مقدمه ای بر آموزش مدیریت فناوری (An introduction to Management of Technology pedagogy (andragogy

Management of Technology (MoT) pedagogy, more rightly described as adult learning or andragogy, is a young field. Here we provide some insight into the importance of “lifelong” MoT learning from a number of separate perspectives. Prof. Daniel Berg’s perspective is that of a progenitor of the MoT field, a former President of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) and Technology Director at Westinghouse. Another is one of the field’s most accomplished practitioners, Prof. H.S. Mani. Dr. Mani retired as dean from the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Kanpur and was the initiating director of Meta Research Institute. He holds India’s coveted Lifetime Achievement Award for Physics and was named one of India’s Science Instructor of the Year. We also provide a multifaceted perspective by introducing the thoughts of a newly minted Ph.D. in technology strategy and entrepreneurship, Dr. Robert Tierney from the University of Twente, Netherlands. The Special Issue editors, Prof. Steven T. Walsh and Dr. Yorgos Marinakis, also provide insights into the MoT pedagogy field and display how the authors in this Special Issue progress the field. We initiate with a brief discussion of the advent of importance in MoT. The importance of Management of Technology (MoT) has been recognized since the earliest days of economic research (Smith, 1776; Ricardo and Li, 1819), yet appreciation of the importance of education on technology management has lagged. Some suggest that this lag is the result of managerial discomfort with technology and lack of understanding of its importance in the strategic process of the firm, region, as well as in national and global economy (Christensen, 2008). Yet the importance of technology in management and the economy was sealed when, in the 20th century, two business cycle economists (Schumpeter and Swedberg, 1942; Kondratief, 1937) demonstrated the central role of technology in creating disproportionate economic growth. The fastest growing regions were those that led in technology commercialization. When another economist (Solow, 1956) won the Nobel Prize for demonstrating that the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was modified by technology as a multiplier of capital and labor, MoT became an important policy matter for most governments and firms. No longer was technology taken as a given. Technology management was now deemed exceptionally important. Research into the strategic role of technology became important (Mansfield, 1968) and at this time authors generally stated that technology needed to be directed by the strategic effort of the firm (Ansoff and Stewart, 1967). Some years later, Friar and Horwitch (1985) suggested a more dynamic interaction between technology and strategy in which each had primal input of the other. Much later, articles on MoT education began to appear (Yanez et al., 2010). Finally, education in general has changed with the times, from traditional practice, to video learning, to on-line processes, “edutainment,” and finally, to providing an educational process that “addicts” students to lifelong learning (Cooper et al., 2015). We now introduce the field of MoT. We first discuss Prof. Mani’s insights. Prof. Mani has managed technology-based organizations since the 1960s. He epitomizes the technologist’s embrace of managerial roles that abound in industry, academia and policy makers. He is both an academic scholar as well as a reflective practitioner when it comes to the field of Management of Technology (MoT). He has teamed with MoT researchers to advance the field (Walsh et al., 2014). He noted that many exceptional engineers are placed in leadership positions without an MoT education. This is one of the reasons why, over the years, many of the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) developed MoT concentrations. Prof. Mani noted that technologists, when thrust into more managerial roles, could not rely on their technical educational background to assist them (Kim, 2015). He stated “Vision is the single most important characteristic for the successful growth of a technical based organization. This was best illustrated to me by the example of William Lawrence Bragg of Cavendish laboratory, when he decided to pursue a new line of research in biophysics, instead of continuing on the previously established path of Ernest Rutherford in the area of radioactivity. This led to one of the most important work, that of unraveling the structure of DNA by Francis Crick and James Watson. He also stated that several other characteristics are also essential for healthy growth of an organization. They are, in my view and experience, (a) understanding the strength’s, weakness and stamina, (b) external visibility of the organization or group, (c) clarity of functions of every team member at all levels, (d) accepting mistakes openly and taking corrective actions (e) open door policy.” These are all things that MoT programs teach today, with pedagogy activities in scenarios (Wright et al., 2015), cases (Marinakis et al., 2014; Walsh et al., in press), simulations (Linton, 2015) and entrepreneurial action (Harms, 2015). Prof. Mani also stated that an academic organization has to identify and choose areas of strength instead of spreading too thin or becoming too narrow. For instance at Harish-Chandra Research Institute, Allahabad, India we chose string theory, high energy phenomenology, some areas of condensed matter Physics Astronomy and number theory to focus on. Later Quantum information theory was also added. This strategic focus with a directed choice paid good dividends, making it an internationally visible research center. This insight resonates with a major contemporary strategic perspective on how to develop exceptional organizations (Walsh and Linton, 2011; Hamel and Prahalad, 1990). Yet the competency based organization comes with a price — meritocracy. Dr. Mani further stated that periodic meetings with the members were critical in ensuring transparency in the roles of each member. They were beneficial to impress upon the entire organization the importance of each person’s contribution to create a supportive and productive environment. Equally essential is to create an atmosphere where it is possible to accept mistakes — this needs an understanding and a collective effort to take corrective steps whenever possible. Finally an open door policy is absolutely necessary in order to keep accurate and effective information flow. Too often, rumor, misrepresentation cause considerable dissipative energy of the organization. Prompt responsive feedback has proven to increase the faith and trust of the entire staff toward the organization allowing the team to feel ownership.