mustafa degerli - 2010 - structured article critiques - is 740

0

Middle East Technical University

Informatics Institute – Dept. of Information Systems

Submitted by:

Mustafa DEĞERLİ

1382142

Submitted to:

Assist. Prof. Dr. Sevgi ÖZKAN

Res. Assist. Emre SEZGİN

Date of Submission:

April 30, 2010

IS 740

MIDTERM

ASSIGNMENT

STRUCTURED ARTICLE CRITIQUES

FOR ASSIGNED THREE PAPERS

1

Table of Contents

1. Structured Article Critique #1 ................................................................................................................... 3

Bibliographical Entry ................................................................................................................................. 3

Problem ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

Objectives ................................................................................................................................................. 4

Review of Literature .................................................................................................................................. 4

Procedures ................................................................................................................................................ 5

Findings ..................................................................................................................................................... 5

Summary ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................... 6

Recommendations .................................................................................................................................... 7

List of References ...................................................................................................................................... 7

Overall Critique of the Study ..................................................................................................................... 7

Strengths ............................................................................................................................................... 7

Weaknesses .......................................................................................................................................... 8

2. Structured Article Critique #2 ................................................................................................................... 9

Bibliographical Entry ................................................................................................................................. 9

Problem ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................... 9

Objectives ............................................................................................................................................... 10

Review of Literature ................................................................................................................................ 10

Procedures .............................................................................................................................................. 11

Findings ................................................................................................................................................... 12

Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 13

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................. 13

Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 14

List of References .................................................................................................................................... 14

Overall Critique of the Study ................................................................................................................... 14

Strengths ............................................................................................................................................. 14

Weaknesses ........................................................................................................................................ 15

2

3. Structured Article Critique #3 ................................................................................................................. 16

Bibliographical Entry ............................................................................................................................... 16

Problem ................................................................................................................................................... 16

Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 16

Objectives ............................................................................................................................................... 17

Review of Literature ................................................................................................................................ 17

Procedures .............................................................................................................................................. 18

Findings ................................................................................................................................................... 18

Summary ................................................................................................................................................. 19

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................. 19

Recommendations .................................................................................................................................. 20

List of References .................................................................................................................................... 20

Overall Critique of the Study ................................................................................................................... 20

Strengths ............................................................................................................................................. 20

Weaknesses ........................................................................................................................................ 21

3

1. Structured Article Critique #1

Bibliographical Entry

Skilbeck, J. N., & Cruickshank, C. M. (1997). A framework for evaluating technology

management process. Proceedings of the Portland International Conference on

Management and Technology: Innovation in Technology Management – The Key to

Global Leadership (PICMET '97), 27-31 July 1997, Portland, Oregon, USA, 138-142.

Problem

To evaluate the technology management (TM) activities of an organization or a company, an

investigative tool is desired. This tool must be a part of an extended TM process framework.

There is a TM process framework, proposed by Gregory (1995), used, yet an extended one

including the key points identified by the academic literature and industrial practice is required.

The problem statements for the article mostly agree with the title of the article. On the other

hand, since the study emphasizes that it is to propose an extended framework, it should have

been better to include the word of “extended” in the title of the article.

Furthermore, the problem is not that clearly noticeable to the reader, and it required some

readings to know why the authors, Skilbeck, J. N., & Cruickshank, C. M., felt this study desired

to be done. Therefore, it should have been better to include a problem definition section at the

very beginning of the article to let the readers know what the exact problem is.

Purpose

The purpose of the study is to identify and bring together the major processes meant for TM

within a straightforward unifying framework. Additionally, this study is done to be used as the

4

foundation for the development of a TM audit. That is, development of a methodology for a

company’s auditing TM process is the main purpose.

The purpose of the study is clearly and concisely stated at the beginning of the article and agreed

with the title of the article. Besides, the purpose is limited to the authors’ capabilities and

resources available.

Objectives

Specifically, the study seeks to determine the processes and their key points to include in the

extended TM auditing framework from both academic literature and industrial practices. In this

context, the study;

a) identifies and incorporates the three levels of TM in extended TM,

b) links the framework to business activities in extended TM, and

c) links generic processes in extended TM.

The objectives are achievable. The authors include sufficient amount of information and

justifications to accomplish the purpose and help solve the related problem. The authors also

include the academic literature and industrial practice justifications for the objectives.

Review of Literature

The authors provide an overview of the available academic literature and industrial practices

with respect to TM definitions and processes. The review of literature with regard to TM

definitions and processes is adequately detailed; however, there is no review of the literature

about the any possible study doing the parallel work. That is, it is possible that some other people

may did try to extend the TM framework before these authors by any means. It may be just

5

because of that the authors did not find the any related study in the literature, yet then it is

expected to see the authors’ direct statement about this case. This could have made the literature

review well detailed and refined.

Section titles in the article are: (1) A Process Framework for Technology Management; (2)

Reviewing the Process Framework; (3) Extending the Process Framework; and (4) Conclusion.

Reference citations appearing in the paper are correct and accurate American Psychological

Association Referencing Style is used.

Procedures

The methods used to gather the data and any other sorts of information for this article are not

clearly explained. The authors use the data and information that are explained and detailed in the

papers of the other authors. In the article, there is no discussion of the any statistical or logical

techniques to validate what the authors try to rationalize in their paper. The reason for this may

be that they are to write a paper based on other papers. Nonetheless, it should have been better to

include why and how they defend, justify and use the other studies’ outputs as inputs for the

current study.

Findings

For extending the framework, the following findings from the other studies and the industrial

practices are addresses in the article. The related findings can be listed as:

Recognizing different levels of TM within an organization is required.

Linking the business activities of the organization to framework is required.

Defining boundaries and links among different levels of TM activities is required.

6

Recognizing the lifecycle of the technology is required.

Using these finding the authors extended the TM framework to meet the following criteria:

The extended TM identifies and incorporates the three levels of TM,

The extended TM links the framework to business activities, and

The extended TM links generic processes.

The findings in the article are well organized, sectioned, sub-sectioned, and reported

correspondingly. Additionally, the relations of the findings are represented and showed in the

figure given in the article.

Summary

There is no summary overtly given as a section in the article. Yet, since it is not a too long or too

detailed article, it can be acceptable as the reader could easily get the main points and go over

them as she or he reads through. Additionally, it would have been even worse if the authors

included a summary section as it will be the just repetition of the some core points which are

easily recapped in a that short article. On the other hand, for the ones who want to read the just

summary part of the article may experience difficulty with this article and this is certainly a

notable thing.

Conclusions

The conclusion of the study is that an extended framework forming a foundation for a TM

process audit is proposed. This framework is extended concerning both academic literature and

industrial practices from the Gregory’s (1995) TM framework.

7

There is a short conclusion section included in the article for the result of the study. When

compared with the length of the whole paper, this length of conclusion is satisfactory. Still, it

could have been included the basics of the extension done in the new framework as listing the

new properties in a one sentence in the conclusion part of the article.

Recommendations

There is no explicit or implicit recommendation in the article. Probably, this stems from that this

article does not provide a well-done and detailed research. However, it could have been better to

include a recommendation to call for additional research in the area. This sort of

recommendation is mostly seen in every article to promote additional research. One sentence

meaning the call for additional research in the area could have been included even in the

conclusion section of the article.

List of References

The references both in-text and end of article are consistently included in the article. All

references given are cited in the article. There are 26 referenced items used to write this paper.

The references are from a range of sources including journals, books, and theses.

Overall Critique of the Study

The related study is structurally critiqued above. In addition to the above judgments, following

comments can be made regarding the related study.

Strengths

This study is the first try to identify and organize major process for TM within a unifying

framework.

8

The review for the work in the article is done in not only academic literature but also in

industrial practices.

The organization of the article is good enough. The complexity of the vocabulary items

used in the article is not too complex. It is easy to understand the whole article.


correspondingly.

References are well off. For further studies, they can be referred.

Weaknesses

The problem was not that clearly obvious to the readers, and it required some readings to

know why the authors felt this study desired to be done.

There is no review of the literature about the any possible study doing the parallel work.

Procedures, Recommendations and Summary parts are openly missing in the article.

There is no discussion of the any statistical or logical techniques to validate what the

authors try to rationalize in their paper.

Overall, this study is a good contribution to the field of research and further studies in the field

are surely desired. Nonetheless, since the referred article was a conference proceeding but not a

full paper, some of the weaknesses stated above could be tolerable concerning the context of the

study.

9



Probert, D. R., Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P. (2000). Development of a structured approach to

assessing technology management practice. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

Engineers Part B, Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 214, (4), 313-321.

Problem

For firms, it is an existent challenging work to integrate the technology management (TM)

systems into conventional business practices. There is a need for a model of TM in order to have

a tool to assess the effectiveness of TM activities and identify areas for improvement in this

context.

The problem statements for the article agreed with the title of the article. Additionally, the

problem is almost noticeable to the reader, and it gives details about to know why the authors,

Probert, D. R., Phaal, R., & Farrukh, C. J. P., felt this study desired to be done. However, it

should have been better to include a problem definition section at the very beginning of the

article to let the readers know what the exact problem is, rather than giving it in the abstract and

introduction sections.

Purpose

The purpose of the study is to produce a practical management guide, or more explicitly,

technology management assessment procedure (TMAP). Additionally, this study is done

describe the development and application of TMAP.

10

The purpose of the study is clearly and concisely stated at the beginning of the article in the

introduction section and agreed with the title of the article.

Objectives

Specifically, the study seeks to produce the TMAP. The TMAP is to be produced to identify and

assess the central effective TM activities. These can be listed as:

a) The development and introduction of new products,

b) Deciding on the manufacturing technologies within the business activities,

c) Deciding on the outsource technology resources,

d) Selection of technology developments to undertake in R&D departments.

Additionally, the study provides the TMAP that

a) can be linked to normal business activities and does not require much interpretation,

b) represents different levels of TM, and

c) provides activity and process mapping.

The other major objective of the study is the testing of the developed TMAP in application.

The objectives stated above are attainable. The authors include adequate amount of information

and justifications to accomplish the objectives and help solve the related problem in the field.

The authors include the literature justifications for the objectives to be achieved.


The authors provide an overview of the available academic literature with respect to TM

definitions and processes, and TM levels. The review of literature with regard to TM definitions

and processes, and TM levels is detailed in the paper; yet, there is no review of the literature

11

about the any possible study doing the same or any sorts of similar work. To be precise, some

other people may also did try to provide or produce a model to assess the TM activities before

these authors by any means. The reason for this for the authors may be that the authors did not

find the any related study in the literature, yet then it is expected to see the authors’ direct

statements about this situation. This could have made the literature review well detailed and

refined.

Section titles in the article are: (1) Introduction; (2) TM in a Manufacturing Business; (3)

Development of the Assessment Methodology; (4) TMAP; (5) Industrial Application of the

TMAP, and (6) Summary and Conclusions.

Reference citations appearing in the paper are correct and accurate Chicago Referencing Style is

used.

Procedures

For the procedure, the authors not only give information about the appraisal and application of

the five-process model but they give information about accessing the company content for data

collection in this context.

The authors include the followings correspondingly for the procedure in the paper:

a) Appraisal and application of the five-process model,

b) Accessing the company context, and

c) Scoping and assessing the assessment.

The methods and procedure used to gather the data and any other sorts of information for this

article are clearly explained. The authors use the data and information that are explained and

12

detailed in the papers of the other authors. Additionally, the authors clearly explain the

development of assessment methodology. Moreover, in the article, there is discussion of the

statistical or logical techniques to validate what the authors try to rationalize in their paper.

Findings

For development and testing of TMAP, a number of findings are made in the paper.

In the paper, it is stated that the TMAP shall do the followings, so the TMAP is designed to

a) include a framework for linking technology with business needs,

b) identify critical TM issues,

c) map and evaluate the TM processes,

d) identify areas of strengths and weaknesses for best practices and improvements, and

e) add to action plans for cross-functional support.

Additionally, concerning the expectations and refinement, the TMAP is designed to not only to

be suitably flexible and modular for the application of broad diversity of contexts but also to

create benefits for the research program and companies.

Moreover, the TMAP is also designed and refined so that it includes the following main stages to

provide enabling the focus of assessment to shift from strategic to operational levels:

1) Strategic overview,

2) Process overview, and

3) Process investigation.

Subsequent to the application of the TMAP, it is found that the TMAP application is successful,

and most of the scores are medium to high levels excluding the usability, usefulness and

13

functionality that are reported as low scores. Yet, the authors provide justifications and

explanations for these low scores in the paper.

In general, the findings in the article are well organized, sectioned, sub-sectioned, and reported


figures given in the article.

Summary

There is a summary overtly given as a section in the article. This is something good for fast

reader. As it is long or detailed article, this can let the reader easily get the main points and go

over them quickly. Owing to this, for the ones who want to read the just summary part of the

article will not have trouble with this article and this is certainly a notable thing for some readers.

Conclusions

The study provides the following conclusions regarding the TM.

There is a trend in the companies to embed TM considerations transparently and

continuously in the business practices.

Few companies are successful in strategic TM.

Multi-business corporations have particular difficulties in identifying and exploiting TM

activities.

New and additional theoretical approaches are needed for integration of full range of TM

considerations.

The TMAP provides mapping out the processes and linkages, and assessing their effectiveness in

the organizations.

14

There is conclusion section included in the article for the results of the study. When thought with

the context and the length of the whole paper, this length of conclusion is satisfactory. It not only

provides the results of the development of the TMAP, but also results of the application and

testing of the developed TMAP.

Recommendations

There is no explicit recommendation in the article. Probably, this stems from that this article is

from a conference proceeding. However, it could have been better to include a recommendation

to call for additional research in the area. This sort of recommendation is mostly seen in every

article to promote additional research. One sentence meaning the call for additional research in

the area could have been included even in the conclusion section of the article.

List of References


references given are cited in the article properly in Chicago Referencing Style. There are 32

referenced items used to write the related paper. The references are from a range of sources

including journals, books, conference proceedings, and theses.




Strengths

The review for the work in the article is done in a well-refined manner.

15




correspondingly.


There is discussion of the statistical or logical techniques to validate what the authors try

to rationalize in their paper.

Weaknesses

There is no review of the literature about the any possible study doing the parallel work.

Recommendations part is openly missing in the article.

Overall, this study is a good quality contribution to the field of research and further studies in the

field are surely desired. Nonetheless, since the referred article was a conference proceeding but

not a full paper, some of the weaknesses stated above could be tolerable concerning the context

of the study.

16



Farrukh, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D. R., Gregory, M., & Wright, J. (2000). Developing a process

for the relative valuation of R&D programmes. R&D Management Journal, Volume 30,

No.1, pp. 43-53.

Problem

The R&D programme prioritization within a manufacturing company in the aerospace industry is

the major problem studied in the related study. Specifically, it is difficult to carry out R&D

project selection among proposals. Therefore, there is a need for a process definition to valuate

the R&D programmes.

The problem statements for the article agreed with the title of the article. Additionally, the

problem is almost noticeable to the reader, and it gives details about to know why the authors,

Farrukh, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D. R., Gregory, M., & Wright, J., felt this study desired to be

done.

Purpose

The purpose of the study is to develop a process model to prioritize or select R&D projects for a

specific sector. Additionally, this study is done to provide a schema that any organization can use

to develop a process model to prioritize or select R&D projects.

The purpose of the study is clearly and concisely stated at the beginning of the article and agreed

with the title of the article.

17

Objectives

Specifically, the study seeks to develop an optimum process for

the valuation of R&D,

enabling the selection and prioritization of programmes, and

giving maximum benefit to the military aircraft business.

Additionally, the study is there to provide a preliminary guide including the major things to

include in R&D valuation for specific purposes. In this context, the study comes up with a

schema including

the developing the initial framework, and

the implementing the methodology details

for any kind of selection and prioritization.

The objectives are achievable. The authors include sufficient amount of information and

justifications to accomplish the purpose and help solve the related problem. The authors also

include the academic literature and industrial practice justifications for the objectives to be

achieved.


The authors provide an overview of the available literature including the academic overview

about the R&D project selection literature, evidences of approaches used, studies of in-company

practice, and academic view of the industrial need.

The review of literature with regard to R&D project selection is well detailed and explained; and

there is review of the literature about the previous studies doing the parallel work. This sort of

18

literature review is good quality as it has more than the academic reviews just for R&D project

selection.

Section titles in the article are: Introduction; Review of R&D Project Selection Literature;

Developing a Practical R&D Project Selection; Results; Discussion; and Conclusions.

Reference citations appearing in the paper are correct and accurate American Psychological

Association Referencing Style is used.

Procedures

The paper describes the development of the R&D project selection procedure at British

Aerospace Military Aircraft and Aero structures. As the research methodology, action research is

used in the study. Five workshops, and further development and a company plot are utilized in

the study.

The methods and procedures used to gather the data and any other sorts of information for this

article are clearly explained. The authors use the data and information that are explained and

detailed in the papers of the other authors. Additionally, the authors clearly explain the procedure

development steps and processes. Moreover, in the article, there is discussion of the statistical or

logical techniques to validate what the authors try to rationalize in their paper.

Findings

In the simplified R&D project selection process,

the requirements are defined by R&D customers,

the R&D programmes are defined by R&D managers to meet requirements,

the questionnaires are completed by R&D managers for the tasks,

19

two value parameters are determined, and

the selection of R&D tasks is made on the data.

Moreover, following two valuing parameters are found:

Technology benefit cost, which is to capture the value of R&D to the company as a piece

of technology, and

Customer focus, which is to capture the value of R&D in meeting the customer

requirements.



figures and tables given in the article.

Summary

There is no summary overtly given as a section in the article. On the other hand, for the ones

who want to read the just summary part of the article may experience difficulty with this article

and this is certainly a notable thing.

Conclusions

The conclusion of the study is that an R&D project selection procedure is developed and

adopted. Additionally, a preliminary guide is created for a similar possible work for different

application areas.

There is a short conclusion section included in the article for the result of the study. When

compared with the length of the whole paper, this length of conclusion is acceptable but not

satisfactory; a longer one with more details could have been better and more explanatory.

20

Recommendations

There is an implicit recommendation in the article. In the learning points and necessary

improvements section the authors do so this. However, it could have been better to include a

recommendation section to call for additional research in the area. This sort of recommendation

section is mostly seen in every article to promote additional research.

List of References


references given are cited in the article properly in American Psychological Association

Referencing Style. There are 36 referenced items used to write the related paper. The references

are from a range of sources including journals, books, conference proceedings, and theses.




Strengths

The review for the work in the article is done in not only academic literature but also in

applied practices.




correspondingly.


21

There is discussion of the statistical or logical techniques to validate what the authors try

to rationalize in their paper.

Weaknesses

Summary part is openly missing in the article.

Conclusions part could have been longer with more details.

Overall, this study is a good contribution to the field of research and further studies in the field

are surely desired.