Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

5 Management Model and Oversight
Pages 47-55

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 47...
... , although no single management structure has emerged as the model most likely to succeed. To the surprise of the committee, a search of the literature did not reveal any attempts to integrate lessons learned from the management of diverse government-industry R&D programs.
From page 48...
... Representatives of the automakers are well positioned to provide this understanding, and the USABC goals were derived from marketdriven vehicle specifications set by Chrysler, Ford, and GM. The committee was favorably impressed by the USABC's use of many proven industry practices for managing projects, controlling costs, auditing, and protecting intellectual property.
From page 49...
... The committee is concerned that the USABC peer review process may not be sufficiently objective because program managers are likely to defend developers for whom they have oversight responsibility. LESSONS LEARNED A review of lessons learned from the entire process associated with the formation of the USABC was conducted in 1993 (Abacus Technology Corporation, 1993~.
From page 50...
... · The process of reviewing and approving contracts and agreements has been significantly improved by lifting the requirement for approval of subcontract terms and conditions, while retaining the requirement that cost and pricing information be submitted to the contracting officer for preliminary review and approval. The revised intellectual property agreements have also streamlined the CRADA review and approval process; the technical review and approval of subcontracts remains a responsibility of DOE headquarters.
From page 51...
... For example, the original equipment manufacturers in the automotive industry typically request that suppliers fund or share the cost of developing automotive component technology but do not require access to the technology. In contrast, DOE requires access to both pre-existing and newly developed technology (Abacus Technology Corporation, 1993~.
From page 52...
... The NRC PNGV committee found that the PNGV technical road map effectively describes the major technologies, the target performance levels, and the schedule for technology development (NRC, 1996~. The present committee believes that a technical road map for battery development and manufacturing, as well as for infrastructure issues, would benefit any follow-on program to the USABC.
From page 53...
... If a requirement for external peer review had been established at the time DOE agreed to participate in the USABC, it would not only have enhanced the USABC management process, but would also have helped communicate nonproprietary results to a broader technical audience, as has been the case with PNGV. The role of external peer reviews is widely regarded in the engineering and science community as an important component of the effective management of technical programs.
From page 54...
... Some other aspects of Sematech's experience could also improve USABC's strategies, especially the use of technical road maps. Sematech periodically issues detailed documents describing the future needs of the semiconductor manufacturing industries in all of the limiting technology areas.
From page 55...
... Finding 3. The resolution of differences between government and industry practices with respect to contractual and organizational issues drew management attention away from the technical development program in the early stages of the USABC, although there is no evidence that the choices of midterm and longterm battery technologies were adversely affected by the differences in business practices.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.