Slide
Centre Interdisciplinaire
de Recherche et d’Innovation
en Cybersécurité et Société
de Recherche et d’Innovation
en Cybersécurité et Société
1.
Koplyay, T.; Malouin, M.; Koplyay, L.; Cohn, S.
MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE IN A MARKET: CASE OF THE HI-TECH INDUSTRY Proceedings Article
In: G., Ng E. H. Zhang H. Natarajan (Ed.): Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Management 2023 International Annual Conference and 44th Annual Meeting: Climbing Higher with Engineering Management, pp. 50–59, American Society for Engineering Management, 2023, ISBN: 9798985333466.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Change affecting firm, Change signal, Clockface, Commerce, CVGA, Hi-tech, Investments, Life cycle, Life cycle theories, Management of change, Market case, Market changes, SPACE
@inproceedings{koplyay_management_2023,
title = {MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE IN A MARKET: CASE OF THE HI-TECH INDUSTRY},
author = {T. Koplyay and M. Malouin and L. Koplyay and S. Cohn},
editor = {Ng E. H. Zhang H. Natarajan G.},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85188520101&partnerID=40&md5=e6847582d180df9277a0778f1ef7a892},
isbn = {9798985333466},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-01-01},
booktitle = {Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Management 2023 International Annual Conference and 44th Annual Meeting: Climbing Higher with Engineering Management},
pages = {50–59},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {Change is a constant within markets and even more so in hi-tech markets. However, there are limits to how much change firms can handle, or even notice before it's too late. This article will trace the evolution of change along the lifecycle in the hi-tech industry and identify the extent firms can cope with the frequency, magnitude, and cumulative effects of change. This article will also describe the different types of change that occur in markets, the natural market impediments that can hinder a firm's adaptation. Essentially, it will explore how firms manage change in relation to the market, which can range from hardly discernible change like the whisper change signal to internal stress factors that induce unnecessary change. Likewise, we will map the response to change during with the market transients, which can influence a firm's adaptive process and survivability. A key contribution of this paper is the introduction of two methods that can be utilized by firms to measure the nature, expected magnitude, and the directionality of pending change required for effective strategic adaptation. One method focuses on the SPACE tool for mapping the situation of the firm in its market environment. The second method, CVGA, maps the firm in its targeted multi-dimensional competitive space to reveal the dangers it faces from elements like insufficient competitor knowledge, internal executive misalignments, and the misdirection of investments to achieve competitive value. Copyright © American Society for Engineering Management, 2023.},
keywords = {Change affecting firm, Change signal, Clockface, Commerce, CVGA, Hi-tech, Investments, Life cycle, Life cycle theories, Management of change, Market case, Market changes, SPACE},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Change is a constant within markets and even more so in hi-tech markets. However, there are limits to how much change firms can handle, or even notice before it's too late. This article will trace the evolution of change along the lifecycle in the hi-tech industry and identify the extent firms can cope with the frequency, magnitude, and cumulative effects of change. This article will also describe the different types of change that occur in markets, the natural market impediments that can hinder a firm's adaptation. Essentially, it will explore how firms manage change in relation to the market, which can range from hardly discernible change like the whisper change signal to internal stress factors that induce unnecessary change. Likewise, we will map the response to change during with the market transients, which can influence a firm's adaptive process and survivability. A key contribution of this paper is the introduction of two methods that can be utilized by firms to measure the nature, expected magnitude, and the directionality of pending change required for effective strategic adaptation. One method focuses on the SPACE tool for mapping the situation of the firm in its market environment. The second method, CVGA, maps the firm in its targeted multi-dimensional competitive space to reveal the dangers it faces from elements like insufficient competitor knowledge, internal executive misalignments, and the misdirection of investments to achieve competitive value. Copyright © American Society for Engineering Management, 2023.
2.
Roy, F. Le; Robert, F.; Hamouti, R.
Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry Journal Article
In: Technovation, vol. 112, 2022, ISSN: 01664972, (Publisher: Elsevier Ltd).
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Co-opetition, Commerce, Horizontal coopetition, Human computer interaction, Incremental innovation, Interactive computer graphics, Market performance, Product innovation, Radical innovation, Vertical coopetition, Video game industry, Video-games
@article{le_roy_vertical_2022,
title = {Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry},
author = {F. Le Roy and F. Robert and R. Hamouti},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85118828275&doi=10.1016%2fj.technovation.2021.102411&partnerID=40&md5=f455c23f06fdd531e405382ddfdd7efd},
doi = {10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102411},
issn = {01664972},
year = {2022},
date = {2022-01-01},
journal = {Technovation},
volume = {112},
abstract = {The aim of this research is to study the impact of coopetition on the market performance of product innovation. Previous research suggests, on the one hand, that coopetition is a powerful strategy for innovation but, on the other hand, that coopetition creates opportunism risk. Therefore, the impact of coopetition on innovation depends on external and internal conditions. This impact also differs according to the radicalness of the focal innovation. Past studies have identified many different factors that influence the impact of coopetition on innovation. However, they have not taken into account the different types of coopetition. To fill this gap, here, 1) we introduce a key distinction between the two main types of coopetition, i.e., vertical vs horizontal coopetition and 2) we distinguish between the impacts of these two types of coopetition on the market performance of two types of innovation, i.e., incremental vs radical innovation. We build a set of four hypotheses and test them on a sample of 763 new products in the video game industry. The results show that 1) horizontal coopetition has a positive impact on the market performance of radical and incremental innovation, 2) horizontal coopetition has a greater impact on the market performance of radical innovation 3) vertical coopetition has no impact on the market performance of innovation, and 4) the null impact of vertical coopetition is true for both radical and incremental innovation. © 2021},
note = {Publisher: Elsevier Ltd},
keywords = {Co-opetition, Commerce, Horizontal coopetition, Human computer interaction, Incremental innovation, Interactive computer graphics, Market performance, Product innovation, Radical innovation, Vertical coopetition, Video game industry, Video-games},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The aim of this research is to study the impact of coopetition on the market performance of product innovation. Previous research suggests, on the one hand, that coopetition is a powerful strategy for innovation but, on the other hand, that coopetition creates opportunism risk. Therefore, the impact of coopetition on innovation depends on external and internal conditions. This impact also differs according to the radicalness of the focal innovation. Past studies have identified many different factors that influence the impact of coopetition on innovation. However, they have not taken into account the different types of coopetition. To fill this gap, here, 1) we introduce a key distinction between the two main types of coopetition, i.e., vertical vs horizontal coopetition and 2) we distinguish between the impacts of these two types of coopetition on the market performance of two types of innovation, i.e., incremental vs radical innovation. We build a set of four hypotheses and test them on a sample of 763 new products in the video game industry. The results show that 1) horizontal coopetition has a positive impact on the market performance of radical and incremental innovation, 2) horizontal coopetition has a greater impact on the market performance of radical innovation 3) vertical coopetition has no impact on the market performance of innovation, and 4) the null impact of vertical coopetition is true for both radical and incremental innovation. © 2021
3.
Koplyay, T.; Malouin, M.
A framework for understanding illegal business activities, from competition to corruption-The case of snc lavalin Proceedings Article
In: E., Krejci C. Keathley H. Schott (Ed.): 2019 International Annual Conference Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Management and 40th Meeting Celebration: A Systems Approach to Engineering Management Solutions, ASEM 2019, American Society for Engineering Management, 2019, ISBN: 978-099751956-3 (ISBN), (Journal Abbreviation: Int. Annu. Conf. Proc. Am. Soc. Eng. Manag. Meet. Celebr.: Syst. Approach Eng. Manag. Solut., ASEM).
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Accountability, Business activities, Collaboration, Collusion, Commerce, Competition, Competitive games, Competitive pressure, Cooperation, Corporate values, corruption, Crime, Entrepreneurial firms, External factors, Firm life cycle and oligopoly, Market condition, Pure competition
@inproceedings{koplyay_framework_2019,
title = {A framework for understanding illegal business activities, from competition to corruption-The case of snc lavalin},
author = {T. Koplyay and M. Malouin},
editor = {Krejci C. Keathley H. Schott E.},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85086287399&partnerID=40&md5=28bb6bb46785cb78b09a7c976aeef250},
isbn = {978-099751956-3 (ISBN)},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-01-01},
booktitle = {2019 International Annual Conference Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Management and 40th Meeting Celebration: A Systems Approach to Engineering Management Solutions, ASEM 2019},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {Markets go from early stages of entrepreneurial firms, linked to ecosystems to late stage value chains dominated by mature firms. In early stages, pure competition dominates with plenty of market space available to distance the firm from direct competitive pressures and whenever these pressures materialize, the firm can reposition somewhere else in the market and pursue its destiny based on its own competencies. As the market develops and firms start to mature, the competition is partially supplemented with cooperation. The first steps are taken towards common capabilities, or the grouping of several firms' competencies. When these capabilities harden by the time the market reaches the cluster stage, the informal coordination is slowly replaced by active and deliberate collaboration and the first prototype of the value chain emerges. By late stages when market boundaries firm up and the market growth is exhausted, the competitive game becomes a zero sum and firms start displaying strategies of harm towards each other. After a wave of massive M&A, the market is reduced to an oligopoly, where strategies of collusion start to happen. If these activities breach the principles of transparency and accountability, and are abetted by crumbling corporate values, corruption can take hold. This paper will explore the market conditions, external factors and societal tolerance that leads to active and contagious business corruption. We shall rely on the Canadian SNC-Lavalin case to illustrate many points. © American Society for Engineering Management, 2019.},
note = {Journal Abbreviation: Int. Annu. Conf. Proc. Am. Soc. Eng. Manag. Meet. Celebr.: Syst. Approach Eng. Manag. Solut., ASEM},
keywords = {Accountability, Business activities, Collaboration, Collusion, Commerce, Competition, Competitive games, Competitive pressure, Cooperation, Corporate values, corruption, Crime, Entrepreneurial firms, External factors, Firm life cycle and oligopoly, Market condition, Pure competition},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Markets go from early stages of entrepreneurial firms, linked to ecosystems to late stage value chains dominated by mature firms. In early stages, pure competition dominates with plenty of market space available to distance the firm from direct competitive pressures and whenever these pressures materialize, the firm can reposition somewhere else in the market and pursue its destiny based on its own competencies. As the market develops and firms start to mature, the competition is partially supplemented with cooperation. The first steps are taken towards common capabilities, or the grouping of several firms' competencies. When these capabilities harden by the time the market reaches the cluster stage, the informal coordination is slowly replaced by active and deliberate collaboration and the first prototype of the value chain emerges. By late stages when market boundaries firm up and the market growth is exhausted, the competitive game becomes a zero sum and firms start displaying strategies of harm towards each other. After a wave of massive M&A, the market is reduced to an oligopoly, where strategies of collusion start to happen. If these activities breach the principles of transparency and accountability, and are abetted by crumbling corporate values, corruption can take hold. This paper will explore the market conditions, external factors and societal tolerance that leads to active and contagious business corruption. We shall rely on the Canadian SNC-Lavalin case to illustrate many points. © American Society for Engineering Management, 2019.
4.
Koplyay, T. M.; Motaghi, H.; Hurta, H.; Malouin, M.
Evolution of firm structures in market and the supporting lifecycle logic Proceedings Article
In: 39th International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2018: Bridging the Gap Between Engineering and Business, pp. 912–921, American Society for Engineering Management, 2018, ISBN: 978-151087464-0 (ISBN), (Journal Abbreviation: Int. Annu. Conf. Am. Soc. Eng. Manag., ASEM: Bridg. Gap Between Eng. Bus.).
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Commerce, Computer circuits, Customer profile, Customer profiles, Evolution of firm, Life cycle, Market lifecycle, Organizational structure, Organizational structures, Powerful devices, Predictive capacity, Strategy, Structural evolution, Structural form
@inproceedings{koplyay_evolution_2018,
title = {Evolution of firm structures in market and the supporting lifecycle logic},
author = {T. M. Koplyay and H. Motaghi and H. Hurta and M. Malouin},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85064340982&partnerID=40&md5=58dafc121ecd6f2f46c9082e8d107647},
isbn = {978-151087464-0 (ISBN)},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-01-01},
booktitle = {39th International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2018: Bridging the Gap Between Engineering and Business},
pages = {912–921},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {The structural forms of companies on the market lifecycle change substantially as the lifecycle unfolds. These changes are both structural and topological in concert with what is happening in the market. The firm shapes and substance evolve in a fashion that suggests an environmental adaption dictated by the market or more precisely anticipated by the firms as they read the market signals. This article traces the logic that defines the modes and results of this adaptation. The lifecycle itself has been demonstrated to be a powerful device by the principal author and colleagues, in a series of articles, to be symmetrically predictive in time, forecasting both the future and the past. This predictive capacity applies to structural evolution of the firm and the constraints that the distinct organizational shape of the structure will place on the firm. Furthermore, knowing the present shape, one can define both the past and successor structures and their fit to the enabling environment. The environment itself can be traced to market deep and surface structures and the closely correlated strategy landscape dominant at each stage of the market. © Copyright© (2018) by American Society for Engineering Management (ASEM). All rights reserved.},
note = {Journal Abbreviation: Int. Annu. Conf. Am. Soc. Eng. Manag., ASEM: Bridg. Gap Between Eng. Bus.},
keywords = {Commerce, Computer circuits, Customer profile, Customer profiles, Evolution of firm, Life cycle, Market lifecycle, Organizational structure, Organizational structures, Powerful devices, Predictive capacity, Strategy, Structural evolution, Structural form},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
The structural forms of companies on the market lifecycle change substantially as the lifecycle unfolds. These changes are both structural and topological in concert with what is happening in the market. The firm shapes and substance evolve in a fashion that suggests an environmental adaption dictated by the market or more precisely anticipated by the firms as they read the market signals. This article traces the logic that defines the modes and results of this adaptation. The lifecycle itself has been demonstrated to be a powerful device by the principal author and colleagues, in a series of articles, to be symmetrically predictive in time, forecasting both the future and the past. This predictive capacity applies to structural evolution of the firm and the constraints that the distinct organizational shape of the structure will place on the firm. Furthermore, knowing the present shape, one can define both the past and successor structures and their fit to the enabling environment. The environment itself can be traced to market deep and surface structures and the closely correlated strategy landscape dominant at each stage of the market. © Copyright© (2018) by American Society for Engineering Management (ASEM). All rights reserved.
5.
Jazouli, A.; Koplyay, T. M.; Mitchell, B.; Motaghi, H.
The rise of complexity due to stakeholders structure along the lifecycle in project management organizations Proceedings Article
In: 2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017, American Society for Engineering Management, 2017.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Commerce, Complexity, Delivery subsystem, Effectiveness and efficiencies, Efficiency, Life cycle, Market dynamics, Market strategies, Organization structures, Project delivery, Project management, Project management organization, Societies and institutions
@inproceedings{jazouli_rise_2017,
title = {The rise of complexity due to stakeholders structure along the lifecycle in project management organizations},
author = {A. Jazouli and T. M. Koplyay and B. Mitchell and H. Motaghi},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85040033522&partnerID=40&md5=b9472689a71e55954a94bd6a06e2df1d},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
booktitle = {2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {Much of complexity is hidden in structures of organizations, and the market forces significant adjustments to these structures during the dynamics of interactions as the market lifecycle unfolds. Market customer based profiles drive strategic choices, which in turn, exercise pressures on the alignment of organizations and their alliances or special delivery subsystems, such as projects. Early market strategies seek the right positioning and are effectiveness focused, and forgive mistakes and inefficiencies, whereas late market strategies search for alignment with the looming final cost leadership strategy by relentlessly concentrating on efficiency. Firms progress from many strategic choices to just one, and live the rest of their market lives under the inexorable dictates of efficiency, unless the market is rejuvenated by some disruptive intrusion. Both effectiveness and efficiency have their organization structure counterparts that best respond to these market signals. This paper will examine the rise of complexity due to stakeholders' structures in projects and the implications for the type of results delivered for host firms by the process. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.},
keywords = {Commerce, Complexity, Delivery subsystem, Effectiveness and efficiencies, Efficiency, Life cycle, Market dynamics, Market strategies, Organization structures, Project delivery, Project management, Project management organization, Societies and institutions},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Much of complexity is hidden in structures of organizations, and the market forces significant adjustments to these structures during the dynamics of interactions as the market lifecycle unfolds. Market customer based profiles drive strategic choices, which in turn, exercise pressures on the alignment of organizations and their alliances or special delivery subsystems, such as projects. Early market strategies seek the right positioning and are effectiveness focused, and forgive mistakes and inefficiencies, whereas late market strategies search for alignment with the looming final cost leadership strategy by relentlessly concentrating on efficiency. Firms progress from many strategic choices to just one, and live the rest of their market lives under the inexorable dictates of efficiency, unless the market is rejuvenated by some disruptive intrusion. Both effectiveness and efficiency have their organization structure counterparts that best respond to these market signals. This paper will examine the rise of complexity due to stakeholders' structures in projects and the implications for the type of results delivered for host firms by the process. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.
6.
Jazouli, A.; Koplyay, T. M.; Mitchell, B.; Motaghi, H.
The influence of innovation in shaping the underlying project management delivery structure Proceedings Article
In: 2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017, American Society for Engineering Management, 2017.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Commerce, Delivery projects, Firm innovation, High tech, High technology, High technology firms, Innovation, Market dynamics, Organizational structures, Project management, Types of innovations
@inproceedings{jazouli_influence_2017,
title = {The influence of innovation in shaping the underlying project management delivery structure},
author = {A. Jazouli and T. M. Koplyay and B. Mitchell and H. Motaghi},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85040047082&partnerID=40&md5=43ef3a3acc33552526d343c258a426a7},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
booktitle = {2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {High technology markets can be extremely dynamic and grow very quickly, but they generally evolve in a specific lifecycle manner. Innovation is ever present, and some may argue the life-blood of all high technology firms, but the types of innovation and the projects that are harnessed to deliver these innovations change as firms grow, mature, and move through the high technology market lifecycle. Company age and size will have an effect upon the project organizational structure and management approach, but the types of innovation required at certain times in the lifecycle also concurrently drive the manner in which delivery projects are conceived. This paper builds on previous literature of high tech markets and firm innovation strategies, by the authors, to examine why projects are less formalized, product or technology-focused in smaller or early start-ups and growth companies, but evolve to highly formalized process-focused in mature companies. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.},
keywords = {Commerce, Delivery projects, Firm innovation, High tech, High technology, High technology firms, Innovation, Market dynamics, Organizational structures, Project management, Types of innovations},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
High technology markets can be extremely dynamic and grow very quickly, but they generally evolve in a specific lifecycle manner. Innovation is ever present, and some may argue the life-blood of all high technology firms, but the types of innovation and the projects that are harnessed to deliver these innovations change as firms grow, mature, and move through the high technology market lifecycle. Company age and size will have an effect upon the project organizational structure and management approach, but the types of innovation required at certain times in the lifecycle also concurrently drive the manner in which delivery projects are conceived. This paper builds on previous literature of high tech markets and firm innovation strategies, by the authors, to examine why projects are less formalized, product or technology-focused in smaller or early start-ups and growth companies, but evolve to highly formalized process-focused in mature companies. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.
7.
Jazouli, A.; Koplyay, T. M.; Mitchell, B.; Motaghi, H.
Inferential evidence for complexity migration from markets to firms during the lifecycle Proceedings Article
In: 2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017, American Society for Engineering Management, 2017.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Boundary layers, Commerce, Corporate vision, External funding, Life cycle, Life cycle stages, Management issues, Market structures, Strategic plan, Tipping point, Value chains
@inproceedings{jazouli_inferential_2017,
title = {Inferential evidence for complexity migration from markets to firms during the lifecycle},
author = {A. Jazouli and T. M. Koplyay and B. Mitchell and H. Motaghi},
url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85040076267&partnerID=40&md5=5e9882af9599bc298ec0bf2e6c2de568},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
booktitle = {2017 International Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Management, ASEM 2017},
publisher = {American Society for Engineering Management},
abstract = {Markets evolve very quickly and companies form, grow, and then oftentimes fail in quick succession. The complexity of interactions change throughout the market and the firm's evolution, as companies navigate within their markets, manage their internal staffing and product development, and handle external funding imperatives. The inability or unwillingness to address complexity at any of the various life cycle stages, a firm could be forced into rapid decline and ultimately fail. Complexity is a collection of interacting objects: Human, technological, financial, or management issues; and these factors change along the high tech lifecycle as well. Complexity cannot be completely managed, but it can be often reasonably contained; this paper will provide inferential evidence for complexity migration from markets to firms, and the authors will examine factors that influence the nature of complexity in markets at various stages in the firm and market life cycle and discuss the boundary layers and tipping points that change the complexity landscape. The concept appears to be paramount because the literature on complex markets indicates that decisions can only be made on the margin when the future is made uncertain by high level of uncertainty due to complexity. And the firm will have to readjust its behavior without guidance from strategic plans and corporate vision, in some circumstances without the benefit of a stabilizing feedback generated through corporate learning under these circumstances of extreme decision pressures. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.},
keywords = {Boundary layers, Commerce, Corporate vision, External funding, Life cycle, Life cycle stages, Management issues, Market structures, Strategic plan, Tipping point, Value chains},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
Markets evolve very quickly and companies form, grow, and then oftentimes fail in quick succession. The complexity of interactions change throughout the market and the firm's evolution, as companies navigate within their markets, manage their internal staffing and product development, and handle external funding imperatives. The inability or unwillingness to address complexity at any of the various life cycle stages, a firm could be forced into rapid decline and ultimately fail. Complexity is a collection of interacting objects: Human, technological, financial, or management issues; and these factors change along the high tech lifecycle as well. Complexity cannot be completely managed, but it can be often reasonably contained; this paper will provide inferential evidence for complexity migration from markets to firms, and the authors will examine factors that influence the nature of complexity in markets at various stages in the firm and market life cycle and discuss the boundary layers and tipping points that change the complexity landscape. The concept appears to be paramount because the literature on complex markets indicates that decisions can only be made on the margin when the future is made uncertain by high level of uncertainty due to complexity. And the firm will have to readjust its behavior without guidance from strategic plans and corporate vision, in some circumstances without the benefit of a stabilizing feedback generated through corporate learning under these circumstances of extreme decision pressures. © 2017 American Society for Engineering Management.