Many books and articles have been written demonstrating and discussing Portfolio Management. Most literature focuses on the actual project selection process, however a good project selection process optimizes the value of a portfolio.

Portfolio management encompasses three major tasks. First, the portfolio needs to be designed. In this stage, a risk/reward profile and potential return is designed. In the second phase, project opportunities are continually reviewed and selected in order to optimize the portfolio within a given portfolio design. Finally, the implementation of a portfolio through project execution needs to be continuously managed.

Peter was the highest rated speaker at MRT's recent conference on product development metrics. Here's what participants said about his presentation:

"Great information - real world input to tough questions"

"Dynamic. Good. Portable."

"Very good practical examples of Technology Development Portfolios"

"I wish he had more time. It was right on target."

"Very good session. Suggest you make this a short course topic. I would attend such a course. Good discussion with audience."

Peter Dierauer
Technology Leader
Honeywell Sensing & Control

Peter Dierauer is an Engineering Fellow with Honeywell. He graduated in 1988 from the University Biel/Bienne, Switzerland with a MSEE. He held several positions in Honeywell Europe before he moved to the United States in 1995. Since then he has focused his activities in the Technology Management field. Over the past three years he was involved in the development and deployment of the portfolio management system within a division of Honeywell Control Products. He facilitated the Automotive on Board Product Approval and Portfolio Management Committee and developed and deployed the Automotive Technology Portfolio Management Process. Today, Peter Dierauer is the Technology Leader for a division of Honeywell Control Products.

For the consumer, each new generation of semiconductor technology brings integrated circuits that are significantly faster, smaller, and cheaper, producing products with significantly more capability at ever decreasing prices. For the manufacturer, each new semiconductor technology generation brings greatly increased market opportunities along with greatly increased development costs, product portfolio risks and compressed product life cycles within which to recapture the total product portfolio investment. How to stretch limited internal resources to simultaneously bring the next generation of products to market while harvesting the profits from the previous generation is a problem often addressed through the use of strategic co-development partnerships. However, doing this successfully requires proper alignment of critical resources and project portfolios of both partner companies. Examples of "dos and don'ts" and "lessons learned" in achieving proper resource and project portfolio alignment for achieving successful semiconductor product co-development will be given.

Curt Raschke
Senior Member
Technical Staff
Texas Instruments

Curt Raschke, Ph.D is a Senior Member, Technical Staff with Texas Instruments and has over twenty years experience in managing new electronic product development projects with co-development partners. He has managed co-development projects in both the customer and supplier role and has brought to market products in the areas of wireless signal processing, digital printing, electronic countermeasures, terrain following radar, and secure communication. Curt is currently assigned to the Design Quality organization, adapting proven pipeline and portfolio management techniques to improve the quality and reliability of integrated circuits manufactured with newly developed deep sub-micron semiconductor manufacturing technology. In his previous assignment, he was a charter member of the TI R&D Effectiveness group and helped establish a Project Management Center of Excellence within the mixed signal product business units of TI

• Important steps within a portfolio management process to quantify project value
• Improved methods for prioritizing projects by using objective, standardized metrics
• How to plan and allocate resources for maximum utilization within your pipeline
• How to use tools to capture metric data during projects to support decision-making within gate meetings

Mark Wozniak
Technology Manager
J.M. Huber

Mark Wozniak, Ph.D., is the manager of a recently created new technology group for Huber Engineered Materials, a division of J.M. Huber Corporation. Dr. Wozniak is responsible for the identification and management of long-term research programs and technology platforms consistent with corporate and divisional strategies. His current work includes establishing process and structure for the research, statistical analysis and launch of new products.

&

Minas Apelian
Director, NPD
J.M. Huber

Minas Apelian, Ph.D., is the new product development leader for Huber Engineered Materials, a division of J.M. Huber Corporation. Dr. Apelian holds a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering with a Business Administration minor, and a M.S. in Chemical Engineering Practice from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He also has a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from Columbia University School of Engineering & App. Science. A Six Sigma blackbelt, Dr. Apelian brings a unique balance of science and business acumen to his new product development role. His experience includes extensive knowledge of materials processing, precipitation, statistical analysis methods and refining technology.

In today’s tough business climate, organizations must do everything possible to assure they receive maximum return from their limited research and new product/process development investments. One way to improve ROI in this area is to minimize uncoordinated or misaligned activities. Bruce Kirk will discuss Corning’s strategy for minimizing wasted efforts and improving linkage in the following areas:

• R&D with market needs - today and in the future
• Business and research alignment
• Functional alignment

assure the necessary alignment of R, D and other functional areas to maximize ROI.

Bruce Kirk
Corporate Process Owner
Corning

Bruce Kirk is the Corporate Process Owner for Corning Incorporated's Innovation Project Management and Roadmap Processes as well as the Manager of their Innovation Effectiveness group. Bruce's responsibilities at Corning include process development and deployment, employee education and training, global benchmarking, next generation process improvement and the development of the Division Process Owners role across Corning.

Bruce joined Corning Incorporated in 1976 and has held sales, sales management, marketing management and business management positions. His career experience has spanned the Medical Products, Science Products, Human Resource, Photonic Technologies and the Science and Technology Divisions.

Strategic decision processes and methodologies are playing a critical role in improving resource allocation in Pharma R&D. Optimal allocations are developed through information intensive processes that are marked by significant management focus; yet the complex and intense tactical details of organizing and mobilizing resources globally to enact decisions is often overlooked when choices are made. R&D organizations must be capable of quickly translating portfolio choices into hundreds of interlocking activities encompassing thousands of individuals. Among several, 4 levers can be considered to hone resource management:

1. Ensure that the resource capability and capacity of the organization to implement the decision are explicit considerations in the allocation process.
2. Develop resource plans and structures that provide shelter from the uncertainty inherent in R&D.
3. Develop the capability to respond effectively when operational reality is in conflict with the resource plan.
4. Develop the capability to implement high impact decisions where the work gets done, rapidly and efficiently.

Brian Kelly
Executive Director
Capacity Planning & Management
Merck

An IBM business unit suffering from projects missing committed launch dates (and revenue shortfalls). Believing that resource overloads, particularly on key people, were a major contributor, the unit invested in a resource management system that integrated product strategy and plans with resource planning. This ensured agreement on the right projects, prioritized allocation of resources, and a management ability to better work through dynamic changes. This case study will discuss the management approach and tools used to get better results.

• What are the prerequisites to operational success in resource management?
• How do you design tools and management systems with checks and balances?

Paul Aspinwall
Process Architect
IBM

During 35 years with IBM, Paul has been a salesman, market planner, business strategist for software, manager of product forecasting and business planning for software in Europe, manager of technology planning for internal use of IT, manager of systems education, program manager on National Language Support and Information Development, and currently a process architect for IBM's Integrated Product Development process. In 1999, the book "Business Process Engineering" included a chapter he co-authored on "IBM Reengineering from a Development Reengineering Perspective." Paul has
presented on IBM's reengineering efforts at the International Association
for Product Development workshops and at Management Roundtable and PDMA workshops.

In order to compete in today's marketplace, resources need to be planned and linked to business and technology strategies and the execution of those strategies. Proper resourcing needs to be performed both at the project level and the portfolio level.

This presentation links theory with practice as state-of-the-art information is merged with case studies of resourcing in several Kodak business units. Information from literature and consultants in product delivery is blended with manufacturing theory and case studies to demonstrate how time to market can be significantly reduced through proper resourcing. Recommendations are made first for individual projects, and then for portfolios of projects.

Chuck Hura
Portfolio Manager
Eastman Kodak

Chuck Hura is portfolio manager and executive assistant to the CTO & Vice President of Engineering, Encad, Inc., an Eastman Kodak Company. He currently is responsible for the delivery of product and technology roadmaps, portfolio resourcing plans, and linking technology and business strategy. Chuck has held various positions within Kodak for the past 20 years, including design engineer, engineering supervisor and manager, quality leader, and program manager. He has worked on copiers, desktop blood analyzers, satellites, printers, film cartridges, magnetic tape cartridges, and cameras at Kodak in an engineering consulting role.

This presentation will outline why Seagate opted to develop its own Resource and Technology Portfolio Management Tool/Process (R&TPM). The presenter will discuss the obstacles and lessons learned during implementation as well as the mechanics of the process/tool including monthly flow of information and report examples. Lastly, you will learn how Seagate’s R&TPM interacts and overlays with its development process.

Jerry Cash
Seagate Technology

Jerry Cash is Director of Resource and Technology Portfolio Management at Seagate Technology. He has been with Seagate for 15 years, spanning Engineering, Business Management, Operations, Product Launch Core Teams, and Technology Process Development. His current role at Seagate has called on him to build a system to map technologies and resources for strategic decision making for the development of computer disk drives under increasingly demanding technology, cost, and time pressures. Jerry reports to Brent King, head of the Business Process Office, which oversees Seagate's development processes and related initiative management.

Portfolio analysis generally bases project outcome on a top level declaration of business objectives coupled with ROI and risk analysis of projects in the presumed pipeline. While this approach establishes business priorities and cost/benefit, it does not generally tie the capability of the business systems to the desired outcome. Thus, processes are overloaded and the result is a suboptimal business outcome. We have tied system capability to portfolio objectives in a multiproject scheduling tool by using consistent timelines where scheduling is based on Theory of Constraints (TOC) algorithms. The presenters will review process, utility, and preliminary outcomes of this approach. Key learnings:

• An overview of some typical methods of portfolio management
• A reality-based method to manage multiple projects
• An introduction to portfolio management that is tied to organizational capacity

Douglas R. Brandt, PhD
Director
Abbott Laboratories

Douglas R. Brandt, Ph.D. Director, ADD Project Management Office. With over 20 years experience in the development of diagnostic assays and in project management, Dr. Brandt has championed the used of Critical Chain Project Management in the Abbott Diagnostic Division (ADD). Beginning in 1999, ADD began its development of a project management standard for the division based on the theory of constraints and these efforts resulted in the creation of Abbott Project Management (APM) and its implementation across the entire organization.

Therese Graff, MBA
Sr. Project Manager
Abbott Laboratories

Therese Graff, MBA. Senior Project Manager, ADD Project Management Office. With almost 20 years experience in assay and system development within the ADD, Ms. Graff has utilized multiple project management techniques. In 1999, she piloted the use of Critical Chain Project Management on a complex system development project and this methodology formed the basis for the current division project management standard, APM.

Aziz Ahmed
Project Manager
Abbott Laboratories

Aziz Ahmed. Project Manager, ADD Project Management Office. With nineteen years of experience in diagnostic immunoassay development in both clinical and commercial environments, Mr. Ahmed has spent the last ten years in project management, and three years implementing APM in the ADD.