The optimization planning of research equipment operation through the efficient integration of research equipment and scientist

  • Authors

    • Donghun Yoon
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.21504

  • This paper provides a quantitative way of ensuring the placement and integration of research equipment and scientists. An attempt was made to develop methods of enhancing the research equipment efficiency by focusing on the research equipment utilization difficulty level and the research equipment utilization capability of scientists. Eight research equipment and five scientists were selected for the study. Methods and research results on how to deploy and integrate research equipment and manpower according to the ranks based on the research equipment utilization difficulty and the research capabilities of scientists are presented herein. It is believed that a systematic method of and an optimized plan for deploying and integrating research equipment and scientists, as opposed to the intuitive method, are necessary. That is, deploying and integrating research equipment and scientists according to the ranks based on the research equipment utilization difficulty level and the research equipment utilization capability of the scientists are effective. The authors are confident that an efficient and optimized deployment and integration study for research equipment and scientists will make a significant contribution to research efficiency and productivity improvement. It is hoped that the findings obtained from this study will prove to be very useful for professors, researchers, and policymakers at universities and research institutes around the world.

  • References

    1. [1] The Ministry of Science, Technology, and Information (MoST), Direction and standard of government R&D investment, The Ministry of Science, Technology, and Information (MoST), (2018), 9-38.

      [2] Matsusaka, J. G., “Public Policy and the Initiative and Referendum: A Survey with Some New Evidenceâ€, Public Choice, 174(1), (2018), 107-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-017-0486-0.

      [3] Potrafke, N., “Government ideology and economic policy-making in the United States - a surveyâ€, Public Choice, 174(1), (2018), 145-207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-017-0491-3.

      [4] Liotard, I. & Revest, V., “Contests as innovation policy instruments: Lessons from the US federal agencies' experienceâ€, Technological Forecasting Social Change, 127, (2018), 57-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.008.

      [5] Oladosu, G. A., Leiby, P. N., Bowman, D. C., Uría-Martínez, R., & Johnson, M. M., “Impacts of oil price shocks on the United States economy: A meta-analysis of the oil price elasticity of GDP for net oil-importing economiesâ€, Energy Policy, 115, (2018), 523-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.01.032.

      [6] Onoe, J., “Trend of Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy and Its Expectation to Academicaâ€, Vacuum and Surface Science, 61(1), (2018), 41-43. https://doi.org/10.1380/vss.61.41.

      [7] Stephan, A., Schmidt, T. S., Bening, C. R., & Hoffmann, V. H., “The sectoral configuration of technological innovation systems: Patterns of knowledge development and diffusion in the lithium-ion battery technology in Japanâ€, Research Policy, 46(4), (2017), 709-723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.009.

      [8] Hanisch, M., “The effectiveness of conventional and unconventional monetary policy: Evidence from a structural dynamic factor model for Japanâ€, Journal of International Money and Finance, 70, (2017), 110-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2016.08.002.

      [9] Rammer, C. & Schubert, T., “Concentration on the few: mechanisms behind a falling share of innovative firms in Germanyâ€, Research Policy, 47(2), (2018), 379-389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.12.002.

      [10] Ringel, M., “Energy efficiency policy governance in a multi-level administration structure - evidence from Germanyâ€, Energy Efficiency, 10(3), (2017), 753-776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-016-9484-1.

      [11] Rommel, K. & Sagebiel, J., “Preferences for micro-cogeneration in Germany: Policy implications for grid expansion from a discrete choice experimentâ€, Applied Energy, 206, (2017), 612-622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.08.216.

      [12] Li, D. Z. & Zhang, Q., “Policy choice and economic growth under factional politics: Evidence from a Chinese Provinceâ€, China Economic Review, 47, (2018), 12-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2017.11.003.

      [13] Gui-long, Z., Yi, Z., Kai-hua, C., & Jiang, Y., “The impact of R&D intensity on firm performance in an emerging market: Evidence from China’s electronics manufacturing firmsâ€, Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 25(1), (2017), 41-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2017.1302492.

      [14] Weng, Q. & Söderbom, M., “Is R&D cash flow sensitive? Evidence from Chinese industrial firmsâ€, China Economic Review, 47, (2018), 77-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2017.12.008.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Yoon, D. (2018). The optimization planning of research equipment operation through the efficient integration of research equipment and scientist. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4), 2874-2880. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.21504