IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v9y2017i10p1918-d116074.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

R&D Project Selection Incorporating Customer-Perceived Value and Technology Potential: The Case of the Automobile Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Sungjoo Lee

    (Department of Industrial Engineering, Ajou University, Suwon 16499, Korea)

  • Chanwoo Cho

    (Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, Daejeon 34129, Korea)

  • Jaehong Choi

    (Hyundai Motor Company, Hwaseong 18280, Korea)

  • Byungun Yoon

    (Department of Industrial & Systems Engineering, Dongguk University, Seoul 04620, Korea)

Abstract

As user-centric innovation has recently emerged as a successful way of developing new products, services, and concepts, it is worth considering the perspectives of potential technology users during R&D project selection processes. Nevertheless, little effort has been made to reflect customer-perceived value in establishing selection criteria, with the focus mainly on technological potential instead. Therefore, this study aims to develop an R&D project selection model incorporating not only technological potential but also customer-perceived value. For this purpose, a new R&D project evaluation model and process is proposed, and its feasibility is tested by potential users in a real scenario. The automobile industry is suitable for our evaluation model because it is a B2C and system-based industry where customer needs are critical to market success and a number of R&D projects are proposed every year. Finally, a supporting tool is developed to help interact with various evaluators and visualize the evaluation results, as customer involvement is recommended for accurate project evaluation from the perspective of technology users. This study is one of the earliest attempts to reflect customer-perceived value in R&D project selection, and practically, the research outputs are expected to be useful to automobile manufacturers in creating value from R&D projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Sungjoo Lee & Chanwoo Cho & Jaehong Choi & Byungun Yoon, 2017. "R&D Project Selection Incorporating Customer-Perceived Value and Technology Potential: The Case of the Automobile Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1918-:d:116074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1918/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/10/1918/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Melissa A. Schilling, 2009. "Protecting or Diffusing a Technology Platform: Tradeoffs in Appropriability, Network Externalities, and Architectural Control," Chapters, in: Annabelle Gawer (ed.), Platforms, Markets and Innovation, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Merrifield, D. Bruce, 1987. "New business incubators," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 277-284.
    3. Babin, Barry J. & Babin, Laurie, 2001. "Seeking something different? A model of schema typicality, consumer affect, purchase intentions and perceived shopping value," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 89-96, November.
    4. Matthew J. Liberatore & Anthony C. Stylianou, 1995. "Expert Support Systems for New Product Development Decision Making: A Modeling Framework and Applications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(8), pages 1296-1316, August.
    5. Dechezleprêtre, Antoine & Neumayer, Eric & Perkins, Richard, 2015. "Environmental regulation and the cross-border diffusion of new technology: Evidence from automobile patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 244-257.
    6. Eilat, Harel & Golany, Boaz & Shtub, Avraham, 2008. "R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 895-912, October.
    7. Floh, Arne & Zauner, Alexander & Koller, Monika & Rusch, Thomas, 2014. "Customer segmentation using unobserved heterogeneity in the perceived-value–loyalty–intentions link," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 974-982.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seunghoon Lee & Young Hoon Lee & Yongho Choi, 2019. "Project Portfolio Selection Considering Total Cost of Ownership in the Automobile Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-17, August.
    2. Kiwon Lee & Suchul Lee, 2021. "Knowledge Structure of the Application of High-Performance Computing: A Co-Word Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Simone Wurster & Philipp Heß & Michael Nauruschat & Malte Jütting, 2020. "Sustainable Circular Mobility: User-Integrated Innovation and Specifics of Electric Vehicle Owners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Elena Higueras-Castillo & Sebastian Molinillo & J. Andres Coca-Stefaniak & Francisco Liébana-Cabanillas, 2019. "Perceived Value and Customer Adoption of Electric and Hybrid Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Ewa Frąckiewicz, 2021. "Information and Communication Technologies as a Source of Customer Value in the Context of Balancing the Positions of Younger and Older Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Jue & Xu, Wei & Ma, Jian & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "A vague set based decision support approach for evaluating research funding programs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(3), pages 656-665.
    2. Li, Yan-Lai & Tang, Jia-Fu & Chin, Kwai-Sang & Jiang, Yu-Shi & Han, Yi & Pu, Yun, 2011. "Estimating the final priority ratings of engineering characteristics in mature-period product improvement by MDBA and AHP," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 575-586, June.
    3. Luke Butcher & Ian Phau & Min Teah, 2016. "Brand prominence in luxury consumption: Will emotional value adjudicate our longing for status?," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(6), pages 701-715, November.
    4. Alaassar, Ahmad & Mention, Anne-Laure & Aas, Tor Helge, 2021. "Exploring a new incubation model for FinTechs: Regulatory sandboxes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Salimi, Negin & Rezaei, Jafar, 2018. "Evaluating firms’ R&D performance using best worst method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 147-155.
    6. Scott E. Sampson, 2008. "OR PRACTICE---Optimization of Vacation Timeshare Scheduling," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1079-1088, October.
    7. Lo, Ada & Qu, Hailin, 2015. "A theoretical model of the impact of a bundle of determinants on tourists’ visiting and shopping intentions: A case of mainland Chinese tourists," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 231-243.
    8. Rik Rozendaal & Herman Vollebergh, 2025. "Policy-Induced Innovation in Clean Technologies: Evidence from the Car Market," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(3), pages 565-598.
    9. Trang P. Tran & Christopher P. Furner & Ilia Gugenishvili, 2022. "The Effects of Task Service Fit on Brand Loyalty: A Study of Branded Apps," International Journal of E-Services and Mobile Applications (IJESMA), IGI Global Scientific Publishing, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Jingbo Cui & Zhenxuan Wang & Haishan Yu, 2022. "Can International Climate Cooperation Induce Knowledge Spillover to Developing Countries? Evidence from CDM," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(4), pages 923-951, August.
    11. Hiep-Hung Pham & Sue Ling Lai & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2017. "The impacts of value, disconfirmation and satisfaction on loyalty: Evidence from international higher education setting," Working Papers CEB 17-035, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    12. Rafael Lizarralde & Jaione Ganzarain & Mikel Zubizarreta, 2020. "Assessment and Selection of Technologies for the Sustainable Development of an R&D Center," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-23, December.
    13. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2019. "Academic Inventors and the Antecedents of Green Technologies. A Regional Analysis of Italian Patent Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 247-263.
    14. Partovi, Fariborz Y., 2011. "Corporate philanthropic selection using data envelopment analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 522-527, October.
    15. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco & Palma, Alessandro, 2017. "Characterizing the policy mix and its impact on eco-innovation: A patent analysis of energy-efficient technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 799-819.
    16. Morrisson Kaunda Mutuku & Stephen Muathe & Rosemary James, 2019. "Effect of E-customization Capability on Financial Performance of Commercial Banks in Kenya," International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies, Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 8(1), pages 10-20, January.
    17. Greene, Patricia Gene & Butler, John Sibley, 1996. "The minority community as a natural business incubator," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 51-58, May.
    18. Chia-Hua Cheng & James J. H. Liou & Chui-Yu Chiu, 2017. "A Consistent Fuzzy Preference Relations Based ANP Model for R&D Project Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, August.
    19. Khan, Kamran & Hameed, Irfan, 2017. "The mediation of customer satisfaction and moderation of Price: Evidence from the generation Y users of cell phones," MPRA Paper 91773, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Picón-Berjoyo, Araceli & Ruiz-Moreno, Carolina & Castro, Ignacio, 2016. "A mediating and multigroup analysis of customer loyalty," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 701-713.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:10:p:1918-:d:116074. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.