Roadmap For Smart City Technology

Our reference: TFS 17661
P-authorquery-v11
AUTHOR QUERY FORM

Journal: TFS
Please e-mail or fax your responses and any corrections to:

Carol Liston
E-mail: proofCorrections.ESCH@elsevier.spitech.com
Article Number: 17661
Dear Author,
Please check your proof carefully and mark all corrections at the appropriate place in the proof (e.g., by using on-screen
annotation in the PDF le) or compile them in a separate list. Note: if you opt to annotate the le with software other than Adobe
Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF le. To ensure fast publication of your paper please return
your corrections within 48 hours.
For correction or revision of any artwork, please consult http://www.elsevier.com/artworkinstructions.
Any queries or remarks that have arisen during the processing of your manuscript are listed below and highlighted by ags in
the proof. Click on the Q link to go to the location in the proof.
Location in article
Query / Remark: click on the Q link to go

Please insert your reply or correction at the corresponding line in the proof
Q1
Please conrm that given names and surnames have been identied correctly.
Q2
Highlights should consist of 3-5 bullet points. However, more than 5 points were provided. Kindly
modify the provided Highlights to conform with the requirement. For more information, please see
Guide for Authors.
Q3
Table 10 was not cited in the text. Please check that the citation suggested by the copyeditor is in the
appropriate place, and correct if necessary.
Q4
Please supply the year of publication.
Please check this box if you have no

corrections to make to the PDF le.
Thank you for your assistance.
Page 1 of 1
TFS-17661; No of Pages 1
Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2012) xxx
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Technological Forecasting & Social Change
Highlights
Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2012) xxx xxx
R
O
An integrated service-device-technology roadmap for

smart city development
Jung Hoon Lee a,, Robert Phaal b, Sang-Ho Lee c
a
Graduate School of Information, Yonsei University, 134 Shinchon-dong, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749, Republic of Korea
Centre for Technology Management, Institute for Manufacturing, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB 1RX, UK
Ubiquitous City Research Center, Dept. of Urban Engineering, College of Engineering, Hanbat National University, 16-1 Dukmyung-dong, Yuseong-gu,
Daejeon 305-719, Republic of Korea
b
c
A novel integrated strategy process for large-scale service-oriented infrastructure systems National roadmap for smart cities, considering
convergence of technology, devices and services Integration of roadmapping and quality function deployment (QFD) methods to support
foresight Use of roadmapping to support coordination of large complex research program All tables and gures are readable and tested
with the printed manuscript. All typos are corrected by the co-author who is native English as reviewer 1 suggested. Numbers of tables
are reduced from 12 to 9 as reviewer 1 suggested. Numbers of gures are also reduced from 8 to 4 as reviewer 1 suggested.
Q2
0040-1625/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.020
Please cite this article as: J.H. Lee, et al., An integrated service-device-technology roadmap for smart city development,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.020
1
2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
4
20
21
TFS-17661; No of Pages 21
Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2012) xxxxxx
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
R
O
O
An integrated service-device-technology roadmap for smart

city development
Technological Forecasting & Social Change
Jung Hoon Lee a,, Robert Phaal b, 1, Sang-Ho Lee c, 2

a
Graduate School of Information, Yonsei University, 134 Shinchon-dong, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749, Republic of Korea
Centre for Technology Management, Institute for Manufacturing, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB 1RX, UK
c
Ubiquitous City Research Center, Dept. of Urban Engineering, College of Engineering, Hanbat National University, 16-1 Dukmyung-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-719,
Republic of Korea
i n f o
a b s t r a c t
a r t i c l e
Firms and other organizations use Technology Roadmapping (TRM) extensively as a framework
for supporting research and development of future technologies and products that could sustain a
competitive advantage. While the importance of technology strategy has received more attention
in recent years, few research studies have examined how roadmapping processes are used to
explore the potential convergence of products and services that may be developed in the future.
The aim of this paper is to introduce an integrated roadmapping process for services, devices and
technologies capable of implementing a smart city development R&D project in Korea. The paper
applies a QFD (Quality Function Deployment) method to establish interconnections between
services and devices, and between devices and technologies. The method is illustrated by a
detailed case study, which shows how different types of roadmap can be coordinated with each
other to produce a clear representation of the technological changes and uncertainties associated
with the strategic planning of complex innovations.
2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Article history:
Received 13 March 2012
Received in revised form 28 September 2012
Accepted 29 September 2012
Available online xxxx
Keywords:
Integrated roadmapping process
Service and technology roadmap
Smart city planning and development
Quality function deployment
1. Introduction
N
C
Technological innovations, and changes in globally competitive business environments, affect both firms' short-term
performance and long-term sustainability. In such a context, decisions about which technology to apply are critical to many firms'
competitive advantage. In particular, when future directions and options in technology are obscure and uncertain, it becomes
more important to an enterprise to formulate an appropriate technology strategy to support its planning for, and response to,
future technical developments [38,51,60,64]. Technology roadmapping (TRM), a strategic decision process framework that
supports enterprise innovation activities, has attracted the interest of an increasing number of academics and practitioners, and
has been applied in many different industrial sectors and organizations [44]. A study of U.K. manufacturing firms in 2001
indicated that at that time 10% of medium-to-large companies had implemented TRM, with 80% of those companies using the
approach more than once or continuously, with exponential growth in interest in the method since the early 1990s [6]. As well as
responding to market needs, roadmapping is used to support the generation of new ideas for product development, derived by
predicting future technological trends and identifying potential technologies [23,45].
In recent years, a trend towards servitization has also caught the attention of academia, practitioners and governments
[10,63,73,74]. This term, initially proposed by Vandemerwe and Rada [79], has grown into a distinct concept of service science,
which has consolidated itself as a new academic discipline, providing impetus to developments in industry [5,53]. Service science
provides a conceptual foundation for service-oriented business models, promoting the development of flexible and robust
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 2123 4529; fax: +82 2 363 5419.
E-mail addresses: jhoonlee@yonsei.ac.kr (J.H. Lee), rp108@cam.ac.uk (R. Phaal), Lshsw@hanbat.ac.kr (S.-H. Lee).
1
Tel.: +44 1223 765 824; fax: +44 1223 766 400.
2
Tel.: +82 42 821 1191; fax: +82 42 821 1185.
0040-1625/$ see front matter 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.020
1
2
3 Q1
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
17
13
18
14
19
15
20
16
21
22
30
23
31
24
32
25
33
26
34
27
28
29
36
35
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
J.H. Lee et al. / Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2012) xxxxxx
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
2. Literature review
75
R
O
IT-based business models capable of responding efficiently to diverse customers' demands. In these terms, servitization is
intended to enhance an organization's ability to add value to new products by strengthening their planning processes, integrating
these with the delivery of services and generation of value in consumption or use [5]. For instance, the smartphone and its
software applications are aligned in terms of the combination of technologies, products and services they offer (and depend on)
through a concept of service provision that prioritizes the creation of value to end-users [80].
Despite this emerging trend, research in technology roadmapping has tended to focus on specific examples of industrial
technology deployment and product development, paying much less attention to the application of roadmapping as a paradigm
to the service area [76]. This paper, therefore, highlights the importance of having an integrated roadmapping process as a holistic
framework for supporting improved decision-making. Further, it proposes an integrated roadmapping process that is systematic
and standardized in order to coordinate the development of integrated product and service strategies. The proposed roadmapping
process has been applied to a smart city development project in order to demonstrate and validate the utility and benefits
of the methodology. The process specifically aims to forecast the development of future service-oriented smart devices and
technologies, and thus to propose an integrated process for roadmapping. The paper adopts the QFD (Quality Function
Deployment) method to establish interconnections between services and devices for infrastructure, and between devices and
technologies serving a smart city. The method is particularly useful in coordinating and adjusting existing service, device and
technology roadmaps and lends itself to use as a communication tool to support smart city development.
The paper contributes to broadening our understanding of the technological impact of likely future technologies and
technology-based services on IT-based smart device development. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the history
of the concept of TRM with reference to the literature, establishing a conceptual foundation for roadmap development processes, and
identifying different types of roadmaps. Based on this analysis, a distinct methodology is proposed in Section 3, backed up by a
detailed case study. Finally, conclusions are presented in Section 4, recommending areas where further research would be beneficial.
2.1. Smart city service development
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
2.2. Technology roadmapping
102
Although there are various definitions of TRM, technology roadmaps may be also be defined with reference to the roadmapping
processthe set of activities required to develop a roadmap. Roadmapping has been described as a process that contributes to the
integration of business and technology, facilitating the formulation of both short- and long-term technology strategies based on the
interaction between products and technologies over time [28]. Other definitions of the roadmapping process describe it as a
demand-driven technology planning process serving market needs [19,22,32], a communication/knowledge management tool
supporting strategic decision-making [83] and as a collective approach to developing a strategy in which the integration of
science/technological considerations represents a valuable input into product and business planning [26]. In summary,
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
The smart city concept originated from that of the information city, and incrementally evolved to an idea of an ICT-centered
smart city. The concept of the smart city has six main dimensions: a smart economy, smart mobility, a smart environment, smart
people, smart living, and smart governance. It is defined as being smart when investments in human and social capital and
traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic development and a high quality of
life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance [27]. The smart city concept can be
distinguished from other similar ideas such as the digital city or intelligent city in that it focuses on factors such as human capital
and education as drivers of urban growth, rather than singling out the role of ICT infrastructure.
Since the term ubiquitous in this context is derived from ubiquitous computing [82], various definitions of Ubiquitous City
have been put forward by previous studies, in conjunction with terminology associated with the smart city concept. An early
stage smart city can be defined as one that provides combined services via integration of IT and construction industries [37];
while highly advanced future cities will apply IT infrastructure and associated technologies and services to multiple components
of itself. Lee et al. [49] define a smart city in terms of the convergence of IT services within an urban space, such that the city's
citizens may access smart services regardless of time or place. This will enhance the city's competitiveness and its citizens' quality
of life. The Korean Ministry of Land, Transportation & Maritime Affairs have proposed a more technically-oriented definition [57],
as a city that is managed by a network and which supplies its citizens with services and content via the network using both fixed
and mobile smart city infrastructure, based on high-performance ICT. In summary, a smart city provides its citizens with services
via its infrastructure based on ICT technologies. This definition highlights the importance of identifying and planning for future
technologies that may serve future city demands, since it is almost certain that the smart city industry will grow. In this way,
evolving smart city technology is a fundamental component of the infrastructure underpinning the delivery of smart city services.
Additionally, other countries such as the U.S., Europe and Japan are also driving R&D initiatives and implementing smart city
technologies and applications, with the primarily aim of addressing current urban problems such as energy shortages, traffic
congestion, inadequate and poor urban infrastructure, health and education. In particular, the European Union (EU) is investing in
efforts to put in place smart city strategies for metropolitan city regions such as Barcelona, Amsterdam, Berlin, Manchester,
Edinburgh and Bath [58]. Other international cities such as Dubai, Singapore, San Francisco, London and Hong Kong are also
following a similar approach, aiming to improve quality of life for citizens and economic growth for industries within the city [49].
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
2.3. Quality Function Deployment in roadmapping process
143
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) is a management innovation tool based on a matrix approach to mapping customer
requirements and engineering attributes of products [1]. It has been widely used as a communication tool for cross-functional
teams (e.g. manufacturing and marketing) in order to establish relationships and trade-offs in a simplified quantitative form. QFD
has been identified for roughly the last fifteen years as providing a reliable approach for linking the different layers of roadmaps
(e.g. in product-technology roadmapping). Groenveld [28] and Phaal et al. [65] suggest that different roadmap layers can be
coordinated with QFD through cross-functional collaboration to determine which product features should be given development
priority on the basis of customer-orientation. Lee and Lee [42] capture consumer preferences using QFD, applying these to a
roadmapping process in power line communication. An et al. [2] have also proposed an integrated approach that mediates
between products and services for a mobile communication company. These authors suggest modifying QFD by describing a
relationship between different product characteristics and customer needs and, further, by clarifying the relationship between
different service characteristics. Lastly, they represent relationships between product and service characteristics in the form of a
House of Quality QFD cross-impact matrix. This research has followed An's lead in adopting QFD as a coordinating tool to
determine relationships (of priority and otherwise) between different roadmap layers in smart city strategic planning.
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
3. Design of an integrated service-device-technology roadmap
157
3.1. Case background
158
The smart city R&D project was initiated as one of 10 value creators (the so-called VC-10) by the Korean Ministry of
Construction and Transport in 2007. A dedicated government agency for promoting smart city projects was established to pursue
R&D on related issues, including strategy development and the elaboration of a vision for future smart city space and service
development. The agency also took on smart city infrastructure technology development, eco-technology development for the
smart city, and test-bed implementation. This substantial R&D program, with a budget of 490 billion won ($422 million) and
more than 1000 researchers participating in the project between 2008 and 2013. The scale of this initiative demonstrates the
degree to which smart city initiatives in Korea have the backing of government, at both national and local levels, with 36 local
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
N
C
R
O
O
roadmapping is a rational methodology for seeking agreement when selecting technologies supporting organizational goals,
and a framework that may be used for establishing and adjusting technology development time lines.
The roadmapping literature suggests that the process broadly consists of three different phases: preliminary activity,
development of the TRM, and follow-up activity (Garcia and Bray [22] and Strauss et al. [75]). Appendix A includes a comparison
of different models from the literature, comprising process phases and activities. Notable examples of research and practice
relating to roadmapping at the sectorial and national level include the work of Industry Canada [30], the U.S. Department of
Energy [77], and Lee et al. [48]. Over a period of more than a decade, Industry Canada supported the development of roadmaps for
key industrial sectors, including energy, aerospace, textiles, printing, logistics and intelligent buildings. The Industry Canada [30]
approach highlights the importance of establishing a Steering Committee in the early stages of undertaking any roadmapping
initiative, in order to clarify the roles and responsibilities of organizations involved in the process. It is recommended that the
head of this committee be an expert on the roadmapping process itself rather than on the technology or industry being
roadmapped. The process developed by the U.S. Department of Energy is similar to that of Industry Canada, but places a greater
emphasis on technology assessment [77]. Lee et al. [48] build on this work by proposing a six stage roadmapping process for
national level R&D roadmap development and applied demand analysis, environment analysis, technical assessment, portfolio
analysis and prioritization, all envisioning the development of a more detailed and systematic TRM.
There have been many attempts to use various techniques in conjunction with the roadmapping process in order to enhance
or improve the method. What many such techniques have in common is their concern to improve decisions made about which
technologies should receive development priority. For instance, techniques such as AHPthe Analytic Hierarchy Process [16,26]
and portfolio analysis [54] have been introduced into roadmapping processes, while QFD (Quality Function Deployment) and
GRID (decision matrix) analysis have been applied to identify relationships between markets, products and technologies
[17,34,42,67]. Bhasin and Hayden [7] used gap analysis techniques to observe gaps between current and emerging technologies,
while Yasunaga and Yoon [84] and Suh and Park [76] deploy patent map/analysis techniques to estimate the status of emerging
technologies (or level of development) and trends. Cheong [9] has proposed the integration of TRIZ and Six-sigma methods with
roadmapping to generate new ideas for new product development under certain quality standards.
Research and practice have led to extension of the scope of roadmapping beyond the traditional technology development and
R&D focus to other areas, influencing the whole organization [24,25,35]. Roadmapping techniques can be customized to fit
specific contexts and objectives and/or to accommodate uncertainty associated with emerging technologies. Depending on the
roadmapping purpose, the degree of roadmap customization required is an important factor in evaluating the trade-off between
generalization/standardization that is critical for effective roadmap usage, taking into account user satisfaction [47].
The focus of the research described in this paper is on how the roadmapping method can be used to develop mid- to long-term
strategic planning for smart city development. In these terms, the paper will consider how services, devices (infrastructure) and
technologies can be incorporated into a roadmap in order to make available different types of smart services for citizens of the
city. An integrated roadmapping process is proposed in Section 3, guiding the development of smart city strategy.
166
167
168
169
170
3.2. Integrated service-device-technology (SDT) roadmapping process
171
The purpose of this paper is to outline an integrated roadmap framework to support strategic planning for R&D initiatives for smart
city development. Other researchers have proposed roadmapping frameworks that are relevant to this kind of initiative. Phaal et al. [65]
generalize a TRM framework/architecture with three broadly different types of layers ranged from those at the top, relating to purpose
and format, to those at the bottom, relating to resources such as organization and the specific technology/competences/knowledge that
underpin given projects. The middle layer of the framework relates to forms of product or service development that deploy technology
to meet market and customer needs, connecting the top and bottom layers. More specifically, An et al. [2] have developed an integrated
product-service roadmap supporting interdisciplinary research on mobile communications linking manufacturers and service
providers. Lichtenthaler [50] provide an integrated form of product-technology roadmap facilitating open innovation processes capable
of accessing and exploiting external technologies.
Based on a review of this integrated roadmap literature, three different critical factors for designing the roadmapping process
were identified.
Firstly, the roadmapping process needed to rest on a systematic classification of service-device-technology in a smart city
context. Furthermore, possible roadmap types needed to be established according to their purpose within a classification scheme
that enabled the selection of a type suitable to particular smart city applications. In general, technology roadmaps are structured
along two dimensions, representing a system of layers and sub-layers against a time frame [65]. Roadmaps need to be able to
represent and support product planning, the object of the most common type of TRM, to coordinate service/capability provision
and the delivery of smart city services through devices enabled by emerging technology. In this paper, the vertical axis of the
roadmap is more critical than the time dimension, as this provides a common language and structure for the whole program.
Thus, initial roadmapping efforts were focused on the definition of layers and sub-layers based on a systematic classification of
smart city services, devices and technology. Since these three layers are interrelated with each other, it was necessary to define
each layer according to a detailed classification.
Secondly, the research required the development of appropriate templates for use in the integrated roadmap. Since the
roadmap serves as a visualization tool supporting communication between different interested groups, it is desirable for
roadmaps to be structured in a common format, within which multiple layers are arranged to facilitate effective new services,
device and technology development and service introduction.
Thirdly, the proposed roadmapping process needs to provide a systematic way to maintain and update roadmaps, as has been
suggested by other TRM studies [43,44,65]. This requires continuous efforts to build a database of smart city service/device/technology.
It is essential to keep updating information in the database at a frequency relevant to the most rapidly evolving service or device
parameters.
The development of a classification system of topics and themes is a critical step in developing a roadmap, as emphasized by
previous research [15,48,54,68,69]. Additionally, a government-driven initiative such as this tends to need a systematic policy for
planning technical task assignment and development work [33]. Therefore, the first requirement in drawing up a roadmap is the
crafting of an identification process of the various services generally applicable across the entire scope of smart city development.
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
R
O
government bodies (in 52 districts) backing the program, with advanced cities such as Hwaseong in Dongtan district, Woonjeong
in Paju, Inchon Chungla and Songdo currently developing integral smart city architectures. Of these, Songdo in Inchon district is
the largest smart city development project, due for completion in 2015. The various city developments provide a number of smart
technology-based services relating to health, traffic, parking and crime prevention, enabled by radio-frequency identification
(RFID) and wireless network technologies.
205
Structured methods for developing roadmaps have been proposed by previous research, which can be classified into three parts:
preliminary activity, development of the TRM, and follow-up activities [22,75]. For this research these were further subdivided into
detailed steps and activities relevant to smart city development and the three domains of services, devices and technology,
summarized in Table 1. Each of the 8 phases is described below, and subsequently illustrated with reference to a detailed case study.
206
207
208
209
3.3.1. Planning phase

The vision and objectives associated with mid- and long-term strategies are set during the planning phase, identifying the
characteristics needed to support smart city development. In addition, planning has to define the Critical Success Factors (CSFs) of
the roadmapping process in relation to the overall intended outcome and structure of the roadmap. In this phase, a task force
team that will be ultimately responsible for the creation of the roadmap is formed, together with a working group providing
support for the roadmap drafting stage.
210
211
212
213
214
215
3.3.1.1. Step 1: Setting the vision and goals for the development of mid- to long-term strategies. In order to develop mid- to long-term
strategies for a smart city, the future configurations of the city need to be anticipated, and the principal direction and goals of
developing the smart city framed. For this purpose, a literature review of studies of existing city developments was undertaken,
supported with expert interviews. This review generated six different smart city visions: a convenient city, a safe city, a
comfortable city, a cultural city, a productive city, and a city open for participation. These visions can be accomplished by
216
217
218
219
220
3.3. Design of a roadmapping development process
Table 1
A Technology roadmapping process for smart city development.
t1:3
t1:4
Preliminary activity
Development activity of integrated roadmap
R
O
O
t1:5
t1:6
Phase 1. Planning
Step 1. Smart city mid- to long-term vision and goals identified
Step 2. Definition of roadmap
Activity 1. Individual objectives of the roadmap
Activity 2. Setting roadmap boundaries and scopes
Activity 3. Defining an individual time table
Step 3. Critical success factors for the roadmap considered
Step 4. Organization of the project team
Activity 1. Identify the party responsible for the development of the roadmap
Activity 2. Form a working group
Phase 2. Demand identification
Step 1. Identify urban problems
Step 2. Infer demands and solutions
Phase3. Service identification
Step 1. Smart city services classification
Activity 1. Set classification standards
Activity 2. List services (list-up)
Activity 3. Develop and verify service classification system
Step 2. Analysis of service trends (Delphi)
Phase 4. Device identification
Step 1. Smart city device classification
Activity 2. List devices (List-up)
Activity 3. Develop and verify device classification system
Step 2. Analysis of device trends (Delphi)
Phase 5. Technology identification
Step 1. Smart city technologies identification
Activity 2. List technologies (List-up)
Activity 3. Establishment and verification of classification system
Step 2. Analysis of technical trends (Delphi)
Phase6. Roadmap drafting
Step 1. Develop roadmap formats
Step 2. Analyze interdependencies between service/device/technology
Step 3. Develop integrated roadmap
Phase 7. Roadmap adjustment
Step 1. Roadmap adjustment
Step 2. Roadmap verification
Phase 8. Follow-up stage
Step 1. Development of execution plan
Step 2. Execution of plan
t1:1
t1:2
t1:7
t1:8
t1:9
t1:10
Follow-up activity
improving the efficiency and effectiveness of existing services, and/or by providing and developing new services in response to 221
civic demand [57]. Thus, it was decided to establish a mid- to long-term strategy that placed a greater weight on market demand 222
(user requirements), rather than technology/production capability [48].
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
3.3.1.3. Step 3. Identifying CSFs for the roadmap development. In this stage, the critical success factors were derived after conducting
interviews with experts with experience in the development of roadmaps and with senior researchers in the smart city project
team. Since the complexity of the integrated roadmap is high, effective roadmapping process, reflection of customer demand
and continued improvement and adjustment were ranked as being the most important for the roadmap development.
238
239
240
241
N
C
3.3.1.2. Step 2: Denition of the roadmap. This step involved clarification of the objectives of developing the roadmap whilst
determining its limits and scope. As Lopez-Ortega et al. [52] have pointed out, organizations behind the roadmap need to
determine the role that technology will play in fulfilling their business vision, which sets the context for creating a roadmap,
establishing alignment between the smart city vision and available and emerging technological resources.
The framing of these definitions should lead to the establishment of a development timetable for all aspects of the roadmap,
including preparation and systematic preliminary processing. For the smart city integrated roadmap three development themes
received further focus. The first objective was to identify and verify the R&D topics to be passed on to the national level of smart city
development strategy, which in turn aims to realize a high-end city that can keep pace with an ever changing technical and service
environment. The roadmap's second objective was to provide a strategic direction for carrying out the program in light of the likely
redundancy of tasks in the smart city development program driven by the government. The final objective was to support the Project
Management Office controlling and managing the program with respect to monitoring and assessing the current status of service/
device/technologies and their future potential. Based on these themes, 8 different roadmap development objectives were identified.
Of these objectives, suggestion of optimal integration of the service/devices/technologies was the most critical for the development
team due to the complexity of interdependency relationships between the three different layers.
3.3.1.4. Step 4: Organizing the project team. The fourth step involved identification of a roadmap development team and undertaking
preliminary tasks before the Working Group was formed [17,52]. The development team is designed as a cooperating body between
project team members actually participating in smart city R&D projects. This is because all the characteristics of smart city evolution
point to the increasing combination and integration of various smart, technology-based service initiatives. It made sense, then, to
create a development team, together with its cooperating entities, out of project team members, as well as out of experts from
academia, industry and government agencies. The roadmap development team comprised 10 academic professors and 25 senior and
junior researchers in the fields of urban planning and development, and information systems. These researchers have their own
expertise, with a different focus, and provide a new impetus to the effort to converge technologies with services delivered in the
urban space. These scholars' ongoing empirical research is important in terms of supporting the roadmapping program, generating
process learning and continuous improvements and adjustments in the provision of technology-based services.
The expert group included urban experts, such as those from the main task research planning organization and from other
participating bodies in the smart city project. These were public officers from local government, academic scholars, engineers,
technical experts (GIS and ICT) and representatives from IT and communications service providers.
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
3.3.2.1. Step 1: Identication of urban problems. Problems in this context refer to the social obstacles and nuisances caused by the
city's structural imbalances. Kwon et al. [40] classifies urban problems into those concerning, respectively, housing/land,
transportation, environment/sanitation, parks and greenery, social development, disaster control, leisure/tourism development/
land rehabilitation, taxation, the development of the rural outskirts, population intensity in the metropolitan area and suburbs,
local development in relation to the location of shops and services and new town development. The author goes on to measure
the intensity of problems within each class [41,56].
In addition, Choi [13] attribute urban problems to reasons such as the shortage of public services, heavy traffic, inequality,
over-development, land shortages and crime. A total of 17 urban problems were identified in this study, categorized into six
different urban domains: housing/land (e.g. Low quality housing), transportation (e.g. Pollution and traffic accidents), disaster
control/safety (e.g. Natural disasters and man-made hazards), environment/energy (e.g. Deflection of fossil energy and
insufficient user information), urban landscapes (e.g. Insufficient support facilities for minorities) and civil participation
(e.g. Conflicts among individuals, areas, classes).
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
R
O
3.3.2. Demand identication

Citizens place a wide variety of demands on technology-based services in modern cities, which were identified during this phase
of the project, with potential solutions proposed through the provision of smart city technology. This form of problem identification
served in turn as the basis for organizing services, devices and technology types relevant to the smart city of the future.
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
3.3.3. Service identication

In this stage, the roadmapping process identified the services that smart cities will support, and collected information on these
services in a systematic manner through a service classification system. In addition, by monitoring trends in the development of
(and demand for) services, some preliminary work was carried out to underpin the designation and design of service layers in
later stages of the roadmapping process.
279
280
281
282
283
3.3.2.2. Step 2: Proposing solutions for urban problems and dening smart city demands. Some of the urban problems introduced above
can be solved, or at least mitigated, by smart city developments, and the solutions outlined here are connected to the demands made
of the smart city by citizens. In line with this vision, interviews with 15 experts were conducted, from fields ranging from city
services to technology, taken from people involved in the groups drawn up in the planning phase and organization of the Project
Team. As a result, it was concluded that 14 out of 17 urban problems could be addressed and potentially resolved through smart city
technology. These demands were further narrowed down to 9 smart city demands such as sysmatic management/control of
environment pollution, efficient energy management, open environment for civic participation through a number of workshops.
These demand types provide a comprehensive view of how smart technologies can contribute to smart city development.
3.3.3.1. Step 1: Smart city service classication. The services identified in this phase need to be classified properly in order to 284
promote a shared understanding of the nature of smart city services and of efficiencies that may be achieved through the project's 285
execution [29]. A robust classification helps local governments to develop services that address their own unique requirements. 286
For a smart city developer, the generic classification can be used as an indicator that helps to check the current status of smart city 287
services and to anticipate potential services that may be adopted later on. In addition, new services can be identified and 288
developed by exploring connections between services that have already been developed. In this regard, the intention is to 289
establish a classification system that sets out to minimize any difference in team workers' (crucially developers') conceptions of 290
the evolution of service models. This should in turn facilitate the development of systematic R&D projects.
291
Details of such activities include developing standards for the service classification, listing services and developing and verifying 292
the service classification system. The multi-dimensional service classification modes proposed in this research are shown in Table 2. 293
This form of multi-dimensional classification represents an effective alternative to ad hoc adaptations of a generic model in cases 294
where roadmapping has to accept the requirement of diverse classes and still hold together as a rational service model. In other 295
words, every smart service (for example, smart education, smart health and many other services) can be classified according to 296
various dimensions, which can be described as entity of embodiment, applied space, spatial facilities, objective of embodiment, 297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
3.3.3.2. Step 2: Service trend analysis. A two-stage Delphi survey was conducted over a period of three months to identify current
and future trends in smart city services while fitting these into a rigorous classification (Table 4).
Since smart city services are very futuristic and cover a wide scope, it is only of limited use to gather information from ordinary
citizens, who are unlikely to have encountered or demanded such services yet, and indeed experts, who tend to be very specific in
their field of knowledge. This explains the rationale for selecting the Delphi survey, which is capable of gathering information
from a relatively large number of subjects, accumulating it, and finally allowing it to support objective decision making [46]. As
the surveyed service pools are large and complex in their different categories, 12 small groups were formed as a result of the
Delphi analysis. The survey was distributed to 320 people including local government civil servants, members of the Smart City
National Association and urban experts, from which 147 responses were collected, representing a 49% response rate.
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
R
O
O
mode of embodied function and so on. With the strategic goal of developing a classification standard, this work performed nine
multi-dimensional analyses on 228 detailed service units. In these terms, services' Legal/Regulatory View, Space Factors, and Human
and Functional Elements are further broken down and shown in systematically classified form in Table 2. With the classification
standard created as described above, service lists were drawn up and expert groups (of ten participants) invited to verify them.
Table 3 shows some examples of service classification along with their definitions (to a degree consistent with confidentiality).
For instance, U-Work Service, as shown in Table 3, is defined as the creation of a virtual work space between remote workers and
their company that enables a safe and easily navigated working environment through web-based software applications. This service
can be categorized as administration and used at a metropolitan scale, since its primary objective will be to achieve reductions in
carbon emissions and to cut transportation time. This service requires Information Media Facilities such as a Smart Working Center near
train or subway stations or sited by a local community center. The service will also be open to general public to use, since the public will
be its main beneficiary. Within the classification scheme for featured elements, the objective of service is to support business activity
within the community. The service is defined as belonging to work and as being grounded in a common human perspective.
3.3.4. Device identication

319
A classification of device types has been made to collect related information and monitor the necessary progress in a more 320
systematic way, contributing to the device layer within the roadmap.
321
Table 2
smartCity service classification standard.
Category
t2:4
Service names
t2:5
t2:6
Law standard
Sub-category
Descriptions
Types
Integrated services
Name of mega service with multiple service

composition
Name of single unit service
Domains are defined by Ubiquitous City
Construction Law
N/A
Single unit service

Applicable service domains
t2:3
N
C
t2:1
t2:2
3.3.4.1. Step1: Smart city device classication. In the smart city environment, multiple devices perform various functions that can be
recognized by the users in physical or virtual connections via the network. Therefore, in this study, if a function is performed by a
multiple number of devices grouped together, the devices are classed as a single unit. In addition, when using networks, it is
possible that a newly recognized device (actually, a group of devices connected together) may be spread over a wide range of
physical locations (i.e. urban spaces). To account for this, a space-oriented classification standard has been established, enabling a
clearer identification of these service device clusters. Such a classification system serves as preliminary groundwork for the
collection of device-related information and the monitoring of technological progress; it should eventually support a better
understanding of various devices used in smart cities through the systematic acquisition of information.
The first step for classifying devices is to set up a classification standard, which has been done in respect of space type,
infrastructure components and formal type. The definitions of these three standards and classifies as space-oriented standards
devices' space type (urban node, landmark, path, edge, district, metropolitan) and infrastructure components (ceiling, walls,
floors, complex, network), while under the heading of forms type it classes separate or independent, single devices (standalone
devices) and grouped/converged devices that work integrally in combination with the urban space. After setting up the
t2:7
t2:8
Spatial elements
Spatial unit
Spatial facility
Spatial which service can be supplied

Spatial facility in which service are supplied
t2:9
t2:10
Human perspective
Embodying facility
Beneficiary
Embodiment objective
The service provider's entity

Service beneficiary
Service objective
Urban activity
Supporting urban activity
Human behaviour
Functional embodiment
mode
Types of service user's activity

Supporting urban activity
Feature elements
N/A
Administration, transportation, public health and
medicine, environment, crime prevention, facility
management, education, culture and tourism,
logistics, labour and employment, MISC
Metropolitan, city, district, facility, street, building
Control tower, community centre, unit spatial
facility, fixed information facility
Public, private, public and private
Public, citizens and corporations
Business support, life quality support,
industry support
Household and healthcare, safety, community
life, education, economy leisure
Living, working, moving, playing and cybering
Common ground, specialization, potentiality
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
t3:1
t3:2
City
City
Electronic
Voting service
Citizen Report
service
U-hearing
services
Remote
Collaboration
services
Site
Adminstration
Support
service
Citizen
Participation
service
Citizen
Participation
service
Citizen
Participation
service
U-work
service
Site
Adminstration
Support
service
Administration
Administration
Administration
Administration
Administration
City
Metropolitan
City
Partial
Unit
Unit
Service
Information
Media
Facilities
Information
Media
Facilities
Information
Media
Facilities
Information
Media
Facilities
Information
Media
Facilities
Spatial
Facility
Spatial Elements
Integrated
Service
U-City Service
Law
Standard
Law
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Human
Citizen
Citizen
Citizen
Citizen
Business
Support
Business
Support
Community
Community
Community
Community
Community
Working
Common
Based
Common
Based
Officials handle such administrative services like a

licensing process, map checking, an administrative in
the site
Workers in remote workers and company that can

collaborate freely with provided appropriate
application
Hold a public hearing on the urban development

and plan onlin without the cnstraints of time and place
Citizens to report illegal activities in the site

immediatly, and sit surveillance activities
Common
Based
Specialization
Survey in public institutions for the residents without

checking ID
Service Definition summary
Common
Based
Functional
Embodiment
mode
R
O
Working
Working
Working
Working
Human
behavior
Feature Elements
Urban
activity
Business
Support
Business
Support
Business
Support
Citizen
Objective
Beneficiary
Embodying
Entity
Table 3
An example of smartService classification and a service definition matrix.
8
t4:1
t4:2
Table 4
smartService Assessment Index and definitions.
t4:3
Category
t4:4
Service measurement Service demand
Sub category
Service anticipation
Evaluation scales
Expected demand from citizens and ability to resolve

5 level scale
urban problems
Business feasibility
Expected economic profits
Importance
Importance of service in connection to urban problems
Urgency of development
Urgency of service development within city
Commercialization
Time before service will be available or commercialized
in the market for first-hand uses
Innovative diffusion
How service can be diffused with its expected impacts
within city
Commercialization time
Time before service will be available or commercialized
Year
in the market for first-hand usages
Applicable time for smartCity implementation Likely time for the service's becoming actually applicable to
smartCity in light of various circumstances, including regulation
t4:9
Operational definition
R
O
O
t4:5
t4:6
t4:7
t4:8
classification standards, the study identified those devices that already exist, in Korea or elsewhere, together with those likely to
be developed in the future to ensure they fit into the classification standards and wider typology. Ten experts from technological
fields were selected to verify the device classification system.
Table 5 shows an example of devices that are plausible to potentially combine with smart city services. For instance, U-Booth
is an interactive space for enabling various smart city services that can be positioned within an urban node or placed as a
landmark. This single device form will be located within an existed complex space infrastructure. Similarly, other smart devices
such as Intelligent Bus Station and U-Dome were classified into this category. There are also converged forms of device that can
be combined with other infrastructure, such as wall, floor, path or edge space. For an instance Info-Bench was recognized as a
single device that can be placed with floor and path space while Intelligent Cross-Walk converged device form (i.e. multiple
devices) with floor element under path space.
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
3.3.4.2. Step2: Device trend analysis. Similarly to technologically-based services, Delphi surveys were conducted for three months
to analyze the progress that devices were making towards availability. The survey was sent to 108 technical experts working in
smart city related departments of private corporations and 30 experts from the academic sector with a specialism in the smart
city field, receiving a total of 97 useful responses.
Previous studies have assessed the marketability, feasibility and development capability of devices in order to project larger
trends about device development [36]. In this study, the detailed information that would normally be contained in these
assessments was reorganized to suit the specific task requirements (Table 6), further adding as parameters Time to Availability,
Time before Application within the city is Ready, and the plausibility associated with device development in order to anticipate
the likely timeframe of the actual application of the device in smart city networks.
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
t4:10
3.3.5. Technology identication

354
This stage entails the generation of a classification system into which technology-related data is systematically input and 355
verified as a preliminary task before the creation of the roadmap's technical layers.
356
N
C
3.3.5.1. Step1: Smart city technology classication. The first requirement in technology classification was to draw up an overall
taxonomic system for the ICT technologies applicable to smart cities, and then to identify which technologies fitted into this
classification. For this study, a daily life environment was assumed where information would flow to users via a variety of devices
through smart infrastructure.
Baek [3] sets out a process in which users act on information delivered to them through smart networks in three stages:
Awareness, Decision, and Action [4]. This conceptual classification further suggests a subdivision of technical functions and roles
in sub-categories of Sensing, Networks, Processing, Interfaces, and Security, as shown in Table 7 [4,18,61,70,78]. At this stage
individual technologies that fitted in each category were identified on the basis of industrial data and existing literature.
t5:1
t5:2
Table 5
smartCity device classification standard.
t5:3
Category
Definitions
Sub-category
t5:4
Space type
Urban node, landmark, path, edge, district, metropolitan
t5:5
Infrastructure components
t5:6
Formal type
The location where the device lies, or the range in which

the devices can communicate with each other
The location where the devices are installed when connected
with existing infrastructure
The number of the devices needed to perform their functions
or whether the devices are connected with other devices.
Ceiling, walls, floors, combined, network

Single devices (standalone devices), grouped/converged
devices that work integrally in combination
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
10
t6:1
t6:2
Table 6
An example of smartCity device classification and a device definition matrix.
Space type
Infrastructure elements
Device form
Devices
t6:4
Urban node, Landmark
Complex
Single device
t6:5
path, Edge
Ceiling
Single device
Converged (Roof)
Single device
Converged
U-Dome, U-Booth, Intelligent Bus

Station, Cave type Experienced Box
Sky-board
Roof-board
Electronic board
U-Sign
Info-board
Media Facade
Ambient
Interaction
Intelligent traffic light,
Intelligent pole, fo-Bench,
Info-Stand
Eco-Walk
Info-Line
Play Walk
Intelligent Cross-Walk
U-playground, U-Eco Library,
Artificial Island, U-Public space,
Mobile device
Wall
Single device
Converged
Combined
Converged
Metropolitan
Network
Single device
District
The smart city related technologies collected through the survey were divided into 12 sub-categories and 27 more detailed
groupings, to derive 114 technology factors. An expert group of 10 respondents further validated the adequacy of the technical
classification, confirming that the classification standard was accurate, and indicating any technologies that might be excluded
due to duplication or other reasons.
t7:5
t7:6
t7:7
t7:8
t7:9
t7:10
Device importance
Sub category
Category
Marketability
Overall assessment of current market

competitiveness of the device, as well
as future growth potential
Consequential influence
Overall assessment of the technical influence
of the device toward others and industrial
and economic consequences
Feasibility
Economic soundness
Soundness of the device application in city in
light of assessment of economic costs
Utilization
Extent of utilization of the device
Device level
Device maturity
Device's stage of current development
Device productivity
Availability of existing production facilities
for the device and likelihood of mass production
Device anticipation Time of availability
Expected time to completion of developed
device and of market availability
Time of application
Likely time for the device to become actually
applicable to smartCity in light of legal and
other circumstances
Intensity of plausibility
Measure of respondent's confidence in
answers about timing
Obstacles to introduction of the device Possible obstacles that might frustrate
device's application to smartCity
Evaluation scales
5 level scale
t7:4
Table 7
smartCity Device Assessment Index and definitions.
t7:3
3.3.5.2. Step2: Technology trend analysis. In order to establish the trend of technological development, a Delphi survey with ICT
technical experts from industrial, academic, R&D backgrounds was conducted over a period of three months. Participants
comprised 126 technical developers from private information or communication service providers, 100 experts from the
academic sector, and 50 researchers from governmental technical research institutes, resulting in 226 responses. The answers
provided to the survey focused heavily on questions of network and sensing technologies, accounting for 65% of the responses.
In the survey designed to help smart city planners anticipate mid-to-long term technology development, the focus was
principally on the importance of the technologies, the current stage of development, and future scope given likely future
innovation [14,20,59,62]. Therefore, technical assessment indexes were organized into categories for Importance, Current level,
and Future expectations, as shown in Table 8. Each category is further defined for detailed assessment, giving a total of 14 criteria
to measure using quantitative methods. In addition, similarly to the analysis of service and device trends, the expected time of
t7:1
t7:2
t6:8
t6:9
t6:10
Floor
t6:6
R
O
t6:7
t6:3
Introduction/Growth/Maturity/Fade out
(0 ~ 100)%
Year
5 level scale
Lack of Core Technology/Immaturity of the
Industry/High Required Investment Volume
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
11
availability and smart city integration aspects were separated out, in order to factor in additional possible barriers associated with 379
regulatory, commercial or other non-technical reasons [11,12,20,31].
380
3.3.6. Roadmap development
381
In the roadmap drafting stage, a first version of the roadmap was developed and using the data collected during the previous 382
steps that defined service, devices, and technology aspects.
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
3.3.6.2. Step2: Interdependency analysis. Previous phases involved separate information-gathering processes for service, device and
technology aspects of the smart city system. However, with this information being compiled from different sources it can be
challenging to define with confidence the kind of devices smart cities require, and indeed the services than can be provided via
such devices. Nor is it easy to decide what kind of technology is necessary to realize a service and deliver it to users. To solve this
problem, this research has incorporated a version of the quality function deployment (QFD), as described in Section 2.3. The
characteristics of this method are defined in a number of publications [2,28,34,65] where QFD follows a Market Oriented
Approach and is also useful in capturing and expressing interdependencies between the layers of a roadmap.
The above characteristics indicate the congruence of QFD with the aims of this step, namely to systematically identify the
service/device/technology capable of satisfying citizens' needs in part through understanding the interdependencies between
these, and bearing in mind that countless services/devices/technologies may exist at different times and in different locations. The
implication of this multiplicity of factors is that the importance of different factors (devices/services/technologies) changes over
time, as do relationships between devices, services and technologies. Thus, the first step was to establish a database with the
information collected, and then to identify forms of interdependency before the QFD approach could be applied. Previous studies
making use of QFD in roadmapping [34,65] have tended not to make a clear distinction between products and services. As a result,
they are unable to present a methodology for QFD that is capable of simultaneously analyzing customer demands and possible
products and services except An et al. [2]. They have proposed that products and services can be imagined as existing on a similar
level, suggesting a modified method of QFD able to identify relationships between customer demands, products and services.
As a first step, a preliminary QFD analysis was performed to identify key interdependencies between smart city demands and
devices/services as shown in Fig. 1. The total scores of Demand-Device/Service Inter-relationship are listed for both device (from
Mobile Devices to Intelligent Bus Station) and service (from Home Automation Service to Integrated Pollution Control
Services). Intelligent Pole was ranked highest, followed by Mobile Devices for smart device development under given Smart
City Demands, while Integrated and Social Security Card was ranked highest as a service, followed by Integrated Customer
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
N
C
R
O
O
3.3.6.1. Step 1: Developing the roadmap format. In this step, a simple and easy-to-understand roadmap format (structure) was
developed. Service, device and technology perspectives were considered by the project team, including trends and associated
timescales. Based on this, the time horizon for the smart city roadmap was split up into three periods: the near future (up to
2013), a possible future (2014 to 2020), and the far future (2021 and beyond). The near future designates a relatively close
period of time for which it is possible to predict changes that will take place in infrastructures and related technologies with a
degree of confidence. A possible future points to a future further away but not yet so far off that it has become impossible to
make predictions for it. The end of the possible future, that is 2020, marks the end-point of the time schedules of most national
development projects, providing an end point for smart city developments in practice. The far future should not be taken to
imply an actual date, but rather an assumed point in time when all of the services and values embodied in smart city can be
realized without technical constraints, setting out a coherent vision for the system.
The vertical axis of the roadmap represents services, devices and technology as a set of layers and sub-layers, which form
separate aligned service, device and technology roadmaps. The direction of development for each individual service, device and
technology is depicted within this structure using the bar format, one of the types identified by Phaal et al. [66]. A set of common
symbols was used to populate the roadmaps, described in Table 9 and explained below.
The beginning point on the bar-shaped arrows denotes the time of inception for the development of the service, device or
technology in question. The time of availability and time of application are marked with triangular icons. Time of availability
refers to the moment in which the subject becomes commercially available. Even after successful commercialization, however,
legal and regulatory issues, as well as issues to do with standardization, may lead to a delay in actual deployment within the smart
city, and hence these notional times are distinguished. The current maturity of the service, device or technology is marked as
Introduction, Growth, Maturity and Fade Out based on a life-cycle perspective, and the production capability of the device and
current domestic technical proficiency are indicated.
t8:1
t8:2
Table 8
smartCity technology classification standard.
t8:3
.Category
Definition
t8:4
t8:5
t8:6
t8:7
t8:8
Sensing
Processing
Network
Interface
Security
Monitor any external change of status and transmit collected data to process and respond to signals from sensors
Process data from sensors according to an analysis leading to a rational decision
Connect each device and user to support efficient communication
Convert the information that flows between devices or between users and devices into a more intelligible form (Graphical, Textural)
Control illegal access to information from users or facilities over the entire smart environment and protect personal privacy
12
t9:1
t9:2
Table 9
smartCity technology assessment indexes.
Category
Sub category
Evaluation scales
t9:4
Technology
importance
Marketability
Overall assessment of the technology's current market

competitiveness and potential for future growth
Assessment of the technology's potential influence
on other technologies and industry, and economic
consequences
Financial cost of actually integrating the technology
into smartCity
Extent of utilization of the technology
Could the technology lead to another generation
of development?
Technology's stage of development
Taking technical proficiency of country with most
advanced technology as 100, what is state of
national proficiency?
Country/region with most advanced technology
Existence of a substitute/resembling technology
that could be used in similar purpose
Time technology is expected to become available
or commercialized in the market for first-hand uses
Time for technology to be incorporated in smartCity,
in light of legal and regulatory environment
Respondent's confidence about application timetable
of technology
to smartCity
Possible obstacles for technology's application to
related industries
5 level scaleVery high

High
Intermediate
Low
Very low
t9:6
t9:7
Feasibility
Economic soundness
t9:8
t9:9
Application
Potential of future
evolution
Technical maturity
Domestic level against
global status
Technology
anticipation
Introduction/Growth/Maturity/Fade out
(0 ~ 100)%
Most advanced nation

Existence of a substitute
or resembling technology
Time of availability
Choose from Korea/USA/Japan/EU/ETC.

Yes/No
Year
Technology
level
Time of application
Respondent's confidence
about application timetable
Lack of core technology

Immaturity of the industry
High required investment volume
Obstacles to technology
5 level scale
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
3.3.6.3. Step 3: Integrated development of the roadmap. This step involved integrating the roadmap format developed in Step 1 and
the representation of the interdependencies between services, devices and technologies from Step 2. These are combined in such
a way as to support an initial visualization of the collected data based on total priority (weighting). This area of service is
identified as being the most important from the QFD analysis, alongside the related devices and supporting technology. Next,
information for these items is conceptualized using the roadmap format.
An roadmap example, as shown in Fig. 3, is that of Public Transportation Information Service which can be delivered by a number of
devices such as Mobile Devices, Intelligent Traffic Lights, U-Booth and Intelligent Bus Stations that can be implemented by the end of
2012. Intelligent Traffic Lights and Intelligent Bus Stations have low levels of technological maturity (i.e. Introduction) compared to
the other two devices, which are interdependent on different technologies. OLED technology is already available (since before 2009),
yet needs to develop further for city implementation in 2020, while RFID and GPS have already reached the Mature stage.
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
Service. Furthermore, the relationships between products and services are denoted as * in the House of Quality (i.e. the
roof-shaped triangular cross-impact matrix part of the QFD diagram in Fig. 1). Home Automation Service, Integrated Social
Security Card, Public Transportation Info. Service and Emergency Recovery Service are highly co-related and able to provide
these services with Mobile Devices such as smart phones and tablet PCs while Public Transportation Information Service, which
shows a high co-relation, is provided through Mobile Devices, Intelligent Traffic Lights, U-Booth and Intelligent Bus Station.
These relationships enable experts to the rank overall weightings for each device and service area.
Based on the overall weightings from Fig. 1, interdependency relationships between service/device and technology attributes
(sensing, network, interface and processing) were analyzed and the interrelationship scores between device/service and technology
were assessed. Fig. 2 shows that OLED in interface, Binary CDMA in network and RFID in sensors are ranked with higher scores
based on the expert review. As a result, it was possible to identify the most important services and devices that are most capable of
meeting citizens' needs, and to determine how these might relate to existing or emerging technology through the QFD analysis.
t9:10
Consequential influence
R
O
t9:5
t9:3
3.3.7. Roadmap adjustment

448
This stage involves adjustment and verification of roadmap projections as they have been derived through previous stages of 449
the roadmapping process, with a view to improving objectivity and reliability.
450
3.3.7.1. Step 1: Roadmap adjustment. In general, a roadmap contains information gathered from a number of different sources,
since predictions from experts in individual fields are not in themselves sufficient to anticipate and prepare for the future. For this
very reason, a process of repeated adjustment of the roadmap is necessary after the first version has been created in its complete
form [6]. In particular, it is very likely that roadmapping processes of the kind described in this study will be subject to error, not
least because of errors in the information compiled in the roadmap's assembly. Surveys of experts' and practitioners' predictions
451
452
453
454
455
13
R
O
O
Fig. 1. Analysis of the interdependencies between service/device/technology.
456
457
458
459
460
461
462Q3
463
464
465
466
467
468
3.3.7.2. Step 2: Verication of the integrated roadmap. According to Kostoff and Schaller [38], it is not possible to derive a definitive form
for the roadmap before it has been completed, even for those experts who drafted it. It is necessary rather to secure the help of outside
authorities if the map is to be credible. Hence, in this study, a verification process was added to the methodology, with the aim of
making the roadmap more credible and valid, soliciting the involvement of both internal researchers and external experts in the field of
smart city services. A series of smart city workshops and open seminars were held during and after roadmap development to enable
wider participation and engagement, capturing and using feedback from this consultation to improve the quality of the roadmap.
469
470
471
472
473
474
3.3.8. Follow-up stage

During this stage the roadmap is evaluated and an execution plan developed. Feasibility studies and a process/system for
continuous updating of the roadmap are also undertaken and put in place during this stage. In the case of the smart city project, the
expectation is that continued adjustments and enhancements of the TRM will be achieved though surveys and interviews with
experts, supported by input of secondary data from other research institutes and the media. This will serve the purpose of bringing
475
476
477
478
479
N
C
regarding services/devices/technologies do not generally yield a unanimous or unambiguous result, since the experts all have the
perspectives appropriate to their own fields and experience. The adjustment step aims to identify difficulties that have come to
light with the roadmap, refining and enriching roadmapping content though internal discussions and the addition of secondary
data. These adjusting steps improve the roadmap accuracy and credibility. Three different adjustment approaches are identified:
1) adjusting the roadmap with device and (or) technology determined by service; 2) adjusting the service roadmap due to
current technology limitations; and 3) all three layers adjusted based on inputs from both the integrated development team and
the expert group (Table 10).
An example of such an adjustment process is shown in Figs. 34, highlighting roadmap adjustments:For Public Transportation
Information Service it was found that intelligent traffic lights and intelligent bus station devices need to extend to 2014 since
OLED technology, a primary technology for both devices, would be implemented within the city later than 2020 according to
Fig. 4. Again discussions and expert reviews concluded that OLED technology requires an adjustment on the time line not later
than 2014, where both devices can be extended to 2014. Overall, service development time has adjusted from 2011 to 2014. In
this case of adjustment three parties negotiated a change to multiple layers of the roadmap.
R
O
14
Fig. 2. Analysis of the interdependencies between service/device/technology.
480
481
482
483
484
485
4. Conclusions
486
together a consensus on the completed roadmap insofar as it ensures that the roadmap content is sufficiently accurate. The follow-up
stage will also generate an integrated execution plan, based on the priority assessment carried out by QFD analysis. The aim is to assist
designers' decision-making processes in selecting technologies and developments to be pursued. Further, the information gathered at
the definitional stages of each area will be retained and rationalized as a database allowing a more informed style of management and
better data sharing within the project teams. This recommendation of coordinated data is in line with Lee et al.'s study [44], which
pointed out the establishment of [an] adequate software system as a key factor in roadmap utilization.
4.1. Lesson learned
This paper has described the development of a smart city roadmap in Korea, placing particular emphasis on the underlying
classification system, the development of roadmap formats and database accumulation of the large volume of information related
to smart devices, technologies and services necessary to develop the roadmap. Through this case study, the following lessons have
been identified, which may be relevant to similar projects in the future.
Firstly, the developed roadmaps have provided the first comprehensive and unified view of current and future trends for smart city
development in Korea, since there was no prior strategic guidance available. Each city has been developing their own services based on
current technologies without coherent strategic planning which requires a national level coordinating view. Therefore, the developed
roadmap serves an important strategic resource and communication tool to support smart city R&D initiatives in Korea (i.e. what is
possible in near future and what areas need to be developed in nationally or locally). In addition, the roadmap points to best practices
for other smart city developments, creating an integrated knowledge platform founded on technological trajectories.
Secondly, structuring the layers and time frames for smart city development was found to make an important contribution to
the overall program objectives. The multi-layered roadmaps, conceptualized through consultation with experts and stakeholders
within the project, provided an integrated architecture for the whole system, relating to the architecture of the smart city itself
(i.e. services-devices-technologies). Each layer has its own classification system, with sub-categories that supported the
identification of different and new services with potential devices and technologies. Through the roadmapping process, which
involved a series of workshops, in-depth interviews and surveys, the roadmapping process itself becomes a communication
platform enabling knowledge exchange within the large and extended project team, including service development, integrated
platform team, legislation and regulation policy team, and device-technology development team. Since the roadmap served as a
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
History
Short term
Med term
15
Importance
Long term
Service
A
Application
E
Public Transportation Information Service

D
Availability
Device
A
Application
E
Mobile Device
Availability
R
O
O
Application
Intelligent Traffic Lights
Availability
Application
C
A
U- Booth
Availability
Application
Intelligent Bus Station
N
C
Availability
Fig. 3. Integrated roadmap for public transportation information service (before adjustment).
long- and mid-term strategic planning framework for smart city development, the time frame was also critical, divided into three
time horizons (near future, mid-future and the far future).
Thirdly, one of challenges in developing the integrated roadmap was dealing with a large number of R&D researchers and other
stakeholders, to enable a comprehensive and broad view of smart city development for the roadmap. Since many different interested
506
507
508
509
16
Table 10
Service/Device/Technology layer formats.
Service
Diagram
Device
Unit Service Name
Name
Device Name
Name
Time of
Technology
Diagram
Diagram
Technology Name
Name
Time of
Time of
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Time of
Application
Time of
Application
Time of
Application
Application
Application
Maturity
Introduction Growth
Importance
Maturity
Maturity
Fade out
Introduction
Growth
Maturity
Fade out
Importance
R
O
A: Marketability
B: Consequential Influence
C: Feasibility
D: Economic Soundness
E: Utilization
Maturity
E
Importance
A: Feasibility
B: Demand
C: Importanc
D: Influence
E: Urgency
Application
Availability
A
A: Marketability
B B: Consequential Influence
Introduction
C: Feasibility
D: Economic Soundness
E: Utilization
Growth
Maturity
Fade out
Domestic
Production
N/A
Capability
technical
level
against
:
:
:
:
:
100%
76% 99%
51% 75%
26% 50%
0% 25%
Global
Capability
100%
76% 99%
51% 75%
26% 50%
0% 25%
Service
:
:
:
:
:
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
4.2. Research limitations and future research
532
The defined classification systems could be further developed, extended and validated with other experts in order to provide a
more holistic view of smart services, devices (infrastructure) and technologies. In order to test the applicability of the general
framework developed in this research, it would be useful to focus on a specific smart city development, creating a customized
roadmap and process to support alignment of the city's strategic objectives. The methods developed could be further enhanced by
combining other techniques such as patent and portfolio analysis, to improve data, analysis and decision-making quality. The
current project focused more on the communication benefits of the roadmapping processin the future, building on the data
collected the emphasis could shift towards developing a knowledge management tool to support smart city initiatives in the
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
groups needed to participate in order to project current and future trends, the roadmap for each layer (service-device-technology)
was individually developed in a parallel manner, whereas prior roadmapping approaches have generally been more sequential. For
instance, the service roadmap may be sequentially designed followed by mapping available technologies, which are limited to
customized devices and technologies, whereas this study focused rather on a generalization/standardization roadmap at the national
R&D level. In addition, the smart city context may be different, since certain services can be delivered by multiple devices (smart
phone, smart wall paper) with different technologies, and the roadmap development was a rather exploratory learning process.
These maps are combined with adjustment through QFD analysis, as they are interdependent, coupled by demand-pull (service) and
technology-push (device-technology) views. Since many of the exploratory roadmaps were technology-driven the integrated
roadmap attempts to account for both views.
Fourthly, the roadmapping method was combined with other management techniques in order to strengthen the overall
process, and to engage with different stakeholders. The survey-based Delphi method was used for constructing three basic
roadmaps that offered grounded information for projecting current and future trends. The process was also distinctive in its
deployment of QFD within the roadmap adjustment phase to assess multiple possible forms of interdependency between
services, devices and technology. In using a modified form of QFD, the roadmap could clearly highlight important services and
devices that best matched service demands. This was a step further than existing studies, in not only suggesting modifications to
QFD, but in applying them in an actual implementation case.
Lastly, the roadmap content, as represented using the symbols shown in Table 9, provides a more realistic view from a
commercialization perspective. The roadmap accounts for detailed time frames described by availability and applicability. The
former indicates commercialization whereas the latter accounts for regulatory and legal issues to project future deployment. This
identifies which regulation or policy may be acting as a bottleneck for service implementation, and enables a more realistic time
frame which accounts for exogenous variable such as social concerns (e.g. privacy) or security (e.g. RFID adoption creating privacy
problems although the technology is already available for implementation).
t10:1
t10:2
17
R
O
O
Technology
RFID (Passive, Active Tag/Low & High Freq)
Touch Sensor
GPS
C
A
A
E
Availability
N
C
Binary CDMA
Application
Availability
C
A
Availability
Application
Application
Availability
OLED
Application
A
Application
Change
Availability
C
A
Application
E
RFID/USN Security
Availability
D
Before 2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014~2020
After 2020
Importance
Fig. 4. Integrated roadmap for public transportation information service (after adjustment).
future. The development of a database in which to store various forms of information has the potential to facilitate the developed
new services along with technology and devices. The particular specification of the roadmapping process described in this paper
is expected not just to support ongoing smart city development but also to lend itself to applications in other technology-based
industries that need to both coordinate a vast scale of activities and to keep abreast of continual new developments.
540
541
542
543
18
As the smart city roadmap was constructed in a formal and systematic way, accumulating a large volume of data, software
based roadmapping tools could improve roadmap utilization. Such tools enable the reuse of roadmaps and also to capture,
maintain and manage their data over time. The benefit of such a developed system could contribute to automated and customized
roadmapping processes and could play an important role in supporting knowledge management activities within distributed R&D
teams for smart city development.
544
545
546
547
548
Acknowledgment
549
This research was supported by a grant (code 07-High Tech-A01) from High Tech Urban Development Program funded by 550
Ministry of Land, Transportation and Maritime Affairs of the Korean government.
551
R
O
Appendix A. Technology roadmapping processes

Author (Year)
Development of TRM
Lee et al. [47]

Beeton [6]
1. Planning
1. Planning
2. Define technologies
2. Insight collection
EIRMA [17]
1. Pre-project phase2. Setting

up the team
3. Preliminary plan for the
roadmapping project
1. Preliminary activity
4. Processing of the inputs

5. Compression to a working document
6. Checking, consulting, communication,
planning
2. Development of the roadmap
1. Trend foresight
6. Formation of technology
2. Technology forecasting
roadmap
3. Technology characterization
4. AHP modeling
5. Evaluation
2. Roadmapping workshop(s)
3. Roll-out
5. Upgrading of the roadmaps
3. Roadmap discussion and
and their format
information gathering
by a small team
4.Workshop(s) with
multi-disciplinary
participation to draft
roadmaps
3. Technology needs assessment 3. Develop roadmap
4. Technology development
plan
2.Roadmap creation
1) Uncertain events recognition
2) Influenced elements identification
3) QFD adjustment
4) Scenario roadmap creation
2. Divergence
3. Convergence
2. Develop and implement a training program
3. Collect data and create the roadmaps
Kim and Park [34]
1.Roadmap framing
Phaal and Muller

[67]
Daim and Oliver
[15]
1. Ideation
R
R
1. Survey of the organization's

goals, strategies, and survey
of the sector
1. Initiation
1. Collection of literature
Martin and Eggink

[54]
3. Follow-up activity
1. TRM initiation
2. Subject selection
Gerdsri et al. [25]

Yasunaga et al.
[84]
Follow-up activity
4. Follow-up activities
4. Interpretation/
implementation
7. Formulation of a
decision document
8. Update
Lee et al. [48]
1. Planning
1. Problem recognition
by management.
2. Development of the
provisional roadmap
Phaal et al. [66]

Groenveld [28]
Garcia and Bray

[22]
Da-wei and
Lu-cheng [16]
3. Develop roadmap
3. Insight Processing
and data
1. Product range characterization

and thermal issue qualification,
technology listing and
characterization,
fitting criteria and weighting
factor definition
Lopez-Ortega et al. 1. Selecting and characterizing
[52]
the technological destinies
Eom et al. [19]
1. Making common sense
Bhasin and Hayden 1. Vision
[7]
2. Identify high-level requirements
3. Breakdown requirements
Bruce and Fine [8] 1. Planning
2. Development
6. Draw technology roadmap
1) Classification Phase
2) Standardization Phase
3) Modularization Phase
2. Link between technologies and
product thermal issues
3. Idenfication of technical performance, cost,
and technical risk in the application
4. Creation of the TTR based on thermal
performance and technical availabilities in time
2. Routes identification
3. Technology roadmap construction
2. Development
4. Gap analysis
5. Identify technology gap
2. Input and analysis
6. Improvement of
supporting tools
7. Stimulation of learning
7. Formulation of a
decision document
8. Update
4. Synthesis
4. Review and ratify
3. Implementation
7. Form the research report
4. Technology roadmap
scheduled updating
3. Follow-up activity
552
553
19
(continued)
Appendix
(continued)
Development of TRM
Follow-up activity
Fujii and Ikawa

[21]
1. Deciding theme,
Time-frame, Strategic factors
3. Identify critical issues

4. Itemize necessary action
Kostoff and Boylan

[39]
1. Indentifying market
needs or firm's technology
strength
1.Classification
1) Purpose
2) type
2. Workshop
1) Identify market driven
2) Determine the future vision
3) Identify and determine product,
function, technology, R&D process,
resource
4) Identify correlations
2. Identifying candidate technology alternative
3.Identifying technology components
4. Construct roadmap
2. Standardization
1) Product
2) Technology
McCarthy [55]
Team formation
Focus
Collection of literature and data
confirmation of experts list
3. Technology/Workflow Analysis
3. First expert symposium for the trend

of the technology and TRM framework
4. Second expert symposium for designing
technology roadmap
5-1. Industry questionnaire investigation
5-2. Academic research questionnaire investigation
6. Third expert symposium to make clear
industry demand
Draw TRM
3. Identify Vision for Future
1. Identify stakeholders
4. Identify barriers to market entry
and coordinating body
5. Identify strategic approaches to overcome
2. Identify current status
barriers
of technology and market
6. Produce roadmap document
4. Construct a patent map
1. List of services
5. Evaluate technology's priority using the
2. Initial technologies of services
3. Initial keywords of technologies patent map
6. Build up a service-oriented technology roadmap
4. Identify the product that will be the focus
1. Satisfy essential conditions
2. Provide leadership/sponsorship of the roadmap
3. Define the scope and boundaries 5. Identify the critical system requirements
and their targets
6. Specify the major technology areas
7. Specify the technology drivers and their targets
8. Identify technology alternatives and their
time lines
9. Recommend the technology alternatives that
should be persuaded
10.Create the technology roadmap report
11. Critique and validate

the technology roadmap
12. Develop an implementation
plan
13. Review and update
Walsh [81]
Suh and Park [76]
Slabbert and Buys

[72]
Shengbin et al.
[71]
1.
2.
1.
2.
3. Modularization
1) Planning
2) Forecasting
3) Administration
4. Implementation
5. Review
7. Form report
R
O
O
Lee and Park [47]
Author (Year)
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
Y. Akao, Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design (Translated by Glenn H. Mazur), Productivity Press, Tokyo, 1990.
Y.J. An, S.J. Lee, Y.T. Park, Development of an integrated product-service roadmap with QFD, Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 19 (5) (2008) 621638.
H.J. Baek, Implementation strategies for Real-Time Enterprise, SDS Consulting Review, http://www.dbguide.net/upload/data/ca_study/cr_200405_1.pdf2004.
D.H. Baek, H.C. Jin, A feasibility study on the location based services under ubiquitous environment, J. Soc. Korea Ind. & Syst. Eng. 30 (3) (2007) 111.
T.S. Baines, H.W. Lightfoot, O. Benedettini, J.M. Kay, The servitization of manufacturing: a review of literature and reflection on future challenges, J. Manuf.
Technol. Manag. 20 (2009) 547556.
D.A. Beeton, Exploratory roadmapping for sector foresight, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB, 2007.
K. Bhasin, J.L. Hayden, Creating communications, computing, and networking technology development roadmaps for future NASA human and robotic
missions, in: AIP (American Institute of Physics) Conference Proceedings, 2005, pp. 10511062.
E.J. Bruce, C.H. Fine, Technology roadmapping: mapping a future for integrated photonics, http://www.hbs.edu/units/tom/seminars/2004/fine-5Tech_Rdmap.pdf2004.
S.H. Cheong, MOT by using scientific methodology in Samsung R&D, in: Proceedings of Portland International Center for Manage, Eng. & and Technol., 2006.
H. Chesbrough, J. Spohrer, A research manifesto for services science, Comm. of the ACM 47 (2006) 3549.
H.S. Choi, S.Y. Eum, M.K. Jeon, Methodology study on forecasting of digital society. (KISDI) Research Report, 0620, 2006.
M.H. Choi, E.Y. Ahn, A study on the evaluation indicators of the environmental technology, J. Korean Technol. Innov. Soc. 6 (3) (2003) 345357.
M.J. Choi, G.H. Jung, S.Y. Lee, H.W. Seo, The evaluation of technology level on Korea's mid & long-term strategic technologies, J. Korean Technol. Innov. Soc.
8 (2) (2005) 650676.
S. Coldricka, P. Longhurstb, P. Iveya, J. Hannisc, An R&D options selection model for investment decisions, Technovation 25 (2005) 185193.
T.U. Daim, T. Oliver, Implementing technology roadmap process in the energy services sector: a case study of a government agency, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 75 (5) (2008) 687720.
Z. Da-wei, H. Lu-cheng, Strategy for technology roadmap of membrane structure, 2007 Int. Conf. Manag. Sci. (14th) (August 2022 2007) 20212026.
EIRMA, Technology roadmappingdelivering business vision, in: Working group report, 52, European Industry Research Management Association, Paris, 2007.
Electronic Times, Ubiquitous white book, Electronic Times Press, Seoul, 2005.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
N
C
References
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
20
R
O
[19] K. Eom, M. Choi, Y. Uh, Y. Yoo, B. Lee, A study of technology roadmap applications and technology planning in ICT sector, J. Technol. Innov. 11 (2003) 2950.
[20] Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI), Linking between needs of future life and IT-based technology , 2006.
[21] M. Fujii, Y. Ikawa, The development of simplified technology roadmapping for use by Japanese chemical companies, in: Proceedings, 2731 July, Cape Town,
South Africa, PICMET, 2008, pp. 21502158.
[22] M.L. Garcia, O.H. Bray, Fundamentals of Technology Roadmapping, Sandia National Labs, Albuquerque, NM, 1997. (SAND97-0665).
[23] N.N.Z. Gindy, B. Cerit, A. Hodgson, Technology roadmapping for the next generation manufacturing enterprise, J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 17 (2006) 404416.
[24] N. Gerdsri, An analytical approach to building a technology development envelope (TDE) for roadmapping of emerging technologies, Int. J. Innov. Technol.
Manag. 4(2) 121135.
[25] N. Gerdsri, R.S. Vatananan, S. Dansamasatid, Dealing with the dynamics of technology roadmapping implementation: a case study, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 76 (2009) 5060.
[26] N. Gerdsri, D.F. Kocaoglub, Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to build a strategic framework for technology roadmapping, Math. Comput.
Model. 46 (2007) 10711080.
[27] R. Giffinger, H. Gudrun, Smart cities ranking: an effective instrument for the positioning of cities? ACE: Architecture, City & Environ. 4 (12) (2010) 725 (2010).
[28] P. Groenveld, Roadmapping integrates business and technology, Res. Technol. Manag. 40 (1997) 4855.
[29] S.E. Han, G. Kim, J.W. Jung, Regulation on Diffusion of U-City Service Model, Public Administration, The Korean Association For, 2007.
[30] Industry Canada, Technology roadmappinga strategy for success, http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/trm-crt.nsf/eng/h_rm00049.html2000.
[31] K.Y. Ji, M.G. Kim, J.H. Park, Market opportunity and potential on U-City, IITA Weekly Technol. 1233 (2006).
[32] T.A. Kappel, Perspectives on roadmaps: how organizations talk about the future, J. Prod. Manag. 18 (2001) 3950.
[33] B.K. Kim, Dynamic technology roadmap, Research Report, 20061, Korea Institute for Advancement of Technology, 2005.
[34] H.Y. Kim, Y.T. Park, Development and application of Web-based technology roadmap: QFD and scenario panning approach, Proceeding of Korean Institute of
Industrial Eng., Fall, 2004.
[35] H. Kim, J. Lee, S. Cho, A study on the effect of using technology roadmap on company's dynamic capabilities, Proceedings of Korean Society for Innovation
Manag. & Economics, Winter, 2009.
[36] S.H. Kim, Y.J. Ju, S.J. Park, A method on the selection of the promising IT equipment, Technol. Innov.J. 2 (2) (1999) 153325.
[37] Korea Land Corporation, Plan for ubiquitous city development and operation , 2005.
[38] R.N. Kostoff, R.R. Schaller, Science and technology roadmaps, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 48 (2001) 132143.
[39] R.N. Kostoff, R. Boylan, G.R. Simons, Disruptive technology roadmaps, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 71 (2004) 141159.
[40] J.C. Kwon, J. Choi, J.W. Park, B.J. Hyun, J.S. Yoon, J.B. Kim, A study on the enactment of regulations for construction of U-City, National Information Agency,
2006.
[41] S.G. Kwon, U-City concept and trend, Electronic Information Center, KETI, 2008.
[42] C. Lee, J. Lee, Conjoint analysis and QFD for a reliable starting point of technology roadmap, J. Technol. Innov. 16 (2007) 6586.
[43] J. Lee, S. Cho, J. Ham, H. Lee, H. Kim, Methodology for U-City technology roadmap, in: Proceedings of Korean Society for Innovation Manag. & Economics,
Winter, 2009.
[44] J.-H. Lee, R. Phaal, C. Lee, An empirical analysis of the determinants of technology roadmap utilization, R&D Manag. 41 (2011) 485508.
[45] J.-H. Lee, H. Kim, R. Phaal, An analysis of factors improving technology roadmap credibility: a communications theory assessment of roadmapping processes,
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 79 (2012) 263280.
[46] J.S. Lee, Delphi method, Education and Science press, 2001.
[47] S. Lee, Y. Park, Customization of technology roadmaps according to roadmapping purposes: overall process and detailed modules, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 72 (2005) 567583.
[48] S.J. Lee, S.R. Kang, Y.S. Park, Y.T. Park, Technology roadmapping for R&D planning: the case of the Korean parts and materials industry, Technovation 27
(2007) 433445.
[49] S. Lee, J. Han, Y. Leem, T. Yigitcanlar, Towards ubiquitous city: concept, planning, and experiences in the Republic of Korea, in: T. Yigitcanlar, K. Velibeyoglu, S. Baum
(Eds.), Knowledge-based Urban Development: Planning and Applications in the Information Era, IGI Global, 2008, Hershey, PA, 2008.
[50] U. Lichtenthaler, Opening up strategic technology planning: extended roadmaps and functional markets, Manag. Decis. 46 (2008) 7791.
[51] F. Lizaso, R. Guido, Linking roadmapping and scenarios as an approach for strategic technology planning, Int. J. of Technol. Intell. & Plann. 1 (2004) 6886.
[52] E. Lopez-Ortega, T.A. Concepcion, S.B. Viloria, Strategic planning, technology roadmaps and technology intelligence: an integrated approach, Proc. PICMET
(2006) 2733.
[53] P. Maglio, J. Spohrer, Fundamentals of service science, J. Acad. Market. Sci. 36 (2008) 1820.
[54] G. Martin, E. Eggink, Creation of a thermal technology roadmap in a consumer electronics product environment, in: Semiconductor Thermal Measurement
and Management Symposium, 24th Annual IEEE, 2008, pp. 106111.
[55] R.C. McCarthy, Linking technological change to business needs, Res. Technol. Manag. (March-April 2003) 4752.
[56] Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, Laws for supporting Ubiquitous City plans and Construction, 2007.
[57] Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, Ubiquitous City Future Vision and Mid-long Term Strategy, 2008.
[58] T. Nam, T.A. Pardo, Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people and institution, in: The Proceedings of the 12th Annual International
Conference on Digital Government Research, June 1215 2011, pp. 282291.
[59] National Science, Technology Council, National R&D report , 2007.
[60] M. Nishimura, Future design by scenario roadmap, BADA press, 2005.
[61] Nomura Research Institute, Ubiquitous network and new society system, Electronic Times, 2003.
[62] J.S. Park, Forecast on S&T mid-long term development, NISTEP Report, 2004.
[63] L.D. Paulson, Service science: a new field for today's economy, Computer 39 (2006) 1821.
[64] I.J. Petrick, A.E. Echols, Technology roadmapping in review: a tool for making sustainable new product development decisions, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.
71 (12) (2004) 81100.
[65] R. Phaal, C.J.P. Farrukh, D.R. Probert, Technology roadmappinga planning framework for evolution and revolution, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 71 (2004) 526.
[66] R. Phaal, C.J.P. Farrukh, D.R. Probert, Technology Roadmapping: Linking Technology Resources to Business Objectives, Center of Technology Management,
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB, 2001.
[67] R. Phaal, G. Muller, An architectural framework for roadmapping: towards visual strategy, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 76 (2009) 3949.
[68] M. Rinne, Technology roadmaps: infrastructure for innovation, Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 71 (2004) 6780.
[69] Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology, TRM Manual , 2000.
[70] Samsung Economic Research Institute (SERI), Ubiquitous computing: business model and prospect, Issue Paper, 2003.
[71] H. Shengbin, Y. Bo, W. Weiwei, Research on application of technology roadmap in technology selection decision, 2008 Chin. Control and Decis. Conf. (CCDC
2008) (2008) 22712275.
[72] J.A. Slabbert, A.J. Buys, Technology roadmap process to compare commercial broadband technologies available to SME and SOHO owners in South Africa,
AFRICON 2007 (Sept. 2628 2007) 19.
[73] J. Spohrer, P. Maglio, J. Bailey, D. Gruhl, Steps toward a science of service systems, IEEE Comp. Soc. 40 (2007) 7177.
[74] J. Spohrer, D. Riecken, Services science, Comm. of the ACM 49 (2006) 3132.
[75] J. Strauss, M. Radnor, J. Peterson, J. Plotting and navigating a non-linear roadmap: knowledge-based roadmapping for emerging and dynamic environments,
in: Proceedings of the East Asian Conference on Knowledge Creation Management, March 6-7th 2008, Singapore.
[76] J.H. Suh, S.C. Park, Service-oriented Technology Roadmap (SoTRM) using patent map for R&D strategy of service industry, Expert Sys. with App.: An Int. J. 36
(2009) 67546772.
[77] U.S DOE (Department of Energy), Applying science and technology roadmapping, Env. Manag., 2000.
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585Q4
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
21
[78]
[79]
[80]
[81]
K.Y. Um, M.S. Choi, Y.B. Eo, Y.S. Yoo, B.N. Lee, ICT roadmap case and use, Korea Society, Innov. Manag.& Econ. (2003).
S. Vandermerwe, J. Rada, Servitization of business: adding value by adding services, Eur. Manag. J. 6 (1988) 315324.
S.L. Vargo, R.F. Lusch, Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing, J. Mark. 68 (1) (2004) 117.
S.T. Walsh, Roadmapping a disruptive technology: a case study: the emerging micro-systems and top-down nanosystems industry, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 71 (2004) 161185.
[82] M. Weiser, The Computer for the 21st Century, Scientific American, September 1991.
[83] R. Wells, R. Phaal, C.J.P. Farrukh, D. Probert, Technology roadmapping for a service organization, Res. Technol. Manage. (March-April 2004) 4651.
[84] Y. Yasunaga, T. Yoon, Technology roadmapping with structuring knowledge and its advantages in R&D management, Int. Eng. Manage. Conf. (2004)
581585.
R
O
O
Jung Hoon Lee is currently an associate professor at the Graduate School of Information, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea and also visiting scholar at Stanford
Program on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) at Stanford Business School. He received his B.Eng./MSc. in Electronic Engineering/Information
Systems Engineering and MSc. in Information Systems from University of Manchester and London School of Economics respectively. He obtained his Ph.D. in
Manufacturing Engineering and Management from the Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge. His current research interests include performance
management in technology management, technology roadmapping and forecasting and simulation modeling in technological innovation.
Rob Phaal joined the Centre for Technology Management at the University of Cambridge in 1997, where he conducts research in strategic technology
management. Areas of interest include management processes, frameworks and tools, with a particular focus on technology roadmapping and evaluation. Rob has
a mechanical engineering background, with a doctorate in computational modelling and industrial experience in technical consulting, contract research and
software development.
N
C
Sang Ho Lee is a professor at the Department of Urban Planning and Engineering and the chairman of lead Ubiquitous City Research Center at Hanbat University,
Korea. He has also been a project manager for R&D initiatives for U-City project which supported by Ministry of Land and Transport in Korea. Prior to join Hanbat
University, he has worked for SAMSUNG Group. Prof. Lee is also an executive board member of Knowledge City World Summit and currently served as an
international jury of Barcelona Smart City Award. Prof. Lee graduated from Yonsei University in Architecture Engineering then obtained his MSc/Ph.D. in Urban
Planning and Engineering from Yonsei.
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684

Roadmap For Smart City Technology

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Roadmap For Smart City Technology

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Our reference: TFS 17661

AUTHOR QUERY FORM

Please e-mail or fax your responses and any corrections to:

Article Number: 17661

Query / Remark: click on the Q link to go

Please supply the year of publication.

Please check this box if you have no

Thank you for your assistance.

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

Technological Forecasting & Social Change xxx (2012) xxx xxx

An integrated service-device-technology roadmap for

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

An integrated service-device-technology roadmap for smart

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

Jung Hoon Lee a,, Robert Phaal b, 1, Sang-Ho Lee c, 2

2.1. Smart city service development

2.2. Technology roadmapping

2.3. Quality Function Deployment in roadmapping process

3. Design of an integrated service-device-technology roadmap

3.1. Case background

3.2. Integrated service-device-technology (SDT) roadmapping process

3.3.1. Planning phase

3.3. Design of a roadmapping development process

Development activity of integrated roadmap

3.3.2. Demand identication

3.3.3. Service identication

3.3.4. Device identication

Name of mega service with multiple service

Single unit service

Spatial which service can be supplied

The service provider's entity

Supporting urban activity

Types of service user's activity

Officials handle such administrative services like a

Workers in remote workers and company that can

Hold a public hearing on the urban development

Citizens to report illegal activities in the site

Survey in public institutions for the residents without

Service Definition summary

Service measurement Service demand

Expected demand from citizens and ability to resolve

3.3.5. Technology identication

Urban node, landmark, path, edge, district, metropolitan

The location where the device lies, or the range in which

Ceiling, walls, floors, combined, network

Urban node, Landmark

U-Dome, U-Booth, Intelligent Bus

Overall assessment of current market

Overall assessment of the technology's current market

5 level scaleVery high

Most advanced nation

Choose from Korea/USA/Japan/EU/ETC.

Lack of core technology

3.3.7. Roadmap adjustment

Fig. 1. Analysis of the interdependencies between service/device/technology.

3.3.8. Follow-up stage

Fig. 2. Analysis of the interdependencies between service/device/technology.

4.1. Lesson learned

Public Transportation Information Service

Intelligent Traffic Lights

Intelligent Bus Station

Unit Service Name