technology roadmapping thesis

MIT Libraries home DSpace@MIT

• DSpace@MIT Home
• MIT Libraries
• Graduate Theses

Show simple item record

Lean Technology Roadmapping: Assessing the Value Path of Existing Approaches and Exploring Process Improvements

Files in this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

▶ Technology Roadmapping is both an area of practice and active research. Generally, Technology Roadmapping is considered to be part of the broader field of Management of Technology (MOT). Here we summarize some of our ongoing research in technology roadmapping.

Publications

Knoll, Dominik, Alessandro Golkar, and Olivier de Weck. "A concurrent design approach for model-based technology roadmapping." In 2018 Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon), pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2018.

De Weck, Olivier L. Technology Roadmapping and Development: A Quantitative Approach to the Management of Technology. Springer Nature, 2022.

Siddiqi, Afreen, Julia Milton, George Lordos, and Olivier De Weck. "Trends and Technology Roadmapping in Earth Observation Missions." In IGARSS 2022-2022 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, pp. 7174-7177. IEEE, 2022.

Lordos, George C., and Olivier L. De Weck. "Technology Roadmapping of an ISRU System for NASA Using a Medium-Fidelity System Dynamics Simulation." In ASCEND 2022, p. 4307. 2022.

Navigation menu

Technology Roadmapping

• First Online: 22 June 2022

Cite this chapter

• Olivier L. de Weck 2  

3571 Accesses

1 Citations

This chapter begins by explaining what a technology roadmap is and why it is important in helping organizations plan for the future. We also discuss briefly the history of technology roadmapping (Kerr and Phaal, Technol Forecast Soc Chang 155:119967, 2020) as well as provide an example of a reference technology roadmap. This roadmap is designated as “2SEA” and concerns the development and deployment of solar electric aircraft . We give examples of organizations, such as NASA, that rely extensively on technology roadmapping and provide a normative approach to roadmapping called the advanced technology roadmap architecture (ATRA). Finally, we provide a scale for technology roadmapping that organizations can use to assess their own capabilities and maturity level in terms of technology roadmapping. This approach was implemented at a major aerospace company, with significant impact on the composition and direction of their R&D portfolio, and has since been adopted by others in industry, government, and academia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

I served as Senior Vice President (SVP) of Technology Planning and Roadmapping at Airbus for 2 years (2017 and 2018) while on leave from MIT and reported to the Chief Technology Officer (CTO). The CTO at Airbus is at the Executive Vice President (EVP) level and is a member of the company’s senior executive management team (the so-called “C-Suite”).

We estimate that it takes about $250 K per year (2019 figures) to create and properly maintain a quality technology roadmap. This means that an organization that has about 20 technology roadmaps should plan to spend about $5 million per year on technology roadmapping.

These 12 elements are a general recommendation for the outline and content of a technology roadmap. In our technology roadmapping and development class at MIT, we follow this outline and add between 15 and 20 technology roadmaps per year, see http://roadmaps.mit.edu

CFRP = carbon fiber reinforced polymers.

OPD and OPL are based on ISO Standard 19,450 (2015) for object-process methodology (OPM).

In general, physics-based models are preferred since empirically derived models are only valid over the interval of training data that were used on the input side. As technology progresses, the correlations derived for the empirical models may no longer be valid.

Disclaimer: While we have used the Zephyr as a motivating example at the beginning of this section, the strategic drivers in this section should not be taken as a direct reflection of the Airbus Defense and Space business strategy in the area of solar electric aircraft.

Not all targets or ambitions stated in a technology roadmap may initially be funded or fundable by the R&D budget. That is fundamentally okay, since the technology roadmap is a statement of ambitions, translated to quantified targets. However, once converged, the technology roadmap targets should be achievable both fiscally and in terms of their feasibility within physical limits.

This project was partially funded by the DARPA Vulture program whose aim it was to develop a solar-powered UAV that could fly for 5 years without landing. The project was canceled in 2012.

In many organizations, R&D projects are selected based mainly on “intuition” alone and the voices of a few – usually senior and very experienced – individuals. This is potentially a dangerous way to go as Christensen shows (Chap. 7 ) due to the innovator’s dilemma . Usually this intuition-based process by entrenched senior engineers and executives will favor sustaining incremental technology investments, instead of sustaining radical or even disruptive ones. The dynamics and pitfalls of R&D project selection and R&D portfolio management are discussed further in Chap. 16 .

NASA has recently selected the ATRA framework for researching improved ways of managing its technology portfolio, see: https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/spacetech/strg/early-stage-innovations-esi/esi2020/astra/

Bernal, Luis, et al. "Technology roadmapping handbook." International SEPT Program, University of Leipzig (2009)

Google Scholar  

Kerr C, Phaal R. Technology roadmapping: Industrial roots, forgotten history and unknown origins. Technological Forecasting and Social Change . 2020 Jun 1;155:119967.

Knoll, Dominik, Alessandro Golkar, and Olivier de Weck. "A concurrent design approach for model-based technology roadmapping." In 2018 Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon) , pp. 1-6. IEEE, 2018.

NASA Technology Roadmaps, Office of the Chief Technologist (OCT): https://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/roadmaps/index.html

Phaal, Robert, and Muller, Gerrit, “An architectural framework for roadmapping: Towards visual strategy,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change , Volume 76, Issue 1, 2009,Pages 39-49, ISSN 0040-1625

Schimpf, Sven, and Thomas Abele. "How German Companies apply Roadmapping: Evidence from an Empirical Study." Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 52 (2019): 74-88.

Article   Google Scholar  

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics , Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Olivier L. de Weck

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Object-process language (OPL) for the 2SEA roadmap

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

de Weck, O.L. (2022). Technology Roadmapping. In: Technology Roadmapping and Development . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88346-1_8

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88346-1_8

Published : 22 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-88345-4

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-88346-1

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• IEEE Xplore Digital Library
• IEEE Standards
• IEEE Spectrum

• Guide to Technology Roadmaps

A Guide to Technology Roadmaps

Technology roadmaps have been developed in the last few decades to drive the technology industry in new ways. Technology is constantly changing and expanding in development and application. Leaders in technology industries need a tool to both learn about development and consider directions for future innovation. That’s where technology roadmaps come in.

Technology roadmaps are comprehensive documents. They help industry researchers and developers engage in unified exploration of past, present, and future technologies with the goal of solving problems and creating better technologies for future generations.

What Are Technology Roadmaps?

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is a leader in the creation of technology roadmaps. IEEE defines technology roadmaps as documents that “stimulate an industry-wide dialogue to address the many facets and challenges of the development and implementation of an emerging technology.”

Technology roadmaps provide direction for companies looking to expand their own technological processes through advancements in their industries. These roadmaps provide a basis for industry leaders and company-based developers to work together as they develop new products in their fields.

The Elements of Technology Roadmaps

A roadmap is a peer-reviewed and published report usually available in digital and printable formats. The architecture of a technology roadmap varies by subject.

In general, roadmaps are forward looking documents that provide guidance for companies interested in the future of a particular area of technology or industry. Roadmaps can be product-specific, application-specific, or industry-wide.

Technology roadmaps are revised regularly. IEEE refreshes its roadmaps yearly, performing more serious updates and revisions every two years. In this manner, technology roadmaps remain relevant as industries establish and implement technological advancements.

The Development of Technology Roadmaps

Technology roadmaps are a relatively new phenomenon. According to Rakesh Kumar, a semiconductor veteran and chair of the IEEE Technology Roadmaps Committee, the first technology roadmap was created for the semiconductor industry in the 1990s.

This initial process of technology roadmapping brought together scientists and engineers from universities, industry, and government to define and develop the direction of semiconductor technology. These stakeholders used roadmapping to anticipate and prevent potential problems in maintaining development and to define the future needs within the semiconductor industry.

In 2015, IEEE adopted this semiconductor-based roadmap and used it as a roadmap template to develop additional technology roadmaps .

Today, IEEE has roadmap activities under development in a number of areas to address the needs and guide the work of scientists, engineers, and academics researching future technologies. IEEE is dedicated to continually expanding its roadmapping practices to provide industry experts with an overview of the course that their respective technologies are taking.

How Are Technology Roadmaps Used?

Technology roadmaps have a specific audience, though members of that audience use them in unique ways. Overall, stakeholders, such as company executives and research and development teams, use technology roadmaps to understand their industry, expand their companies, and guide their decision-making.

As technology advances, industries continue to refer to technology roadmaps to remain current on developments, design and implement new tools, and sustain their research for generations.

The Industries That Use Technology Roadmaps

The first technology roadmaps were designed for the semiconductor industry, but the creation of the first roadmap set a foundation for future technology roadmaps in many industries. Further roadmaps have been designed to benefit IT, medical, computer science, and electronics industries.

In each of these areas of technology, key stakeholders use roadmapping to stimulate and guide innovation within their field. Company representatives, equipment manufacturers, service providers, and government and research agencies all collaborate. They update one another on research, strategy, technology planning, and developments. They then consider the guidelines in the roadmaps to generate ideas and create plans for future technology solutions.

Technology Roadmaps vs. Product Roadmaps

It’s important not to confuse technology roadmaps with product roadmaps. A key distinction is in their application.

Technology roadmaps provide industry-wide guidelines and perspectives for future developments. In contrast, a product roadmap outlines company-specific guidelines and is usually viewed as a proprietary and competitive resource that explains a single company’s internal processes and designs.

For example, IEEE is the creator of a technology roadmap called “ International Roadmap for Devices and Systems ” (IRDS) which details the history of semiconductor devices and systems and aims to stimulate innovation for all participants in semiconductor devices and systems. It has been made widely available to individuals and organizations working in the semiconductor sector. However, an individual company within the semiconductor device sector may create a product roadmap that outlines the company’s best practices and intentions for product expansion, but this document would be proprietary and would not typically be shared with other sector participants. As companies develop product roadmaps, key stakeholders and research and development teams rely on technology roadmaps to guide their product development plans.

Initially, companies may review a technology roadmap to determine what technology is available and will be available in the near future. They then use that knowledge to develop their product roadmaps and, ultimately, new products to expand their business.

Who Uses Technology Roadmaps?

Technology roadmaps are designed for specific users within specific industries. Those who use them are typically involved in the design and implementation of new products or scientific research. Some examples are provided below.

Development Teams

For most roadmap users, the purpose of technology roadmapping is development. Most companies work in a repetitive chain-like process, moving through the stages of research, development, and manufacturing for each new product. Developing new products, equipment, and processes benefits greatly from the regular use of roadmaps.

Funding Agencies

Government or private funding agencies often refer to technology roadmaps to determine how to allocate funding for research and other initiatives.

Product Managers

Within individual companies, product managers rely on the predictions and statistics found in technology roadmaps to determine how to best allocate resources to allow them to meet their long-term goals.

Academics use technology roadmaps to identify long-term problems and technology gaps in a given industry. Technology roadmaps can guide the focus of academic research toward finding technology solutions and technology alternatives to address those problems that lack solutions.

What is IEEE’s Role with Technology Roadmaps?

Technology roadmaps are more important than ever, and IEEE is a prominent voice in their development and use. As the world’s largest technical professional organization, IEEE is dedicated to advancing technological innovation to benefit humanity. Since its founding in 1884, IEEE has been a key player in the development of technological excellence around the world.

How IEEE Uses Technology Roadmaps

Researchers and developers in the IEEE community have long been stakeholders in creating roadmaps designed to support advancement in electronics, internet technology, neurotechnology, semiconductor devices, and other areas of technological innovation. IEEE has designed roadmaps to encourage the advancement of emerging technologies.

Science and technology roadmaps designed by IEEE are intended to portray the structural relationships among science, technology, and applications. They function as technical roadmaps that provide a practical and applicable business plan for stakeholders from companies in science and technology fields.

For example, IEEE’s “ International Technology Roadmap for Wide Bandgap Power Conductors ” (ITRW) provides guidance for developers and researchers seeking to transition from silicon devices to wide bandgap devices. Meanwhile, IEEE’s “ Heterogeneous Integration Roadmap ” (HIR) is devoted to developing the components that make up technologies such as smartphones, Internet of Things devices (IoT), intelligent automobiles, and many other products. IEEE’s “International Network Generations Roadmap” (INGR) focuses on the future of communications, including applications and services, deployment, energy efficiency, Massive MIMO (developers in the 5G and beyond wireless ecosystem), security, and systems optimization.

Using technology roadmaps from IEEE, industry leaders are closing the gap between potential and attainable solutions to development challenges in the semiconductor and electronic manufacturing fields. IEEE’s roadmaps unite experts to engage in strategic planning to reach

a unified consensus on advancing technology in their fields and setting unified goals.

IEEE is constantly exploring new areas for roadmaps. Currently, it is developing roadmaps in areas such as robotics , power electronics for distributed energy , and neural therapeutics .

Who Is Involved in Building Technology Roadmaps?

Technology roadmaps are never developed in a vacuum. Developing a successful roadmap requires input from stakeholders and specialists. It is essential that each roadmap team contain experts with diverse skills in areas such as management, product development, research, and product implementation. Key roles are the roadmap manager, Product Developers, Project Managers, Program Directors and other industry experts. Senior management may also be involved.

Roadmap Manager

A roadmap manager should be identified to guide the development process. This manager should be an expert product manager who can guide participants to create a technically realistic and innovative roadmap useful for future product development. The manager should be devoted to creating a roadmap that meets the needs of the industry while allowing room for improvement and growth in the field.

The experts working on a roadmap typically come from a variety of backgrounds. Within a company, this could include Product Developers, Project Managers, and Program Directors. More broadly, Scientists, engineers, researchers, development teams, and even academic or government leaders may work together to create an effective roadmap.

Experts who understand marketing needs and the mission of new products should also be involved in roadmap development. These experts ensure that roadmaps don’t just benefit the scientific community but also aid companies in designing product roadmaps based on technology roadmaps.

Senior Management

The senior management of industry-leading companies can also be involved in roadmaps, although sometimes only in a review capacity. Their focus is often on the business implications and outlook of the roadmap. Senior management can also provide guidelines and incentives to workers to encourage the roadmap development process. Support and oversight from senior management can drive the speed and accuracy of development to ensure that each roadmap meets the needs of the industry.

As one example, IEEE’s “International Network Generations Roadmap” (INGR) is run by a series of teams. These teams cover applications and services, deployment, energy efficiency, Massive MIMO (developers in the 5G and beyond wireless ecosystem), security, and systems optimization.

Each team is headed by two or three chair members who act as managers. All roadmap development teams at IEEE work under the IEEE Technology Roadmaps Committee members (senior management), who set the standards, guidelines, and checklists for developing roadmaps.

How Do Technology Roadmaps Relate to Industry Standards?

Technology roadmaps are beneficial in determining industry standards. Each industry has different needs for the development and implementation of technology solutions and products. Technology roadmaps define these standards in a few key ways.

First, technology roadmaps unite industry leaders and development teams in one space. Together, these two groups define the unifying standards and principles necessary to create effective products.

Second, as time goes on and things change within industries, technology roadmaps provide a succinct history of industry standards. When industries need to add new standards or improve upon old ones, roadmaps are easily updated with new information.

Third, as companies develop new strategies and business goals to meet the growing needs of their stakeholders and customers, they can use technology roadmapping to determine what is possible in product development. Then they can implement these standards into their own product roadmaps.

The development process of IEEE’s “ International Roadmap for Devices and Systems ” (IRDS) is a great example of how this works. The initial “International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors” (ITRS) was a precursor to the IRDS that outlined a vision for the semiconductor industry intended to expand the vision of Gordon Moore , a widely acknowledged visionary in the semiconductor industry.

Over time, the semiconductor industry targeted by the ITRS developed new areas of research and new standards for integrating related but tangential devices and systems within the industry. The IRDS was created to broaden the scope of research into developments in communication, the use of fiber optics, and other changes that go beyond the industry’s initial work in semiconductors.

Technology Roadmaps at IEEE

Throughout their history, technology roadmaps have become increasingly useful for development in the fields of science and technology. With IEEE’s comprehensive and ever-evolving technology roadmaps, researchers, development teams, and key stakeholders are unifying around comprehensive documents designed to address past, present, and future processes and needs in their industries.

IEEE is dedicated to helping stakeholders from many industries engage with one another in the development of useful and actionable technology roadmaps.

Interested in learning more about technology roadmaps ? IEEE Roadmaps provides guidance and structure to support technical roadmap development and activities. Joining this initiative will provide you the opportunity to discuss common challenges and objectives while continuing progress towards your roadmap goals. Connect with other industry, academia, and governmental experts providing this critical resource for the advancement of technology.

Our Community

• Alumni Impact Stories
• Community Recognition
• Faculty Awards & Honors
• Researchers & Postdocs Association (RPA^3)
• Student Groups
• DEI Dashboard (Internal)
• Environment, Health, and Safety
• Wright Brothers Wind Tunnel
• Professors Emeriti
• Autonomous Systems & Decision-Making
• Computational Science & Engineering
• Earth & Space Sciences
• Human-System Collaboration
• Systems Design & Engineering
• Transportation & Exploration
• Vehicle Design & Engineering

Undergraduate Program

• Undergraduate Degrees & Requirements
• Apply (via MIT Admissions)
• Objectives & Outcomes
• Research Opportunities
• Work, Internships, & Extracurricular Activities

Graduate Program

• Graduate Degrees & Requirements
• Graduate Fields
• For Prospective Students
• For Current Students
• View Thesis Archive (via DSpace)
• Certificate in Aerospace Innovation

Academics & Resources

• Academic Calendar (via MIT Registrar)
• AeroAstro Communication Lab
• Resources & Support
• Special Course Listings
• Subject Listing (via MIT Course Catalog Bulletin)
• Subject Evaluation (via MIT Registrar)
• News & Impact
• Public Events
• Department Events (Log-in Required)
• Department Resources

3 Questions: Technology roadmapping in teaching and industry

Innovation is rarely accidental. Behind every new invention and product, including the device you are using to read this story, is years of research, investment, and planning. Organizations that want to reach these milestones in the fastest and most efficient way possible use technology roadmaps.  

Olivier de Weck , the Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics and professor of engineering systems, taps into his expertise in systems design and engineering to help company leaders develop their own path to progress. His work has led to an MIT graduate course, two MIT Professional Education classes, and the textbook “ Technology Roadmapping and Development: A Quantitative Approach to the Management of Technology .” Recently, his textbook was honored with the Most Promising New Textbook Award from the Textbook and Academic Authors Association. The textbook not only serves as a guide to students but also to company leaders. Aerospace design and manufacturer Airbus, defense technology laboratory Draper, and package delivery giant UPS have implemented de Weck’s methods. Here, De Weck describes the value of technology roadmapping. 

Q: What is technology roadmapping, and why is it important?

A: A technology roadmap is a planning tool. It connects current products, services, and missions to future endeavors, and identifies the specific technologies needed to achieve them.

Let’s say an organization wants to build a spacecraft to explore an asteroid in the farthest reaches of our solar system. It will need a new kind of electric thruster technology so that it can travel to the asteroid faster and more efficiently than what is currently possible. A technology roadmap details several factors, such as the level of performance needed to meet the goal and how to measure progress. The guide also links various responsibilities within an organization, including strategy, product development, research and development (R&D), and finance, so everyone understands the technologies that are being funded and how they will benefit the company.

Technology roadmapping has been in use for over five decades. For a long time, it was taught in business schools in a more general and qualitative way, but the practice has evolved over the years. The technology roadmapping I teach and write about uses quantitative engineering analysis and connects it to strategic thinking. From 2017 to 2018, I used and refined this approach for Airbus, which has a $1 billion R&D budget. Together, we developed over 40 technology roadmaps, which included a plan to build ZEROe, a commercial aircraft that will run on hydrogen fuel, by 2035.

Q: Are technology roadmaps used widely in industry today, and what gaps in knowledge/processes does your approach address?   

A: Colleagues from the University of Cambridge and the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany and I recently conducted an industry-wide survey about technology roadmapping. Of the 200 companies that participated, 62 percent said they use technology roadmaps to make strategic investment decisions and 32 percent update them yearly. Yet only 11 percent of firms plan technologies 10 years out. This is a bit concerning because technology does not move as fast as many people believe. Using Airbus’s ZEROe aircraft as an example, it is important to think 10 or even 20 years ahead, not just within three to five years.

My approach to technology roadmapping uses a method I call Advanced Technology Roadmap Architecture (ATRA). It provides a step-by-step methodology to create a technology roadmap that is more rigorous and has a longer time horizon than traditional roadmaps. ATRA asks four essential questions: Where are we today, where could we go, where should we go, and where we are going? Instead of technologies, I want people to think of these questions as a guide to their retirement investing. You could invest in some high-risk mutual funds, low-risk bonds, or an index fund that will follow the market. You would pick investments that reflect your future goals and risk tolerances. ATRA works in the same way. It enables organizations to select the right mix of R&D based on different scenarios and different risk tolerances.

Q: Can you share how you designed your book and the courses, including 16.887/EM.427, to help students understand and apply technology roadmapping?   

A: My time at Airbus allowed me to implement and battle-test technology roadmapping and ATRA. When I returned to MIT in 2019, I had already drafted chapters of the book and MIT students provided great feedback, which allowed me to refine and improve the book to the point where it would be useful and understandable to future MIT engineering and business students, industry practitioners, and C-level executives.

An important feature of both my textbook and class that may not be obvious is my focus on history. With innovation moving as fast as it is, it is easy to claim a never-been-done-before technology. That is often not the case — for example, one student did a technology roadmap of virtual reality headsets. He realized that people were doing virtual reality in the 1960s and 70s. It was super crude, clunky, and the resolution was poor. Still, there is a 60-year history that needs to be understood and acknowledged. My students and I have created a library of nearly 100 roadmaps on wide-ranging technologies, including superconducting nuclear fusion, lab-grown meat, and bioplastics. Each one traces an innovation’s history.

Related Stories

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides

Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Technology roadmap'

Create a spot-on reference in apa, mla, chicago, harvard, and other styles.

Consult the top 50 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Technology roadmap.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

Wiklund, Joakim. "Technology roadmap for exploitative development : A case study of a manufacturing company." Thesis, Luleå tekniska universitet, Institutionen för ekonomi, teknik och samhälle, 2017. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-64302.

Letaba, Tshotleho Petrus. "Complex Technology Roadmap Development in the Context of Developing Countries." Thesis, University of Pretoria, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/2263/64412.

Vural, Asli. "Clean Coal And Carbon Capture And Storage Technology Roadmap Of Turkey." Master's thesis, METU, 2010. http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12611709/index.pdf.

Kim, Mun Jung. "Industry Technology Roadmap for the Flushable Pre-moistened Nonwoven Wipes Industry." NCSU, 2009. http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/theses/available/etd-10012009-081723/.

Furuyama, Yasushi 1963. "Technological development under global warning : roadmap of the coal generation technology." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/17855.

Palokangas, M. (Mari). "CeHRes roadmap utilization in development of eHealth technology solutions:a Scoping review." Master's thesis, University of Oulu, 2017. http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:oulu-201712023270.

Roux, Rina Nicolene. "A Roadmap for the Titanium Metal Industry of South Africa." Thesis, University of Pretoria, 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/2263/75057.

Ahmad, Ayyaz. "Rapid prototyping technology adoption framework development: Operationalization and roadmap generation for SMEs." Thesis, Curtin University, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/2440.

Tom, Mary. "An initial technology roadmap for home automation : home and personal life management." Thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2010. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/35719/1/Mary_Tom_Thesis.pdf.

Alva, Macheri Daniel Arturo, and Robledillo Meyling Ku. "Roadmap de tendencias de TI al 2030." Bachelor's thesis, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC), 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/653133.

Bekker, Michiel Christiaan. "A review of Sasol Technology Engineering division's strategic roadmap and the implementation thereof." Thesis, Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch, 1999. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/5032.

Junior, Luiz Antonio Bloem da Silveira. "Aplicação de técnicas de previsão tecnológica visando reduzir o peso de amortecedores." Universidade de São Paulo, 2013. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/12/12139/tde-22012014-183733/.

Mörk, Felix. "Climate Neutral Roadmap in Fossil Free Competitiveness for Paroc, Sweden : what Paroc can do to meet up with the roadmap from Fossil Free Sweden." Thesis, Högskolan Kristianstad, Fakulteten för naturvetenskap, 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-22107.

Amer, Muhammad. "Extending Technology Roadmap through Fuzzy Cognitive Map-based Scenarios: The Case of the Wind Energy Sector of Pakistan." PDXScholar, 2013. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds/999.

Arbesú-Cardona, Jorge. "Copy India, paste in Panama : a roadmap to effective financial inclusion via a digital & cashless evolution." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/117955.

robert, provinah. "Smart Africa : Patents and Standards in ICT, a roadmap for Africa in the digital world." Thesis, Uppsala universitet, Juridiska institutionen, 2018. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-353712.

Hirose, Yuta. "Technology venture emergence characterisation." Thesis, University of Cambridge, 2017. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/273663.

Bondeson, Per, and Stefan Liss. "Roadmap of Virtual Commissioning Inertia : An Investigation of Technical and Non-TechnicalFields of Action." Thesis, KTH, Industriell produktion, 2018. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-232436.

Minnie, Erick Francois. "Technology roadmap for improvement of the North–West University neutron monitor system of the Centre for Space Research / Erick F. Minnie." Thesis, North-West University, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10394/4829.

Ristow, Alan Hugo. "Numerical modeling of uncertainty and variability in the technology, manufacturing, and economics of crystalline silicon photovoltaics." Diss., Atlanta, Ga. : Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/1853/24643.

Wüst, Michael. "Mathcad Prime 3.0." Universitätsbibliothek Chemnitz, 2013. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:ch1-qucosa-114443.

Franco, Renato Ribeiro. "O mapeamento tecnológico e a gestão de tecnologia no CNPDIA - Embrapa." Universidade Federal de São Carlos, 2009. https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/3599.

Figueroa, Salhuana Manuel Antonio, and Zegarra Erick Daniel Salazar. "Haptic Technology y Volumetric Display: Taxonomías de Técnicas de Desarrollo y Propuesta de Roadmap de Proyectos para el avance de estas tecnologías en el Perú." Bachelor's thesis, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC), 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/653656.

Garcia, Richard D. Sloan Joshua K. "The framework for an information technology strategic roadmap for the United States Marine Corps how current acquisitions align to the current strategic direction of the Department Of Defense, Department of the Navy, and United States Marine Corps /." Monterey, Calif. : Naval Postgraduate School, 2008. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA483763.

Sloan, Joshua K. "The framework for an information technology strategic roadmap for the United States Marine Corps how current acquisitions align to the current strategic direction of the Department Of Defense, Department of the Navy, and United States Marine Corps." Thesis, Monterey California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/4088.

Grillon, Louis S. "Creation and sustainment of manufacturing technology roadmaps." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/73412.

Ekebring, Oskar, and Mattias Eriksson. "Managing a transformation towards industry 4.0 : A study within the bus manufacturing industry." Thesis, Karlstads universitet, 2020. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-78855.

Box, Stephanie. "Arterial roadway traffic data collection using bluetooth technology." Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/1853/42778.

Rajagopal, Anand 1979. "A knowledge services roadmay for online learning." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2005. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/30200.

Rosenbaum, Tommy. "Performance prediction of a future silicon-germanium heterojunction bipolar transistor technology using a heterogeneous set of simulation tools and approaches." Thesis, Bordeaux, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017BORD0550/document.

Dominik, Benjamin Philipp. "Decarbonization Pathways for the German Chemical and Steel Industry : Integrated Scenario-Based Technology Roadmaps." Thesis, KTH, Skolan för industriell teknik och management (ITM), 2019. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-264346.

Laube, Thorsten. "Methodik des interorganisationalen Technologietransfers ein Technologie-Roadmap-basiertes Verfahren für kleine und mittlere technologieorientierte Unternehmen." Heimsheim Jost-Jetter, 2009. http://d-nb.info/995041504/34.

Laube, Thorsten. "Methodik des interorganisationalen Technologietransfers ein Technologie-Roadmap-basiertes Verfahren für kleine und mittlere technologieorientierte Unternehmen." Heimsheim Jost-Jetter, 2008. http://d-nb.info/993473814/04.

Kamtsiou, Evanthia. "Meso-level co-innovation dynamic roadmapping for managing systemic innovations." Thesis, Brunel University, 2016. http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/14270.

Saliba, Danielle. "WIFI Integration with LTE in the Roadmap of 5G Networks." Thesis, Ecole nationale supérieure Mines-Télécom Atlantique Bretagne Pays de la Loire, 2019. http://www.theses.fr/2019IMTA0168.

Wickström, Jennie. "Roadmate re:design : Design- och utvecklingsprocessen vid redesign av en digital tjänst." Thesis, Södertörns högskola, Institutionen för naturvetenskap, miljö och teknik, 2014. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-23562.

Laube, Thorsten [Verfasser]. "Methodik des interorganisationalen Technologietransfers : ein Technologie-Roadmap-basiertes Verfahren für kleine und mittlere technologieorientierte Unternehmen / vorgelegt von Thorsten Laube." Heimsheim : Jost-Jetter, 2009. http://d-nb.info/995041504/34.

Carlos, Rafael. "Modelo para atualização de roadmaps utilizando conceitos de agilidade e inteligência competitiva." Universidade de São Paulo, 2014. http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/18/18156/tde-02062014-084313/.

Sorsh, Nancy, and Egelstad Joacim Semper. "Jämförelse av appar för mätning av vägkvalitet." Thesis, KTH, Skolan för industriell teknik och management (ITM), 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-299342.

Tian, Wenhui. "Transition énergétique et inégalité de carbone : une analyse prospective des feuilles de route technologique pour la Chine, la France et les États-Unis d’Amérique." Thesis, Université Paris-Saclay (ComUE), 2015. http://www.theses.fr/2015SACLC001/document.

Colombo, Marcelo. "Desenvolvimento de ferramenta de autoria para aplicação de videos digitais interativos na educação." [s.n.], 2009. http://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/251538.

Lee, Anne Lim. "Return on Investment of the CFTP Framework With and Without Risk Assessment." ScholarWorks, 2017. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/3306.

高盟超. "A Technology Roadmap for 3D Display." Thesis, 2011. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/03945226544782956893.

Tsai, Chia-lin, and 蔡佳潾. "Technology analysis for front-end industry using patent roadmap and technology roadmap：a case study based on CNT-FED." Thesis, 2006. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/16236660328981323472.

Hu, Chufen, and 胡菊芬. "Technology Roadmap Modeling and Patent Analysis of Intelligent Robot." Thesis, 2013. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/47039394487506314283.

LU, YING-CHIEH, and 呂英傑. "Roadmap and Patent Analysis for Robot Visual Servo Technology." Thesis, 2013. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/76677614223126517359.

HUANG, CHENG-PING, and 黃政平. "THE STUDY ON TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY STATUS AND TREND IN TECHNOLOGY ROADMAP." Thesis, 2003. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/35073531664496064559.

Hung, Chia-chih, and 洪家智. "Development Tendency of High Speed Transfer Interface - Technology Roadmap Analysis." Thesis, 2012. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/21294154764331415065.

Chen, Yu-Ju, and 陳昱茹. "MADM Methods Based Data-Driven Technology Roadmap for Virtual Reality." Thesis, 2018. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/82834a.

Weng, Chien-I., and 翁建一. "Studies on smart manufacturing technology roadmap and enterprise investment intention." Thesis, 2018. http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/pe9c6p.

share this!

May 15, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

trusted source

Q&A: Technology roadmapping in teaching and industry

by Marisa Demers, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Innovation is rarely accidental. Behind every new invention and product, including the device you are using to read this story, is years of research, investment, and planning. Organizations that want to reach these milestones in the fastest and most efficient way possible use technology roadmaps.

Olivier de Weck, the Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics and professor of engineering systems, taps into his expertise in systems design and engineering to help company leaders develop their own path to progress. His work has led to an MIT graduate course, two MIT Professional Education classes, and the textbook "Technology Roadmapping and Development: A Quantitative Approach to the Management of Technology."

Recently, his book was honored with the Most Promising New Textbook Award from the Textbook and Academic Authors Association. The textbook not only serves as a guide to students but also to company leaders. Aerospace design and manufacturer Airbus, defense technology laboratory Draper, and package delivery giant UPS have implemented de Weck's methods. Here, De Weck describes the value of technology roadmapping.

What is technology roadmapping, and why is it important?

A technology roadmap is a planning tool. It connects current products, services, and missions to future endeavors, and identifies the specific technologies needed to achieve them.

Let's say an organization wants to build a spacecraft to explore an asteroid in the farthest reaches of our solar system. It will need a new kind of electric thruster technology so that it can travel to the asteroid faster and more efficiently than what is currently possible.

A technology roadmap details several factors, such as the level of performance needed to meet the goal and how to measure progress. The guide also links various responsibilities within an organization, including strategy, product development, research and development (R&D), and finance, so everyone understands the technologies that are being funded and how they will benefit the company.

Technology roadmapping has been in use for over five decades. For a long time, it was taught in business schools in a more general and qualitative way, but the practice has evolved over the years. The technology roadmapping I teach and write about uses quantitative engineering analysis and connects it to strategic thinking.

From 2017 to 2018, I used and refined this approach for Airbus, which has a $1 billion R&D budget. Together, we developed over 40 technology roadmaps, which included a plan to build ZEROe, a commercial aircraft that will run on hydrogen fuel, by 2035.

Are technology roadmaps used widely in industry today, and what gaps in knowledge/processes does your approach address?

Colleagues from the University of Cambridge and the Fraunhofer Institute in Germany and I recently conducted an industry-wide survey about technology roadmapping. Of the 200 companies that participated, 62% said they use technology roadmaps to make strategic investment decisions and 32% update them yearly. Yet only 11% of firms plan technologies 10 years out. This is a bit concerning because technology does not move as fast as many people believe. Using Airbus's ZEROe aircraft as an example, it is important to think 10 or even 20 years ahead, not just within three to five years.

My approach to technology roadmapping uses a method I call Advanced Technology Roadmap Architecture (ATRA). It provides a step-by-step methodology to create a technology roadmap that is more rigorous and has a longer time horizon than traditional roadmaps.

ATRA asks four essential questions: Where are we today, where could we go, where should we go, and where we are going? Instead of technologies, I want people to think of these questions as a guide to their retirement investing.

You could invest in some high-risk mutual funds , low-risk bonds, or an index fund that will follow the market. You would pick investments that reflect your future goals and risk tolerances. ATRA works in the same way. It enables organizations to select the right mix of R&D based on different scenarios and different risk tolerances.

Can you share how you designed your book and the courses, including 16.887/EM.427, to help students understand and apply technology roadmapping?

My time at Airbus allowed me to implement and battle-test technology roadmapping and ATRA. When I returned to MIT in 2019, I had already drafted chapters of the book and MIT students provided great feedback, which allowed me to refine and improve the book to the point where it would be useful and understandable to future MIT engineering and business students, industry practitioners, and C-level executives.

An important feature of both my textbook and class that may not be obvious is my focus on history. With innovation moving as fast as it is, it is easy to claim a never-been-done-before technology. That is often not the case—for example, one student did a technology roadmap of virtual reality headsets. He realized that people were doing virtual reality in the 1960s and 70s. It was super crude, clunky, and the resolution was poor.

Still, there is a 60-year history that needs to be understood and acknowledged. My students and I have created a library of nearly 100 roadmaps on wide-ranging technologies, including superconducting nuclear fusion, lab-grown meat, and bioplastics. Each one traces an innovation's history.

This story is republished courtesy of MIT News ( web.mit.edu/newsoffice/ ), a popular site that covers news about MIT research, innovation and teaching.

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Can we rid artificial intelligence of bias?

3 hours ago

Q&A: Model disgorgement—the key to fixing AI bias and copyright infringement?

May 17, 2024

Sun, sustainability, and silicon: A double dose of solar fuel research

Floating photovoltaics could limit Africa's future reliance on hydro-generated energy

Orphan articles: The 'dark matter' of Wikipedia

The tentacles of retracted science reach deep into social media: A simple button could change that

Researchers find LLMs are easy to manipulate into giving harmful information

A promising three-terminal diode for wireless communication and optically driven computing

Scientists develop a soft robot that mimics a spider's leg

May 16, 2024

New research to make digital transactions quantum safe and 20 times faster

Related stories.

Use of roadmapping as a strategic planning tool in industrial and research organizations

Jun 30, 2023

In new book, researchers address challenges of adopting additive manufacturing

Feb 20, 2019

Worker mobility can impact adoption of new technology

Mar 27, 2024

Researchers release roadmap for the development of quantum information technologies

Dec 14, 2022

New roadmap guides industries to invest in low-cost, low-energy salt water treatment and recycle wastewater

Sep 10, 2021

New circular economy roadmap reveals how to reduce plastic waste in India

Dec 7, 2023

Recommended for you

Finding credible pathways to net-zero emissions: The challenge of scaling up an emerging electrification technology

'Green grabbing' of Brazilian public and common lands a threat, says study

May 14, 2024

Microsoft claims that small, localized language models can be powerful as well

Apr 24, 2024

Securing competitiveness of energy-intensive industries through relocation: The pulling power of renewables

Apple claims its new AI outperforms GPT-4 on some tasks by including on-screen content and background context

Apr 9, 2024

Gmail revolutionized email 20 years ago. People thought it was Google's April Fool's Day joke

Mar 31, 2024

Let us know if there is a problem with our content

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Tech Xplore in any form.

Your Privacy

This site uses cookies to assist with navigation, analyse your use of our services, collect data for ads personalisation and provide content from third parties. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use .

E-mail newsletter

Graduate Writing Center

Introductions, thesis statements, and roadmaps - graduate writing center.

• Citations / Avoiding Plagiarism
• Critical Thinking
• Discipline-Specific Resources
• Generative AI
• iThenticate FAQ
• Types of Papers
• Standard Paper Structure

Introductions, Thesis Statements, and Roadmaps

• Body Paragraphs and Topic Sentences
• Literature Reviews
• Conclusions
• Executive Summaries and Abstracts
• Punctuation
• Style: Clarity and Concision
• Writing Process
• Writing a Thesis
• Quick Clips & Tips
• Presentations and Graphics

The first paragraph or two of any paper should be constructed with care, creating a path for both the writer and reader to follow. However, it is very common to adjust the introduction more than once over the course of drafting and revising your document. In fact, it is normal (and often very useful, or even essential!) to heavily revise your introduction after you've finished composing the paper, since that is most likely when you have the best grasp on what you've been aiming to say.

The introduction is your opportunity to efficiently establish for your reader the topic and significance of your discussion, the focused argument or claim you’ll make contained in your thesis statement, and a sense of how your presentation of information will proceed.

There are a few things to avoid in crafting good introductions. Steer clear of unnecessary length: you should be able to effectively introduce the critical elements of any project a page or less. Another pitfall to watch out for is providing excessive history or context before clearly stating your own purpose. Finally, don’t lose time stalling because you can't think of a good first line. A funny or dramatic opener for your paper (also known as “a hook”) can be a nice touch, but it is by no means a required element in a good academic paper.

Introductions, Thesis Statements, and Roadmaps Links

• Short video (5:47): " Writing an Introduction to a Paper ," GWC
• Handout (printable):  " Introductions ," University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Writing Center
• Handout (printable): " Thesis Statements ," University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Writing Center
• NPS-specific one-page (printable)  S ample Thesis Chapter Introduction with Roadmap , from "Venezuela: A Revolution on Standby," Luis Calvo
• Short video (3:39):  " Writing Ninjas: How to Write a Strong Thesis Statement "
• Video (5:06): " Thesis Statements ," Purdue OWL

Writing Topics A–Z

This index makes findings topics easy and links to the most relevant page for each item. Please email us at [email protected] if we're missing something!

A    B    C    D    E    F    G    H    I    J   K   L    M    N    O    P    Q   R    S    T    U    V    W   X  Y   Z

Now The Senate Has Unveiled Its AI Roadmap, What Next?

Plus: Adobe’s Privacy And Cyber Security Head Talks AI and Trust, Google Brings AI To Search, OpenAI Introduces A Conversational Chatbot, Apple Adds AI Chips, U.K. Gives Pre-Election Cybersecurity Boost

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

This is the published version of Forbes’ CIO newsletter, which offers the latest news for chief innovation officers and other technology-focused leaders. Click here to get it delivered to your inbox every Thursday.

Like every nation, in the last couple years the U.S. has been quickly trying to figure out how to regulate AI technology . Technological capabilities—and adoption—of AI are growing every day, as are the questions that arise about appropriate uses of it. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has led a bipartisan group over the last year informally called the “Senate AI Gang,” and they unveiled a 31-page roadmap for AI policy on Wednesday.

As he presented the plan, Schumer said three words govern what the group has done: urgency, humility and bipartisanship . And at this stage, much of the urgency points toward increasing funding for U.S. innovation in the technology. The report endorses government spending on non-defense AI innovation to be at least $32 billion annually, which was initially proposed by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence.

As a roadmap, the document presented Wednesday has general goals, but few specifics . For example, the U.S. needs to enforce existing laws that apply to AI and develop ways to ensure it is unbiased. The federal government should identify the high impact uses of AI in its agencies and utilize it. Policies should be considered to ensure information accuracy and transparency, especially during elections. Copyright protections should be taken into consideration when using different kinds of data to train AI systems. A strong data privacy framework should be created.

While the roadmap could be less tangible progress toward AI regulation than some may like to see, tech policy experts told the Washington Post that it’s a good first step. The roadmap came out of months of discussions, scores of meetings, educational briefings for all senators and nine AI Insight Forums between policymakers, developers, researchers, think tanks, labor and other community leaders. Writing the roadmap got many people in Washington talking about AI as a reality—not just a magic-seeming technological idea—and learning about the real issues behind it .

So what happens next, and when? It’s all up to Congress . In his statement presenting the roadmap, Schumer said he hopes some legislation covering portions of AI regulation, funding, innovation and policy will be passed before the end of the year. Some issues around AI—and some bills—are being discussed by legislative committees. But, as with much that happens in Washington, momentum around discussion does not always translate to momentum around action. With an election coming in November, it’s difficult to say whether AI will rise to the top of policymakers’ list of priorities.

Even without well defined federal regulations, policy around AI and privacy is extremely important to everyone who works with tech. As Adobe’s global chief cybersecurity legal and privacy officer, Nubiaa Shabaka oversees, discusses and charts policy dealing with data and privacy. I talked to her about her job and how she sees its landscape changing because of AI. An excerpt from our conversation is included later in this newsletter.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Google CEO Sundar Pichai speaks at the Google I/O developer conference this week.

Google has been working with its Gemini AI model for years, and rolled it out to the U.S. in a huge way this week. The world’s most popular search engine is adding AI Overviews to the top of all searches . This new function, powered by Google’s Gemini model, performs a quick search and uses AI to write answers to complex queries. If a person searches for “best running shoes,” AI Overviews writes a summary of the different qualities that running shoes have, plus includes links to purchase ones with better reviews. This function is on top of the search results that users expect from Google.

AI-powered search has been in test mode for the last several months, and available to some users by clicking a star-shaped Gemini button at the top of the search screen.

This rollout brings AI directly to where users are, whether they want it or not . It goes a step further than Meta’s addition of its AI chatbot to the top of users’ Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp pages. There, the AI chatbot is a selection they can choose to do something that may be related to their social media feed, or not. Google’s move puts AI front and center, performing the action that users have come to the search engine to do. It shows that Google thinks Gemini is ready for the spotlight, and could do a lot to expand use of the technology—or show its vulnerabilities on a wide scale.

OpenAI announced its new GPT-4o model this week, an AI chatbot that the company says can respond to any combination of text, audio, image and video in real-time, and can generate any of those kinds of output . The company has an array of videos on its website showing people interacting with the upgraded chatbot, which is capable of having conversations and responding to what people are doing. Media outlets—and even OpenAI CEO Sam Altman in a post on X —have compared the launch to the Scarlett Johansson-voiced operating system in the 2013 movie Her . In a blog post , Altman wrote, “ It feels like AI from the movies; and it’s still a bit surprising to me that it’s real.” The new model will be slowly rolled out, but the company says certain GPT-4o capabilities will be free to users.

TECHNOLOGY + INNOVATION

An Apple Store in the Garden State Plaza Mall in Paramus, New Jersey.

After Apple announced its new iPad Pro line featuring an “outrageously powerful chip for AI” last week, there’s an obvious follow-up question: What about Apple users who aren’t ready to upgrade? News reports in the last week have answered: Apple’s adding powerful AI-ready chips into its data centers , allowing the company to add AI-driven functions to operating system upgrades. Forbes senior contributor Kate O’Flaherty writes that the company planned this initiative three years ago, but it’s been accelerated by launches of other AI applications, including ChatGPT. Bloomberg, which first reported the plan , writes that these chips in servers will be able to do complex functions, like generating images or summarizing text, while processors in phones themselves can perform the easier tasks.

Many potential developments to bring Apple into the AI age are being discussed, including the possibility of a partnership with OpenAI . (A similar potential partnership with Google for its Gemini AI was rumored in March.) It’s highly likely that more will be announced at Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference, which begins June 10 .

NOTABLE NEWS

U.K. flag bunting outside a polling station in 2023. (Photo by Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images)

As a year of many important elections worldwide converges with sweeping new capabilities for technology, the U.K. has decided to provide its candidates, election officials and others at high risk with an additional layer of security on their personal devices . The initiative, spearheaded by the U.K.’s National Cyber Security Centre, is most concerned about malicious attacks by Russian and Chinese actors, writes Forbes senior contributor Emma Woollacott . The Personal Internet Protection service will warn users if they try to visit a domain known to be malicious, block traffic to these domains, and will alert users of malicious activity detected on their accounts.

BITS + BYTES

Adobe global chief cybersecurity legal and privacy officer nubiaa shabaka on trust, data security and ai.

Adobe Global Chief Cybersecurity Legal and Privacy Officer Nubiaa Shabaka.

While cybersecurity and privacy are two different aspects in dealing with data, Nubiaa Shabaka says they fit well together. She’s a vice president at Adobe, serving as the company’s global chief privacy and cybersecurity legal officer. I talked with her about these two aspects of technology, changes AI is bringing to the way business is done, and what the future holds.

This conversation has been edited for length, clarity and continuity. A longer version is available here .

How do you see privacy and security fitting together? Why are they a good pair to have under one person?

I actually was so excited when I was interviewing with our chief trust officer a couple of years ago to understand their structure, because I’ve always had a really attached-at-the-hip relationship with the chief security officer. I’ve been a chief cyber legal officer and the head of privacy or chief privacy officer for many years. It’s so important that it be so connected because you’re able to look over the horizon. You’re able to plan and have the most streamlined and efficient manner to protect Adobe, and give the best trustworthy products to our customers. As well, being so integrated, [you have] weekly meetings, daily chats, invited to each other’s team related off-sites and things of that nature.

It’s really all in the construct of what is trust. You need security, you need privacy. And it all is just so interconnected. If you think about personal information, of course that’s privacy. And security is the assets, the infrastructure and potentially proprietary and IP, but you cannot have privacy without security. Privacy is a huge part, of course, of security. They’re very, very interconnected, and folks who pull it together, who have that close relationship, I think have a better value, not only internally, but also to their customers because of the trust that we’re able to build.

How does AI impact privacy and security?

My whole title is chief cybersecurity legal officer. I think about my role as those two things and two other things. I also co-lead data governance with our chief information officer and our chief security officer, bringing in all of the applicable business units and risk folks to run data governance. I also am a core member of our AI governance. Privacy and security is just key [for] AI at Adobe, a cross-functional team that has folks from our IT department, our security department, my team, other folks in legal and in strategy, coming together to have this cross-functional AI governance.

How privacy and security is impacted by AI, ooh ooh ooh, the stories you can tell. The concept of good folks and even bad actors are able to just be so much more sophisticated on a proactive and reactive standpoint. AI is here. We really need to incorporate it in a privacy and security conscious fashion, but it will allow us to be more privacy-centric when done correctly, and allow us to be more security-focused, when done correctly, to counterbalance the bad actors. Having security and privacy sit at the table in AI governance really keeps security and privacy top of mind when we roll out AI to make sure they have those appropriate data protection aspects. And any privacy-related tools that we roll out always have the personal privacy considerations in mind to make sure we have the appropriate balancing act and impact assessment.

You work in areas in which there are a lot of policymakers paying attention and talking about regulations, but there aren’t really a lot of regulations there. Where do you see things going in terms of AI and privacy regulations in the next year? What is Adobe doing to help these questions get worked out? What are your priorities in these areas?

I would say that there are plenty of regulations that are hard and fast on a sectoral basis. The U.S. has a different mindset than Europe. Europe has [General Data Protection Regulation] and large omnibus rules. The U.S. certainly has sectoral rules that have been around for a very long time. If you think back to 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. I come from a financial services background, and so there are hard-and-fast rules that exist. Now we have omnibus state laws that have somewhat mimicked GDPR, and are different in many ways. We are up to 17 U.S. omnibus state laws, which are hard and fast rules.

The U.S. has been a leader on the security side starting with the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, which is optional. Now they are proposing to implement certain items in the U.S. to make hard-and-fast rules. But we certainly have cyber and personal information breach laws in every jurisdiction in the U.S., which is a mitigating factor, right. You don’t want to have to report breaches, so you have appropriate safeguards in order to counterbalance your reporting. We have the new SEC cyber-disclosure laws that came into effect in December of 2023, which is a hard-and-fast rule for disclosure. It is, in fact, a mechanism to have and support appropriate cybersecurity controls.

I do think, even with the rules that we have in place, multinational companies forget about what the rules are just in the U.S. Adobe is a multinational company, and we have to abide by the plethora of rules throughout the Americas and Asia and EMEA. We don’t believe in playing whack-a-mole, following rule by rule and law by law. We look over the horizon to have an appropriate privacy program and cyber program that we stand behind.

On the security side, we have our proprietary Common Controls Framework that maps to the various laws around the world from a technical perspective on the privacy and security angle. Adobe’s vision is to set our high water mark, which typically will address any rule, any law that comes into play. That’s how we abide by having the appropriate privacy and security controls.

What I see coming is the additional continual global standard. We are excited about the potential proposed federal privacy law here in the U.S., and encourage governments around the world to continue to work together to promote cross-border data transfers and innovation and technology, while of course balancing privacy and security. Adobe is happy to be part of those conversations through trades and directly meeting with regulators around the world to help move in that direction, whereby we can have innovation and prosperity all together.

FACTS + COMMENTS

TikTok will be the first video-sharing platform to use Content Credentials technology to automatically label AI-generated content , it announced last week . The app has had a label creators could apply to posts made with TikTok’s native AI effects since last September.

37 million: Creators who have used TikTok’s AI effects label since its inception

12: Number of videos TikTok will release throughout the year explaining these labels and helping users contextualize what they see on the app

‘We're vigilant against those risks’: TikTok statement about the harm that can be done using AI generated content to mislead users

STRATEGIES + ADVICE

If you want to add more AI to your workplace, it pays to be like the U.S. Senate and craft a playbook for moving forward . Here are some tips to build that strategy .

In a recent Gallup report, employee engagement hit an 11-year low . Here are some ways that business leaders can help their workers feel more like a part of the organization .

The U.K.’s Conservative Party recently committed an online communications faux pas . What did it do?

A. An employee opened a phishing email, which shut down the party’s website

B. Someone forgot to BCC a mass email, exposing hundreds of email addresses

C. Made an embarrassing typographical error in the subject line of an email newsletter

D. An employee fell for a scam in which someone impersonating Prime Minister Rishi Sunak asked for £1 million in gift cards

See if you got the answer right here .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Join The Conversation

One Community. Many Voices. Create a free account to share your thoughts. 

Forbes Community Guidelines

Our community is about connecting people through open and thoughtful conversations. We want our readers to share their views and exchange ideas and facts in a safe space.

In order to do so, please follow the posting rules in our site's  Terms of Service.   We've summarized some of those key rules below. Simply put, keep it civil.

Your post will be rejected if we notice that it seems to contain:

• False or intentionally out-of-context or misleading information
• Insults, profanity, incoherent, obscene or inflammatory language or threats of any kind
• Attacks on the identity of other commenters or the article's author
• Content that otherwise violates our site's  terms.

User accounts will be blocked if we notice or believe that users are engaged in:

• Continuous attempts to re-post comments that have been previously moderated/rejected
• Racist, sexist, homophobic or other discriminatory comments
• Attempts or tactics that put the site security at risk
• Actions that otherwise violate our site's  terms.

So, how can you be a power user?

• Stay on topic and share your insights
• Feel free to be clear and thoughtful to get your point across
• ‘Like’ or ‘Dislike’ to show your point of view.
• Protect your community.
• Use the report tool to alert us when someone breaks the rules.

Thanks for reading our community guidelines. Please read the full list of posting rules found in our site's  Terms of Service.

US Lawmakers seek $32 billion to keep American AI ahead of China

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by David Shepardson and Alexandra Alper; Editing by Clarence Fernandez and Cynthia Osterman

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

World Chevron

Helicopter carrying Iran's President Raisi crashes in mountains, official says

The lives of Ebrahim Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian were at risk, the official said.

Advertisement

Supported by

Senators Propose $32 Billion in Annual A.I. Spending but Defer Regulation

Their plan is the culmination of a yearlong listening tour on the dangers of the new technology.

• Share full article

By Cecilia Kang and David McCabe

Cecilia Kang and David McCabe cover technology policy.

A bipartisan group of senators released a long-awaited legislative plan for artificial intelligence on Wednesday, calling for billions in funding to propel American leadership in the technology while offering few details on regulations to address its risks.

In a 20-page document titled “Driving U.S. Innovation in Artificial Intelligence,” the Senate leader, Chuck Schumer, and three colleagues called for spending $32 billion annually by 2026 for government and private-sector research and development of the technology.

The lawmakers recommended creating a federal data privacy law and said they supported legislation, planned for introduction on Wednesday, that would prevent the use of realistic misleading technology known as deepfakes in election campaigns. But they said congressional committees and agencies should come up with regulations on A.I., including protections against health and financial discrimination, the elimination of jobs, and copyright violations caused by the technology.

“It’s very hard to do regulations because A.I. is changing too quickly,” Mr. Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in an interview. “We didn’t want to rush this.”

He designed the road map with two Republican senators, Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Todd Young of Indiana, and a fellow Democrat, Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, after their yearlong listening tour to hear concerns about new generative A.I. technologies. Those tools, like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, can generate realistic and convincing images, videos, audio and text. Tech leaders have warned about the potential harms of A.I., including the obliteration of entire job categories, election interference, discrimination in housing and finance, and even the replacement of humankind.

The senators’ decision to delay A.I. regulation widens a gap between the United States and the European Union , which this year adopted a law that prohibits A.I.’s riskiest uses, including some facial recognition applications and tools that can manipulate behavior or discriminate. The European law requires transparency around how systems operate and what data they collect. Dozens of U.S. states have also proposed privacy and A.I. laws that would prohibit certain uses of the technology.

Outside of recent legislation mandating the sale or ban of the social media app TikTok, Congress hasn’t passed major tech legislation in years, despite multiple proposals.

“It’s disappointing because at this point we’ve missed several windows of opportunity to act while the rest of the world has,” said Amba Kak, a co-executive director of the nonprofit AI Now Institute and a former adviser on A.I. to the Federal Trade Commission.

Mr. Schumer’s efforts on A.I. legislation began in June with a series of high-profile forums that brought together tech leaders including Elon Musk of Tesla, Sundar Pichai of Google and Sam Altman of OpenAI.

(The New York Times has sued OpenAI and its partner, Microsoft, over use of the publication’s copyrighted works in A.I. development.)

Mr. Schumer said in the interview that through the forums, lawmakers had begun to understand the complexity of A.I. technologies and how expert agencies and congressional committees were best equipped to create regulations.

The legislative road map encourages greater federal investment in the growth of domestic research and development.

“This is sort of the American way — we are more entrepreneurial,” Mr. Schumer said in the interview, adding that the lawmakers hoped to make “innovation the North Star.”

In a separate briefing with reporters, he said the Senate was more likely to consider A.I. proposals piecemeal instead of in one large legislative package.

“What we’d expect is that we would have some bills that certainly pass the Senate and hopefully pass the House by the end of the year,” Mr. Schumer said. “It won’t cover the whole waterfront. There’s too much waterfront to cover, and things are changing so rapidly.”

He added that his staff had spoken with Speaker Mike Johnson’s office

Maya Wiley, president of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, participated in the first forum. She said that the closed-door meetings were “tech industry heavy” and that the report’s focus on promoting innovation overshadowed the real-world harms that could result from A.I. systems, noting that health and financial tools had already shown signs of discrimination against certain ethnic and racial groups.

Ms. Wiley has called for greater focus on the vetting of new products to make sure they are safe and operate without biases that can target certain communities.

“We should not assume that we don’t need additional rights,” she said.

Cecilia Kang reports on technology and regulatory policy and is based in Washington D.C. She has written about technology for over two decades. More about Cecilia Kang

David McCabe covers tech policy. He joined The Times from Axios in 2019. More about David McCabe

Explore Our Coverage of Artificial Intelligence

News  and Analysis

Ilya Sutskever, the OpenAI co-founder and chief scientist who in November joined three other board members to force out Sam Altman before saying he regretted the move, is leaving the company .

OpenAI has unveiled a new version of its ChatGPT chatbot  that can receive and respond to voice commands, images and videos.

A bipartisan group of senators released a long-awaited legislative plan for A.I. , calling for billions in funding to propel U.S. leadership in the technology while offering few details on regulations.

The Age of A.I.

D’Youville University in Buffalo had an A.I. robot speak at its commencement . Not everyone was happy about it.

A new program, backed by Cornell Tech, M.I.T. and U.C.L.A., helps prepare lower-income, Latina and Black female computing majors  for A.I. careers.

Publishers have long worried that A.I.-generated answers on Google would drive readers away from their sites. They’re about to find out if those fears are warranted, our tech columnist writes .

A new category of apps promises to relieve parents of drudgery, with an assist from A.I.  But a family’s grunt work is more human, and valuable, than it seems.

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.

Senators studied AI for a year. Critics call the result ‘pathetic.’

The 31-page “road map” calls for a $32 billion infusion for AI research and development and asks congressional committees to develop legislation.

For much of the last year, Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer and a bipartisan group of his colleagues have been huddling with tech CEOs, civil rights leaders and top researchers to develop an “all hands on deck” plan to address the urgent threats posed by artificial intelligence.

This week, the Senate AI Gang, as the group is known, unveiled the fruits of that effort, celebrating a sprawling 31-page road map that calls for billions of new funding in AI research as the “deepest” AI legislative document to date. But consumer advocates are furious about the final product, saying that the document is far too vague about how it will protect people from AI’s harms and that the senators’ initiative is sucking up the oxygen from other efforts to aggressively regulate the technology.

“This road map leads to a dead end,” Evan Greer, the director of Fight for the Future, an advocacy group, said in a statement that called the plan “pathetic” — a criticism echoed by others.

The immediate divisions over the plan bring to the fore the challenges of regulating the swiftly evolving technology in a deeply polarized Congress during an election year. Rather than pursuing a single comprehensive bill, the AI Gang has decided to delegate the legislative work to Senate committees, which are at drastically different stages in their efforts to understand the promise and peril of AI.

GET CAUGHT UP

70 years later, 1 in 3 Black people say integration didn’t help Black students

Journalists sue Chicago Tribune owner alleging pay discrimination

Abbott grants Daniel Perry pardon in murder of Black Lives Matter protester

NFL disavows Harrison Butker’s comments, cites commitment to inclusion

6 Airbnb red flags to spot before you make a booking mistake

Schumer (D-N.Y.) expects that some AI bills could pass the Senate and potentially the House by the end of the year, but he noted that much of this work will extend into the next Congress. But the plan faces an uncertain future next year, as key lawmakers working on tech issues are scheduled to retire and the 2024 elections could reshape the leadership of Congress and the White House. The Senate Rules Committee on Wednesday advanced a trio of bipartisan bills addressing the role of AI in elections, which Schumer noted was one of the most urgent issues facing Congress amid the 2024 elections.

“We’re not going to wait on legislation that addresses every aspect of AI in society,” Schumer said. “If some areas are ready earlier than others, they should go forward.”

Other congressional committees are just beginning their work on artificial intelligence, as major tech companies are plowing forward with ever more advanced systems intended to further entrench the technology in consumers’ lives. On Monday, OpenAI announced a handful of upgrades that will make it easier for people to talk to ChatGPT, drawing comparisons with the 2013 film “Her,” which depicts a human falling in love with a digital voice assistant. On Tuesday, Google announced that it would roll out this week AI-generated answers to the top of everyone’s search results in the United States, transforming the way people access information online.

Lawmakers have repeatedly promised that they will regulate AI with greater urgency than they did with social media. For the last half decade, lawmakers have held numerous hearings and introduced a flurry of bills to address the ways social media allegedly harms children, undermines elections and imperils users’ privacy. But to date, the main social media legislation that Congress has passed is a law that could force a sale or ban of TikTok. With the new roadmap, critics say lawmakers risk repeating the same mistakes.

Tech industry groups were largely supportive of the road map. TechNet, whose members include OpenAI, Google and Meta, said in a statement that the directive “will strengthen America’s global competitiveness in AI and emerging technologies” through providing $32 billion for AI research and development, which will be distributed to the Energy Department, Commerce Department, National Science Foundation, and National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Tony Samp, the head of AI policy at the DLA Piper law firm and former founding director of the Senate AI working group, said the Senate’s process helped raise awareness about AI among lawmakers and helped prompt ideas for how to legislate. DLA Piper, including Samp, has lobbied on behalf of clients including OpenAI, according to federal disclosures.

“There are some who think you can wave a magic wand and Congress could pass comprehensive AI legislation, but that thinking ignores the political realities in the United States, as well as the real objectives of the AI Insight Forums and the road map,” Samp told The Washington Post.

Reggie Babin, a senior counsel at the law firm Akin and a former chief counsel to Schumer, told The Post that the working group succeeded in its goals. Babin has lobbied on behalf of Akin clients, including Adobe, according to federal disclosures.

“The goal of the process was to figure out how to make sure that 80 percent of stakeholders in the middle of this conversation are satisfied while preserving space for continued engagement on all fronts,” he said. “I think the working group hit that mark.”

The lawmakers gathered input for the road map in private sessions dubbed Insight Forums. Over the nine sessions, lawmakers met with executives including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, as well as consumer advocates and civil rights leaders, such as Maya Wiley, the president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a Washington-based group that represents a number of civil rights organizations. Liz Shuler, the president of the AFL-CIO who participated in the Insight Forums, called the road map an “important start” to passing AI legislation.

But civil society leaders were frustrated that the road map only made a cursory mention of AI bias, amid widespread concerns that the technology can replicate and exacerbate harmful stereotypes. Nik Marda, a technical lead on AI governance at Mozilla, noted on X that “bias” was mentioned in the road map as many times as “space debris.”

Rashad Robinson, the president of the civil rights group Color of Change, said the report shows Schumer “is not taking AI seriously.” Robinson called for lawmakers to move swiftly to respond to the bias that AI can pose.

Schumer told The Post in a statement that he shares the goals of the advocates.

“Leader Schumer agrees with their goals and we’re going to continue to work closely with them as legislation is written,” said Schumer spokeswoman Allison Biasotti.

Greer said the report reads like industry had outsize influence over the process, and it was written by Altman and other tech lobbyists.

“They heard from experts about the urgency of addressing AI harms and then paid lip service to that while giving industry most of what they want: money and ‘light touch’ regulatory proposals,” Greer told The Post.

The United States’ efforts to regulate AI lag far behind those of the European Union, which last year advanced a wide-ranging AI Act that sets limits on AI based on how risky regulators deem an application to be. The E.U. AI Act, for instance, bans social scoring systems similar to those used in China, and it places transparency requirements on high-risk applications of AI in medical devices or employment settings.

Many observers hoped that the road map would provide clarity on a path forward for Congress to address some of the thorniest issues in AI governance that have divided the tech industry — including the future of copyright law and the growing debate over the regulation of AI models that are open source, or freely available to the public, without the guardrails that OpenAI, Google and Microsoft place on their models. But Schumer’s report doesn’t mention open source, and it largely punts issues of intellectual property rights to government agencies, directing lawmakers to review existing and forthcoming reports from the U.S. Copyright Office and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on AI.

In a briefing with reporters Tuesday night, Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.), a member of the AI Gang, said the report had “a high level of specificity” for a document of its size and scope. But senators acknowledged the report leaves key questions unanswered. The report calls for a $32 billion investment in nondefense AI research and development, but it does not specify how much funding should be directed to the military. The report also leaves key questions about how Congress should regulate consumer privacy in the age of AI to the committees.

“Where vagueness was required to come to an agreement, we embrace vagueness,” Young said.

But that strategy doesn’t work, said Suresh Venkatasubramanian, a Brown University professor who co-authored the White House’s AI Bill of Rights. He participated in the forums and felt as if lawmakers ignored the problems raised during the sessions.

“Embracing vagueness at this point is basically saying the status quo is just fine," he said.

The report “repackages” many issues around AI that have been debated on Capitol Hill for years, and its delivery may prompt some legislators to “yearn for more than just polished reiterations,” said Divyansh Kaushik, a vice president at Beacon Global Strategies, which advises companies on national security issues.

“After almost a year of hearings, briefings and forums, I think members are hungry for tangible, actionable steps and crisp legislative blueprints, something beyond the theoretical … a call for concrete, actionable strategies,” he said. “The real challenge begins now and it’s one for congressional committees: ensuring that this report does more than stir the pot, but rather sparks a sustained drive toward innovative and decisive policymaking to ensure American competitiveness on these critical technologies."