R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach

Omega

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 895-912

  Eilat, Harel ^a   Golany, Boaz ^a   Shtub, Avraham ^a  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Balanced scorecard; Data envelopment analysis; Project evaluation

Indexed keywords

DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS; INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH; LIFE CYCLE; PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

BALANCED SCORECARD APPROACH; BALANCED SCORECARDS; CASE-STUDIES; DATA ENVELOPMENT ANALYSIS MODELS; DIFFERENT STAGES; HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURES; INPUT AND OUTPUTS; INTEGRATED DATA; MULTI-CRITERIA APPROACH; PROJECT EVALUATION;

RESEARCH LABORATORIES;

EID: 38649129450     PISSN: 03050483     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2006.05.002     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Kaplan R.S., and Norton D.P. Translating strategy into action: the balanced scorecard (1996), Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA
2. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Lewin A., and Seiford L.M. Data envelopment analysis: theory, methodology and applications (1994), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Massachusetts
3. Stewart W.E. Balanced scorecard for projects. Project Management Journal 32 1 (2001) 38-53
4. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., and Rhodes E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of the Operational Research 2 (1978) 429-444
5. Seiford L.M. Data envelopment analysis: the evolution of the state of the art (1978-1995). Journal of Productivity Analysis 7 (1996) 99-137
6. Oral M., Kettani O., and Lang P. A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects. Management Science 37 7 (1991) 871-885
7. Khouja M. The use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Computers and Industrial Engineering 28 (1995) 123-132
8. Baker R.C., and Talluri S. A closer look at the use of data envelopment analysis for technology selection. Computers and Industrial Engineering 32 1 (1997) 101-108
9. Cooper R.G., Edgett S.J., and Kleinschmidt E.J. Portfolio management for new products (1997), McMaster University, Ontario
10. Cooper R.G. Winning at new products: accelerating the process from idea to launch. 3rd ed. (2001), Perseus Publishing, Cambridge, MA
11. Baker N., and Freeland J. Recent advances in R&D benefit measurement and project selection methods. Management Science 21 10 (1975) 1164-1175
12. Hall D.L., and Nauda A. An interactive approach for selecting R&D projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 37 2 (1990) 126-133
13. Martino J.P. Research and development project selection (1995), Wiley, New York
14. Golabi K. Selecting a group of dissimilar projects for funding. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-34 3 (1987) 138-145
15. Bard J.F. Using multicriteria methods in the early stages of new product development. Journal of the Operational Research Society 41 8 (1990) 755-766
16. Lockett G., Hetherington B., Yallup P., Stratford M., and Cox B. Modelling a research portfolio using AHP: a group decision process. R&D Management 16 (1986) 151-160
17. Melachrinoudis E., and Rice K. The prioritization of technologies in a research laboratory. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 38 3 (1991) 269-278
18. Lauro G.L., and Vepsalainen P.J. Assessing technology portfolios for contract competition: an analytic hierarchy process approach. Socio-Economic Planning Science 30 6 (1986) 407-415
19. Khorramshahgol R., and Gousty Y. Delphic goal programming (DGP): a multi-objective cost/benefit approach to R&D portfolio analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-33 3 (1986) 172-175
20. Souder W.E. System for using R&D project evaluation methods. Research Management 21 (1978) 29-37
21. Cook W.D., and Seiford L.M. R&D project selection in a multi-dimensional environment: a practical approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society 33 5 (1982) 397-405
22. Newton D.P., and Pearson A.W. Application of option pricing theory to research and development. R&D Management 24 1 (1994) 83-89
23. Silverman B.G. Project appraisal methodology: a multidimensional R&D benefit/cost assessment tool. Management Science 27 7 (1981) 802-821
24. Baker N., and Pound W.H. R&D project selection: where we stand. IEEE Transactions On Engineering Management 11 (1964) 124-134
25. Danila N. Strategic evaluation and selection for R&D projects. R&D Management 19 1 (1989) 47-62
26. Schmidt R.L., and Freeland J.R. Recent progress in modeling R&D project-selection processes. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 39 2 (1992) 189-201
27. Henriksen A.D., and Traynor A.J. A practical R&D project-selection scoring tool. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 46 2 (1999) 158-170
28. Banker R.D., Charnes A., and Cooper W.W. Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30 9 (1984) 1078-1092
29. Roll Y., and Golany B. Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA. Omega 21 1 (1993) 99-109
30. Charnes A., Cooper W.W., Wei Q.L., and Huang Z.M. Cone-ratio data envelopment analysis and multi-objective programming. International Journal of Systems Science 20 (1989) 1099-1118
31. Thompson R.G., Langemeier L.N., Lee C.T., Lee E., and Thrall R.M. The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming. Journal of Econometrics 46 (1990) 93-108
32. Thomas R.R., Barr R.S., Cron W.L., and Slocum J.W. A process for evaluating retail store efficiency: a restricted DEA approach. International Journal of Research in Marketing 15 (1998) 487-503
33. Roll Y., Cook W., and Golany B. Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IIE Transactions 23 1 (1991) 2-9
34. Cook W., Roll Y., and Kazakov A. A DEA model for measurement the relative efficiency of highway maintenance patrols. INFORS 28 2 (1990) 113-124
35. Dyson R.G., and Thanassoulis E. Reducing weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society 39 (1988) 563-576
36. Wong Y.-H.B., and Beasley J.E. Restricting weight flexibility in data envelopment analysis. Journal of the Operational Research Society 41 9 (1990) 829-835
37. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 1992(January-February): p. 71-9.
38. Kaplan RS, Norton DP. Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review 1996(January-February): p. 75-85.
39. PMI, A guide to the project management body of knowledge. Project management institute; 1996.
40. Roll Y., Cook W., and Golany B. Controlling factor weights in data envelopment analysis. IIE Transactions 23 1 (1991) 2-9
41. Golany B., Phillips F.Y., and Rousseau J.J. Models for improved effectiveness based on DEA efficiency results. IIE Transactions 25 6 (1993) 2-10