Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Introduction
A public funded research laboratory in a
developing country like India faces problems with
respect to allocation of scarce resources from
Government on the large portfolio of projects. Some
of these projects are contractual in nature with part of
the funds for the same sourced as grants from
departmental agencies or Government institutions. In
certain cases private or public sector industries may
sponsor research by providing entire cost for the
project. Even in such cases the project cost projection,
particularly in respect of manpower costs are usually
on the lower side on account of the exigencies of the
situations and expectations in industry circles which
make it contingent on public funded research entities
to make subsidized projections. Thus, a Government
research laboratory in India may have a portfolio
consisting of : (i) In-house projects, (ii) Grant-in-aid
projects, and (iii) Sponsored research. In-house
projects are fully funded by the research institutes
through Central Government funds since they are of a
basic nature. Industry may not fund such programmes.
Nevertheless institutions need to undertake basic
research for expertise development and catching up
with scientific progress in the field elsewhere. This
situation calls for definite criteria for giving priority
to the projects so as to facilitate resource allocations.
Certain well-defined criteria are discernible in this
context. These are applicable to the wide spectrum of
projects undertaken and could be categorized as: (i)
Organizational, (ii) Technical, (iii) Strategic, and (iv)
889
890
891
Definition
Explanation
1
3
Equal importance
Moderate importance of one over another
5
7
Strong importance
Very strong importance
Extreme importance
2,4,6,8
Reciprocals
892
893
894
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Eigen vector
[Pi]
Priority vector
[Pi]=[Pi]/ [P]
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
1/3
2
2
1
1/3
2
3
3
1
1/3
2
1
1.000
0.747
0.647
0.974
0.297
0.222
0.192
0.289
Level 3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
1
1
1/3
1/3
1
1
1/3
3
3
1
1/3
895
3.1.4
Priority
vector Pi
3
4
3
1
0.364
0.385
0.164
0.087
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.2.6
Priority
vector Pi
1
1/3
1/3
3
1
2
4
2
2
1
2
3
3
1
1/3
1/3
3
1
1
20
1/3
2
1
1
340
0.064
0.092
0.226
0.136
0.146
Level 3.3
3.3.1
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
1/3
1/3
1/3
Level 3.4
3.4.1
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3
3
1
5
5
3
3
1/5
1
1/3
3.3.5
Priority
vector Pi
3
2
1/5
3
1
0.360
0.258
0.059
0.193
0.131
1
4
2
1
1/3
Priority
vector Pi
3
1
0.137
0.625
0.238
Very Poor
Poor
Satisfactory
Good
Excellent
Priority
vector Pi
1
3
5
7
9
1/3
1
3
5
7
1/5
1/3
1
3
5
1/7
1/5
1/3
1
3
1/9
1/7
1/5
1
1
0.033
0.063
0.129
0.262
0.513
896
wt
0.108
0.114
0.049
0.026
0.075
0.014
0.020
0.030
0.033
0.069
0.050
0.011
0.037
0.025
0.040
0.181
0.069
PROJECT PROPOSALS
1
2
G
P
P
P
S
V
S
S
S
G
S
S
G
P
P
V
S
P
S
S
S
P
G
S
P
P
G
S
S
P
S
V
S
V
3
G
S
G
G
S
S
S
G
S
S
G
G
S
G
G
G
V
4
P
P
S
S
P
S
G
S
S
P
P
S
P
S
S
P
G
5
V
V
S
S
V
S
S
G
G
G
S
S
G
S
G
G
P
6
P
S
P
P
S
S
G
P
P
P
P
S
P
P
S
V
V
Note; V- very good, P- Poor, S- Satisfactory, G-Good, and E- Excellent For example, for project 1,
Total score =
3
4
5
6
7
8
Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges the help rendered by Mr
N P Manojkumar, M Tech scholar in literature search
and data analysis. The help rendered by Mr M P
Varkey in preparing the chart, graphics and the
electronic manuscript is also acknowledged.
References
1
2
9
10
11
12
13