Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Technical Risk (technical + risk)
Selected AbstractsPROJECT CHOICE AND RISK IN R&D*THE JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS, Issue 1 2005Heiko A. Gerlach We introduce stochastic R&D in the Hotelling model and show that if the technical risk is sufficiently high, all firms focus on the most valuable market segment. We then endogenize technical risk by allowing firms to choose between a safe and a risky R&D technology. Firms either both target the most attractive market with at least one firm using the risky technology or they choose different niche projects and both apply the safe technology. R&D spillovers lead to more differentiated R&D projects and patent protection to less. Project coordination within an RJV implies more differentiation, and may be welfare-improving. [source] Analysis of Donor Risk in Living-Donor Hepatectomy: The Impact of Resection Type on Clinical OutcomeAMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 8 2002Ephrem Salamé The progressive shortage of liver donors has mandated investigation of living-donor transplantation (LDT). Concerns about increasing risk to the donor are evident, but the impact of the degree of parenchymal loss has not been quantified. We analyzed clinical and biological variables in 45 LDT performed by our team over 2years to assess risks faced in adult LDT. All donors are alive and well with complete follow-up through to February 2001. When the three operations were compared, right hepatectomy (RH) was significantly longer in terms of anesthesia time and blood loss compared with left hepatectomy (LH) and left lobectomy (LL). Donor remnant liver was significantly reduced after RH compared with LH and LL. There were significant functional differences as a consequence of the remnant size, measured by an increase in peak prothrombin time after RH. RH for adults represents a markedly different insult from pediatric donations in terms of parenchymal loss and early functional impairment. Left hepatectomy donation offers modest advantage over right lobes but seems to confer substantial technical risk for a small gain in graft size. Unless novel strategies are developed to enhance liver function of the LH graft in the adult recipient, right lobe donation will be necessary for adult LDT. [source] From experience: Capturing hard-won NPD lessons in checklistsTHE JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT, Issue 5 2001Raymond F. Riek The application of a good New Product Development (NPD) process is frequently limited by the experience of the user. Avoiding relatively minor errors and omissions that can lead to seriously flawed project results is still an art. Checklists for each stage of a development project can capture this art and their disciplined use can avoid many potentially critical omissions and errors. Development of checklists frequently comes from the hard experiences many of us have had in bringing new products to market. Consequently, benchmarking "trials and tribulations" rather than success stories can be more appropriate to developing a thoughtful checklist. This article is a partial accumulation of one practitioner's experiences of over three decades of executing, managing, directing and observing these projects. Fifteen NPD case histories are examined to develop learnings from these experiences. These cases are organized around three basic product development issues: managing technical risks, managing commercial risks, and managing NPD personnel. In these examples, NPD project problems have a common theme of poor technical or commercial risk management, as opposed to technical failure. Improved planning and a more disciplined management interface would have avoided many of the problems discussed in these case histories. Analysis of each of the case histories and learnings is provided from which suggested checklist items are derived. These checklist additions are presented by development stage to allow use by other NPD teams, with the intention of avoiding the repetition of similar problems. [source] | ||||||||||