347
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 41. NO 4, NOVEMBER 1994
Technology Management: Educational Trends
Dundar F. Kocaoglu, Fellow, IEEE
Invited Paper
Abstruct- Educational institutions are offering an increasing number of degree-granting programs to prepare engineers
and scientists to move toward management responsibilities while
maintaining identity in their technical backgrounds. These programs are offered under various titles including “Engineering
Management,” “Engineering and Management,” “Management
of Technology,” “Technology Management,” and several others.
This paper presents the summary of the findings of a study
conducted among those institutions [l], [2]. It is the fifth such
study since the mid-1970’s. The previous ones were conducted
in 1977, 1981, 1984, and 1990 [3]-[8]. The paper reports on the
trends and observations about the past, present and future of
the educational aspects of this field. The term “Engineering and
Technology Management” (E&TM) is used as the representative
title for the programs identified.
-$
--
160
m 159
I
140
E
2
120
100
W
80
m
60
r
&
40
5
20
n
0
m
*
?
m
m
?
m
Z
m
m
Z
a
b
o
w
?
m
Z
b
m
?
?
r
r
?
-
u
Z
I. INTRODUCTION
12
r
Manuscript received November 1994. This work was supported by the
Portland State University Engineering Management Program.
The author is with the Engineering Management Program, School of
Engineering and Appled Science, Portland State University, Portland, OR
9 7 2 0 7 4 7 5 1 USA.
IEEE Log Number 9408976.
-
?
~
b
?
~
m
I
T
The growth of E&TM Programs is shown in Fig. 1. The
figure is based on the dates of establishment of the programs
that are currently being offered. The growth curve has not
m
~
Growth of engineering and technology management programs
HE most dramatic growth pattern we have seen in the
last 40 years of engineering and technology management (E&TM) has been in educational programs. Based on
11. T H E GROWTHPATTERN
Z
Year of Establishment
Fig. 1.
a worldwide study that we conducted among the educational
institutions over a period of 12 months, there are 159 degree
granting programs today. One hundred and three of them are in
the United States. The remaining 56 are in 25 countries. These
are the programs which provided detailed information about
their curricula, research areas, organizational characteristics,
and resource levels. The information was evaluated on the
basis of emphasis in managing innovation, creativity, basic
and applied research, development, design, implementation,
marketing and transfer of technology. Both strategic and
operational levels of technology management were considered
in including the programs in the E&TM classification. Approximately 40 other programs provided partial information,
but they were not included in the study because the information
was not sufficient to determine whether or not they could
be considered as Engineering and Technology Management
programs. The summary of the preliminary results of the study
is presented in this paper.
m
+
B
4 1
j
3
5
2
I
1
0
m
?
P
m
Z
m
s
Z
m
Z
w
k
Zw
E ? ; $ $ g @ g
a
m
m
Year of Establishment
Fig. 2.
Engineering and technology management programs by year.
reached the flat, stable region yet. The number of institutions
offering E&TM is continuing to increase.
The trend is better observed in Fig. 2, which shows that the
development of the E&TM programs was relatively slow from
1949-1970. Then there was a sudden increase in the 1970’s,
followed by a stronger pattern in the 1980’s, continuing even
stronger in the 1990’s. Ten universities were offering E&TM
in 1960. Since then, that number has been doubling roughly
every eight years.
The sudden growth in the 1970’s can be explained by the
need for engineers and scientists to manage technology under
pressure from the then-important oil crisis. When the oil crisis
subsided, the growth slowed down toward the end of the
decade. It was a temporary slowdown, however, as seen by
the large number of universities starting their programs in the
1980’s. This second growth was the result of the recognition
that we were in an era where technology alone was no longer
sufficient for competitive advantage; we needed the ability
0018-9391/94$04.00 0 1994 IEEE
m
348
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 41, NO. 4, NOVEMBER 1994
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Canada
Denmark
France
Germany
Hong Kong
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
Japan
Mexico
New Zealand
Norway
Saudi Arabia
Scotland
Singapore
South Africa
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
United Kingdom
USA
Total
9
1
2
1
8
2
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
3
1
I
103
159
Fig. 3. Geographic distribution of the E&TM programs
Engineering Schools
Business Schools
Joint Between Engineering and Business Schools
Other
Fig. 4.
Academic location of E&TM programs.
to manage it. While the growth experienced in the 1970’s
can be seen as temporary, the growth pattern that we have
been observing since the early 1980’s is clearly a permanent
phenomenon caused by the fundamental shifts taking place in
the educational and industrial infrastructure. The exponential
growth will not continue indefinitely, but there is no indication
that it has reached the saturation level yet.
Fig. 3 shows the geographic distribution of the programs
reported in the study.
What once was a predominantly US phenomenon is spreading throughout the world now. The number of non-US universities with E&TM programs has started to grow rapidly,
even though the total figure is still a small fraction of the US
universities. If this trend continues, we could very well see
the growth curve not reaching the saturation level until well
into the 21st century.
111. ACADEMICLOCATION
The vast majority of the earlier E&TM programs were in
the Schools of Engineering with a few joint programs with
Business Schools, and fewer located in the Business Schools.
Currently, the Engineering Schools still represent more than
50% of the E&TM programs, but the rate of growth is higher
for the programs offered jointly, as well as those offered by
the Business Schools. The academic locations of the programs
are summarized in Fig. 4.
Because of the multi-disciplinary nature of the E&TM
programs, most of the educational institutions reported that
even when their programs were not offered jointly, the actual operation had many joint activities. The joint activities
included cross-listing of courses in multiple units of the
university, joint research projects, and participation of faculty
members from various departments or schools in the thesis
committees. As this trend continues, we are likely to see
the growth of multidisciplinary programs originating in both
Engineering Schools and Business Schools.
IV. PROGRAM
TITLES
Forty six different titles were reported by the universities
offering E&TM programs. The top 10 of the most frequently
used titles are listed below:
Engineering Management
Management of Technology
Master of Engineering Management
Technology Management
Industrial Management
Systems Engineering
Engineering Science
Manufacturing Management
Production Management
Diploma in Tech. Management
34
20
13
7
7
4
3
3
3
2.
Clustering similar titles together, the 46 different titles have
been reduced to six categories as follows:
77 Programs
Category 1: Engineering Management
42 Programs
Category 2: Management of Technology
15 Programs
Category 3: Industrial Management
8 Programs
Category 4: Manufacturing Management
Category 5: MBA w/Technol. Concentration 5 Programs
Category 6: Others
12 Programs
Total
159 Programs
The distribution of the title categories to academic locations
shows that the “Engineering Management” category and the
“Industrial Management” category are predominantly in the
Schools of Engineering. While the “Management of Technology” category is more prevalent in Business Schools, it is also
being used by the Engineering School programs and the joint
programs as summarized in Fig. 5.
V. DEGREES
E&TM programs are developing primarily at the graduate
level. The degrees offered by the 159 educational institutions
are summarized below:
BS only
MS only
Ph.D. only
BS and MS
BS and Ph.D.
MS and Ph.D.
BS, MS and Ph.D.
15
92
5
8
1
22
10
Total BS:
Total MS:
Total Ph.D.:
34
132
38
The comparison between 1990 and 1994 in the number of
degree-granting programs at each level is given in Fig. 6.
As the number of degrees offered by the programs has
increased by 23%, the shift of emphasis toward the graduate
degrees has become visible in the last four years. The undergraduate programs have decreased both in absolute numbers
and as a percentage of the total while the graduate programs
have increased, with the master’s degree representing the
majority of the offerings [1], [7].
KOCAOGLU: TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT: EDUCATIONAL TRENDS
349
Engineering Schools
Business Schools
Joint Engineering and Business
Other
Total
60
3
16
I1
7
I
4
2
3
32
3
4
2
0
I
3
13
77
42
15
8
5
12
I59
Engineering Management
Mgmt. of Technol.
Industrial Management
Manuf. Management
MBA wl Technology
Other
Total
11
IO
3
0
4
88
I1
1
2
2
26
Fig. 5. Distribution of E&TM program titles in academic locations.
1990
Number
I
1994
52
Number
8
RS
- v
?I(
7_”
7
?A,
_,
17
MS
Ph.D.
99
29
60
17
132
64
19
I Total
166
Fig. 6.
78
I
204
MS
Ph.D.
Total
7.
I677
I254
325
3356
5841
107
6128
1295
243 1
4265
3867
4503
3348
13791
615
17 754
Enrollment estimates.
E&TM degree program\ in 1990 and 1994.
REFERENCES
VI. ENROLLMENTS
It is estimated that approximately 18 000 students are
currently enrolled in the E&TM programs worldwide. The
distribution of the students at various degree levels in the US
and non-US universities is shown in Fig. 7.
The estimated number of students enrolled in the E&TM
programs was 11 231 in 1960 [7].That figure has increased
58% in four years. The majority of the students are pursuing
the master’s degree on a part-time basis. Approximately 25%
of the doctoral students are also part-time students. The
undergraduates are mostly full-time students.
VII. CONCLUSIONS
The educational component of technology management is
continuing with its strong growth. From a handful of programs
40 years ago, the field has grown to more than 200 educational
programs. The growth is taking place primarily at the graduate
level. What started out initially as an Engineering School
activity is now moving into Business Schools just as strongly.
“Engineering Management” is being used as the title almost
exclusively in the Engineering Schools. “Management of Technology” is more common in the Business Schools, but it is also
gaining popularity in the Engineering Schools and the joint
programs. There is no indication that the growth is approaching
the saturation point. On the contrary, as the field continues to
expand in both the United States and the non-US universities,
Engineering & Technology Management is establishing itself
with higher degrees of visibility and recognition throughout
the world.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Alfredo Sandoval and Fernando Rivera were the graduate
assistants who helped in conducting the study and analyzing
the results. More than 3000 educational institutions were
contacted. Their responses were reduced to the preliminary
results summarized above. The University’s support, the time
and effort of the respondents, and the work done by Alfredo
Sandoval and Fernando Rivera are gratefully acknowledged.
D. F. Kocaoglu and F. Rivera, “Engineering and technology management,” paper presented at TIMS/ORSA Joint Nut. Meering, Detroit, MI,
Oct. 1994.
D. F. Kocaoglu and A. Sandoval, “Engineering and technology inanagement: Educational characteristics,” paper presented at ORSA/TI’MS Joint
Nutional Meering, Phoenix, AZ, Oct./Nov. 1993.
D. F. Kocaoglu, “Research and education in engineering management,”
presented at the 92ndASEEAnnu. Cot$, Salt Lake City, UT, June 1984.
D. F. Kocaogiu, “Engineering management education and research,’’
Proc. lnr. Congress on Tech. und Tech. Exchange, Pittsburgh, PA, Oct.
1984, pp. 4 8 1 4 8 2 .
D. F. Kocaoglu, “Engineering management programs as aids in inoving
from technical specialty to technical management,” Eng. Mnnuge. Int..
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 33117, Jan. 1984.
D. F. Kocaoglu, “Engineering management: Where it is, where it is
going,” Proc.. EMTA86 Irir. Cor$ o n Oz,qineering Manuge. T h e o n cind
Applicnrions. Swansea, UK, Sept. 1986, pp. 35 1-358.
D. F. Kocaoglu, “Research and educational characteristics of the engineering management discipline,” [E€€ Trans. Eng. Mrinuge., vol. 37,
pp. 172-176, Aug. 1990.
D. F. Kocaoglu, “Education for leadership in management of engineering and technology,” Technology Mnnngement, D. F. Kocaoglu and K.
Niwa, Eds., Piscataway, NJ, 1991, pp. 78-83.
Dundar F. Kocaoglu (SM’84-F’91) received the
B.S in civil engineering from Robert College,
Turkey, in 1960, the M S in structural engineering
from Lehigh University in 1962, the M S in
industrial engineering and the Ph D in operations
research and s y s t e m management, both from
the University of Pittsburgh in 1972 and 1976,
respectively
He is Profesor and Director of the Engineering
Management Program at Portland State University
in Portland, OR Dr Kocaoglu has published
over 40 articles and presented more than 100 papers on engineering
and technology management He is the author or editor at three book5
Engineering Manugernent (McGrdw-Hill), Tec hnolog) Manngement (IEEE),
and Munngement of R&D cind Engineering (Elqevier) His research interests
are in the areas of technology management, project management, multicriteria
decision analyvs, and project evdluatiom
Dr Kocaoglu is the editor of IEEE Trnnsncriony on Gigrneering
Mnnngerrient and the John Wiley Book Serie5 in Engineering and Technology
Management
Dr Kocaoglu is the recipient at the IEEE Centennial Medal He is listed
in Who’r Who in the World, Who’, Who in America. m d more than a doren
other reference publications