Industrial R&D Program Evaluation Techniques

David P. Sorensen, Kerry S. Nelson and John P. Tomsyck
Additional contact information
David P. Sorensen: 3M Corporate Technical Planning and Coordination Department
Kerry S. Nelson: 3M Corporate Technical Planning and Coordination Department
John P. Tomsyck: 3M Corporate Technical Planning and Coordination Department

Evaluation Review, 1994, vol. 18, issue 1, 52-64

Abstract: U.S. industry's interest in and implementation of research and development (R&D) program evaluation techniques has been evolving throughout the twentieth century. Due in large part to the amount of funds corporations are now investing in R&D programs, evaluation techniques continue to become increasingly important. In this article, the history of R&D and its evaluation within the 3M Company will be used as an example of this progression. The article discusses how U.S. industrial R&D has moved from individual or few-person efforts earlier this century to today's high-investment, large-scale team approaches. A review of the most frequently used U.S. industrial R&D program evaluation methods is included. Among these are scoring methods, cost/benefit analysis, and risk analysis. The largest part of the article is a description of the 3M technical audit process. In addition to discussing the procedural and scoring elements of the technical audit, emphasis is placed on how 3M attains a variety of benefits from the process. The article concludes with a summary of other activities that take place in 3M's Technology Analysis Department. These projects involve measuring R&D productivity and assessing the technological health (present and future) of 3M.

Date: 1994
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X9401800106 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:evarev:v:18:y:1994:i:1:p:52-64

DOI: 10.1177/0193841X9401800106

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Evaluation Review
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().