Going concerns and social agitations has been that the older versions of franking fluids developed were environmentally unsafe. This is because they were known to be toxic chemical mixtures which had the potential of polluting the source of water I. E.

The water table. Hence, the development of a safe franking chemical is welcomed with t hope of exploiting a niche market for environmentally safe franking chemicals. As a result, this report looks in to the current position of the technology management framework for the new franking chemical.Green (2013) revealed that hydraulic franking started since asses where drilling horizontally through shale layers for hydrocarbon recovery became popular in parts of Pennsylvania, Oklahoma and Texas in the United States of America. As at 2011, shale gas production in the US was approaching 30 billion cubic feet per day. Healy (2012) described franking as a method used by petroleum drilling engineers t stimulate and recover hydrocarbon from underground reservoirs.

Franking technology involves the pumping of a mixture of chemicals sand and water into underground reservoir formation at high pressures, penetrating through fissures, pores and crevices of hard rock formations underground so that dissolved gas bubbles are trapped in water solutions which are then pumped back up surface an processed to recover the entrained gas. Potential risk and benefit tradeoffs in franking operations to recover shale gas and tight oil resources were examined by Ingénues et al. , (2013).The report argued that recovered shale gas has significantly increased fuel available for electric power generation, transportation and industrial purposes thus revamping the US economy. More Jobs have been created, consume energy bills have reduced, and domestic energy production has increased thus reducing dependency on imports.

3. 0 FRANKING CHEMICALS Healy (2012) further reported that in order to accelerate the franking, the following monuments are typically added to pumped water solution: Quartz-rich sand is added as prospects to crack open the crevices in the sub surface formation.Acids are added to help initiate the fractures. Corrosions and scale inhibitor chemical additives are added to protect the pipe linings used in the operations and Other chemical additives to alter the viscosity of the fluid flow.

Recently in the news, franking chemicals have been claimed to cause a lot of socio- economic agitation such as sex hormone imbalance leading to infertility, cancer and birth defects (Gruffest. 013). These claims were supported by INS studies in England. A US supreme court in Wyoming recently moved in favor of disclosures of what chemicals are used by dealers in franking operations (Brotherhood, 2014).

This was necessitated by water contamination found near franking well sites of which the company involved would not divulge what chemicals were used, claiming protection of trade secrets. An investigative report into the franking chemicals used by Quadrille, a known franking company has it that the chemical contents include Hydrochloric acid, FRR-40 ruction reducer, carried biocide's, Stimulus W friction reducer, breakers, corrosion inhibitors, gelling agents, crinkliness, oxygen scavengers, pH adjusters, scale inhibitors, and surface acting agents (Radix, 2014). . 0 FRANKING TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION Whereas technology is the application of science to solve human problems, innovation is the introduction of creativity and ingenuity to bring about better solution to the market (COED, 2011). Solutions could be in the form of improved products, services or marketing strategy, organizational strategy, operational strategy and so on.

In the case of franking chemical, the original chemical manufacturer has produced an environmentally safe franking chemical that should compete favorably in the market because it offers solutions to concerns of chemical pollution of the water table during this operation with older chemicals in existence. 5. 0 NEW FRANKING CHEMICAL TECHNOLOGY LIFE CYCLE Life cycles enables an understanding of what operational strategy, marketing strategy and technological management strategy an organization should adopt at each point in time (Accidental et al. 2010). The graphical representation below gives an understanding of technological life cycle mapping: Figure 1: shows the technology life cycle graph for new franking chemical Source: Philologist (2014) Technology life cycle as seen in the categorization above, presents a formulation and that it has significant resources to exploit her invention to the fullest.

However, with the necessary aid of international market partners to network product penetration and sales performance in specific regions/countries targeted. . 0 CURRENT STRATEGY OF THE COMPANY Strategy stipulates the critical objectives a firm wishes to focus its strengths on evolving in order to obtain a long term market competitive advantage (Higher and Render, 2014). The company operates on a market differentiation strategy, proposed by porter 5 models (Porter 1985).

Serving a niche market of chemical lubricants used in deep shale gas franking operation, the company reserves the right to exert premium price influence on the market, thus making a high profit margin.With a target to serve global markets from headquarter location in the United Kingdom; the current priorities would be about sourcing out for the best marketing partners to deal with. Delivering well researched franking lubricant formulations that will meet the acceptability criteria of market needs will also potentially be top on the objective of the company. 8. 0 CURRENT OPERATION STRATEGY OF THE COMPANY This has to do with understanding the geography of where the company is currently located, its target customers location and what networks would deliver the products. This would enable the company to plan adequately for the future.

At a developmental stage of the technology driven venture, it is often the case that the company's best talents-its employees would be a group of people working with highly acid business secrets which are codified hence would need to be treated as company assets. Hence it would be in the best interest of the operations to maintain the company operational base within a highly absorptive environment where its employees could be in close contact with technology market needs, advancements, technical interest groups and network of like minds in fostering knowledge growth (Cohen and Leviathan 1989).Perhaps, this is the motivation why Google Company is moving its world headquarters from California to the heart of London kings cross location (Norman, 2013). Regardless of the massive cost implication of this operational change in headquarter location, the company whose business strategy is to sell it products and services to a differentiated market still deems it smart investment choice to bring its employees to the centre of action and networking with other innovators next door.

Varying arguments has it that franking for shale gas recovery holds no solution to rise in energy cost and stability of supplies when a holistic cost benefit view is taken (Brown, 2013). Hence the invention of CEO friendly chemical promises to reduce the level of toxicity introduced into groundwater where other versions have failed to address this problem. Being a genealogy on development with core R&D operation located in I-J, licensing, franchising and Joint venture partnership are some options of marketing processes it could consider in getting products to global markets.However, strategic objectives need to be clearly defined as proposed by FAA (2009). FAA came up with the Activities Value Profitability and Change (ABACA) framework, which explores the profitability of a firm's strategy with recommendations for improved performance on its core business.

Thus the firm leverages on an opportunistic innovation strategy tit its new technology to offer unique value to its customers as old competitor chemicals come to the end of life with no known alternative environmentally safe franking chemical yet in existence.This idea is supported by Ford and Saran (2002) which concurs that winning current technology driven markets requires a business strategy that integrates innovation plans in line with a firm's resources and core strengths. 10. 0 SOOT ANALYSIS OF THE COMPANY It is imperative to discuss with strength, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the company manufacturing the franking chemical with a view to understanding its rent position in the market.

Strengths The following factors could be considered as key selling points for the company.These include: It develops its technology internally using robust research and development employees. It is experienced in filing and managing patents. It is a distinctive market leader, making first entrance into the market with an anticipated new CEO friendly franking chemical.

Weaknesses Over optimism on the new technology Reliance on one core business of technology development and patenting Operating in the technology development phase, employees who handle tacit information are in higher bargaining position of power to the company.This could be manipulated against certain interest. Opportunities Operating a segmented market affords the chance to sell at premium price, hence increase profit. It could compete on both strategic objective of market differentiation and cost leadership if can motivate and convince its research and development employees to move from the United Kingdom to some other cheaper operational base.

Although this could have its after effect downsides through cutting off the absorptive environment necessary to stimulate productivity among the think tanks who's expertise drive the business.Considering the product, market, and the technology as the deciding variables, the position of market attractiveness of the company could be understood in order to ascertain where the stake lie in centralization process (Ford and Saran, 2009). Although several other models such as the Roberts-Benny model, Abernathy and Clark Model, Henderson-Clark Model, Tech Model, Turtleback-Abernathy, Dustman- Responses technology life cycle model and Foster's S-Curve have been formulated on appropriate strategic frameworks for evaluating technology, Ford and Saran's proposed model tend to be suitable in the case considered.Therefore a model which elates the strength of the company's technology to market attractiveness is shown below: Figure 2: Shows the technology and market interplay. Saran, 2002) (Source: Ford and As seen in the figure above, the new franking chemical fall within the technological quadrant of new solutions to existing environmental degradation caused by the former chemicals used.

As such this new technology is quite novel and based on market demand pull. 12. CONCLUSION Whilst franking technology and chemicals used have been well developed in America, unconventional shale gas recovery through franking remains a highly debated subject in the United Kingdom. These were seen to be as a result of deferring views on how disruptive the technology is and how to draw the tradeoffs between potential risk and benefit opportunities of the operation. However, the development of a new franking chemical that is less polluting by this medium size R&D firm in I-J, offers a win-win situation to the market and speculators.Hence as seen in this study, the inventor company is currently in a good market position to deploy its technology developed using its experience and finance to explore international marketing partnerships.

Therefore, it is recommended that having ascertained the current session of the franking chemical innovation as a technology on development, distinctive, and market demand driven, it is imperative that market channels and entrance are quickly established in order to gain significant capture, prominence and profit.