Dea Support System for Assessing R&d Projects

ARTICLE REVIEW        

Name of the author: Jonathan D. Linton, joseph Morabito and Julian Scott Yeoman’s

Title of the article: “DEA support system for assessing R&D projects”

Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers: R&D Management 37, 7, 2007, 29-36.        

Statement of the problem: The extension to DEA support system used for R&D in assessment, rating and diverse portfolios of research.

The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions: The approach used is DEA for attractiveness for considering a R&D project and how the ranking and outcome of the project proposals differ from current decisions helping to improve decision making, informal policies and constant improvements.

Title: the title of the article is very clear stating the extended support for R&D projects using DEA.

• The abstract is specific and clearly states that a project is not merely selected on the basis of its DEA ranking but also from managerial insights like decision making procedures, decision quality taken  by managers.
• The purpose of the article is very specific about how screening of a new project is done on various dimensions like company standards, NPV and fundamental grouping, by applying these dimensions projects are categorized in accepting or rejecting a project.
• The discussion of the topic was relevant since there was an insight how the alternatives or projects were ranked and weighted which was compared with other projects where every small set of factors were considered and these different dimensions helps them in decision making.
• The data provide in the article is relevant enough since all the inputs and outputs are assigned to complete the DEA process and grouping of projects are ranked according the scores. This helps to select a projects from the available bunch.
• The idea to select a project not merely on the basis of accept\reject was avoided by emphasized properly by using partitioning of groups to select efficient projects.
• The sections of manuscripts are relevant enough to justify its data and efficient explanation was provided.
• The author’s statement how management can determine the official and unofficial gap of expectations can be rectified by using rankings of DEA.
• The author’s had assumption of gap between official and unofficial reality which cannot be considered of the DEA and analyst since an analyst predictions and decision may vary focusing on the long turn success of the firm, affecting the decision and the data from DEA can be sufficient enough to avoid unadvisable deviation. Help in taking an efficient decision.

• The author’s main objective was how managers can evaluate the improvements done by analysts and DEA to rectify the presence of undesired tendency which will help to assess the decisions making effective.