Project selection. A process analysis

Industrial Marketing Management

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 39-54

  Daniel, Harold Z ^a   Hempel, Donald J ^b   Srinivasan, Narasimhan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

Collaboration process; Project selection; Strategic alliances

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037236778     PISSN: 00198501     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0019-8501(01)00193-6     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Abell DF. Strategic windows. J Mark 1978;42:21-6 (July).
2. Menke MM. Improving R&D decisions and execution. Res Technol Manage 1994;25-32 (September-October).
3. Kanter RM. Collaborative advantage: the art of alliances. Harv Bus Rev 1994;96-108 (July-August).
4. Schmidt RL, Freeland JR. Recent progress in modeling R&D project selection processes. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 1992;39(2): 189-201 (May).
5. Souder WE, Mandakovic T. R&D project selection models. Res Manage 1986;2(4):36-42.
6. Rubenstein AH. Trends in technology management revisited. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 1994;41(4):335-41 (November).
7. Tornatsky L, Fleischer D. The process of technological innovation. Lexington (MA): Lexington Heath & Co., 1990.
8. Steele LW. What we've learned selecting R&D programs and objectives. Res Technol Manage 1988;17-36 (March-April).
9. Millson MR, Raj SP, Wilemon D. Strategic partnering for developing new products. Res Technol Manage 1996;41-9 (May-June).
10. Myers MB, Rosenbloom RS. Rethinking the role of research. Res Technol Manage 1996;14-8 (May-June).
11. Deshpande R, Webster FE. Organizational culture and marketing: defining the research agenda. J Mark 1989;53:3-15 (January).
12. Faulkner TW. Applying 'options thinking' to R&D valuation. Res Technol Manage 1996;50-6 (May-June).
13. Werner BM, Souder WE. Measuring R&D performance-US and German practices. Res Technol Manage 1997;28-32 (May-June).
14. Hempel DJ, Daniel HZ. Value assessments in R&D investments: linking program context to project valuation. Final report submitted to the National Science Foundation Industry University Cooperative Research Program, Award No. 9403891, November 1996.
15. Henderson RM, Clark KB. Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Adm Sci Q 1990;35:9-30 (March).
16. Hamel G, Prahalad CK. Strategic intent. Harv Bus Rev 1989;67: 63-76 (May-June).
17. National Research Council. Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications Research restructuring and assessment: can we apply the corporate experience to government agencies? Report of a workshop. Washington (DC): National Academy Press, 1995.
18. Smith AK, Bolton RN, Wagner J. A model of customer satisfaction with service encounters involving failure and recovery. J Mark Res 1999;36:356-72 (August).
19. Leisen B, Hyman MR. A social penetration theory perspective in dyadic service interactions: the client-service provider relationship. In: Pride WM, Hult GT, editors. 1997 AMA Educators' Proceedings, Enhancing Knowledge Development in Marketing, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 1997;8. pp. 322-3.
20. Dwyer FR, Schurr PH, Oh S. Developing buyer-seller relationships. J Mark 1987;51:11-27 (April).
21. Garbarino E, Johnson MS. The different roles of satisfaction, trust and commitment in customer relationships. J Mark 1999;63:70-87 (April).
22. Morgan RM, Hunt SD. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. J Mark 1994;58:20-38 (July).
23. Ekici A, Sohi R. The role of pre-relational trust in first time supplier selection. In: Workman JP, Perreault W, editors. 2000 AMA Winter Educators' Conference, Marketing Theory and Applications, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 2000;11. pp. 265-74.
24. Grayson K, Ambler T. The dark side of long-term relationships in marketing services. J Mark Res 1999;36(1):132-41 (February).