Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | R | Research-Technology Management

Roadmapping--agent of change: implementation of a technology roadmapping process resulted in the systematic integration of technology management processes within Rockwell Automation.

Article Excerpt
Eight years ago, Rockwell Automation began a journey, detailed in this article, to redefine and enhance its technology management processes. The goal was to enable better planning and adaptation to changing market conditions. The journey required patience, ultimately commitment at all levels, and learning. Nevertheless, the introduction of technology roadmapping drove a change in the corporate culture as managers gradually "bought into" the process.

With roadmapping as a foundation, Rockwell was able to identify and confirm core competencies and to reveal and address gaps. The roadmapping process allowed the company to clearly determine knowledge "nuggets" essential to its business and to maximize their application. The result was improved business performance through markedly higher alignment among its corporate units and functions, and optimally targeted project selection. Along the way, as needs were identified, additional processes including patent, portfolio and standardization management were successfully introduced or modified. Looking back, it is clear that without roadmapping, Rockwell would have wasted critical time and resources re-inventing and would almost certainly have been blindsided by new technologies.

How It Began

Senior Rockwell management was introduced to technology roadmapping during a Motorola visit in 1995. Rockwell had no formal technology management processes at this time, and management was especially concerned that the company might not be keeping up with important technology and industry changes, including the greater emphasis on software engineering.

Under the guidance of the Technical Council (chaired by Rockwell's CTO, with technical representatives from the then 22 business units and the directors of the three Advanced Technology Research Labs), a team was formed to investigate how technology roadmapping could influence product development. Concurrently, the company began to explore the status of technology management processes through participation in a feasibility study sponsored by the National Center for Manufacturing Sciences (NCMS) which later spawned the Management of Accelerated Technology Innovation (MATI) consortium. It was decided that technology roadmapping would be pursued as an initial pilot program in the company and that the Advanced Technology Group would take the lead.

The Group' s first effort, in August 1995, had three main components. The first component identified the key technology needs of the company's business units, i.e., those technologies required to maintain a competitive advantage in their market. The second provided a technology strategy to satisfy these needs within a required timeline. The selected evaluation timeline was five years with historical data limited to two years. The third component was an R&D annual operating plan, focused on these specific technical challenges, with sponsorship, support and participation from the impacted business units. (This became the first R&D project selection process.)

Key attributes used for identification of the technology needs in the first roadmaps were:

* Business unit (who is/are the customer(s)?)

* Engineering discipline (e.g., materials science, power, etc.)

* Market requirements (geography, industry and application).

* Core competencies (in what is Rockwell Automation world class?)

* Technology timing (core, emerging and seed).

Core technology is defined as fundamental to the business needs now and into the future. Emerging technologies are those anticipated for use in the business units. Seed technologies are those to be nurtured for potential future use of the business units. The result was a prioritized set of technology needs within the given timeline.

The technology strategy was described in terms of technology directions and deliverables. A technology direction was established by analyzing its ability to impact a figure of merit, established for particular product lines within the timeline. The figure of merit was defined as a quantitative metric of change in a product dimension (size, performance, cost, manufacturability, etc.) that significantly impacts competitive advantage.

The technology itself was categorized as one...