Poster Session
2009 ESD
Symposium
MIT
ESD
!"#$%&'(&)#$*+$,--*./(0*-$1(2'#34$$
5)#$*&)$%*)6*)/(#$%&'(&)#3$!&-#7$
+*)$,--*./(0*-8
(OOHQ&]DLND0DVWHU¶V6WXGHQW
Thesis advisor: Dr. Ricardo ValerdiReader: Professor J. UtterbackStart date Jan 2008
Research Group: System Design and Management
Corporations develop on-going cultures similarly to the way
nations do. This research investigates whether certain cultures align with different types of innovation: incremental and radical; disruptive and sustaining.
What is going on? Companies innovate but may not be matching their type of innovation to their corporate culture.
How did it get that way? Companies create their corporate strategy based on market analysis and external assessments instead of
looking inward at their own strengths and styles.
:K\LVQ¶WLWZRUNLQJQRZ"&RPSDQLHVIRUFHDVWUDWHJ\RQWKHLU employees that is addressing the external world and forces
employees and the culture to act differently from its authentic form.
Are certain corporate cultures better suited to certain types of innovation? If so, how can a company create an innovation
strategy that fits its own culture and prepares it to compete in the external market? Does perspective matter? That is, does seeing a corporation as determined by the particular people comprising it or seeing it as an entity through which different people flow
influence this research?
9*(0./(0*-$:$;)*<'#=
9#("*7*'*>2
?#2$@(0*-A3B
Hypothesis:
Corporate culture
and innovation type
reinforce or detract
from each other.
Ultimately, be able to help align corporate innovation strategy with corporate culture and encourage corporate culture to
engender innovation.
Initially, determine whether a relationship exists between
corporate culture and innovation strategy or whether the external market environment is the primary influence in innovation
strategy.
Afuah, A. and J.M. Utterback. "Emergence of a New Supercomputer Architecture." Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol 40, 1991: 315-328.
Brown, W.B. and N. Karagozoglu. "A Systems Model of Technological Innovation." IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol 36,
No.1, February 1989, 1989: 11-16.
Christensen, C.M. and M.E. Raynor. The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2003.
Ettlie, E.J. and W.P. Bridges. "Environmental uncertainty and organizational technology policy." IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol EM-29, no1, 1982.
Fowler, F.C. "Applying Hofstede's CrossCultural Theory of Organizations to School Governance: A French Case Study." Reports
-Comparative and International Education Society Conference. Toronto: -Comparative and International Education Society, 1999. 1-35.
Hage, J. and R. Dewar. "Elite values versus organizational structure in predicting innovation." Admin. Sci. Quart., vol 18, 1973. Hofstede, G. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1991.
Kelly, G. "Seducing the elites: The politics of decision making and innovation in organizational networks"." Acad. Manag. Rev., 1976: 66-72. McGregor, J. The World's Most Innovative Companies; Businessweek. April 17, 2008.
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/04/0417_mostinnovative/index_01.htm (accessed Nov 10, 2008).
Miller, D. and P.H. Friesen. "Innovation in Conservative and Entrepreneurial Firms: Two Models of strategic Momenetum." Strategic
Management Journal, Vo 3, No 1. (Jan.-Mar., 1982), 1982: 1-25.
von Hippel, E. Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2005.
CD6#E(#7$%*-()0<&(0*-5EF-*G'#7>=#-(3
H0(#)/(&)#$I#.0#G
Ellen Czaika
eczaika@mit.edu
Using the sociological categorizations developed by Hofstede and the models for innovation developed by Utterback, Abernathy,
Christensen, Henderson, Brown, Miller and Friesen, identify where
each test corporation falls in each model and run statistical regression to determine significant correlations.
3URIHVVRU-DPHV8WWHUEDFNDQG³'LVUXSWLYH7HFKQRORJ\ 3UHGDWRURU3UH\´FODVV 3URIHVVRU2OLYLHUGH:HFNDQG³6\VWHP3URMHFW0DQDJHPHQW (6'´ 3URIHVVRU'HERUDK1LJKWLQJDOHDQG³,QWHJUDWLQJWKH/HDQ (QWHUSULVH(6'-´
Dr. Ricardo Valerdi, Masters Thesis Advisor
!"#$;'/--#7$I#3#/)E"
Following a literature review of appropriate sociological models for cultural classification and technology and business models for innovation, I selected the models in which to investigate a
relationship. Then I identified candidate companies from which to collect data. The data to collect from each company include:
cultural data and innovation data to identify cultural pattern and current innovation type.
Adaptive Test Strategies Using
PATFrame
Technology andPolicy Program
Thesis advisor: Dr. Ricardo Valerdi
John T. Hess
johnhess@mit.edu
2010 Annual Meeting
Expected Graduation Date: June 2011
Poster Session
Motivation
The PATFrame Team
Methodologies Leveraged
Sponsors and Transition Partners
Acknowledgments
Unmanned Systems from MIT
“A battle plan seldom survives first contact with the enemy. Strategy is a system of expedients”
-Helmuth von Moltke the Elder
German Generalfeldmarschall
What is PATFrame?
•Design of Experiments
•Defect Modeling
•Simulation
•Real Options
•Decision Theory
•Ontologies
•Value Based Testing
Professor Deborah Nightingale
Like a battle plan, a test plan is predicated on
incomplete information. We don’t know what
failures our testing will uncover, so even the best
test plan can be “overcome by events” at any time.
Embracing the second part of von Moltke’s famous
quote, we realize that the best “strategy” for T&E is
adaptation. We propose a Prescriptive and
Adaptive Testing Framework (PATFrame) that
enables testers to address the rapidly evolving
needs of Unmanned and Autonomous Systems Test
(UAST).
PATFrame is a Decision Support System Addressing
Questions Posed by the Test Community:
•How much testing is enough?
•How long will testing take? How much will it cost?
•How do I test effectively given the compressed schedule of
a “Rapid Acquisition” program?
•How do I measure the quality of my tests?
•What are the most valuable tests for my system?
•How should I prioritize my tests?
•How do I make sure my tests are representative of the
operational environment?
•How do I get more knowledge for my dollar?
•What are the unique challenges in testing UAS’s and
Systems of Systems (SoS’s)?
•How do I test a SoS without explicit requirements?
•How does my system affect the SoS in which it operates?
•What are the most valuable tests for my SoS?
Images courtesy of mit.edu
This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Defense, United States Army, White Sands Missile Range, NM. under contract #
W9124Q-09-P-0230
Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Defense, United States Army, Whites Sands
