The evolution of project portfolio selection methods: from incremental to radical innovation

被引:9
作者
Flechas Chaparro, Ximena Alejandra [1 ]
de Vasconcelos Gomes, Leonardo Augusto [1 ]
de Souza Nascimento, Paulo Tromboni [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, PPGA FEAUSP, Sao Paulo, Brazil
来源
REGE-REVISTA DE GESTAO | 2019年 / 26卷 / 03期
关键词
Radical innovation; Portfolio management; Decision support; Project selection methods; INTERACTIVE APPROACH; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; MODEL; RISK; UNCERTAINTY; MANAGEMENT; FRAMEWORK; DECISION; PROBABILITY; STRATEGY;
D O I
10.1108/REGE-10-2018-0096
中图分类号
C93 [管理学];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ;
摘要
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to identify how project portfolio selection (PPS) methods have evolved and which approaches are more suitable for radical innovation projects. This paper addressed the following research question: how have the selection approaches evolved to better fit within radical innovation conditions? The current literature offers a number of selection approaches with different and, in some cases, conflicting nature. Therefore, there is a lack of understanding regarding when and how to use these approaches in order to select a specific type of innovation projects (from incremental to more radical ones). Design/methodology/approach - Given the nature of the research question, the authors perform a systematic literature review method and analyze 48 portfolio selection approaches. The authors then classified and characterized these articles in order to identify techniques, tools, required data and types of examined projects, among other aspects. Findings - The authors identify four key features related to the selection of radical innovation projects: dynamism, interdependency management, uncertainty treatment and required input data. Based on the content analysis, the authors identified that approaches based on different sources and nature of data are more appropriated for uncertain conditions, such as behavioral methods, information gap theory, real options and integrated approaches. Originality/value - The research provides a comprehensive framework about PPS methods and how they have been evolving over time. This portfolio selection framework considers the particular aspects of incremental and radical innovation projects. The authors hope that the framework contributes to reinvigorating the literature on selection approaches for innovation projects.
引用
收藏
页码:212 / 236
页数:25
相关论文
共 66 条
[21]   Multi-objective binary cuckoo search for constrained project portfolio selection under uncertainty [J].
El-Kholany, Mohammed M. S. ;
Abdelsalam, Hisham M. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING, 2017, 11 (06) :818-853
[22]   AN APPLICATION-ORIENTED GUIDE TO RESEARCH-AND-DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SELECTION AND EVALUATION METHODS [J].
FAHRNI, P ;
SPATIG, M .
R & D MANAGEMENT, 1990, 20 (02) :155-171
[23]  
Freedman M., 2011, LARGE PROJECT MANAGE
[24]   OPTION PRICING MODEL AND RISK FACTOR OF STOCK [J].
GALAI, D ;
MASULIS, RW .
JOURNAL OF FINANCIAL ECONOMICS, 1976, 3 (1-2) :53-81
[25]   A methodology for selecting portfolios of projects with interactions and under uncertainty [J].
Ghapanchi, Amir Hossein ;
Tavana, Madjid ;
Khakbaz, Mohammad Hossein ;
Low, Graham .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT, 2012, 30 (07) :791-803
[26]   Project portfolio selection through decision support [J].
Ghasemzadeh, F ;
Archer, NP .
DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 2000, 29 (01) :73-88
[27]   AN INTERACTIVE APPROACH FOR SELECTING IR-AND-D PROJECTS [J].
HALL, DL ;
NAUDA, A .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, 1990, 37 (02) :126-133
[28]   Managing Underperformance Risk in Project Portfolio Selection [J].
Hall, Nicholas G. ;
Long, Daniel Zhuoyu ;
Qi, Jin ;
Sim, Melvyn .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2015, 63 (03) :660-675
[29]   Approaches for making risk-based Go/No-Go decision for international projects [J].
Han, SH ;
Diekmann, JE .
JOURNAL OF CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT-ASCE, 2001, 127 (04) :300-308
[30]   A practical R&D project-selection scoring tool [J].
Henriksen, AD ;
Traynor, AJ .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, 1999, 46 (02) :158-170