy and readable for readers.
The process model of research and development projects management (Figure 2)
The main units of the process
Innovation secretariat
The members of innovation secretariat are selected based on the guidelines by the head of research and development unit and some of the most important
tasks of this secretariat include:
1. Developing the research priorities based on the strategies of research and development unit as well as developing and updating the ideas bank and
executives bank
2. Identifying the current opportunities as the starting point of the activities related to investment
3. Identifying and documenting the capacities of universities as well as signing joint memorandums for defining the participatory projects and the
relationship between industry and university
4. Organizing the cooperation with the marketing unit, independent researchers, and generally all of those insides or outside the organization having an
idea in their minds
Innovation secretariat collects the idea and information of executives and collaborative institutions by some forms and monitors them by appropriate software.
Innovation secretariat is not only responsible for capturing ideas. This unit should provide the context through well-known scientific methods encouraging the

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
332
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
interested individuals, groups, and organizations to make ideas and attempting in this regard. In addition, the contexts for integrating, developing, and
improving the ideas through specialized committees should be provided.
In this regard, the recognized techniques and structures such as brainstorming, mind mapping, etc. are considered as very strategic and key subjects. In
addition, the representatives of innovation secretariat should consider the development of strategy and definition of project based on strategy as a key target in
their board meetings of E organization projects based on documents. In addition, the portfolio board should provide the innovation secretariat with the project
documents and priorities to select the appropriate projects.
Project feasibility group
Decision for taking advantage of feasibility studies depends on the type of project and adapted by innovation secretariat. In order to observe the principles of
dependency, this group is independent of research and development process and innovation secretariat is in charge of it. In addition, a part of the
commitments by feasibility team should be dependent on the realization of the project goals as the good performance guarantee. Furthermore, the
performance of feasibility group should be documented and be in line with the clarity of information available to stakeholders.
The most important tasks of this group are:
-Studying the ideas confirmed in specialized committees such as different aspects including economic and technical aspects depending on the type of
environmental project based on specific instructions.
-Evaluating the executive capabilities for project implementation
-Depending on the project type, specific aspects of each project should be evaluated as addressed in the feasibility report
The board of project portfolio management
It is a board including the head of research and innovation unit, the head of innovation secretariat, the head of knowledge management center, and the
secretary of project portfolio. The head of research and innovation unit is in charge of managing this board. The most important tasks of this board include:
-Developing the strategies in line with the projects by the strategies of research and development unit
-Prioritizing the feasible projects based on financial limitations, resources, and acceptable risk level of the company
-Monitoring all phases of research and development projects
-Coordinating and managing the risk and resources optimally

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
333
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
-Developing the macro strategies and main orientations in different areas such as memorandums and participating with other research institutes and private
companies
The members of the evaluation board are employer, executive, project manager, project supervisor, special representative of the head of organization, and the
representative of portfolio management group to keep the independence of the board and if necessary the representative of engineering deputy. The tasks of
this board include:
-Providing the head of research and innovation unity and other stakeholders with the implemented results based on the evaluation implemented by the
supervisor, the special representative of the head of organization, collection of contextual data, and the report created by the implementation board to increase
transparency.
-Preventing the reports of implementation results to the board of portfolio management of research and development projects to free the organizational
capacities completely from the relevant projects and allocate it to new projects and other current projects
- Reporting the implementation results as well as completing and collecting the knowledge management form for conducting more analyses in knowledge
management center.
- Sending the report of implementation results as the input of innovation secretariat as well as idea feasibility unit
- Evaluating the predicted objectives to attract and make ideas feasible in future and evaluating the project team performance
Project team
In line with the participation strategy and based on the integrated system of project implementation includes the employer, executive, project supervisor, and
project manager. This strategy has a certain role and responsibility in each phase of definition, execution, and implementation, as discussed in the next section
in detail.
The main phases of the process
The acquisition, creation, and feasibility of ideas
The minimum formality and bureaucracy should govern this phase and the idea production should be completely open to use all ideas inside and outside the
organization. For this purpose, creating sufficient incentives and advertisements are of key significance. In this phase, the bank of idea, innovation, and
information of executives is used to enrich and increase the efficiency of idea production phase and improve the assets of organizational process. The
strategies of research and innovation unit should turn into research priorities and idea suggestion should be in the framework of these priorities. This issue
realizes the strategic alignment to some extent. The ideas specified in this phase are evaluated based on pre-determined indicators by six committees (based
on the studied subject) according to the type of the project. Such indicators can involve different criteria such as the alignment with organizational strategies,
financial feasibility, and technical feasibility, etc. Thus, the strategies of organizations and consequently the strategies of research and innovation unit should

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
334
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
be developed and determined before investigation. Project team (including employer, project manager, project supervisor, and executive) is initially allocated
to the ideas which can gain the required minimum score in this phase and these ideas enter the feasibility phase. Feasibility phase is separated from the phase
of idea reviews and involves an independent team because the feasibility of research and development projects has mainly costs both in time and money.
Thus, the projects having some minimums in the field of feasibility enter this phase. Furthermore, most ideas should be integrated, promoted, and developed
before entering the feasibility phase using the mechanism of creativity and idea development workshop (specialized committees) to take more realistic aspect.
It should be noted that all ideas should not necessarily pass all above-mentioned phases in the process model to become a project. Under specific conditions
and according to the demand of the head of innovation secretariat and agreement of the head of research and innovation unit, the projects can be exempted
from some phases or steps of the process. After the project feasibility, if the project is not feasible, its information will be stored in the knowledge base. In
case of feasible project, the board of project portfolio management should conduct three phases of understanding, classification, and prioritization of research
and development projects having technical, economic, and environmental feasibilities according to the OGC standard of portfolio management .
The definition of research and development project
After confirming the project by the board of portfolio management, the primary project team is officially assigned to the project after applying some probable
changes and then the project definition phase begins. In this phase, three forms should be completely filled based on the appropriate and realistic estimates by
the project team through aconsensus-orientedapproach. Project management plan form (this form can be completed based on project management standard
forms according to the instruction of this standard or be designed for organization in a specialized way), the form of “evalu ation indicators of research
results”, and the form of evaluation indicators of implementation results.”

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
335
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Figure (2) The process model of research and development projects management(source: authors)

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
336
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Research
In this phase, the project team should form some meetings based on the determined scheduling and
monitor the progress of the project through periodical reports. Finally, after receiving the final report, the
project team specifies the fulfillment of commitments and feasibility or non-feasibility of continuing the
study based on the comparison of final report and evaluation criteria of the research result. The other
relevant forms in this phase are completed by the supervisor and provided to the board of portfolio
management. This board gives these forms to the engineering deputy, if necessary, and this deputy
determines the implementation of the project. Three decisions may be made in this phase:
-The project is in line with the primary goals and can enter the implementation phase
-The project is deviated from the primary goals and requires corrective measures
-The project cannot continue and enter the implementation phase and should be stopped to use the
theoretical achievements in knowledge management center
In addition, the project may be of pure service projects. In such conditions, projects directly enter the
completion phase. Due to the complexities encountered by projects in terms of internal and external
changes, the necessity and significance of continuing the study should be consistently evaluated and
documented. This issue is known as business case in the project management standard of OGC institute.
For this purpose, the project is stopped whenever the evaluation group concludes that continuing the
project has no value added to the organization. Meanwhile, the role of supervisor and his formal
relationship to the board of portfolio management is of great significance for decision-making in this area.
In addition, considering this point has a significant effect in allocating optimal resources based on project
requirements and effective risk management. At the end of this phase, the reports of the projects as well
as the completed forms by the project team are collected and stored by the representative of knowledge
management center and then transferred to knowledge management center for more analyses.
Development
In this phase, the project evaluates the feasibility of implementing the research results in the first meeting.
A representative from engineering deputy should attend this meeting in case of necessity. In this meeting,
different dimensions of implementation and its side effects are determined and documented. The
implementation board should specify the stakeholders affected by the project implementation based on
previous documents and determine their effectiveness. Based on this analysis and after sending the project
to all stakeholders, they are asked to present their opinions and state their agreement or disagreement on
implementing the project as well as the effects of project implementation on their sector. Based on the
received feedback, the project evaluation board invites some key stakeholders of the project to the second
meeting for more investigation and better coordination of plan implementation. Finally, the
implementation plan is developed based on the relevant form and given to the board of portfolio
management after holding the required number of meetings and applying the changes based on received
verbal and written feedbacks. This board should compare the different dimensions of implementation to
the capacity and feasibility of the organization. The board of portfolio management makes decisions in
line with the implementation of non-implementation of research results and its appropriate time. After
confirming the plan, the research results are conducted based on the scheduling time with the agency of
project executive and manager as well as the guidance and supervision of project employer and
supervisor. The implementation plan of research results should have a certain amount of details based on
the project type.

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
337
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Project termination
In this phase, the results implemented by the evaluation board are studied based on the forms of
„evaluation indicators of research results” and “evaluation indicators of implementation results”. In
addition, this board presents a report in this regard to the head of research and innovation unit. In this
report, a summary of other information of the project as well as the results of implementation and the
most significant features of the project should be presented. The form completion should have a
completing process. In other words, each specified part of the form should be completed by each relevant
individual and then updated if necessary. In this phase, the report of evaluation result and completed
forms of knowledge management center should be completed by the project team to store and conduct
more analyses in line with the extraction of project knowledge and process management knowledge, and
evaluated by the representative of knowledge management center, and then sent to the knowledge
management center.
Knowledge management in the proposed process
There are different models for knowledge management each one having almost similar phases of
knowledge management but different from each other in some limited details. Probest‟s Building Stones
Model that was introduced as an appropriate model for introduced projects in theoretical resources were
used for Eorganization research and development process model. This model has the phases of knowledge
goals, knowledge evaluation, knowledge discovery, knowledge acquisition, knowledge development,
knowledge sharing, and knowledge retention. The central core of knowledge management in this model is
firmed by the knowledge management center which is responsible for supporting and implementing the
knowledge activities in the model. The significant abilities of this model obtained by the knowledge
processes in the model include the possibility to improve the model continuously. This can be realized by
storing the implicit knowledge of the project team (in different projects) and evaluating it in knowledge
and management center and, if necessary, defining a new project for solving the problem.
Conclusion
In this study, the researchers first identified the challenges of research and development projects
management process by comparing the theoretical findings and whatever being current in Iranian
companies and especially in E organization. Then, the most appropriate solutions were developed through
questionnaire and Delphi technique to deal with the ranked challenges. Accordingly, the process of
research and development project management in E organization was designed and then adapted by
presenting it to stakeholders. The most important achievements of the proposed process for managing
research and development projects include changing the attitude of stakeholders to research and
development unit from an operating unit to a project-based unit, using the project management knowledge
and a wide range of solutions and techniques developed in this area, increasing the probability to achieve
the benefits through a clear definition, and creating a complete connection between the phases of
research and development projects life cycle, fitting the defined process and conditions of E organization
through increasing flexibility and the ability to support a variety of projects encountered by E
organization, using portfolio management approach, strategic alignment and its extensive interests,
considering the principle of continuous improvement and its successful combination with knowledge
management system, reducing stress, increasing efficiency, and reducing the need for monitoring the
process by aligning the interests of various stakeholders especially the project team, assigning the project
manager and project supervisor to strengthen the project team, establishing independent and multi-layered
monitoring mechanisms, increasing transparency at different levels, using participation as a major
strategy and spirit governing the process especially in the area of project system, project financing, and
determining the project success criteria.

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
338
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
Limitations and suggestions for future studies
This study faced some limitations such as the lack of access to information, lack of cooperation and
resilience of some stakeholders, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, and so on. In addition, there are
many other challenges requiring further research in the future. Such challenges include the effective
structures and processes for the development of cooperation between universities and research centers and
research and development units of companies, evaluating the required structure and processes for the
development of cooperation ,defining joint projects between research and development units of different
companies, studying the area of strategic plan of research and development units and better alignment of
research and development projects and strategies, and finally providing the financing strategies for
research and development projects.
References
1. Jamali Paghalue, M. and E. Shafiezadeh, Comparative analytic approach to research & development in Iran and
some developed countries. Roshd-e-Fanavari (Scientific Quarterly Journal of Science and Technology Parks &
Incubators), 2012: p. 23-34.
2. Kisielnicki, J., Project management in research and development. foundations of management, 2014. 6(3): p. 57-70.
3. Bhattacharyya, R., P. Kumar, and S. Kar, Fuzzy R&D portfolio selection of interdependent projects. Computers &
Mathematics with Applications, 2011. 62(10): p. 3857-3870.
4. Sammons, P.A., The outsourcing R&D toolkit. 2000: Gower Publishing, Ltd.
5. Khedhaouria, A., F. Montani, and R. Thurik, Time pressure and team member creativity within R&D projects: The
role of learning orientation and knowledge sourcing. International Journal of Project Management, 2017. 35(6): p.
942-954.
6. Wang, J., et al., Method for analyzing the knowledge collaboration effect of R&D project teams based on Bloom’s
taxonomy. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2017. 103: p. 158-167.
7. Jung, U. and D. Seo, An ANP approach for R&D project evaluation based on interdependencies between research
objectives and evaluation criteria. Decision Support Systems, 2010. 49(3): p. 335-342.
8. Procca, A.E., Development of a project management model for a government research and development
organization. Project Management Journal, 2008. 39(4): p. 33-57.
9. McAlister, L., R. Srinivasan, and M. Kim, Advertising, research and development, and systematic risk of the firm.
Journal of Marketing, 2007. 71(1): p. 35-48.
10. Ellis, G., Project Management in Product Development: Leadership Skills and Management Techniques to Deliver
Great Products. 2015: Butterworth-Heinemann.
11. Liu, P.-L. and C.-H. Tsai, Research on the influences of new product design and new product development process
management on new product development performance in Taiwan’s industries. Asian Journal on Quality, 2009.
10(1): p. 89-106.
12. Barthès, J.-P.A. and C.A. Tacla, Agent-supported portals and knowledge management in complex R&D projects.
Computers in industry, 2002. 48(1): p. 3-16.
13. Yoon, B., et al., Development of an R&D process model for enhancing the quality of R&D: comparison with CMMI,
ISO and EIRMA. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 2015. 26(7-8): p. 746-761.
14. Ma, J., et al., An ontology-based text-mining method to cluster proposals for research project selection. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-Part A: Systems and Humans, 2012. 42(3): p. 784-790.
15. Paul, S.M., et al., How to improve R&D productivity: the pharmaceutical industry's grand challenge. Nature
reviews Drug discovery, 2010. 9(3): p. 203.
16. Hernández-González, Y., et al., A semantic-based platform for R&D project funding management. Computers in
industry, 2014. 65(5): p. 850-861.
17. Chandrasekaran, A., et al., Managing R&D project shifts in high
‐
tech organizations: A multi
‐
method study.
Production and Operations Management, 2016. 25(3): p. 390-416.
18. Xu, W., et al., A personalized information recommendation system for R&D project opportunity finding in big data
contexts. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2016. 59: p. 362-369.

International Journal of Future Generation Communication and Networking
Vol. 13, No. 4, (2020), pp. 323–339
339
ISSN: 2233-7857 IJFGCN
Copyright ⓒ 2020 SERSC
19. Sarhadi, M. Comparing communication style within project teams of three project-oriented organizations in Iran. in
IPMA 29th World Congress, 28-30 September. 2016. Panama: Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences.
20. Finance, D.O., The budget plan 2006 focusing on priorities.: . 2006, Ottawa: Queen‟s Printer.
21. Palm, K. and M. Lindahl, A project as a workplace: Observations from project managers in four R&D and project-
intensive companies. International Journal of Project Management, 2015. 33(4): p. 828-838.
22. Criscuolo, P., et al., Evaluating novelty: The role of panels in the selection of R&D projects. Academy of
Management Journal, 2017. 60(2): p. 433-460.
23. Liu, F., et al., Solving multiple-criteria R&D project selection problems with a data-driven evidential reasoning
rule. International Journal of Project Management, 2019. 37(1): p. 87-97.
24. Jordan, G.B., What matters to R&D workers. Research-Technology Management, 2005. 48(3): p. 23-32.
25. Adler, T.R., T.G. Pittz, and J. Meredith, An analysis of risk sharing in strategic R&D and new product development
projects. International Journal of Project Management, 2016. 34(6): p. 914-922.
26. Cooper, R.G. and A.F. Sommer, The agile–stage
‐
gate hybrid model: a promising new approach and a new research
opportunity. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 2016. 33(5): p. 513-526.
27. Cronemyr, P. and M. Danielsson, Process Management 1-2-3–a maturity model and diagnostics tool. Total Quality
Management & Business Excellence, 2013. 24(7-8): p. 933-944.
28. Thamhain, H.J., Assessing the effectiveness of quantitative and qualitative methods for R&D project proposal
evaluations. Engineering Management Journal, 2014. 26(3): p. 3-12.
29. Cassanelli, A.N., G. Fernandez‐Sanchez, and M.C. Guiridlian, Principal researcher and project manager: who
should drive R&D projects? R&D Management, 2017. 47(2): p. 277-287.
30. Sarhadi, M., S. Yousefi, and A. Zamani, Participative Project Management as a Comprehensive Response to
Postmodernism Criticisms: The Role of Communication. International Journal of Managing Project in Bisiness,
2018. 11(4): p. 935-959.
31. Geraldi, J. and J. Söderlund, Project studies and engaged scholarship: Directions towards contextualized and
reflexive research on projects. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2016. 9(4): p. 767-797.
32. van der Hoorn, B., Continental thinking: a tool for accessing the project experience. International Journal of
Managing Projects in Business, 2016. 9(4): p. 865-891.
33. Hällgren, M., M. Jacobsson, and A. Söderholm, Embracing the drifting environment: The legacy and impact of a
Scandinavian project literature classic. International Journal of Managing projects in business, 2012. 5(4): p. 695-
713.
34. Morris, P.W., Research and the future of project management. International journal of managing projects in
business, 2010. 3(1): p. 139-146.
35. Dalcher, D., Rethinking project practice: emerging insights from a series of books for practitioners. International
Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2016. 9(4): p. 798-821.
36. Hodgson, D. and S. Cicmil, Making projects critical 15 years on: a retrospective reflection (2001-2016).
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 2016. 9(4): p. 744-751.
37. Cicmil, S., et al., Rethinking project management: researching the actuality of projects. International journal of
project management, 2006. 24(8): p. 675-686.