| Abstract: | There is growing evidence to suggest that the success of new technology is linked to whether it is introduced as part of an overall corporate strategy or alternatively as an ‘ad hoc’ response to falling profits, extended lead-times and reduced productivity. Interviewing engineering managers in leading electronics and engineering companies including BICC, Ferranti, Rolls Royce, British Aerospace, Thorn EMI and others, the author found that investment in computer-aided design was not always implemented in line with corporate strategy, but instead as part of a sub-strategy, the success of which was usually constrained by the accounting methods used to justify it as well as the attitudes adopted by senior managers. In discussing these issues, the article compares British and Japanese managements' approach to new technology and questions the validity of traditional capital budgeting methods. |
