Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer (2014)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

36 Tier 1: Foundational/ Organizational Components • Address Societal and Legal Issues • Have an Effective Champion • Engage Decision Makers • Develop a T2 Plan • Identify, Inform, and Engage Stakeholders • Identify and Secure Resources Organizational decision makers play two key roles in guided T2. They assume ownership of the need, whether the need is a problem that must be solved, a deficiency that must be remedied, or an opportunity that should be pursued, and they control the resources required by the guided T2 effort (Elrahman, 2003; Orcutt and AlKadri, 2009; Vowles et al., 2011). In practice, these two roles expand into multiple subroles that come into play at different times and to varying degrees depending on the specific technology being transferred and the characteristics of the organization or organizations involved. For example, identifying and defining the need can be straightforward when the problem presents itself (e.g., when customers demand real-time traffic information streamed via mobile devices such as smart phones). Conversely, the need may be elusive and difficult to define such as when a new technol- ogy has the potential to change business practices (e.g., adding e-commerce capabilities where previously customer transactions were primarily in person and by mail). Often times, deci- sion makers will be engaged before the guided T2 phase of the Innovation Adoption Process begins. Having timely and detailed information about an innovation can help a decision maker understand how the innovation addresses the need and what resources will be necessary for successful T2. To move past the identification and definition stage, the need must make it to the top of the decision maker’s priority list. Where the need falls in the hierarchy of priorities depends, of course, on competing priorities as well as the severity of the problem or the promise of the opportunity that this need presents. Priority of need also depends in part on the likelihood of a solution. If the need is pressing but a solution is at hand, a decision maker is likely to make it a top priority in order to “check it off the list.” A guided T2 effort makes a solution more likely. Once a need has been defined and becomes a priority, the technology must be recognized as a potential solution. If the case has been made that the technology in question will solve a C H A P T E R 4 Engage Decision Makers 1. Have the decision makers been identified and engaged? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no or unsure, proceed to the component discussion. 2. Have the resources been committed? If yes, proceed to the next question. If no or unsure, proceed to the component discussion. 3. Have possible barriers been addressed? If yes, proceed to the next component. If no, proceed to component discussion.

Engage Decision Makers 37 problem or alleviate a deficiency in an organization (through careful attention to the activities outlined in the first two phases of the Innovation Adoption Process, i.e., defining the need and research and development), and if the decision maker has taken ownership of the need and regards it as a top priority, then the decision to move forward with the T2 effort is likely to be a matter of education and communication. In many cases, particularly when the need is pressing and deployment of the technology will affect multiple business practices, there will be several decision makers, with their own responsibilities and perspectives concerning the need, the proposed technology, and the T2 effort. One or more decision makers may emerge as innovation champions, applying their technical credibility, enthusiasm, and skills in persuasion to advance the solution. Considering the multiple components of successful T2, a basic goal of education and communication activities is to guide decision makers so that they are on the same page and keep them on the same page throughout the T2 effort. Decision makers also control the resources needed to transfer a technology from its source to its destination. Resources include budgets, staffing, scheduling, training, equipment, mate- rials and supplies, and more. Staging these resources and applying them to achieve T2 may unfold over several phases and involve numerous stakeholders, and day-to-day management Utah DOT Engages Decision Makers by Creating a Culture that Embraces Change The Utah DOT (UDOT) has long been considered a leader in embracing innova- tions and successfully transferring technology through their organization. One of the keys to its success is engaging DOT decision makers early in the process of addressing needs, embracing innovation, and creating an organizational culture that encourages change. As John Njord, Director of the UDOT, states, “Innovation is a topic we discuss at every one of our senior staff meetings.” Decision makers at the DOT, especially upper management, are diligent about creating an envi- ronment that encourages reasonable risk taking to achieve innovation. A clear message is sent to employees—management will support them in their endeav- ors even if something goes wrong. The DOT also celebrates employee successes, which encourages employees to sustain that culture. Further, decision makers at UDOT are actively engaged in bringing innovation into the department. They provide the opportunity for several employees to attend the TRB Annual Meet- ing, more than they send to nearly any other national conference. Before they go, the attendees identify sessions that they plan to attend where they are most likely to collect ideas that are ripe for implementation. Employees must bring innovation back to the department. When employees return, they make a pre- sentation of what they found to decision makers and identify one to two ideas that they are going champion for implementation. Decision makers are engaged because they are looking to apply best practices and proven technologies/ innovations to better their operations. Those ideas become part of Utah DOT’s “TRB Scoreboard.” Senior management checks on progress 6 months after the TRB Annual Meeting to review progress on transfer activities for that technol- ogy. Thus, decision makers stay engaged through their responsibility to conduct follow-up/assessment of progress reviews, keeping in mind that they are likely to eventually provide resources towards T2 efforts. (Interview with John Njord, Director, UDOT, on October 18, 2012; Lindsey, 2009)

38 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer may be delegated to others (such as a T2 champion). However, ultimate responsibility for the success of the effort remains with the decision maker because that is where responsibility for the need resides. Guided T2 is facilitated by an organizational culture that is open to change and innovation. An innovative culture means that organizational processes are tuned to handle change as a matter of routine. Staff members are expected to embrace new ways of doing things and are trained to solve problems. Decision makers play a key role in establishing and promoting an embrace of innovation in an organization’s culture. Considerations Regarding Decision Makers What Actions Should Be Considered? Identify the decision maker or decision makers • Is one decision maker responsible for all significant T2 decisions, or are two or more decision makers responsible for T2? – If two or more decision makers are involved, how are their responsibilities allocated? Will their roles be concurrent or sequential? Are there any reporting relationships between decision makers, and how will this affect the T2 effort? • Was the decision maker involved in the selection of the technology or solution to be transferred? Engage the decision maker (or makers) in the T2 effort • Is solving the problem that the technology addresses a major responsibility of the decision maker? • Does the decision maker have the necessary information regarding the technology to be transferred (including the need that the technology addresses, how this technology was chosen as a feasible solution, and by whom)? Engaged Decision Makers Cross Functional Lines at Nissan to Bring Support for Auto Design Faced with a need for increased innovation, Nissan hired western designer Jerry Hirshberg to lead Nissan Design International. Hirshberg’s first assignment was to redesign light trucks at Nissan. He quickly realized that his team lacked the knowledge to develop novel design. Although organizationally forbidden at the time and culturally taboo, he crossed organizational boundaries to engage in discussions with key decision makers in marketing and sales. Unique input from these individuals helped Hirshberg’s team realize that truck redesign had to begin with the cab of the truck and work outward (Hunter et al., 2012). The redesign was successful, as were the subsequent sales and marketing approaches. The broad success observed at Nissan Design International can be traced to lead- ership that saw the implicit value in engaging not only those in their own groups, but also decision makers who might shape the implementation of those designs (Hirshberg, 1999). Such input was critical at Nissan not only from an information-gathering perspective, but also to ensure that others within the organization would support the final designs. (Mumford and Hunter, 2005)

Engage Decision Makers 39 • Is the decision maker involved in writing the T2 plan? If so, to what degree? Does the decision maker have ultimate approval of the T2 plan? • What is the working relationship between the decision maker and the champion? Between the decision maker and the stakeholders? What effects will these relationships have on the T2 effort? • Does the decision maker have experience managing change in this organization, includ- ing surmounting bureaucratic obstacles, managing cross-unit or boundary-spanning teams and activities, effectively communicating with stakeholders, and minimizing risk exposure? Does the decision maker influence policy? Obtain commitments for the necessary resources • Are the resources required for successful T2 understood by the decision maker, including financial, staffing, scheduling, training, communication, equipment, supplies, and so forth? • Does the decision maker have the authority to commit the necessary resources? If no or partially, who else should be involved? • What responsibilities does the decision maker have for evaluating the progress of the T2 effort? For justifying T2 resource expenditures? What Are Some of the T2 Challenges and Barriers Encountered by Decision Makers? Overcoming barriers to T2 often hinges on the actions of decision makers. By way of illustra- tion, consider these categories and barriers to T2: Contextual • Little organizational support for innovation • Leadership does not highlight technology needs or accomplishments • Low investment in and funding for new technology and innovation Organizational/Bureaucratic • Organization policies, business processes, and standards work against change and innovation • Organizational structure discourages cross sharing and collaboration • Lack of management support and staffing Legal/Risk • No support for assuming any risk for testing and implementing new policies • Design-build is not allowed or encouraged • Inadequate formal process for new product evaluation Communication/Knowledge Management • Information is not readily shared across the organization • Training and development opportunities are limited and underfunded Many of these barriers arise because of past decisions about how resources were spent, what policies were established and enforced, what information was shared, and what training and development opportunities were available to staff. What Are Some of the Tools or Strategies a Decision Maker Can Use to Overcome the T2 Challenges Encountered? Organizational decision makers and leaders can pave a smoother road for T2 by promoting a culture of innovation and by employing some of the tools below when barriers are encountered or anticipated.

40 Guide to Accelerating New Technology Adoption through Directed Technology Transfer Contextual • Link T2 projects to current program priorities • Make T2 and innovation a standard part of leadership meetings • Align organizational mission and values to support innovation Organizational/Bureaucratic • Designate an innovation champion to lead T2 activities • Target specific funds for T2 and deployment • Set metrics that require change Legal/Risk • Work with legal staff to include contract terms that encourage innovation on specific projects • Conduct scans to learn from other organizations • Be willing to talk about “failures” and what was learned from them Communication/Knowledge Management • Use communication and information technologies and tools to get the message out • Establish structured programs for continuous learning • Senior management encourages and provides resources for strong internal communications Suggested Readings Elrahman, O. A., “Effective Transfer of Research Results: Human Element for Successful Transfer.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1848, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2003) pp. 118–124. Lindsey, R., “Reaping the Benefits of Attending the TRB Annual Meeting.” TR News, Vol. 265 (November– December, 2009) pp. 38–40. Accessed on July 24, 2013. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/trnews/ trnews265Utah.pdf Orcutt, L. H., and M. Y. AlKadri, “Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation: Three Case Studies at the Califor- nia Department of Transportation.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2109, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2009) pp. 65–73. Touran, A., K. R. Molenaar, D. D. Gransberg, and K. Ghavamifar, “Decision Support System for Selection of Project Delivery Method in Transit.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2111, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C. (2009) pp. 148–157. Vowles, N., P. Thirkell, and A. Sinha, “Different Determinants at Different Times: B2B Adoption of a Radical Innovation.” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64 (2011) pp. 1162–1168.