ENGINEER - Vol. XXXX, No. 02, pp. 19-28, 2007© The Institution of Engineers, Sri Lanka

Successes and Failures of Sri Lanka Railways inInternational Technology Transfer

D. G. Hemachandra and A. K. W. Jayawardane

Abstract: This paper analyzes successes and failures of two foreign funded international technologytransfer (ITT) projects carried out for Sri Lanka Railways (SLR) using an integrated conceptual modelwhich is a combination of the concepts of technology capability enhancement, polytrophic componentsof technology, Stage-Gate model and Seven factor model.

The results show that the project implemented in 1959 was successful due to the selection ofappropriate technology, suitable technology supplier and high level of commitment of the transferee.

However the recent ITT project implemented in 1997 was a failure since the transferee was unable toenhance the technological capabilities to the required levels. Poor acquisition process, lack ofknowledge & capabilities in modern technologies and low level of commitment of the transferee werethe major contributory factors for the failure in ITT.

Due consideration in selecting the technologies and getting all components transferred at appropriatelevels was found to be vital for effective technology transfer, since the "State of the art technology ofthe transferor need not always be the most appropriate technology for the transferee".

Present regulations and the guidelines enforced for the procurement of goods and services do not focuson the technological aspects to guide successful technology transfer. Therefore the public sector needs amore "comprehensive check list" to evaluate and select appropriate technology suppliers and a"Steering Committee" to effectively implement international technology transfer projects in addition tothe usual Technical Evaluation Committees and the Tender Boards.

Key Words: International Technology Transfer, Successes and Failures, Technological CapabilityEnhancement, Sri Lanka Railways.

1. Introduction

Sri Lanka Railways (SLR) has been playing amajor role in land transport in Sri Lanka since itsinception in 1864. It has been operatingprofitably until about 1945 except for a briefperiod from 1935 to 1940. Since then SLR hasbeen making operating losses and now theoperating losses have exceeded 150%. Further,its market share has reduced due to competitionfrom road transport. However, it has to continueits role in fulfilling the social, economic andpolitical needs and expectations.

Rail transport systems mainly consist ofInfrastructure, Motive Power and Rolling Stockand Operation & Commercial activities.Therefore, various technologies of all majorengineering disciplines have been used toachieve the business objectives of SLR. Sincesuch technologies connected with infrastructure,motive power and rolling stock have not beendeveloped in Sri Lanka, International

Technology Transfer (ITT) is a vital factor forSLR, in its survival and development.

Existing procedures for purchasing ofequipment have not been able to guide the ITTprojects in SLR, in order to meet the needs andexpectations. Therefore, the absence of aformalized criteria and guidelines has causedthe technology transfer to be incomplete andinappropriate in some recent ITT projects thuspreventing the technological capabilityenhancement and making the investmentunjustifiable.

For example, one of the factors which hascontributed adversely on the performance ofSLR, besides the road competition anddisturbances, is "excessively varied and some

Eng. I). G. Heinacliandra, C. Eng., MIE(SL), MBA (Mtimttiwa), Director,Sri Lanka German /?<// /HY/V Technical Training Centre, Ralinalana.

Eng. (Prof). A. K. W. Jayawardane, BSc Eng (Moratuwa), MSe(Untghhomugh), PhD(Loitboroitgh), C.Eng., FIE(SL), Professor (if CivilEngineering and Dean, Faculty of Engineering, University ofMoratnwa.

19 ENGINEER

times 'ill advised' equipment purchasingpolicies driven by foreign assistance where thetechnology choice has imposed an impossiblemaintenance burden and inventory requirementon the SLR" [I].

The problems of SLR have been accumulated inthe past due to purchasing of plant andequipment based on the availability of creditlines rather than justifying them economically oroperationally [1].

Also, SLR has not been able to provide asatisfactory passenger and freight service evenafter spending huge sums on infrastructure,motive power and rolling stock [2].

It is extremely important to give dueconsideration to ITT when making heavyinvestments since the influence of technologicalcapability on the long term objectives is critical.

Therefore, identifying the drawbacks of theprevious ITT projects and formation ofguidelines will help in solving one of the biggestproblems in the SLR.

With the above background a research projectwas implemented to review successes andfailures of International Technology TransferProjects carried out by the SLR, to identify thefactors that affected the ITT of Signallingtechnology and to develop better guidelines forsuccessful ITT in the future.

This paper provides the key findings of thisinvestigation together with the broad guidelinesdeveloped. The same guidelines can be used forother public sector organizations as well.

2. Technological Capabilities andTechnology Transfer

2.1 Understanding Effective TechnologyTransfer

Technology Transfer is an important businessstrategy today because the technology providesthe competitive advantage for a firm or a nationin producing goods and services.

Technology Transfer (TT) can be referred to astechnology flows or diffusion of technologywhich implies movements of technology fromone entity to another. Further, it states that if thereceiver does not understand and use the

technology effectively, the transfer is consideredto be incomplete [3]. However, the introductionof technologies effectively into the organizationand reaping the benefits is more complex [4].

The term 'international technology transfer' isused as the equivalent of the acquisition of thetechnological mastery from the foreign sources.Although there are several ways to look attechnology it may be defined as knowledge andmethods, which are necessary for theimplementation and improvement of theexisting ways of production of goods andservices. It follows that technologicalcapabilities refer to the ability to comprehend,utilize, adapt, modify and develop technology.Thus technological mastery is achieved whentechnology recipients have built uptechnological capabilities [5], to use local labourforce of the recipient country to effectivelyutilize, adapt and modify the transferredtechnology. In such situations the importedtechnology is ful ly absorbed by the localworkforce [5].

2.2 Assessment of Technological Capabilitiesas a Measure of Successful TT

Technological capability enhancement can beconsidered as a measure of determining thesuccess of an ITT project and, hence, it isimportant to consider what specific capabilitiesare required for a particular firm to succeed.

Even though a firm can purchase technologyresources, technological capability has to begradually acquired by self-learning, because it isnot an item tradable in the market. It is alsoimportant to mention that 'self learning' whichis an outcome of commitment, plays a vital rolein enhancement of technological capabilities.Therefore the recipient's commitment isessential in successful TT [6].

The TT capabilities required for a productiveenterprise can be considered as follows:

1. Converting/Transforming capabilities:Technology needed to convert input tooutput/products.

2. Acquiring capabilities: capabilities neededfor the successful acquisition ofTechnologies.

3. Vending capabilities: Technology needed formarketing and servicing.

ENGINEER 20

4. Modifying capabilities: Capabilities neededfor modifying and improving the technology.

5. Generating/Innovative capabilities:Capabilities needed for technologicalinnovations.

It should be stated that every business does notrequire all these capabilities at the highest level.Even though the capabilities have been specifiedfor the productive sector, they can be applied tothe technologies related to the infrastructure andservice sectors as well.

In order to have successful transfer of technology, therecipient firm should identify the technologicalcapabilities that should be enhanced and theirminimum levels,

The capabilities described above are analyzedfurther and modified to suit the infrastructuresector.

2.3 Review of Technology Components as aMeasure of Technology Transfer

Purchasing hardware alone is not sufficient togain the types of capabilities described above,but different levels of capabilities need differenttechnology components at different levels.Enhancement of technological capability levelsof a recipient also depends on his needs andcapabilities.

The knowledge required for modifying andrefining the technology is much more than theknowledge required for operation andmaintenance of the technology [7]. However, thedifferent levels of the knowledge required willhave to be decided by the receiver, according tohis capabilities and expectations.

The definition of Tolytrophic components' ofmanufacturing technology identified asTechnoware, Humanware, Orgaware andInforware can facilitate better management ofthe technology transfer process [4].

Technologies in the service sector andinfrastructure sector also have hardware(tehnoware) with controlling devices; operatingand maintenance personnel; information relatedwith operation, maintenance and modifications;and the organizational work.

Therefore polytrophic components can beapplied with little modifications for the analysis

of the components of the signalling technologytoo, as mentioned below.

Technology Components as Applicable to SLR

TECHNOWARE

1. System components - All hardware neededfor successful implementation and operationof the signalling system and all software incase of computer controlled systems.

2. System tools - Tools, testing equipment,measuring instruments needed forinstallation, operation, maintenance,upgrading and training of personnel.

3. Spare parts - Minimum spare parts requiredto operate the system for an agreed period.

HUMANWARE

1. Contact humanware - Operating personnel

2. Support humanwarepersonnel

3. System humanwaredeveloping the system.

Maintenance

Personnel for

The component of system humanware is a newaddition to the standard components ofhumanware to suit service sector.

ORGAWARE

Since the items described under orgaware arealready available with SLR the orgawarecomponent is not considered in this analysis ofassessing the transferred level of technology.

INFORWARE

1. Technical Specifications

2. Operating Instructions

3. Maintenance Instructions

4. Installation Instructions

5. System design information

6. System Management Information

2.4 Technology Transfer Process

Skillful management of the technology transferprocess is important in order to harness themaximum benefits from the technology transferbecause the technology does not transferautomatically once a transfer channel has been

21 ENGINEER

sought. Negotiating capability and knowledgeof the receiving party can improve or worsen theterms and conditions of the transfer [5].

Stage-Gate model has been used successfully byJagoda and Ramanathan [8] for TT projects.

The same model has been modified byRamanathan [9] for the application of TT in theprivate sector; therefore the Stage-Gate modelcan be further modified to suit the TT process inthe public sector. Table 1 shows the modifiedStage - Gate model to suit the TT process in SLR.

2.5 Other Relevant Factors Influencing theInternational Technology Transfer

As discussed earlier, the process plays animportant role in successful TT in order toensure the acquisition and assimilation of allrelevant technological components which leadto the enhancement of technological capabilitiesto the required level.

The seven factor model describes seven majorfactors affecting TT [10] irrespective of the typeof project, whether manufacturing,infrastructure or service because these factorsare common to any sector.

These seven elements are as follows:

1. Transferor

2. Transferee

3. Technology

4. Transfer mechanism

5. Transferor's environment

6. Transferee's environment

7. Greater environment

Greater EiTVTranmenl

Transfer

Transferor^ Tedirobgy N Transferee.•f s*-.

Mechanism^'

The success of any TT depends on the selectionand manipulation of the aforementioned factors.A Diagrammatic form of the Seven Factor modelis shown in Figure 1.

2.6 Integrated Conceptual Model forSuccessful Technology Transfer

Based on the above discussion, successful TTcan be conceptualized as shown in Figure 2.

Favourable Seven factors

4LRight ITT Process

11

Receiving Needed Componentsof Technology

IEAchieving a Higher Level ofTechnological Capabilities

Figure 2: Integrated Conceptual Model for Successful ITT

3. Research Design andImplementation

Success of a Technology Transfer (TT) projectdepends on the level of technology capabilityenhancement of a firm after acquiring thetechnology. The transferred technologycomponents and their levels are vital factors ingaining the expected technological capabilities.Even though the expected levels of the aboverequirements are at higher levels, the TT processand the influence of the relevant factors canaffect the end results greatly.

Therefore it is necessary to have an integratedapproach in analyzing the ITT projects. As suchthis study used a research design consisting offour steps as shown in Figure 3.

1 . Assessment of the technologicalcapability enhancement after ITT

J-J^2. Assessment of the transferred

components of technologyn-U-3. Analysis of the processes followed for

ITT _

4IU4. Analysis of all the relevant factors

involved in ITT

Figure 1, Seven Factor ModelFigure 3. Integrated Conceptual Model for AnalyzingITT Projects

ENGINEER 22

3.1 Data Collection and Analysis

Necessary data were collected on the followingITT projects carried out under foreignassistance.

• Introduction of Colour Light Signalling insuburban railways -1959

• Rehabilitation of Signalling on the Coastalline-1997

The following documents were used for datacollection.

• Project proposals, relevant correspondence,evaluation reports and the contractagreement.

• Annual reports, Standing orders andfortnightly notices issued by the SLR.

• Working timetables.

• Minutes of the operational review meetings.

Further information was collected tosupplement the above data by interviewingtwenty three persons at various levels in therelevant sub departments in SLR and sixpersons retired from SLR. Out of the twentynine personnel, seven were senior executives,eleven were middle level executives and thebalance were operating level officers.

The following Tools and Models were used toanalyze the data found in the above projectsrelated to Signalling technology in the SLR.

1. Assessment of the technologicalcapability enhancementTechnology Capability Assessment Scoremethod given in [6] was used to assess thetechnological capability enhancement afterthe ITT.

2. Assessment of the transferredcomponents of technologyPolytrophic components described byRamanathan [4] were used along with asuitable marking scheme for meeting therequirements of the SLR.

3. Analysis of the processes followed bySLR for ITTStage-Gate Model given by Ramanathan [9],which is a modified version of Jagoda andRamanathan model [8] was used, to analyzethe process followed by the SLR.

4. Analysis of all relevant factors involvedin ITTAnalysis was carried out using Seven FactorModel considering the entire scenario [10].

4. Research Findings

Table 2 shows the summarized results of theassessment of transferred technologycomponents after implementation of the TTproject.

Table 1: Implementation of Stage-Gate Activities for TT Projects in SLR

Stage 1GatelStage 2Gate 2Stage 3GateSStage 4Gate 4Stage 5GateSStage 6Gate 6

Activity

Identifying Core Value Determinant enhancing technologiesConfirming identified technologiesFocused technology searchProject confirmationNegotiationFinalizing and approving agreementPreparing a project implementation planApproving implementation planImplementing technology transferImplementation auditTechnology transfer impact assessmentDeveloping guidelines for new project

Responsible

SC

LM/NPDTEC/TBTB/CATB/COMSC

SC Steering CommitteeTB Tender BoardLM Line MinistryCATB Cabinet Appointed Tender BoardNPD National Planning DepartmentCOM Cabinet of MinistersTEC Technical Evaluation Committee

23 ENGINEER

Table 2: Assessment of the Transferred Level of Technology Components

Component oftechnology

1. Techno ware2. Humanware3. Inforware

TotalTechnology Transfer(Average)

HLE

555

15

5

Casel

MLE

3.884.163.33

11.37

3.79

LA

5.004.163.58

12.74

4.24

Remarks

AboveMLE

Case2

MLE

3.884.163.33

11.37

3.79

LA

2.773.301.587.65

2.55

Remarks

BelowMLE

HLE - Highest Level Expected MLE - Minimum Level Expected LA - Level Achieved

Note 1: See Exhibit 3 for Marking Scheme for Assessment of Transferred Components of Technology

Table 3 shows the results of the assessment of the capability enhancement after implementation of the TT project.

Table 3: Assessment of Capability Enhancement

Status of Technology Capabilities

Converting CapabilitiesAcquiring CapabilitiesVending CapabilitiesModifying CapabilitiesGenerating CapabilitiesTotalAverage

HLE*

10101010105010

Casel

LA**

10.07.09.09.07.042.08.4

Remarks

'Best''Advanced''Superior''Superior''Advanced'"Superior"

Case 2

LA

4.05.04.03.00.016.03.3

Remarks

'Secondary''Secondary''Secondary''Elementary''Worst''Secondary'

* HLE - Highest Level Expected ** LA - Level AchievedFrom 0-1 Worst case From 5 - 7 AdvancedFrom 1-3 Elementary From 7 - 9 SuperiorFrom 3 - 5 Secondary From 9-10 Best case

Note 2: See Exhibit 4 for Marking Scheme for Assessment of Technological Capabilities

Tables 4 and 5 show the summarized results of the complete analysis of cases 1 and 2 respectively.

Table 4: Summary of the Analysis (Casel)

Step

1. Technological Capability Enhancement

2. Technology Component Transfer Level

3. Stage-Gate Analysis

4. Seven Factor AnalysisTransferor

Transferee

TechnologyTransfer MechanismTransferor's EnvironmentTransferee's EnvironmentGreater Environment

HLE MLE LA Remarks

10 - 8.4 'Superior'

5 3.79 4.24 84.8% Technology Transfer

Not carried out due to lack of information.Note 3: However it should be mentioned that theprocess followed in this ITT could not be poor as thetransferee was able to enhance the technologicalcapabilities to a higher level by getting a higher level oftechnology components transferred and to maintainlong relationships with the transferor.

Potential supplier of signalling systems

High level of commitment, Searchingfor technology as a business strategyRight Technology Right componentsBest Transfer mechanismFavourable for the transfereeFavourable, High commitment,Fully Supportive

All relevantfactors werefavourable andsupportive fora successful TT

ENGINEER 24

Table 5: Summary of the Analysis (CaseZ)

Step HLE MLE LA Remarks

1. Technological Capability Enhancement 10 3.3 "Secondary"2. Technology Component Transfer Level 3.79 2.5 50% Technology Transfer3. Stage-Gate Analysis

6Oto

Stage 1Gate 1

"Stage 2Gate 2Stage 3Gate 3Stage 4

Gate 4

Stage 5Gate 5Stage 6Gate 6

Not gone throughBy passedPoor performance and low level of commitmentProject confirmed because of the availability of foreign fundsExtremely poor level negotiationFinal approval without critical analysisImplementation plan prepared by the transferor did not meet the SLRrequirementTransferee was compelled to approve the implementation plan preparedby the TransferorNot much gain to the transferee during the implementation periodImplementation auditing has not been carried outPost TT impact assessment not donePreparation guidelines for future projects not done

oex

a; H _t;n

g|?l•a g ra

T3ai

o -o ^G. i

4. Seven Factor AnalysisTransferorTransfereeTechnologyTransfer MechanismTransferor's EnvironmentTransferee's EnvironmentGreater Environment

Not the Right SourceLow level of commitmentMostly Technoware. Technology not appropriateSuitable, but not effectiveNot favourable for the transfereeNot favourable. Low level of commitmentSupportive - --5-C

CX

5. Conclusions

This research concludes that:

1. The first project carried out in 1959 wassuccessful in international technologytransfer since the technological capabilitieswere enhanced to a higher level.

The following majorcontributed for its success.

factors have

2.

(a) Matching the technology with businessneeds and proper selection oftechnology;

(b) Selection of a potential supplier havinga favourable environment fortechnology transfer; and

(c) Higher level of commitment of thetransferee. Implementation has not beenskillfully managed;

The second project carried out in 1997 was afailure in international technology transfersince the technological capabilities were notenhanced to the expected level, because:

(a) The decisions on technology were notobjectively oriented;

(b) A systematic and proper process inacquisition of international technologyhas not been followed;

(c) Implementation has not been skillfullymanaged;

(d) Due considerations for the technologicalcapability of the local staff has not beengiven;

(e) Negligence of local capabilities and thetechno- economic aspects of technologytransfer projects have resulted in inflowof inappropriate technology to SLR; and

(f) Very low level of commitment of thetransferee.

3. The major factors that affected internationaltechnology transfer of SLR are identified as:

(a) Poor process followed by the transfereeand non-availability of properguidelines needed for successfultechnology transfer;

(b) Lack o f :

- Knowledge in modern technologies

- Technological capabilities;

- Managerial capabilities; and

25 ENGINEER

Poor identification of technologycomponents; and

(c) Lack of commitment by transferee

6. Recommendations

Based on the findings of the research thefollowing guidelines are recommended forconsideration for successful ITT in the SLR.

6.1 Improvements to InternationalTechnology Transfer Process

Amend the Guidelines on Government TenderProcedure in order to ensure effectivetechnology transfer in ITT projects by carryingout the following.

(a) Creation of a Steering committee

Create provisions for the appointment of aSteering Committee (SC), for implementation oftechnology transfer projects and the SC shall beresponsible for:

• Pre negotiation activities (See Exhibit 1)

• Assist TEC in negotiations

• Implementation of ITT project

• Post TT impact assessment

• Documentation of Lessons learned.

(b) Pre-qualification of Technology Suppliers

The process of pre-qualification of technologysuppliers of all tenders related to technologytransfers should be essential and a pre-condition.

(c) Use of Stage-Gate Model

Transferee to follow the Stage-Gate model shown inTable 1 in order to ensure the right process of ITT.

6.2. Improvements to Capabilities

In order to improve the technology transfercapabilities of SLR the following supportsystems and tools for decision making arerecommended.

(a) Technology Information: Provide facilitiesfor gathering technology information forimproving the knowledge in moderntechnologies.

(b) Technology Capability: Make arrangementsto improve the technological capabilitiesthrough proper training.

(c) Technology Management: Improvemanagerial capabilities of SLR by providingtraining in the areas of technologymanagement to all executive staff involvedin managing technologies.

(d) Technology Components: Improve theidentification of the required components oftechnology by identifying them correctly,under Technoware, Humanware, Orgawareand Inforware discussed earlier.

Sample checklist of technology componentsgiven in Exhibit 2 could be used for this purpose.

6.3. Improvement in the Levels of Commitment

Exhibit the highest level of commitment by topmanagement in any project involvingtechnology with priority to methodology andmodalities in place for successful and effectivetransfer of technology rather than confiningthemselves to adherence to procedures andgovernment regulations.

Since the decision on purchasing of technologytaken at a higher level on the recommendationsof the transferee, the top management of thetransferee should not simply take technologydecisions just as a solution to an existingproblem or for solving a long standing problem,because of the availability of a foreign fundedtechnology proposal or credit facilities. Allefforts should be taken to study the long-termeffects of the proposed technology on thebusiness and it is essential to consider the localcapabilities.

Exhibit 1: PRE NEGOTIATION ACTIVITIES

\. Identify the technology needs2. Identify the available technologies3. Evaluation of technologies4. Selection of the appropriate technology5. Identify and specify the suppliers' capabilities.6. Identify the technology components to be

transferred7. Identify the structural changes8. Identify the new staff needed and their

qualifications, scheme of recruitment9. Identify the local training needs before the

transfer10. Preparation of cost estimates11. Decide the most suitable transfer mechanism12. Method of payments13. Mechanism to ensure the technology transfer

before payments14. Preparation of specifications and tender conditions

ENGINEER 26

Exhibit 2: SAMPLE CHECKLIST OFTECHNOLOGY COMPONENTS

Exhibit 3: MARKING SCHEME FOR ASSESSMENT OFTRANSFERRED COMPONENTS OF TECHNOLOGY

System Components & Materials(Technoware)• All hardware components required

for achieving the expectedperformance of the system

• Tools and testing equipment• Spare parts• Training equipment• Operating software• Application software• Programming tools• Office equipment, vehicles etc

Training of Personnel & ExpertServices (Humanware)• Operator Training

- Top, Middle & Lower levels• Maintainer Training

- Top, Middle & Lower levels• System Training

- Top & Middle level• Project Training

- Top Level

• Services of Specialists• Design• Installation

- Top, Middle & Lower level• Testing & Commissioning• Operation and Management

- Top, Middle & Lower level

Information (Inforware)Installation ManualsOperating manualsMaintenance ManualsLayout diagrams (as installed)Circuit DiagramsSpecificationsSystem Design InformationTechnical BrochuresSource Codes of Application softwareData TablesWork organizationManagement procedures

Remarks

y?CO•.ss3vexto£'

COM,Cf

•S^o o.SX E £ oOH ̂ -°

111bO C c £C,*.-1^

.S U .2 J2re > '-£

t £ S£•5 "3 T3MH OJ C C

O X) O ffi

0-J Q '.£ I/} ^

QJ 3 0 ; ;j~]"c "o> Jii .£ 'ua i .s s ^

§ w>•r^ n3ffl r> „?3 g> SD <5 .2 D

Ifll|3| Bt- ^H n3 p

zlot2

Num

ber o

f har

d co

pies

,El

ectr

onic

cop

ies

if ne

cess

ary

Component Marks

HLE MLETechnoware

Equipment for:• Wayside Signalling• Interlocking System• CTC SystemTools for:• Maintenance• System upgrading• TrainingSpare parts for:• Wayside Signalling• Interlocking System• CTC System

Average Total for Technoware

5.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

5.0

10/3

10/3

3.88

Humanware

Training in System operationTraining for maintenance (Waysideequipment, Interlocking system,Controlling system)Training in system Modificationsand DevelopmentAverage Total for Humanware

5.05.0

5.0

5.0

5.05.0

2.5

4.16

Inforware

Specifications:• Wayside Equipment• Interlocking Equipment• Controlling Equipment

Hard copies of operating Instructionand software requiredMaintenance instructions of waysideequipment, Manuals, software if needed

Design diagrams for:• The System• Signalling equipment

Theoretical knowledge in RailwaysignallingDesign calculations, formulae, dataAverage Total for Inforware

5.0

5.0

5.0

50

5.0

5.05.0

3.0

5.0

5.0

2.5

2.5

2.03.33

27 ENGINEER

Exhibit 4: MARKING SCHEME FOR ASSESSMENT OFTECHNOLOGICAL CAPABILITIES

Technological Capability

Converting CapabilityEfficient operation of the systemEfficient maintenance of the systemUse computerized information andcontrol system to provide informationsupport for service operation.

Acquiring CapabilityJustify and specify clearly the requiredsystem components & technologiesIdentify the sources of technology,especially for alternativesUndertaking project planning andexecution for system improvementsand new system

Vending CapabilityOptimum utilization of the systemDeveloping the system in new areasMaintenance of the system meet theservice requirement

Modifying CapabilitySubstitution of equipment and spare partsAdapt installed technoware andorgaware for better efficiencyCarry out improvements for superiorquality outputsFurther training of personnel inoperation and maintenanceExpansion of the system

Generating CapabilityReverse engineering acquired technologyIntroduce system innovations

Marks(HLE)

1010/310/310/3

1010/3

10/3

10/3

1010/310/310/3

1010/510/5

10/5

10/5

10/510

10/210/2

References:

1. Jayaweera, D.S., The Policy Objectives of theGovernment vis-a-vis an appropriate businessstrategy to be implemented by the RailwayAuthority in order to create an economic role forit and Ensure a way forward, Paper presented atthe IESL, August 2003.

2. Wijewardena, D.L.D.K, Eng. B. D. RampalaMemorial Lecture, Presented at the Institution ofEngineers Sri Lanka, on 14th November 2003.

3. National Science Foundation (2002) TechwatchLanka, Volume 1, No. 3, April 2002.

4. Ramanathan, K., The Polytrophic Components ofManufacturing Technology, TechnologyForecasting and Social Change, 46, 221-258,1994.

5. Technology Acquisition Under AlternativeArrangements with TransnationalCorporation: Selected Industrial Case Studies inThailand, UNCTC Current Studies, No. 6, series A.

6. PMN 301 (2003) Unit 2, Technology Components,Technological Capabilities and TechnologyTransfer Models for Effective TechnologyTransfer, In: Class Notes on Technologymanagement, Department of Management ofTechnology, University of Moratuwa

7. Myers, Donald D, Strategic Technology TransferIn: Richard, C. Dorf. ed. The TechnologyManagement Hand Book, CRC Press, Florida,USA, 1998.

8. Jagoda, K. and Ramanathan, K. A Stage-GateModel for Guiding International TechnologyTransfer, Proceedings of the PICMET 2003,Portland Oregon, 19-23 July 2003.

9. Ramanathan, K., Building Effective InternationalCapabilities for Enhancing CompetitiveAdvantages, Notes of the seminar on"International Technology Transfer" held inColombo, 17th July 2004.

10. Ramanathan, K. Analytical Framework forTechnology Transfer, In: Gougeon, Patrick andGupta, Jyoti ed. Contemporary Issues inTechnology Transfer, Eska Publishers, 1997.

11. Hemachandra, D.G. Success and Failures of SriLanka Railways in International TechnologyTransfer, MBA dissertation, Universi ty ofMoratuwa, 2005.

ENGINEER 28