Technology Management - Science topic

you can get the legal copy

In my opinion, there is a fundamental difference between the two.

"Management of technology" implies putting technology at the service of mankind, thereby avoiding the most arduous and physically demanding tasks.

"Technology management", on the other hand, gives primacy to the machine. Work is organised according to the capabilities of the machine, optimised so that the machines can perform to the best of their ability. The role of the human being is then to complement the machine, to carry out tasks that it is not yet capable of doing itself due to lack of dexterity, or tasks that would be too costly to automate.

What I've written here about the machine should be understood in a wider sense: it applies equally and especially to software.

We have devoted quite a lot of work to these subjects. You can find examples here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356811569_OSH_in_a_digital_economy_workers'_health_to_the_test_of_customer_satisfaction

Jogendra Singh

Nano-fertilizers and Neem-coated urea are modern advancements in farming. Nano-fertilizers are tiny particles that deliver nutrients directly to plants, helping them grow better. Neem-coated urea is urea coated with neem oil, which slows down its release, making nutrients available to plants over a longer time.

The difference in how plants take up nutrients lies in their mechanisms: Nano-fertilizers are so small that plants can absorb them more easily through their roots, while Neem-coated urea gradually breaks down, allowing plants to absorb nutrients as needed.

Surface area is crucial because Nano-fertilizers have a large surface area per particle, enhancing nutrient release and uptake efficiency. Neem-coated urea's surface area affects how fast it breaks down, influencing nutrient availability. These innovations help farmers increase crop yield while using fertilizers more efficiently and sustainably.

Yes I would be willing to answer these.

I'm sorry but I cannot participate with questionnaires or video, but if you and your students wish you have free access to many works of mine that you may be interested in having a look at this page on Google Scholar

All the best. Kind Regards.

please share my request

Don't know if you maybe find some inspiration on this site:

Could be helpful for the international market

Dear Mr. Shravan Macherla,

There are many potential research topics in civil engineering that could benefit from thorough investigation and analysis, depending on your specific interests and expertise. Here are a few examples:

These are just a few examples of the many potential research topics in civil engineering. The most important thing is to choose a topic that aligns with your interests and skills, and that has the potential to make a meaningful contribution to the field.

Best regards,

Predatory publisher, present in Beall's list, avoid all the journals that approach you in this way, even asking for your phone number.

Dear José Roberto Marty Delgado,

Thanks for answering the above question: Yes, you have noticed important issues related to the use of new information technologies, ICT and Industry 4.0 in order to improve enterprise management systems.

Thank you very much,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Energy Economics；

Energy Policy；

Applied Energy；

Resources Policy;

Energy；

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews;

Energy Reports;

Good evening. Thank you for the interesting question. We conduct research on the morphofunctional indicators of children and adults and the factors that affect them (for example, unfavorable environmental conditions, polyutants). Unfortunately, our research stopped during the pandemic. Because the object that we study is children and adults. Because of the pandemic, teaching has changed a lot (online lectures and video conferences).

Dear Aijaz Panhwar,

Thank you for your answer. I also believe that information technologies and ICT are among the technologies that will develop dynamically in the future.

Thank you,

Best wishes,

Dariusz Prokopowicz

Consider the perspective of users

Thanks for another insightful contribution, . I hope you don't object to my tacking on some cautionary thoughts:

With all the money that Bill Gates and his cadre have provided to research diseases related to COVID-19, and possibly to have funded its transfer from Fort Detrick, Maryland, to the labs in Wuhan -- also subsidized by taxpayer funds spent unlawfully under the possibly criminal regime of Dr. Anthony Fauci; and given the strong possibility that 5g and 60GHz technologies are designed as weapons to interact to the detriment of people already carrying nanoparticles from geoengineering; and given the ability to put personal IDs into vaccines that would permit total control of humans under a cryptocurrency regime ... might you agree that Americans and the rest of the people on earth should exercise a modicum of caution and skepticism with regard to an eagerness to be injected with vaccines? We are at war. We are suffering under a medical tyranny and unlawful germ warfare. We need to vet all processes and histories related to these matters, before entrusting anybody to insult us further by injecting us with any substances that are potentially harmful in the extreme to both our bodies and our worldwide communities. I am not jumping at the chance to lose my freedoms completely.

Those are my thoughts. YMMV. ;-)

Respectfully, -Steve- gambist@gmail.com ... https://tinyurl.com/to8tsbt

Dear friend

As like you, I’m following to found out the best PhD. Subject, but I’ve confused in many items. But, as my mentor suggested me to focus in two main issues . As we’re PhD. Candidate, our proposal should be able to contribute in ISI journal or other academic area. The second one it should be applicable or able to solve an important problem for any organization or you may interest cutting edges of pure science . You may need to support by any organization. So in my recommendation, please make a comparative ( important – approach) matrix, and you may concern in three major items( inputs , process, outputs )and compare whit your capabilities , goals, and destination . Then you may choose the best subject that you interested in.

I have a strong interest in the book project

Time issue in construction project... as I think

You can't build an elevator to the ISS at 400km, because at this altitude the orbital rotation speed is not the same as the earth rotation speed. Furthermore, the ISS orbit is not on the equatorial plane.

The idea of Space elevator is conceivable only in the equatorial plane and does not really make sense elsewhere.

I would recommend you that please narrow down your concept and make it domain specific. You may conduct a research on innovation or eWom. Its more worthy to start work on IACM model. For more please check the journal "Informatics & Telematics". If you need more help or willing for collaborative work then please me. I have some unique ideas

Dear

Thank you for your opinion

Please complete the questionnaire if possible

The cost of prefabricated construction unites with sustainable materials.

Best wishes!

Basically, in the field of management, be careful of the use of "best or most effective modern" management approach for the basic reasons of (1) there is NO best practices or most effective management practices, but only "appropriate" within the context, culture, capabilities, capacities, competencies of the organization; (2) there are "generic" practices in management that are adapted or re-hashed over the decades as management gurus try to "re-invent, re-package or re-construe" basic management practices as adapted to new environmental changes/demands. Also an important note is that "what is applicable to one company" might not work for another, so when using or applying any re-construed modern management practices, both of the rationales (1) and (2) applies. Hope that this helps.

Review those papers:

Industry 4.0 in logistics.

My best regards

Here is a link that may be beneficial:

Information and communication technology (ICT) for development might be of interest. "ICT for Development" springs from the desire to leverage ICT to propel economic and social progress and enhance its effects in developing countries, where over three billion people—almost half of the global population—subsist on less than $2.50 a day. For sure, in these less fortunate environments, countries that harness ICT can leapfrog stages of development by

Without ICT, the efforts of developing countries to connect, innovate, and transform will be stymied, irrespective of income thresholds. But, their endeavors to produce, diffuse, and use ICT require substantial investment—both public and private—in policy and regulatory frameworks, infrastructure (including connectivity), applications, and capacities and skills for ICT, with an eye also on standardization and information technology security.

PS: A one-pager on this subject is at .

Technology is the practical application of knowledge (in the form of methods, processes, skills, and techniques) to produce goods and services or accomplish objectives in a particular area, e.g., engineering, medicine, etc. (To note, it can also be taken to refer to the knowledge of such methods, processes, and the like as well as their embeddedness in machines.) Therefore, any consideration of the "pitfalls" of technology—a word that, strictly speaking, alludes to hidden or unsuspected dangers or difficulties, not just "shortcomings"—should relate to the specific objective sought by and the specific characteristics and scope of the technology under discussion. Past the technical "pitfalls", dangers, difficulties, shortcomings, etc. associated with the technology per se, impacts can be found in economic, environmental, ethical, financial, legal, military, political, societal, and other arenas, both in the short term and the long term (and at different removes, meaning, degree of remoteness or separation). Not to forget, it is often the case that technology finds applications in areas other than those it was designed for (the Global Positioning System being but one example); there is also the matter of planned obsolescence …

Delineating management zones by partitioning spatial variability within a field into homogenized blocks is the purpose of such attempts ...

It is very hard to get, however I do hope you find in the attached links.

Web 3.0 is the "Learning Web" in which database systems are used to capture information about specific consumers, and use it to develop stronger relationships between the website company and the individual consumer.

Web 3.0 is already used extensively in advertising to focus the message to individual consumers because the database knows the interests and preferences of the individual.  Outside of advertising, Web 3.0 can be used in a wide range of other contexts in which the company benefits from knowing the customer better.

Mr Ardito, I happen to come by this question today, as the year 2016 is rapidly coming to an end.

I see no further responses than that  given by Mr Cua in 2012. His question: "What phenomenon at the trademark is bothering you? Why did you focus on the relationships between technologies and products a company is developing?" strikes the right note and I agree. I cannot see how a trademark could determine a product's characteristics. Toshiba makes cars, but they also are into power generation including using turbines and nuclear reactors. GE is into aviation engines,  healthcare/medical equipment, locomotives; Siemens is into a range of products from high voltage electrical equipment, to medical equipment to micro-electronics.

I would think trademarks have little to define  in a products characteristics, if you consider the examples I have cited. I hope my response even at this belated moment helps in a small way to answering your question.

Dear Lorenzo,

NIH syndrome harms the process of acquiring external technologies and knowledge.

Please check our last publication about this.

Regards,

To offer a more general perspective, trademark can be helpful where IP protection for the innovation is uncertain or unavailable. Trademark will not only enable the innovator to gain a head start in the new market but will can establish and preserve her reputation as an innovating force, even if IP protection is ultimately unavailable for the innovation itself. For example, if the innovation is a widget, and it is subsequently determined that widgets are not amenable to patent protection (and consequently others produce widget knock offs) the trademark not only establishes the innovator as a source but can also be supplemented with descriptions such as "the original widget". Thus, an innovator who is reluctant to commercialize an innovation because of uncertain IP protection can proceed with the alternative (albeit limited) protection of trademark.

please, see attached article for more analysis of your question.

Dear Syukri,

I used the system log files to trace the actual users of my system and match them with their stated intentions

Article: Understanding the impacts of product knowledge and product type on the accuracy of intentions-based new product predictions

Muammer Ozer

Article · Jun 2011 · European Journal of Operational Research

It is unclear to me what the thrust of your question is. Without referring to other published work, and I am sure there are many out there, I will say this. The arrival of Microsoft’s Powerpoint has changed the way many lectures are delivered – instead of lecturers writing on blackboards /greenboards, the white screen is used, and that has often been replaced by video-screens today. I was at a church in Singapore in November, and was pleased to see that the worshippers could follow the texts used during the mass on strategically placed video-screens. Worshippers could see what the priest was going to say or was saying.

Testing can be done using the same technology. In an effort to get my students to do regular studying instead of trying to do cramming at the 11th hour before the examination, I would conduct 15-minute long tests (only multiple-choice questions for obvious reasons) just before the new lecture started… the innovation, if you can call it that was to pass the individual answers to randomly selected students who would then assess the answers based on what they know or how they themselves had answered – so this means testing the students twice. The questions would appear on the screen but as students had different rates of reading, I switched to printed questions. Of course the answers can be given electronically and assessed automatically/electronically, but my method really worked.

E-Learning is one R&D project that I funded as technology manager to develop an easy to use learning platform – engineers later produced learning material for what we called “on-demand, learning”… this helped engineers to learn at their own pace, and saved on travel costs. Today, there are MOOC ( massive, open online courses).

Lectures can be recorded on video and replayed later, the only difference being that if there were no lecturers present, students could not ask questions, which is a huge negative aspect. But, you can discern it might be possible to replace some lecturers if lectures are recorded, especially if managements want to reduce costs, often to the detriment of student’s learning process. I would think lecturer-student interaction fosters learning better than if it was all video-based. If managements go the route, there will be dissatisfaction amongst teaching staff, and students might not want to come to lecture sessions…

Rene,

Building on Xavier's comments above, MB Sarkar and I (forthcoming, SMJ) explore the role of "technological resources" of a firm-- more specifically, component-level resources possessed by industrial robot manufacturers-- in diversification from hydraulic robots to electrical ones. Here's the reference--

Roy, R. and Sarkar, M. (2015), Knowledge, firm boundaries, and innovation: Mitigating the incumbent's curse during radical technological change. Strat. Mgmt. J.. doi: 10.1002/smj.2357

Although the paper is an empirical one, we reviewed the literature till 2014. Hope that helps you somewhat.

Good luck!

Raja

Dynamic Fuzzy Cognitive Maps

I think this code is useful for you

In recent years there have been several projects in Colombia with the component technological surveillance and competitive intelligence with successful participation of SME'S.

I suggest you check the work of Dr Palop world expert on the subject, I recently joined us in Armenia - Quindio Colombia and a project on technological surveillance in not intensive technology SME´S 

Sehr geehrter Herr Vodel, falls noch von Interesse, könnte ich meine Erfahrungen mit der Einführung - genauer der versuchten Einführung - von Lean Techniken in der SW Produktion anbieten. Wichtig zu klären, wäre welche Ziele Sie mit der Einführung von  "Lean Management in the IT sector" verfolgen. Die Aufgabe würde mich reizen.

Beste Grüße Gernot Westphalen

To be honest, I am a little confused with your question. Are you saying that a company could,  after obtaining a patent,  go and create a  new trademark? Perhaps it might but I do not see how that would be beneficial to the company, which is there  to rake in revenues and increase share-holder value/wealth.  A new trademark may not be known to  consumers and a whole lot of costly marketing activities may well  be required to get that trademark in the mind of a consumer. I tend to think that in the consumer’s mind a brand name ( often a trademark, e.g. CocaCola) conjures up an image of the quality of a product from that company, in this case CocaCola, or of a desirable attribute in the new product. CocaCola, Sony, are company names, brand names and trademarks. I am wondering why would CocaCoal or Sony create new trademarks? That  said, it is possible that following an acquisition,  a company may own other brands/trademarks and the decision to persist with the trademark or brand name is strategic  as the newly acquired company (in an M&A exercise) and its products with the old brand names have associations in the buyers’ minds  with certain qualities. Or it could be that another product with a slight difference may get a new trademark, but I do not see that difference would ever get a new patent, at least at the US Patent Office.

I tend to think that creating new trade marks for newly patented products may not always be profitable. Just consider any well-known company with a new patented product – I think retaining the familiar trademark is likely to be more profitable than in  creating a new trademark and flogging it in the marketplace. To be clear, a  trademark is a word or words, phrase(s), symbol(s), images to distinguish a particular good or services from a manufacturer or vendor from another. Nonetheless, I should like to know of  companies that have created new trademarks which depart from their old ones – I can still learn new things…

PS: It is possible that a company might want to create an entirely new trademark, but that could be,  if a previous trademark has  a negative image of some kind.

Hi

Please study the article:

Review MIAF experience and you will get the  answer to your questions.  It is a pitty that the Colegio de Postgraduados removed (or hidden) the page that documented this case of success...

As the products are becoming complex it is quite obvious that testing them will be too complex and might possible that testing for future products turn into impossible phase. 

Thanks

Dear Rosane,

Your question has two dynamics. Dynamics of ecosystem and dynamics of innovation.  May I put your question in this way.

'What are the determinants of ecosystem dynamics in urban environments? What are the determinant that influence (enhance/ reduction) those ecosystem  dynamics.

Have I clarified your question or complicated it?

Upananda (Sri Lanka)

Dear Mr. Ardito,

US Patent Classification - CPC / USPC

The USPTO uses its own US Patent Classification System (USPC) in which all inventions are first put in a class having a three-digit number, then in a numbered subclass under the class. The subclasses are arranged in a hierarchical form, but not necessarily in numerical order. The US classification system is more based on structure than function. In this case, the patent was classified primarily in subclass 123/90.17, defined as follows:

123 INTERNAL-COMBUSTION ENGINES

90.1 Poppet Valve Operating Mechanism

90.15 . With means for varying timing

90.17 .. Camshaft or cam characteristics

Knowing the US classification(s) for a patent is important in searching, because the USPTO database only indexes patents issued before 1976 by number and classification. Therefore, if you need to retrieve pre-1976 patents in your search you have to search by class/subclass number, rather than by keywords.

Since 2013, the US Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office have been WORKING ON coordinating their classification systems into a new system, called the "Cooperative Patent Classification" or "CPC". This classification system is based loosely on the IPC, but is more detailed and easier to use in our opinion. The two patent offices have a website on the CPC which explains how it WORKS. For the same example given above, the CPC for this type of invention would be defined as follows:

F: MECHANICAL ENGINEERING; LIGHTING; HEATING; WEAPONS; BLASTING

F01: MACHINES OR ENGINES IN GENERAL; ENGINE PLANTS IN

GENERAL; STEAM ENGINES

F01L: CYCLICALLY OPERATING VALVES FOR MACHINES OR

ENGINES

F01L 1/x: Valve-gear or valve arrangements, e.g. lift-valve gear

F01L1/34 •characterised by the provision of means for changing the timing of the valves without changing

the duration of OPENING {and without affecting the magnitude of the valve lift

F01L1/344 • •changing the angular relationship between crankshaft and camshaft

F01L1/3442 • • • using hydraulic chambers with variable volume to transmit the rotating force

F01L2001/34423 • • • • Details relating to the hydraulic feeding circuit

F01L2001/34426 • • • • •Oil control valves

F01L2001/34433 • • • • • •Location oil control valves

Please, follow the two links to see the dates ( years that USC had been established).

Best regards,

Hazim

Marie,

Ventures should be treated like scientific experiments, which involve identifying gaps in knowledge, developing a hypothesis, designing a test, conducting the experiment, and evaluating the results. If the hypothesis is supported, further research along the same lines can be undertaken with greater confidence. If it is not, the scientist will reflect on the possible reasons and then either stop or redesign the experiment. Even a hypothesis that is not borne out can be valuable, because it offers new insights. Budget approval processes that require proponents of a new business idea to commit to a return on investment (or net present value) goal inhibit managers from approaching ventures in this fashion. Everyone is forced to focus on success or failure in achieving a specific business outcome rather than on insights arising from the hypothesis that led to the venture. It makes much more sense to focus on the option value of a venture—the value of the opportunities it may open up, not all of which are known at the outset.”

Technology makes production factors more efficient. Invention of new technology can be applied in many fields.For example, technology in painting can make painters paint more in a given time period so that shifts production function. Then, all factors in production will be more productive. Production factors are labor, capital and land and raw materials. Innovation is making new invention commercially buyable and make profit. There are many inventions that are not commercially utilized. Some people recognize the value and others do. Digital technology was invented by Kodak, but not commercialized by Kodak.

Not all innovation contributes to profit. Invention of new technology and patent can be utilized for production of goods and services. For example, IT (information technology)

makes us more productive which means that we can get done more work per unit of time. According to Schumpeter, innovation is the source of profit.

Some analysis from reviewing large company approaches can be found in the report published at http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/resources/technology/oiimplement/ and in Mortara, L. and T. Minshall (2011). "How do large multinational companies implement open innovation?" Technovation 31(10-11): 586-597.

Benchmarking in general can be defined as a continuous search for, and application of, significantly better practices that lead to superior competitive performance Benchmarking of Different R&D Approaches in Different Workplace

Contexts, belongs to strategic activities within the project and constitutes the second completed activity within the project’s benchmarking line of action. The first benchmarking report1, which was published in July 2005 by the Finnish Workplace Development Programme TYKES, centred on benchmarking the activities of the programme and institution level by utilizing a conceptual framework originally developed by professor Frieder Naschold of the Berlin Science Centre2.http://www.workinnet.org/dateien/Del_6-4-Benchmark-report-No_2.pdf

At the end of the day it's incentives. It's all about setting the right incentives.

If e.g you want your university students/researchers/professors to go out with their business ideas and found companies that will bring in money and create jobs, you have to give them the right incentives, such as e.g.

1.) encourage them (by e.g. funding them with some seed money) to expose themselves to the market so that their business idea will be tested in the most brutal and realistic way (and make them stop writing endless reports/business plans/white papers on their oh-so-great-idea-the-world-has-waited-for)

2.) a "plan B" for the case the venture won't work out - so that they know they can e.g. return to the university if the business fails

3.) Make it easy to transfer the IP (that was created by the scientists but usually belongs to the univesrity) into the start-up's balance sheet in exchange for a stake in the company. If and only if the IP belongs to the company, the company can eventually be sold. If the IP is merely leased/licensed/borrowed from the university no one is going to buy the start-up (when it grows big enough).

THIS AGAIN means that legislation might have to be adjusted. It is not a given that a university is allowed to hold stakes in companies.

Which leads us to the other stakeholders you mentioned - they have their agendas too and it's up to you to set the right incentives so they gonna change them the way you'd like.

Businesses e.g. love to use universities as their extended workbench or brush up their cash flow statements, in case the government is giving away some subsidies related to that (the keyword here would be "tech-transfer") - here both the university and the government would (maybe) be better off if they adjusted the incentive system.

Many universities e.g. love to file patents - the more the better. Makes a good impression for the image brochures ("Ohhhh, look at us, we are such an innnovative university..."). Such universities have absolutely no incentives to build up coherent patent startegies. Because that would mean that only highly selected and sophisticated inventions are going to get filed. And that's bad for the stats.

The result is that easily fileable crap gets filed (esp. if the state administration or someone else is paying for it) and true, focused innovation does not take place.

And the list goes on andon and on - it's an interesting & complex field.

It would be nice to learn from you what you actually are trying to achieve at your place.

The most impotent thing to find out is, in my opinion, if you really have a product. In the definition: a product is something that can be sold AND someone is willing to pay for it. If you can pin down what it is exactly what you plan to sell, you can figure out the potential production cost. And then try to find out if there is really someone who needs your product so much that he will pay for it. And roughly how much. If these two figures fit, you have a product. If not, you don't.