time & dates

ART3.pdf

QTIP: Quick technology intelligence processes Alan L. Porter*,1 R&d, Search Technology, Inc.,4960 Peachtree Industrial Blvd.

Suite 230, Norcross, GA, 30071, USA Received 13 may 2004; received in revised form 11 october 2004;

accepted 18 october 2004 Abstract Empirical technology analyses need not take months; they can be done in minutes.

One can thereby take advantage of wide availability of rich science and technology publication and patent abstract databases to better inform technology management.

To do so requires developing templates of innovation indicators to answer standard questions. Then, one can automate routines to generate composite information representations (bonepageersq that address the issues at hand, the way that the target users want.

We traditionally perceived the answer calibrated in months, particularly for empirical technology analyses. This mindset contributes to many technology management

and co-directs the Technology policy & Assessment Center there//tpac. gatech. edu. Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081

The time to conduct certain technology analyses can be reduced from months to minutes by taking advantage of four factors enabling QTIP Quick Technology intelligence Processes:

These databases can be searched from one's computer, enabling retrieval of electronic records in seconds.

As a loose analogy, consider the change from the handmade automobile to the assembly line Model T Ford beginning in 1908.

In a minute or so, we can examine several alternatives, select the one (s) for presentation,

But, even more importantly, it familiarizes users with data-based technology analyses The manager who gets the prescribed FTA A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1071 outputs upon

this analysis was done not in the target time of b1 dayq. Instead it derives from analytical work that has been ongoing for 2 years as illustrative material for a book 1. But,

I would like to use the content to consider the four QTIP factors noted above to show how this work could,

indeed, be done in a day. Fuel cells are the example technology. They convert hydrogen and oxygen into water, producing electricity and heat in the process.

200 binnovation indicatorsq. 2 We gratefully acknowledge support of the U s. National science Foundation for"QTIPS-24-Hour Technology intelligence & Forecasting"(DMI-0231650.

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1072 Innovation indicators are rooted empirical measures in models of how technological innovation proceeds.

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1073 Whatever the route the key is that,

Nonetheless, the entire process can usually be completed in minutes. The complete search and retrieval process can often be completed in under an hour,

contingent on how delicate the search specification and refining processes are. Those depend on the sensitivity of the MOTISSUES being addressed.

requiring less precision than the second (is this a suitable partner?.In this case, we actually began with searches on bfuel cellsq in general.

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1074! The SOFC topic map (upper right, based on factor analysis of keywords appearing in multiple papers) shows an intriguing bcluster of clustersq in the upper region.

o several terms appear for the first time in the most recent year's publications we could use these to stimulate discussion with our subject experts,

**Nano-surfaces & rare-earth materials 0 50 100 150 200 250 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

1999 2000 2001 2002 Priority Patents Family Member Patents Factor Map keywords-combo (Cleaned)( tec..

AIR FUEL CELL X-ray photoelectron spectra SURFACE ORGANOMETALLIC CHEMISTRY impedance spectroscopy (IS platinum alloys electrooxidation electric impedance measurement 1988 1989 1990 1991

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 nano-combo methanol stuff Map:

Nano-surfaces & rare-earth materials*Activity--%during the last 3 years: 261 articles 44%last 3 years 72 priority patents 14%last 3 years 133 family patents 32%last 3 years*Conference/Journal Ratio:

10%vs. 29%for SOFC*New Terms include: chemisorption, free energy, isotope effects, glass-ceramics, surface segregation & diffusion*Patenting:

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1075 o three companies each show 7

U s. Patents (select) Citation Tree Heat Resistant Steel 2001 Elec Interconnect for a planar fuel cell-2001 Fuel cell Interconnect Device-1999 Sumitomo Disc brakes Sarnoff SOFC

CHANAUD P Badwal AHMED K 012345678 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Company Patenting Trend Who uses their patents?

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1076! Within the Scorecard, the Capabilities Spectrum synthesizes information to draw implications regarding this company's relative strengths.!

We know of a major corporation that reduced its time to provide a key set of competitive technological intelligence (CTI) analyses from 3 months to 3 days.

We mutually recognized that certain preliminary analyses could be done in 3 minutes enabling refinement of information searches that would drastically upgrade subsequent FTA work.

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1077 bprocess managementq factors should be considered for all types of QTIP players:!

Over the past decades, many management domains have come to rely quite heavily upon empirical evidence. For example, manufacturing process management used to depend completely on tacit knowledge.

A supervisor spent decades gaining familiarity with his (or occasionally her) machines, people, and processes.

& Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1078 miningq exploits the information compiled by S&t and other (e g.,

it will take two semesters to completeq. Instead, the quick mindset has the user set the defining temporal parameter the deadline then we technology analysts fit into that schedule.

Most importantly, this changed mindset opens up tremendous potentials for better informed MOT. Sidebar: hypothetical QTIP vignette!

The Vice-president for Research at Georgia Tech asks me to benchmark this university's SOFC research against the leading American universities for a presentation this noon.

We decide to focus on the last 5 years. He wants 3 Powerpoint slides like those we used last month in a similar benchmarking exercise.!

8: 05 am: I finish a quick Dialog bdialindexq search that identifies which databases contain the most SOFC information.

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1079! 8: 40 am: I search a compilation of Georgia Tech publication records to augment the VP's awareness of who is active in fuel cells.

I undertake the dfinalt searches in SCI and EI Compendex and download hundreds of SOFC records for the most recent 5 years.!

A comparative 5-year trend script is run. Results are pasted from MS Excel into MS Powerpoint bgt Benchmarkingq slide templates.!

and elucidation of relationships based on text co-occurrence patterns can extend QTIP possibilities. Development of information visualizations especially for S&t offers great potential 12

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1080 But it is worth the effort.

Exploiting New technologies for Competitive advantage, Wiley, New york, 2005.2 T. Teichert, M.-A. Mittermayer, Text mining for technology monitoring, IEEE IEMC 2002 (2002) 596 601.3 R

. J. Watts, A l. Porter, Innovation forecasting, Technological forecasting and Social Change 56 (1997) 25 47.4 N c. Newman, A l. Porter, J. Yang, Information professionals:

changing tools, changing roles, Information Outlook 5 (3)( 2001) 24 30.5 A l. Porter, A. Kongthon, J.-C. Lu, Research profiling:

improving the literature review, Scientometrics 53 (2002) 351 370.6 K. Bo rner, C. Chen, K. W. Boyack, Visualizing knowledge domains, Annual Review of Information science and Technology 37 (2003) 179 255.7 A l. Porter, E. Yglesias, A. Kongthon, C. Courseault, N c. Newman, Getting

What You Need from Technology information Products, Research-Technology management, 2004 (Nov 8 H. de Bruijn, A l. Porter, The education of a technology policy analyst-to process management, Technology analysis and Strategic management 16 (2)( 2004

) 261 274.9 H. Ernst, Patent information for strategic technology management, World Patent Information 25 (3)( 2003) 233 242.10 A. Kontostathis,

L. M. Galitsky, W. M. Pottenger, S. Roy, D. J. Phelps, A survey of emerging trend detection in textual data mining, in:

and Retrieval, Springer, New york, 2004, pp. 185 224.11 See http://www. kdnuggets. com/.12 C. Chen, Mapping Scientific Frontiers:

The Quest for Knowledge Visualization, Springer, London, 2003.13 R. M. Shiffrin, K. Borner, Mapping knowledge domains, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (Suppl. 1)( 2004

A l. Porter/Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1070 1081 1081

ART30.pdf

This article was downloaded by: University of Bucharest On: 03 december 2014, At: 05:11 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:

1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1t 3jh, UK Technology analysis & Strategic management Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

12 oct 2009. To cite this article: Ahti Salo, Ville Brummer & Totti Könnölä (2009) Axes of balance in foresight reflections from Finnsight 2015, Technology analysis & Strategic management, 21:8, 987-1001, DOI:

10.1080/09537320903262447 To link to this article: http://dx. doi. org/10.1080/09537320903262447 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our platform.

Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www. tandfonline. com/page/termsanndconditions Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Technology analysis & Strategic management Vol. 21

8 november 2009,987 1001 Axes of balance in foresight reflections from Finnsight 20151 Ahti Saloa*,Ville Brummera and Totti Könnöläb asystems Analysis Laboratory, Helsinki University

binstitute for Prospective Technological Studies of the Joint research Centre of the European commission, Edificio Expo, C/Inca Garcilaso, 3, E-41092 Seville, Spain In 2005, the Finnish Government

in the belief that our analysis may be instructive for the planning of large-scale foresight exercises that need to serve high-level policy objectives subject to demanding time constraints and expectations.

group decision support 1. Introduction As an instrument of strategic policy intelligence (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), foresight must often serve multiple objectives that are shaped by its policy context.

or (5) to foster new networks (Georghiou and Keenan 2006). Ultimately, many of these objectives seek to strengthen the efficacy of innovation activities,

Eriksson and Weber 2008; Hekkert et al. 2007; Salo, Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004.**Corresponding author. Email:

ahti. salo@tkk. fi ISSN 0953-7325 print/ISSN 1465-3990 online 2009 Taylor & francis DOI:

10.1080/09537320903262447 http://www. informaworld. com Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 988 A. Salo et al.

In effect, the extent to which the objectives of a foresight exercise are instrumental (e g. priority-setting)

or informational (e g. awareness-raising) has implications for planning decisiion that include, among others, choices about how many stakeholder groups will be consulted;

Irvine and Martin 1984; Martin and Irvine 1989; Rask 2008) with the aim of aligning the methodological design of the exercise with the explicit and even implicit objectives that are placed on the exercise.

In this paper, we describe Finnsight 2015 (henceforth Finnsight for brevity), the national foresight exercise of the Academy of Finland and the Finnish funding agency for technology and Innovation (Tekes),

which served to inform albeit indirectly the development of the national strategy and the attendant implementation of several Strategic Centres of Excellence in Science and Technology.

In our analysis, we discuss the policy context, management structure, methodological execution and key results of Finnsight.

Kaivo-oja, Marttinen, and Varelius 2002; Andersen et al. 2007. For examplle the Ministry of Trade and Industry has facilitated a so-called Foresight Forum (Könnölä, Brummer, and Salo 2007;

the Finnish Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes) has catalysed extensive consultation processes with researchers and industrialists in its strategy developmmen (Salo and Salmenkaita 2002;

and the Finnish innovation Fund (Sitra) has sought to promote a constructive dialogue on impending societal challenges by establishing a So-called future Forum.

In addition to one-of-a-kind exercises, important elements of foresight activity are ingrained in policy processes at the highest level of decision making:

Salo and Kuusi 2001. Yet, these many activities notwithstanding (or possibly because of the proliferation thereof), there have been no foresight exercises on a scale that would match the scope

Germany and United kingdom, see Havas 2003; Durand 2003; Cuhls 2003; Keenan 2003. This may have been

because Finland is a small country: thus, some results from even seemingly isolated foresight activities can be brought to bear on policy making even in the absence of formal coordination,

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 989

because it is more likely that some experts participate in several such activities. Furthermore, the overall institutional and organisational structure (cf.

Edquist 1997) of the Finnish innovation system has remained largely unchanged for some time. As a result, there has been need less for establishing national thematic priorities that would transcend the boundaries of individual organisattion

or go beyond the processes of thematic priority-setting that are carried out within specific S&t policy instruments such as research

Salo 2001; Salmenkaita and Salo 2002. This situation changed in April 2005 when the Government took a decision in principle on the structural development of the public research system at large.

In this decision, the Government emphasised that the research system is to be developed in its entirety, with the aim of improving the quality and relevance of research and development activities.

The Government also noted that key measures towards this end will include the establishment of shared priorities, the strengthennin of the national and international profile of research organisations,

and Technology policy Council of Finland (STPC) should develop by the end June 2006 a national strategy for establishing Strategic Centres of Excellence in Research and Innovation.

These two main funding agencies for basic and applied technological research (which had annual funding appropriation of some¤297 million and¤527 million in 2008,

Salo and Salmenkaita 2002. Yet, the very remit of the foresight exercise for which the apt title Finnsight 2015 was coined implied that a large-scale consultative process was called for,

and legitimacy. 3. Process design and implementation 3. 1. Early preparations and management structures The initial preparations of Finnsight were started in early 2005 at a time

definition of panel titles and appointment Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 990 A. Salo et al. of panel chairmen).

it was imperative to achieve a proper balance in addressing the Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 991 intertwined components of research (of key concern to the Academy of Finland and innovation

and approved by the Steering Group was based on panel-centricwork where each panelwould have three half-a-day meetings.

It is noteworthy that the dates for the two initial panel meetings were fixed by the panel chairmen before the panellists were selected:

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 992 A. Salo et al. panel meetings were organised only about seven weeks later than the initial meeting of the panel chairmen. 3. 3. Analytical concepts and methodological

Specifically, about three weeks before the first panel meeting the purpose of which was to address driving forces that would set the stage for the development of focus areas each panellist was requested to propose through the internet three to five driving forces using the template.

This compilation document was circulated to the panellists about three days before the workshop. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 993 In the first panel meetings

this compilation document served as a background document that helped set the stage for the meeting.

and of knowledge in this focus area of competence respond to the societal and industrial needs in 2015?).

whether the focus area was among the most importaan third, the second most important third,

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 994 A. Salo et al. The coordination of panels was supported by three meetings for the panel chairmen.

At this one-day meeting, much of the attention was devoted to the synergies at the panel interfaces.

Könnölä, and Salo 2008) which made it easier to compare results. Second, the questionnaires supported the consideration of interfaces in that the panellists were requested to specify which other panels their driving forces

and economic crisis of 2008 09) was driven by the recognition that Finland is strongly dependent on global developments, due to its relatively small size and the structure of its economy.

and those policy makers who would not have the opportunity to read the full Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 995 Table 1. Examples of focal areas of competences identified by the panels.

The panel reports were published on 13 june 2006 in the Auditorium of the Museum of Contempporar Art (Kiasma) in central Helsinki.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 996 A. Salo et al. d) Subsequent policy developments Because foresight is a highly systemic instrument with close linkages to other policy processes that contribute to the development of the R&i system,

Smith 2000; Smits and Kuhlmann 2004. Such developments often build on various processes of sense-making and negotiation that draw upon on foresight conclusions.

With this important proviso, we briefly characterise selected policy developments that have been influenced or at least informed by Finnsight.

In 2006, the STPC6 referred to Finnsight in its comprehensive report which contained numerous proposals towards the development of the Finnish research and innovation system (STPC 2006).

Also, in the same month when the results of Finnsight were published, the STPC took steps towards the establishment of Strategic Centres for Science,

Technology and Innovation7 in fields that are important to the future of Finnish society and business and industry.

with the aim of fostering research that will offer possibilities for the commercial deployment of results within 5 10 years.

By June 2009, six strategic centres have started their operations (i e. energy and environment; metal products and mechanical engineering;

the results of Finnsight were published at an opportune moment for the development of the strategic research plans for these centres.

the Finnish innovation Fund, launched a So-called future Forum already at the time when Finnsight was running.

Furthermore, in 2007 the Ministry of Trade and Industry started a process towards the establisshin a National Innovation strategy,

The objectives of this process whose Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 997 results were published in June 2008

which has been debated in the Parliament in late 2008.4. Axes of balance in Finnsight Although formal evaluation of Finnsight has been carried out,

nevertheless to provide feedback on the foresight process and the panel reports in April 2006. In this survey

As instruments of strategic policy intelligence (Smits and Kuhlmann 2004), foresight exerciise such as Finnsight must respond to implicit

Rask 2008. We therefore reflect on Finnsight along four design attributes (see also Könnölä et al. 2009) that are concerned with (1) instrumental vs informative use of foresight results;(

2) exclusive vs extensive engagement of stakeholders;(3) consensual vs dissensual development of recommendations; and (4) fixed vs autonomous management of the process. 4. 1. Instrumental vs informative use of foresight results In terms of alternative modes of harnessing foresight conclusions,

Along this axis, it is noteworthy that the Finnsight reports were published in June 2006 when the Government took decisions towards the implementation of a national strategy in which the establishment of Strategic Centres of Science,

This opportune timing gave possibilities for instrumental use, because the foresight results characterised focal competence areas that would plausibly merit explicit attention in strategy implementation.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 998 A. Salo et al. 4. 2. Extensive vs exclusive stakeholder engagement Extensive stakeholder engagement refers to foresight approaches where the number of participants is high

even if this may cause a certain degree of unpredictability and cause management challenges. In contrast, exclusive stakeholder engagement refers to expressly controlled stakeholder participation that may be driven,

and coalitions that may reflect rivalling visions or even incompatible perspectives on the future (Könnölä,

Brummer and Salo 2007. Along this attribute, Finnsight was closer to the consensual approach. To some extent, this was

Könnölä, Brummer and Salo 2007) while others found that the full length panel reports were more interesting than the synthesis report which,

Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 999 In Finnsight,

a balance along this dimension had to be achieved to ensure that the process would contribute to the attainment of foresight objectives

and that they could also adapt the use of methodological tools that were offered to them in a responsive manner (Salo, Könnölä, and Hjelt 2004).

As a result, these latter panels spent more time on demarcattin their boundaries and clarifying their objectives;

more time may be required to lay the grounds for the generation of such perspectives. In hindsight, the development of novel methodological approaches in Finnsight most notably the definition of dedicated units of analysis (driving forces, focus areas of competences) and the extensive deployment of internet-based tools for engaging the panel

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 1000 A. Salo et al. Notes on contributors Ahti Salo is a professor at the Systems analysis Laboratory of the Helsinki University of Technology.

and Innovation policy Council as of January 2009) is to assist the Government and its ministries by addressing, for instance,

and B. A. Mölleryd. 2007. Foresight in Nordic innovation systems. Oslo: Nordic Innovation Centre. http://www. nordicinnovation. net/img/nordic foresight forum final report. pdf (accessed 20 september 2009.

Ansoff, I. 1975. Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals. California Management Review 17, no. 2: 21 33.

and A. Salo. 2008. Foresight within ERA NETS: experiences from the preparation of an international research program.

Cuhls, K. 2003. From forecasting to foresight processes new participative foresight activities in Germany. Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 93 111.

Durand, T. 2003. Twelve lessons drawn from‘Key technologies 2005',The french technology foresight exercise. Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 161 77.

Edquist, C.,ed. 1997. Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions and organizations. London: Pinter. Eriksson, E. A. and K. M. Weber. 2008.

Adaptive foresight: navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies. Technological forecasting and Social Change 75, no. 4: 462 82.

Georghiou, L, . and M. Keenan. 2006. Evaluation of national foresight activities: assessing rational, process and impact.

Technological foresight and Social Change 73, no. 7: 761 77. Havas, A. 2003. Evolving foresight in a small transition economy.

Journal of Forecasting 22, nos. 2 3: 179 201. Hekkert, M. P.,R. A a. Suurs, S. O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann,

and R. E. H. M. Smits. 2007. Functions of innovation systems: a new approach for analysing technological change.

Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Axes of balance in foresight 1001 Irvine, J,

. and B. R. Martin. 1984. Foresight in science: picking the winners. London: Dover. Kaivo-oja, J.,J. Marttinen,

and J. Varelius. 2002. Basic conceptions and visions of the regional foresight system in Finland. Foresight 4, no. 6: 34 45.

Keenan, M. 2003. Identifying emerging generic technologies at the national level: the UK experience. Journal of Forecasting 22, no. 2 3: 129 60.

and A. Salo. 2007. Diversity in foresight: insights from the fostering of innovation ideas. Technological forecasting and Social Change 74, no. 5: 608 26.

and R. Koivisto. 2009. Management of foresight portfolio: analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organization. Technological Analysis & Strategic management 21, no. 3: 381 405.

and J. Irvine. 1989. Research foresight: priority-setting in science. London: Pinter. Rask, M. 2008.

Foresight balancing between increasing variety and productive convergence. Technological forecasting and Social Change 75, no. 8: 1157 75.

and A. Salo. 2002. Rationales for government intervention in the commercialization of new technologies. Technology analysis and Strategic management 14, no. 2: 183 200.

Salo, A. 2001. Incentives in technology foresight. International Journal of Technology management 21, no. 7: 694 710.

and O. Kuusi. 2001. Developments in parliamentary technology assessment in Finland. Science and Public policy 28, no. 6: 453 64.

and J.-P. Salmenkaita. 2002. Embedded foresight in RTD programs. International Journal of Technology Policy and Management 2, no. 2: 167 93.

and M. Hjelt. 2004. Responsiveness in foresight management: reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry.

Smith, K. 2000. Innovation as a systemic phenomenon: rethinking the role of policy. Enterprise&innovation Management Studies 1, no. 1: 73 102.

and S. Kuhlmann. 2004. The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1, nos. 1 2: 4 32.

STPC. 2006. Science, technology, innovation. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. http://www. minedu. fi/export/sites/default/OPM/Tiede/tutkimus-ja innovaationeuvosto/TTN/julkaisut/liitteet/Review 2006. pdf?

lang=fi (accessed 7 october 2009. Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014 Downloaded by University of Bucharest at 05:11 03 december 2014

ART38.pdf

Introduction From priority-setting to societal challenges in future-oriented technology analysis Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) is derived a term from a collective description given to the range of technology-oriented forecasting methods and practices by a group of futures researchers and practitioners

In fact Slaughter made it clear in his review of a previous decade of futures studies that‘‘As we look ahead it becomes increasingly clear that technical innovation on its own is not the main issue.''

‘‘Technology will play as significant a role in the 21st century as it did in the 20th''4. From the conceptual ground of the paper,

In its first iteration in 2004 it was billed as an EU-US Scientific Seminar but the scope has widened

even if the field is not ready to tolerate a new collective term. 2 This leads to the second persistent theme.

the success of foresight in recent years illustrates the strength of what they describe as the‘‘covenant between futures methodology and the needs of long-term strategic management and policy''.

This was reflected in the futures 43 (2011) 229 231 2 This tension has been mirrored at the time of writing by an attempt by parts of the European commission to put into wider usage the collective term they are using for internal managerial purposes

The experience of FTA suggests that then new term will only have currency in the space and time in

However, the central output this time was edited an book. In preparing the conference the scientific committee had concluded that a better focus could be achieved through the production by its members of‘‘anchor papers''.

The 2006 anchor papers formed the core of the book. In concluding the collection, Keenan et al. identified a number of dimensions in

The 2008 FTA Conference continued the focus on the‘‘impacts and implications of FTA for policy and decision making''but this time constructed its themes and anchor papers differently.

For a conference that attracted 166 abstracts and accepted only 56 of them, there was always the opportunity for a rich vein of ideas to be mined.

Introduction/Futures 43 (2011) 229 231 230 In Spring 2011 the fourth FTA Conference will take place.

toward integration of the field and new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (2004) 287 303, in press. 2 T. J. Gordon, J. C. Glenn (Eds.

Futuresresearchmethodology, Version 2. 0, Millenniumproject of theamerican Council for theunitednationsuniversity2003 (July. 3 R. A. Slaughter, Probing beneath the surface:

review of a decade's futures work, Futures 21 (1989) 447 465.4 H. A. Linstone, Corporate planning, forecasting,

and the long wave, Futures 34 (3 4 april 2002) 317 336.5 F. Scapolo, New horizons and challenges for future-oriented technology analysis the 2004 EU-US seminar, Technological forecasting

and Social Change 72 (2005) 1059 1063.6 S. Kuhlmann, P. Boekholt, L. Georghiou, K. Guy, J.-A. He'raud, P. Laredo, T

a pressing and long-term challenge, Futures 41 (2009) 67 70.8 I. Miles, From futures to foresight, in:

Concepts and Practice, Elgar, Cheltenham, 2007, pp. 24 43.9 F. Scapolo, A l. Porter, M. Rader, Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA:

impact on policy and decision-making the 2006 FTA INTERNATIONAL SEVILLE SEMINAR, Technological forecasting and Social Change 75 (2008) 457 461.10 J. C. Harper, K. Cuhls, L. Georghiou, R

. Johnston, Future-oriented technology analysis as a driver of strategy and policy, Technology analysis & Strategic management 20 (2008) 267 269.11 M. Keenan, R. Barre',C. Cagnin, Future-oriented technology analysis:

Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 163 169.12 O. Saritas, C. Cagnin, A. Havas,

I. Miles, Impacts and implications of future-oriented technology analysis for policy and decision making, Technology analysis & Strategic management 21 (2009) 915 916.13 T. Ko nno la, J. Smith, A. Eerola, Introduction

, Future-oriented technology analysis impacts and implications for policy and decision making, Technological forecasting and Social Change 76 (2009) 1135 1137.14 I. Nonaka, H. Takeuchi, The Knowledge-creating Company, Oxford university Press, Oxford

, 1995. Luke Georghiou*Manchester Institute of Innovation research MBS, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9pl, UK Jennifer Cassingena Harper Malta Council for Science and Technology, Villa Bighi, Bighi, Kalkara

Available online 19 november 2010 Introduction/Futures 43 (2011) 229 231 231

< Back - Next >