Bachelor of Business Administration-BBA

Semester 5 BB0026 Introduction to technology Management Assignment (30 Marks)

1 Explain the role and importance of technology management. Answer: Technology Management is set of management disciplines that allows
organizations to manage their technological fundamentals to create competitive advantage. Typical concepts used in technology management are technology strategy (a logic or role of technology in organization), technology forecasting (identification of possible relevant technologies for the organization, possibly through technology scouting), technology road mapping (mapping technologies to business and market needs), technology project portfolio ( a set of projects under development) and technology portfolio (a set of technologies in use). The role of the technology management function in an organization is to understand the value of certain technology for the organization. Continuous development of technology is valuable as long as there is a value for the customer and therefore the technology management function in an organization should be able to argue when to invest on technology development and when to withdraw. Technology Management can also be defined as the integrated planning, design, optimization, operation and control of technological products, processes and services, a better definition would be the management of the use of technology for human advantage. The Association of Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering defines Technology Management as the field concerned with the supervision of personnel across the technical spectrum and a wide variety of complex technological systems. Technology Management programs typically include instruction in production and operations management, project management, computer applications, quality control, safety and health issues, statistics, and general management principles. Perhaps the most authoritative input to our understanding of technology is the diffusion of innovations theory developed in the first half of the twentieth century. It suggests that all innovations follow a similar diffusion pattern - best known today in the form of an "s" curve though originally based upon the concept of a standard distribution of adopters. In broad terms the "s" curve suggests four phases of a technology life cycle - emerging, growth, mature and aging. These four phases are coupled to increasing levels of acceptance of an innovation or, in our case a new technology. In recent times for many technologies an inverse curve - which corresponds to a declining cost per unit - has been postulated. This may not prove to be universally true though for information technology where much of the cost is in the initial phase it has been a reasonable expectation. The second major contribution to this area is the Carnegie Mellon Capability Maturity Model. This model proposes that a series of progressive capabilities can be quantified through a set of threshold tests. These tests determine repeatability, definition, management and

Page 1 of 7

optimization. The model suggests that any organization has to master one level before being able to proceed to the next. The third significant contribution comes from Gartner - the research service, it is the hype cycle, and this suggests that our modern approach to marketing technology results in the technology being over hyped in the early stages of growth. Taken together, these fundamental concepts provide a foundation for formalizing the approach to managing technology Technology management aims at maximizing the cost effectiveness of investments in technology development which contributes to the value of an organization. If an organization fails to plan for its technology it might encounter issues like data loss or misuse of that technology by its employees. But if the organization creates a frame work and plans for its technology, its output will increase. Below I have listed some of the importance of technology management: Growth of the Firm: The process of managing technology involves organizing, coordinating, and managing activities. If technology is well managed, an organization will improve on its operations and reduce on operational costs of the organization. The technical staff will have a challenge of analysing what customers need and specify which technologies are supposed to be implemented as well as spot the ones to be stopped. After this process of analysing what is necessary, both the organization and its consumers will benefit which will lead to the growth of that organization. Eliminates duplication: If technology is well managed, it will automate information flow in an organization. In this case, the technical team will set up a management information system (MIS) which provides periodic, predetermined and ad-hoc reporting capabilities. In most cases the MIS reports summarize or aggregate information to support decision-making tasks. So, MISs are systems that have information-processing responsibilities that include information through online analytical processing (OLAP) and conveying information to whoever needs it. To a small organization this process might be expensive, so people in charge must calculate return on investment. MISs are commonly known as management alerting systems because they send alerts to management concerned to the existence or potential existence of problems or opportunities. A management information system (MIS) provides reports in many different forms. Its reports can be periodic reports, summarized reports, exception reports, ad hoc reports and comparative reports. Periodic reports are reports that are produced at a predetermined time interval such as daily, weekly, monthly or yearly. Summarized reports: These are simply reports that aggregate information from periodic reports these show only a subset of available information based on some selection criteria. Comparative reports: These show two or more sets of similar information in an attempt to illustrate a relationship. Ad hoc reports: These are reports you can generated at any time. They are just the opposite of the periodic reports.

Page 2 of 7

2 Explain how the ten basic tenets for the management of technology is used in an enterprise to operate within a TC framework by taking a sample enterprise to explain. Answer:
1 Value diversification is a poor substitute for the management of technology (MOT). Value diversification is the improvement of stockholders investments in a company through quick-fix solutions on paper, such as mergers, acquisitions, and other stockenhancing strategies. 2 Manufacturing must keep pace with inventiveness and marketability. 3 Quality and total productivity are inseparable concepts in managing technology. 4 It is managements responsibility to bring about technological change and job security for long-term competitiveness. 5 Technology must be the servant, not the master. The master is still the human being. 6 The consequences of technology selection can be more serious than expected because of systemic effects. 7 Continuous education and training in a constantly changing workplace is a necessity, not a luxury. 8 The technology gradient is a dynamic component of the technology management process, to be monitored for strategic advantage. The technology gradient is a dynamic component of the technology management process, to be monitored for strategic advantage. 9 The RTC factor must be carefully analysed and meticulously monitored for gaining the most out of any technology, particularly a new one. 10 Information linkage must keep pace with technology growth. Here are some basic tenets of management as practiced in the Editorial Division at the Daily Press. This list is by no means exhaustive or all-inclusive. But it provides enough rudimentary hints to get you through just about anything you'll face as a manager. Use the team. There are a lot of brains at work here. They can help make a bad thing good or a good thing better. Solicit ideas from your subordinates and from other editors. There's a lot of creativity available nearby. What we do can affect a lot of people news people, other departments at the paper, our readers. It helps to kick an issue around so that we get a chance to consider its ramifications and to come up with the best solution. Listen to your instincts. There's a little person inside you waving a flag. Pay attention to her. If she's whispering an idea, it might be a good one. You'll kick yourself for having thought of it if you didn't move on it and someone else did. If the flag is a red one, heed the warning. If something bothers you, act on it, question it, and make a note of it. The red flag might be a false alarm. But, then again, it might not be. We correct our mistakes. All of them. If we've published something incorrect, we want to own up to it and set the record straight. We make a practice of aggressive correction of factual errors, even when the error is of no particularly dreadful consequence. And we correct mistakes even when no one has complained. If nothing else, we want our readers to know that we know we made the mistake. We make a practice of knowing how the mistake was made, so that we can prevent a recurrence and take appropriate responsive action.

Page 3 of 7

Important: Involve the person who made the error so that he can learn from the mistake. Nobody likes mistakes and nobody likes corrections, but making of them a learning process salvages great value from adversity. How to make the boss feel better about the correction: Have the correction ready before anyone asks for it and know precisely how the error occurred. How to make the boss crazy, which has unpleasant ramifications: Make a mistake in the correction. You own what you do: When something important happens, make sure there's a piece of paper in the responsible party's file. That goes for the good stuff, maybe even more than for the bad stuff. An employee's evaluation file should be filled with notes about our many successes. If the bad stuff is particularly grievous, make sure there's an appropriate document in the file and in the hands of the offending employee. Before you do that, see the rule about making big decisions alone. A good supervisor is slow to take credit and quick to take blame. When the goodies are being passed out, deflect everything you can to your staff. And when the bad stuff hits the fan, make sure you jump between it and your staff. You can pass it on appropriately and constructively later. The people you work for will thank and respect you for it. But do something: You shouldn't let the fear of making a mistake freeze you or the people who work for you. Trying something is better than trying nothing, and if it goes wrong, you'll at least have learned something. But do yourself a favour: Don't try it for the first time in a situation where there's no escape. It's like diving into unfamiliar water; it might be awfully shallow. No surprises. We communicate: Tell your boss, tell your colleagues, tell your staff. If you can't find your boss, tell your boss's boss. The no-surprise rule lets your boss know that you're on top of the problem, that you cared enough to issue the warning and that you're looking for a solution. Keeping your staff on board allows them to offer ideas and solutions for the challenges that we all face together. As you disseminate information to the people who work for you, don't blame it on someone higher up, don't fall into the "Jane said ..." or "Jack said ..." syndrome. When you do, you abdicate your authority and become a mere messenger. Make the message your own. If that means talking it out even arguing about it with your boss, do it. But when the debate is over, embrace the idea as if you had come up with it yourself, even if it's not exactly the way you'd do it. The worst things that can happen to you: The boss hears about a problem in your department from someone other than you. Your staff misses out on something important because you failed to tell them about it. Your boss learns about something big and ugly when she reads it in the paper. Give feedback: If you can say something nice, say something nice, the more detailed the better. (Those general "good jobs" have a hollow ring.) If you can't say something nice, say something constructive. In survey after survey of newsroom attitudes, reporters and copy editors complain that they don't get enough feedback. Make 'em happy and help 'em grow. Don't assume: When in doubt, ask. Not knowing is not an excuse. You have immense resources at your disposal: lots of co-workers, a well-stocked and well-wired library, a major communications corporation. The inverse corollary: Don't ask the editor where the bathrooms are, and don't let your staff do it, either. Be resourceful before you ask a dumb question whose answer you can easily find on your own.
Page 4 of 7

 If it doesn't make sense, it's probably not right: Rules and edicts tend to collect like seagulls to a garbage dump. They also tend to lose a great deal in translation from original notion to the chiselled-in-granite version. If you are presented with some block-ofstone idea that sounds goofy, question it. Some of these things spring from spurious parentage. Some of these things get passed badly from hand to hand. And if it's something we've "always done that way," maybe it's time to change. Be an innovator. Grow a successor: We put a premium on developing talent. That requires a supervisor's attention and care. Be a teacher. Be a mentor. You can expect the same thing from your boss. Make the wisdom your own and pass it along. If you don't ask for it, you may not get it: Don't wait for something to happen. Make it happen. Don't assume that your reporters will know the best way to approach the story; coach them through it, probe for angles, and help stimulate some ideas. Don't assume that the photographer will have an inspiration for an illustration; share your own inspiration. If you think it will improve the paper, ask for it. If it's broken, fix it: We make a practice of trying to make things right. If that means reshooting a photo assignment, tearing up a page or rewriting a story, do it. Don't let expedience stand in the way of excellence. And if you have an idea for the newsroom or elsewhere share it. Use facts: If you have a case to make, make it with empirical data, not supposition or anecdote. If you don't know, say so. Then find out. Use your judgment: We can't make rules for everything, and you wouldn't want to work here if we did. So you sometimes have to make decisions without a net. Think about it, ask about it, consider it and do something. You're here because someone had a reasonable degree of faith in your ability to think, to judge. Be the gatekeeper. If you thought about what you were doing and did it because you considered it right and appropriate after thinking about it, you'll find lots of people standing behind you. They may want to talk about the decision, debate your conclusion, but they'll defend it. On the other hand, you'll find that a lapse in judgment the failure to exercise it is quite lonely. In all matters requiring judgment, refer to the rules about using the team, making decisions alone, communicating and asking smart questions. Try the golden rule: Above all else, be fair. Treat your charges the way you'd like your boss to treat you. Put yourself in their shoes and ask whether you'd want to treat yourself that way.

Page 5 of 7

3 How do you assess technology management? Answer: The problems dealt in this assessment concern the quality of present and future life
system threatened and social and environmental system dragged by the industrial option. The achievements are to assess the impact of the technology management. Quality management is the proposed methodology. It is a global strategy by which enterprises manage the entire organization so that they excel on all dimensions of products that are important to the customer. Achievements are about evaluating the advantages and the disadvantages on the industry application of Technology Management. The study is about appraising what happen while a Computer Integrated Manufacturing keeps on running and assessing what is the actual situation without that innovative technology. From the above studies the following results are pointed out; the technology remedies contrasts between industrial and environmental strategies and the innovative technology brings luck to restart the competitiveness in a sustainable development context. So technology improves not only the competitiveness of the enterprise and the national economy but also reconciles the binomial industrial development and sustainable development TA is the study and evaluation of new technologies. It is based on the conviction that new developments within, and discoveries by, the scientific community are relevant for the world at large rather than just for the scientific experts themselves, and that technological progress can never be free of ethical implications. Also, technology assessment recognizes the fact that scientists normally are not trained ethicists themselves and accordingly ought to be very careful when passing ethical judgement on their own, or their colleagues, new findings, projects, or work in progress. Technology assessment assumes a global perspective and is future-oriented, not antitechnological. TA considers its task as interdisciplinary approach to solving already existing problems and preventing potential damage caused by the uncritical application and the commercialization of new technologies. Therefore any results of technology assessment studies must be published, and particular consideration must be given to communication with political decision-makers. An important problem, TA has to deal with it, is the so-called Collingridge dilemma: on the one hand, impacts of new technologies cannot be easily predicted until the technology is extensively developed and widely used; on the other hand, control or change of a technology is difficult as soon as it is widely used. Some of the major fields of TA are: information technology, hydrogen technologies, nuclear technology, molecular nanotechnology, pharmacology, organ transplants, gene technology, artificial intelligence, the Internet and many more. Health technology assessment is related, but profoundly different, despite the similarity in the name. Forms and concepts of technology assessment The following types of concepts of TA are those that are most visible and practiced. There are, however, a number of further TA forms that are only proposed as concepts in the literature or are the label used by a particular TA institution. Parliamentary TA (PTA): TA activities of various kinds whose addressee is a parliament. PTA may be performed directly by members of those parliaments (e.g. in France and Finland) or on their behalf by related TA institutions (such as in the UK, in Germany and Denmark) or by organisations not directly linked to a Parliament (such as in the Netherlands and Switzerland). Expert TA (often also referred to as the classical TA or traditional TA concept): TA activities carried out by (a team of) TA and technical experts. Input from stakeholders and other actors is included only via written statements, documents and interviews, but not as in participatory TA.

Page 6 of 7

Participatory TA (pTA): TA activities which actively, systematically and methodologically involve various kinds of social actors as assessors and discussants, such as different kinds of civil society organisations, representatives of the state systems, but characteristically also individual stakeholders and citizens (lay persons), technical scientists and technical experts. Standard pTA methods include consensus conferences, focus groups, scenario workshops etc. Sometimes pTA is further divided into expert-stakeholder pTA and public pTA (including lay persons). Constructive TA (CTA): This concept of TA, developed in the Netherlands, but also applied and discussed elsewhere attempts to broaden the design of new technology through feedback of TA activities into the actual construction of technology. Contrary to other forms of TA, CTA is not directed toward influencing regulatory practices by assessing the impacts of technology. Instead, CTA wants to address social issues around technology by influencing design practices. Discursive TA or Argumentative TA: This type of TA wants to deepen the political and normative debate about science, technology and society. It is inspired by ethics, policy discourse analysis and the sociology of expectations in science and technology. This mode of TA aims to clarify and bring under public and political scrutiny the normative assumptions and visions that drive the actors who are socially shaping science and technology. Accordingly, argumentative TA not only addresses the side effects of technological change, but deals with both broader impacts of science and technology and the fundamental normative question of why developing a certain technology is legitimate and desirable. Health TA (HTA): A specialised type of expert TA informing policy makers about efficacy, safety and cost effectiveness issues of pharmaceuticals and medical treatments, see health technology assessment.

Page 7 of 7