Fundamental and exploratory research priorities selection method

Economics


Аuthors

Davydov A. D.*, Dianova E. V.**, Khmelevoi V. V.***

Moscow Aviation Institute (National Research University), 4, Volokolamskoe shosse, Moscow, А-80, GSP-3, 125993, Russia

*e-mail: addavydov1959@gmail.com
**e-mail: dandev1977@mail.ru
***e-mail: khmelevoy@mail.ru

Abstract

The paper suggests methodological approach to fundamental and research priorities portfolio forming. Such an approach is based on expert selection procedure. The authors formulated thematically oriented verbal and numerical scales for qualitative selection criteria groups. This criteria grouping is organized according to thematically similar features, significant while new perspective aircraft systems design.

Due to the complexity of solved selection tasks it is reasonable to implement quality criteria system, described by 3-5 criteria groups with 3 to 7 criteria in each group. It allows convenient, transparent and comprehensive presentation of information to the expert in necessary and sufficient scale.

Group-1 represents usefulness and importance; Group-2 represents resource intensiveness and resourcing, and Group-3 represents stability and manageability.

With allowance for expertize complexity and supposed relative inconformity of experts opinions when evaluating significance of particular researches trends, we suggest selection procedure based on the Ansoff's theory of weak signals. Here, with allowable level of experts' nonconforming opinions, the individual opinions of competent experts with high estimate of particular FERs are taken into account. Here, core index (CI) and concordance index (DI) serve for the generalized selection measure. In this case we suggest FERs grouping in the following way.

FER-1 are the trends with experts' high estimation by CI with high DI value. FER-2 are the trends with relatively high estimation by CI with relatively low DI values. FER-3 are the trends which CI is better than this for FER-2, with DI lower relative to FER-1 and comparable to this for FER-1. FER-4 represents such FER trends, which received consensus on lower importance, either special opinion was expressed by experts with relatively low authority.

The authors suggested to form the portfolio not only by the trends with high CI and DI values, but consider FAR-2 trends (with priorities higher than this of FAR-3) as well. This approach allows us to identify and select among the priority research areas with potentially high efficiency, albeit with relatively high level of risk. The proposed approach also makes it possible to make informed decisions in a limited time based on authoritative (respectable) peer review. The method is oriented for use in decision support system.

⁠

Keywords:

fundamental research, selection priority areas, expert selection, verbal and numerical scales, method of weak signals

References

  1. Burenok V.M., Pogrebnyak R.N., Skotnicov A.P. Metodologiya obosnovaniya perspektiv razvitiya sredstv vooruzhennoi bor'by obshchego naznacheniya (Methodology of armed struggle general purpose means development prospects substantiation), Moscow, Mashinostroenie, 2010, 368 р.

  2. Burenok V.M. Vooruzhenie i ekonomika, 2012, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 6-19.

  3. Burenok V.M. Vooruzeniye i economika, 2013, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 3-7.

  4. Buravlev A.I., Burenok V.M. Vooruzeniye i economika, 2014, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 73-92.

  5. Vikulov S.F. Econimika voennogo stroitel'stva: evolutsiya vzglyadov na problemy, metody, resheniya (Economy of military construction: evolution of views on problems, methods, solutions), Moscow, Granitsa, 2013, 454 p.

  6. Lavrinov G.A., Vikulov S.F. Ekonomika voennogo stroitel'stva: novaya paradigma (Economy of military construction: a new paradigm), Yaroslavl, Litera, 2008, 423 p.

  7. Borisenkov I.L., Smirnov I.L., Lyaskovskii V.L. Kompetentnost', 2013, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 6-11.

  8. Borisenkov I.L., Smirnov I.L., Lyaskovskii V.L. Kompetentnost', 2013, vol. 124, no. 4, pp. 50-58.

  9. Borisenkov I.L., Smirnov S.S., Pronin A.Yu. Vooruzhenie i ekonomika, 2014, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 12-19.

  10. Kuprin I.L., Davydov A.D. Materialy XII Mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii “Aviatsiya i kosmonavtika 2013”, Moscow, MAI, pp. 551-552.

  11. Kuprin I.L., Davydov A.D., Vinogradov S.M. Vestnik Moskovskogo aviatsionnogo instituta, 2008, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 199-201.

  12. Mel'nikova G.V. Prognozirovanie innovatsii (Forecasting of innovation), Moscow, MAI, 2008, 84 p.

  13. Kanashchenkov A.A., Kanashchenkov A.I., Novikov S.V. Vestnik Moskovskogo aviatsionnogo instituta, 2016, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 217-227.

  14. Lyaskovskii V.L., Smirnov S.S., Pronin A.Yu. Vooruzhenie i ekonomika, 2013, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 54-59.

  15. Lyaskovskii V.L., Smirnov S.S., Reulov R.V. Fundamental'naya i prikladnaya gidrofizika, 2014, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 10-16.

  16. Faramazyan R.A., Borisov V.V. Transformatsiya voennoi ekonomiki: XX nachalo XXI veka (Transformation of the war economy: the XXthe XXI century beginning), Moscow, Nauka, 2006, 342 p.

  17. Malinetskii G.G. Strategicheskaya stabil'nost', 2014, vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 21-29.

  18. Kuprin I.L., Davydov A.D., Tikhonov I.P. Menedgment razvitiya vysokotekhnologichnikh kompleksov (Management development of high-tech complexes), Moscow, Dobroe slovo, 2015, book 1 — 136 p.

  19. Ansoff Igor H. Strategic management, New York, Aldebaran, 1979, 803 p.

  20. Brummer V., Konnola T., Salo A. Forsait, 2010, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 56-68.

mai.ru — informational site of MAI

Copyright © 1994-2024 by MAI