The Experts below are selected from a list of 306 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Georg Von Krogh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Problem Formulation: Identification of the ‘Right’ Problem for Improved Innovative Performance
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2018Co-Authors: Daniel Ehls, Markus Baer, Karim R. Lakhani, Jack A. Nickerson, Francesco Rullani, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem solving is “a search through a vast maze of possibilities” but also a key mechanism to explain superior value creation of organizations, entrepreneurs, and innovations. Problem Formulation ...
-
CROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation
Organization Science, 2015Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need–solution pair.” For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need–solution pair.We propose the identification of need–solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need–solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply.
-
crossroads identifying viable need solution pairs Problem solving without Problem Formulation
Organization Science, 2015Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need–solution pair.” For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need–solution pair. We propose the identification of need–solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need–solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated prob...
-
identifying viable need solution pairs Problem solving without Problem Formulation
Eric von Hippel, 2013Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need‐solution pair.’’ For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need‐solution pair. We propose the identification of need‐solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need‐solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply.
-
Identifying Viable ‘Need-Solution Pairs’: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research, and formal Problem-solving practice as well, begins with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together, and tested for viability as a need-solution pair. For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution, and assess it to be worth adopting even though the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search -- or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation if done at all, comes only after the discovery of the need-solution pair.In this article, we propose the identification of need-solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need-solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply. We suggest that this approach merits further investigation.
Eric Von Hippel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
CROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation
Organization Science, 2015Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need–solution pair.” For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need–solution pair.We propose the identification of need–solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need–solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply.
-
crossroads identifying viable need solution pairs Problem solving without Problem Formulation
Organization Science, 2015Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need–solution pair.” For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need–solution pair. We propose the identification of need–solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need–solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated prob...
-
identifying viable need solution pairs Problem solving without Problem Formulation
Eric von Hippel, 2013Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research and formal Problem-solving practice begin with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together and tested for viability as a “need‐solution pair.’’ For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution and assess it to be worth adopting although the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation, if done at all, come only after the discovery of the need‐solution pair. We propose the identification of need‐solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need‐solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply.
-
Identifying Viable ‘Need-Solution Pairs’: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Eric Von Hippel, Georg Von KroghAbstract:Problem-solving research, and formal Problem-solving practice as well, begins with the assumption that a Problem has been identified or formulated for solving. The Problem-solving process then involves a search for a satisfactory or optimal solution to that Problem. In contrast, we propose that, in informal Problem solving, a need and a solution are often discovered together, and tested for viability as a need-solution pair. For example, one may serendipitously discover a new solution, and assess it to be worth adopting even though the “Problem” it would address had not previously been in mind as an object of search -- or even awareness. In such a case, Problem identification and Formulation if done at all, comes only after the discovery of the need-solution pair.In this article, we propose the identification of need-solution pairs as an approach to Problem solving in which Problem Formulation is not required. We argue that discovery of viable need-solution pairs without Problem Formulation may have advantages over Problem-initiated Problem-solving methods under some conditions. First, it removes the often considerable costs associated with Problem Formulation. Second, it eliminates the constraints on possible solutions that any Problem Formulation will inevitably apply. We suggest that this approach merits further investigation.
Thomas Weiland - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Initial Value Problem Formulation of 3-D Time Domain Boundary Element Method
IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 2014Co-Authors: Hideki Kawaguchi, Seiya Itasaka, Thomas WeilandAbstract:A time domain boundary element method (TDBEM) gives us another possibility of time domain microwave simulations in addition to a finite difference time domain (FDTD) method. In particular, the TDBEM has good advantages in analysis of coupling Problems with charged particle motion such as in a particle accelerator. However, it is known that time domain microwave simulations in the particle accelerator by the conventional TDBEM often encounter numerical instability and inaccuracy because of its bad matrix property. To avoid the numerical instability and inaccuracy caused by the conventional open boundary Problem Formulation of the TDBEM, an initial value Problem Formulation of 3-D TDBEM is presented in this paper.
-
Initial value Problem Formulation of time domain boundary element method for electromagnetic microwave simulations
Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements, 2012Co-Authors: Hideki Kawaguchi, Thomas WeilandAbstract:Abstract To aim to obtain more stable solutions and wider area applications for the Time Domain Boundary Element Method (TDBEM), initial value Problem Formulation of the TDBEM is newly introduced for microwave simulations. The initial value Problem Formulation of the TDBEM allows us to solve transient microwave phenomena as interior region Problems, which gives us well matrix property and interior resonance free solutions. This paper concentrates on applying the initial value Problem Formulation of the TDBEM to wake field phenomena in particle accelerator cavities.
Alan Raybould - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Problem Formulation and phenotypic characterisation for the development of novel crops.
Transgenic research, 2019Co-Authors: Alan RaybouldAbstract:Phenotypic characterisation provides important information about novel crops that helps their developers to make technical and commercial decisions. Phenotypic characterisation comprises two activities. Product characterisation checks that the novel crop has the qualities of a viable product-the intended traits have been introduced and work as expected, and no unintended changes have been made that will adversely affect the performance of the final product. Risk assessment evaluates whether the intended and unintended changes are likely to harm human health or the environment. Product characterisation follows the principles of Problem Formulation, namely that the characteristics required in the final product are defined and criteria to decide whether the novel crop will have these properties are set. The hypothesis that the novel crop meets the criteria are tested during product development. If the hypothesis is corroborated, development continues, and if the hypothesis is falsified, the product is redesigned or its development is halted. Risk assessment should follow the same principles. Criteria that indicate the crop poses unacceptable risk should be set, and the hypothesis that the crop does not possess those properties should be tested. However, risk assessment, particularly when considering unintended changes introduced by new plant breeding methods such as gene editing, often ignores these principles. Instead, phenotypic characterisation seeks to catalogue all unintended changes by profiling methods and then proceeds to work out whether any of the changes are important. This paper argues that profiling is an inefficient and ineffective method of phenotypic characterisation for risk assessment. It discusses reasons why profiling is favoured and corrects some misconceptions about Problem Formulation.
-
A simple Problem Formulation framework to create the right solution to the right Problem.
Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP, 2018Co-Authors: Alaina Sauve-ciencewicki, Alan Raybould, Kathryn P. Davis, Justin Mcdonald, Tharacad S. Ramanarayanan, Douglas C. Wolf, Ted ValentiAbstract:Abstract A systematic approach to formulate consistent, technically robust and scientifically tractable Problems will facilitate achieving innovative and effective solutions in risk evaluation. The fundamentals of Problem Formulation have been adapted from environmental and human health risk assessments. A structured Problem Formulation enables focus on describing and evaluating the specifics of the Problem to be solved, instead of immediately creating solutions. First the Problem should be framed to provide clarity and gain agreement on the Problem to be addressed, resulting in a specific Problem statement. Second the Problem is explored in order to transform it into an operational state through questions to answer, hypotheses to test, and represented by a conceptual model. Finally the approach to testing hypotheses is mapped and the analysis plan is developed to address the Problem statement. This simple adaptable framework can be applied to any circumstance to resolve a specific Problem and describe a path to resolution.
-
Problem Formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants
Transgenic Research, 2010Co-Authors: Jeffrey D Wolt, Alan Raybould, Paul Keese, Julie W Fitzpatrick, Moises Burachik, A J Gray, Stephen S Olin, Joachim Schiemann, Mark K Sears, Felicia WuAbstract:Problem Formulation is the first step in environmental risk assessment (ERA) where policy goals, scope, assessment endpoints, and methodology are distilled to an explicitly stated Problem and approach for analysis. The consistency and utility of ERAs for genetically modified (GM) plants can be improved through rigorous Problem Formulation (PF), producing an analysis plan that describes relevant exposure scenarios and the potential consequences of these scenarios. A properly executed PF assures the relevance of ERA outcomes for decision-making. Adopting a harmonized approach to Problem Formulation should bring about greater uniformity in the ERA process for GM plants among regulatory regimes globally. This paper is the product of an international expert group convened by the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Research Foundation.
-
Problem Formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants.
Transgenic research, 2009Co-Authors: Jeffrey D Wolt, Alan Raybould, Paul Keese, Julie W Fitzpatrick, Moises Burachik, A J Gray, Stephen S Olin, Joachim Schiemann, Mark K SearsAbstract:Problem Formulation is the first step in environmental risk assessment (ERA) where policy goals, scope, assessment endpoints, and methodology are distilled to an explicitly stated Problem and approach for analysis. The consistency and utility of ERAs for genetically modified (GM) plants can be improved through rigorous Problem Formulation (PF), producing an analysis plan that describes relevant exposure scenarios and the potential consequences of these scenarios. A properly executed PF assures the relevance of ERA outcomes for decision-making. Adopting a harmonized approach to Problem Formulation should bring about greater uniformity in the ERA process for GM plants among regulatory regimes globally. This paper is the product of an international expert group convened by the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Research Foundation.
-
Problem Formulation and hypothesis testing for environmental risk assessments of genetically modified crops.
Environmental biosafety research, 2006Co-Authors: Alan RaybouldAbstract:Environmental risk assessments can provide high confidence of minimal risk by testing theories, “risk hypotheses”, that predict the likelihood of unacceptable harmful events. The creation of risk hypotheses and a plan to test them is called Problem Formulation. Effective Problem Formulation seeks to maximize the possibility of detecting effects that indicate potential risk; if such effects are not detected, minimal risk is indicated with high confidence. Two important implications are that artificial test conditions can increase confidence, whereas prescriptive data requirements can reduce confidence (increase uncertainty) if they constrain Problem Formulation. Poor Problem Formulation can increase environmental risk because it leads to the collection of superfluous data that may delay or prevent the introduction of environmentally beneficial products.
Masayoshi Tomizuka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Probabilistic Prediction from Planning Perspective: Problem Formulation, Representation Simplification and Evaluation Metric
2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2018Co-Authors: Wei Zhan, Arnaud De La Fortelle, Ching-yao Chan, Yi-ting Chen, Masayoshi TomizukaAbstract:Accurate probabilistic prediction for intention and motion of road users is a key prerequisite to achieve safe and high-quality decision-making and motion planning for autonomous driving. Typically, the performance of probabilistic predictions was only evaluated by learning metrics for approximation to the motion distribution in the dataset. However, as a module supporting decision and planning, probabilistic prediction should also be evaluated from decision and planning perspective. Moreover, the evaluation of probabilistic prediction highly relies on the Problem Formulation variation and motion representation simplification, which lacks a formal foundation in a comprehensive framework. To address such concerns, we provide a systematic and unified framework for the analysis of three under-explored aspects of probabilistic prediction: Problem Formulation, representation simplification and evaluation metric. More importantly, we address the omitted but crucial Problems in the three aspects from decision and planning perspective. In addition to a review of learning metrics, metrics to be considered from planning perspective are highlighted, such as planning consequence of inaccurate and erroneous prediction, as well as violations of predicted motions to planning constraints. We address practical Formulation variations of prediction Problems, such as decision-maker view and blind view for viewpoint, as well as reactive prediction for interaction, so that decision and planning can be facilitated.
