Another notable result from the local level case studies is that the respondents did not perceive the potential added value of foresight studies for policy innovation (see also, the conclusion by 26.
and innovation are encouraged and change is embraced rather than opposed. They also had the impression that future-oriented policy-making is by its nature a kind of well-informed policy-making.
A Study of Stakeholder participation in an Integrated Assessment of Long-term Climate Policy in The netherlands, LEMMA Publishers, Utrecht, 2004.15 P. A. van der Duin, Qualitative Futures research for Innovation, Eburon
Innovation International foresight Roadmapping Scenarios Vision-building A b s T R A c T Geographical dispersion, organisational and cultural differences,
The first principle is interconnected understanding innovation systems. This principle ensures that participants position the foresight exercise and their own activities in a global context.
like any significant international undertaking, calls for clarity, unity, integrity and coherence 3 5. Further design requirements are introduced if the project aims to incorporate international research, innovation systems 6 and the diversity of stakeholders.
Understanding interconnected innovation systems. Responsiveness towards diverse languages and cultures. Capacity to reconfigure international networks, and a‘glocal'impact orientation. 2. 1. Understanding interconnected innovation systems Before starting any foresight venture is important to have a clear idea of the system being analysed
and related interconnected systems (e g. social, technological, economic, environmental, political, value, cultural, among others) 6. Managers of international exercises must also take into account the distinctiveness of local, regional and national subsysstem around the world.
Hence, the further development of transnational research and innovation collaboration benefits from experiences with the vertical coordination of multilayered research and innovation systems.
Ko nno la et al. 15 claim that stakeholders'diversity1 is important to foster innovation capabilities through the creation of viable alternatives (scenarios) that escape the existing dominant designs
when organising the debate on the relevance 1 In reference to existing and emerging innovation capabilities based on technological (social and technological artefacts and infrastructures) options,
and dimensions of how foresight processes impact on the innovation systems globally. The consideration of‘glocal'foresight impacts is close to the concept of‘adaptive foresight coined by Weber 22,
The innovation roadmaps 24 highlight the main milestones of innovation activities (i e. research and development, management and policy actions) which are needed to achieve a desired vision.
and (v) innovation, competence development and education. The aim was to identify relevant research topics and the supporting actions needed to shape the future of intelligent manufacturing through international cooperation in each of,
The latter also asked for innovation ideas for IMS and required changes to have realised these. All these activities produced a total of 754 research issues to be explored further
which include the milestones of innovation activities identified, was open for wide consultation in the IMS region and beyond through a wiki platform.
when designing and managing an international foresight exercise. 4. 1. Understanding interconnected innovation systems In the IMS2020 project the understanding of the global system of sub-systems was attained by mapping scientific literature,
Activities conducted within IMS 2020 Guiding principles for global foresight Understanding interconnected innovation systems Responsiveness towards diverse languages and cultures Capacity to reconfigure international networks A glocal impact orientation
and engaging stakeholders Dissemination of results through the networks Training Tailored dissemination to targeted stakeholders Dissemination in different levels of innovation systems 9 However,
Only after a debate on the nature of innovation and on how to solicit creative future ideas did partners achieve a common understanding and,
and innovation (RI) could encourage sustainable manufacturing. It highlighted some of the challenges in organising global foresight exercises.
Institute of Innovation research, 2006.7 TFAMWP (Technology Futures analysis Methods Working group), Technology futures analysis: Toward integration of the field and new methods, Technological forecasting and Social Change 71 (2004) 287 303.8 T. Ko nno la, A. Salo, V. Brummer, Foresight for European Coordination:
reflections from the Finish food and drink industry, International Journal of Foresight and Innovation policy 1 (1 2)( 2004) 70 88.14 T. Ko nno la, T
insights from the fostering of innovation ideas, Technological forecasting and Social Change 74 (2007) 608 626.16 L a. Costanzo, Strategic foresight in a high-speed environment, Futures 36 (2004
) 219 235.17 C. Cagnin, E. Amanatidou, M. Keenan, Orienting EU innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play, Science and Public policy 39 (2012) 140
Insights from the FORLEARN mutual learning process, Technology analysis and Strategic management 20 (3)( 2008) 1 232.24 T. Ko nno la, Innovation roadmap:
and the shaping of new research and technology development networks in European-wide innovation policy coordination. It also describes the major methodological challenges involved in the process.
pro-actively, innovation-promoting regulatory framework conditions, which are crucial for the competitiveness of national or regional innovation systems. 3 For further information:
http://ec. europa. eu/research/era/index en. html. 2 http://forera. jrc. ec. europa. eu/fta/intro. html. 458 F
The fourth paper, by Robinson and Propp, addresses the important issue of alignment of actors for innovation policy to succeed.
and sustaining an innovation chain. The paper informs on the outcomes of a project on the simulation of alignment tools to allow the creation of innovation chains in the field of micro and nanotechnology.
It explains the development of a particular variation of a roadmapping technique, the so-called‘multi-path mapping'(MPM) toolset by exploring its prospects
and a continuing reassessment of relationships with the private sector and the innovation-related Knowledge Economy agenda (e g. through third stream activities.
Towards Innovation Foresight: Two empirical case studies on future TV experiences for/by users Katrien De Moor a b, 1,,
, 9000 Ghent, Belgium c PREST/MIOIR, Manchester Inst. of Innovation research, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9pl, UK d National research University
and influenced the increased emphasis on principles such as connectedness, interaction and knowledge sharing in R&d and innovation management.
The‘open innovation paradigm'1, which has been covered widely (and even hyped) in the literature is a Futures 59 (2014) 39 49 A r T I C L E I N F O Article history:
Innovation Foresight User involvement User practices Future TV experiences Interaction A b s T R A c T This paper discusses the need for a shift towards more Foresight-based inclusive innovation processes
and introduces the concept of‘‘Innovation Foresight''(IF) in this respect. IF represents an approach for bringing the future into holistic innovation processes, in
This could allow for a better integration of inclusive, long-term visions in decision-making and strategic thinking in the context of innovation.
It is argued that a better introduction of future anticipation in inclusive innovation processes could enhance the input of users in innovation
Although the principles underlying the open innovation concept have been subjected to critical analyses, which designated it as‘old wine in new bottles'2,
it has propagated undoubtedly (re the belief that successful innovation requires openness, interaction and knowledge sharing. The nature of innovation in this new era is fundamentally different from the earlier technology push
and market pull approaches due to increasing complexity and uncertainty of systems, more distributed nature of knowledge creation and innovation,
and finally the recognition of the close relationship between Science, Technology and Society due to the limits to the‘plasticity'of the society,
development and innovation 7. Users are seen as important sources of knowledge and co-shapers of the innovation trajectory (cf.
whose needs, values and expectations should be tapped'systematically 8, 9. In so-called‘user-driven innovation, 'users are involved in a more systematic and continuous way, from the early, anticipatory and generative stages on.
However, in inclusive processes aimed at enhancing users'input into innovation, notions of the future and anticipation often tend to be introduced poorly
and discusses the concept of‘‘Innovation Foresight''(IF) 11 in this respect. It is argued that IF could serve as an interactive,
'IF is a basis for stimulating a future-oriented innovation dialogue that enables different types of users
and constraints of traditional market innovation research and enhance users'input into innovation. The remainder of the paper is organised as follows:
in the next section, the Innovation Foresight concept is introduced and contextualised. Thereupon, the methodological setup and results from two empirical studies in which current and future users were involved closely in the exploration,
Finally, Section 4 discusses a number of experiences and conclusions from the empirical studies in the light of the proposed shift towards more Innovation Foresight-based inclusive innovation processes. 2. Towards Innovation Foresight (IF?
A number of concepts and approaches were proposed, such as Constructive technology assessment (CTA), Participatory Design and Participatory Innovation 13,14.
CTA, for example, with its aim of broadening design and development processes and early interaction between the relevant technology and societal actors, can be considered an initial attempt at Innovation Foresight.
Development and Innovation (RDI) activities. Similarly, Participatory Innovation sought to empower people and to create an environment for user innovation in a broad sense 13.
In spite of the terminological differences, a common, explicit focus is put on dialogue, co-production, societal learning, joint agenda-building, etc.
The benefits of such user involvement and interaction are discussed widely in the literature. For instance, active and continuous user involvement have been said to lead to‘unique and valuable ideas for future development'15, to more‘socially and environmentally friendly technologies',to an increased‘quality of innovations'16
and even to societal democratisation 8, 16. The term‘hybrid fora'has also been coined in this respect.
improved acceptance and social embedding of technology, broadly supported decision-making on innovation'.'At a more tangible level, it has been argued that active involvement of users helps to create a good fit between the needs, expectations,
/Futures 59 (2014) 39 49 40 Although in theory, such inclusive processes aim to strengthen the role and input of users into innovation,
and that have been applied successfully in innovation research. However they cannot be considered as inclusive in the sense that they only rely on a small niche group of expert users 23.
this knowledge is crucial in view of strategic planning and decision making within innovation research. Therefore, lowering this uncertainty is an important challenge,
the introduction of the future in inclusive processes aimed at enhancing users'input into the innovation process remains problematic.
An integrated approach towards Innovation Foresight is thus called for. The notion of Innovation Foresight is based on the consideration of different dynamics.
These include the recognition of challenges facing innovation including the increasing complexity and uncertainty which result in failing innovations;
overaan underestimations of technological and social developments, and unanticipated use; the need for accurate insight into and anticipation of user's needs and expectations;
and the emerging necessity of diagnosing the changing innovation landscape to address these issues for‘Foresightful Innovation.'
'Such Foresightful innovation requires investigations into systems through (i) anticipation of the drivers and weak signals of change with the intention of being prepared for whatever might follow from the ongoing and future social, economic and political mayhem with a rich understanding of systems, their history and possible futures,(ii) analysis of different stakeholder perspectives
and their social relationships, which can affect and be affected by the Foresight process, and (iii) investigation into the formal and informal networks and procedures,
the concept of Innovation Foresight (IF) 11 has been introduced as an interactive, participatory and forward-looking way to engage in the‘social shaping of technology'.
and other relevant stakeholders from the early stages of a holistic innovation process in view of discovering future opportunities (and risks),
and informing decisionmakking strategic thinking with a long-term vision in the innovation development trajectory''11. Different from more policy oriented institutional Foresight exercises,
They represent two different approaches for going beyond the‘here and now'in the context of innovation research. 3. Illustrations from two empirical case-studies 3. 1. Study 1:
In a next research phase, these potential Lead User-ideas were evaluated by a group of 15 Flemish experts in the field of digital TV (consisting of content managers and innovation managers from Flemish broadcasters
we argue that it differs from traditional approaches in market innovation research. First of all, user surveys are used traditionally rarely at the early, exploratory stages of the development process and with the purpose of detecting future needs or opportunities.
This intelligence can than serve as relevant input for decision making and strategic planning within the innovation trajectory.
yet it offers a way to open up the innovation process, to gain a better and richer insight into their needs, aspirations,
and limitations to user involvement in the earliest innovation phases and the poor or even entirely lacking introduction of the future as component in traditional user innovation research,
this paper has proposed a shift towards Innovation Foresight. IF aims to go beyond the dominant‘here and now'focus in traditional user research
and could allow for a better integration of inclusive, long-term visions in decision-making and strategic thinking in the context of innovation.
Secondly, it would be relevant to further investigate the link between Innovation Foresight and the Living Lab concept which was mentioned already in 11.
Living Labs 32 are systemic policy instruments that facilitate user-driven and social innovation in a natural, more ecologically valid research context, reflecting real life situations and conditions.
References 1 H. Chesbrough, Open innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, 2003.2 P. Trott, D. Hartman,
Why‘open innovation'is old wine in new bottles, International Journal of Innovation Management 13 (2009) 715 736.3 C. Cagnin, D. Loveridge, O. Saritas, FTA
new approaches to governance, Futures 43 (2010) 279 291.4 P. Warnke, G. Heimeriks, Technology foresight as innovation policy instrument:
Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer-verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 71 87.5 R. Smits, S. Kuhlmann, The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy, International Journal of Foresight
and Innovation policy (IJFIP) 1 (2004) 4 32.6 C. Cagnin, E. Amanatidou, M. Keenan, Orienting innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play, in:
2005.8 E. Von Hippel, Democratizing Innovation, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2005.9 R. Williams, D. Edge, The social shaping of Technology research Policy 25 (1996) 865
899.10 D. Loveridge, P. Street, Inclusive foresight, Foresight 7 (2005) 31 47.11 K. De Moor, O. Saritas, Innovation Foresight for living labs, in:
Proceedings of Yeditepe International research Conference on Foresight (Yircof 2009), Istanbul, Turkey, 2009.12 O. Saritas, Innovation Foresight and Foresightful Innovation in Europe and beyond, in:
Presentation at Vienna University of Technology, 27,september 2010. 13 J. Buur, B. Matthews, Participatory Innovation a research agenda, in:
Lente, The Sociology of expectations in Science and Technology, Technology analysis & Strategic management 18 (2006) 285 298.18 P. den Hertog, R. Smits, The Co-evolution of Innovation theory, Innovation Practice
and Innovation policy: An Analysis of the Possible Roles of Parliamentary Technology assessment in Innovation policy, Copernicus Institute, Utrecht, 2004.19 K. De Moor, K. Berte, L. De Marez, W. Joseph
, T. Deryckere, L. Martens, User-driven innovation? Challenges of user involvement in future technology analysis, Science and Public policy 37 (2010) 51 61.20 C. Lettl, User involvement competence for radical innovation, Journal of Engineering and Technology management
24 (2007) 53 75.21 R. W. Veryzer, B. Borja de Mozota, The impact of user-oriented design on new product development:
an examination of fundamental relationships, Journal of Product innovation Management 22 (2005) 128 143.22 S. Dimitri, M. Katrien De, M. Lieven De, E. Tom
, Investigating user typologies and their relevance within a living lab-research approach for ICT-Innovation, in:
in the scientific instrument innovation process, Research policy 5 (1976) 212 239.26 F. Piller, C. Ihl, Open innovation with Customers.
A Qualitative Study on the Domestication of Interactive Digital Television in Flanders,(Unpublished doctoral thesis), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2011.32 A. Følstad, Living Labs for Innovation and Development of Information
At the same time, FTA is considered to contribute to enhanced governance modes that improve the performance of innovation systems 41.
They affirm that networked learning enables a process of innovation and institutional adaptation that is participatory, interactive and in
and innovation 39. More importantly, the system outlined in Fig. 2 addresses all limitations encountered both in research
Future-oriented technology analysis Strategic intelligence for an Innovative economy, Springer, Heidelberg, 2008.40 C. Cagnin, E. Amanatidou, M. Keenan, Orienting EU innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles that FTA can play, Science
new approaches to governance, Futures 43 (2011) 279 291.42 K. Koschatzky, Foresight as a governance concept at the interface between global challenges and regional innovation potentials, European Planning
http://ftp. jrc. es/EURDOC/JRC55981. pdf (accessed 10.11). 47 O. Saritas, Systems thinking for Foresight,(Phd thesis), Manchester Institute of Innovation research, 2006.48 E
Exploring the use of futures research in innovation networks Patrick van der Duin a b, 1,,*Tobias Heger c, Maximilian D. Schlesinger d a Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, The netherlands b Futures research & Trendwatching at the Fontys University
of Applied sciences, Academy for Creative industries, The netherlands c Chair for Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship, University of Potsdam, August-Bebel-Straße 89,14482 Potsdam, Germany d EICT Gmbh
, Ernst-Reuter-Platz 7, 10587 Berlin, Germany 1. Introduction Both innovation and futures research have been identified as being crucial for the success of companies.
The connection between futures research and innovation has been established well (e g. by Cooper 1, Tidd 2) and the use of futures research within individual companies has been studied on various occasions.
Chesbrough coined the term‘Open innovation'to describe the paradigm‘‘that firms can and should use external ideas as well as internal ideas,
Innovation networks Futures research Foresight Networked foresight Open innovation A b s T R A c T Along with the rise of the now popular‘open'paradigm in innovation management,
networks have become a common approach to practicing innovation. Foresight could potentially greatly benefit from resources that become available when the knowledge base increases through networks.
This article seeks to investigate how innovation networks and foresight are related to what extent networked foresight activities exist
For the former the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM) is utilized as analytical framework and applied to three cases.
1 The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the Innovation-Oriented Research program‘Integral Product Creation and Realization (IOP IPCR)' of The netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation.
and started to cooperate with others with regard to innovation 12. A way to practice open innovation are‘innovation networks'.
'Under this term, cooperations organized as inter-organizational networks with the goal to innovate collaboratively are understood.
The link between futures research and innovation networks led us to investigate the following questions:(1) How is futures research related to the context of‘open innovation'in general,
and to‘innovation networks'in particular?(2) Do activities that could be named‘networked foresight'exist?(3) How are these activities currently conducted?
We explore these questions by describing three cases with different settings, by applying the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM)
and by analyzing foresight activities therein in terms of type, scope, and their respective roles. In the next section the concept of networked foresight is approached in two ways:
first, by investigating the relationship and analogies of innovation management and futures research; second, by explicating the link of futures research to innovation networks.
Then, the approach for the analysis is outlined, the CIM is introduced as an analytical framework and the categorization of foresight is explained.
The article finishes with concluding remarks. 2. Toward networked foresight 2. 1. Analogies in the development of innovation management and futures research Liyanage 13, Niosi 14 and Ortt and van der Duin 15
van der Duin et al. 16 distinguished between four different generations of innovation management: 1. Technology push:
and feedback and feed-forward linkages are established. 4. Innovation in systems or networks: innovation processes are distributed among different organizations
which contribute to the innovation process with complementary assets. Within each of these generations companies aimed to overcome disadvantages of the previous one to improve internal innovation processes
The close link between innovation and futures research tempts analogies to be drawn between the historical developments of both concepts as illustrated in Table 1
networked foresight. 2. 2. Linking futures research to innovation networks 2. 2. 1. Trends driving corporate innovation toward open innovation processes Innovation, i e.,
In fact, substantial efforts were put into keeping the results of innovation a secret. They were shared rarely,
A preceding concept to open innovation that takes a corporate perspective is absorptive capacity. This initially analyzed the‘‘ability of firms to recognize the value of new information
The last two decades have seen an increase in collaborations between different organizations driven by at least five trends in corporate innovation:
High innovation speed 33.3. Shortening product life cycles 34.4. Spread of knowledge in the value chain and concentration on core competencies 35,36. 5. Business models that integrate across various industries 9, 37.
and open innovation describes the efforts and reasoning of companies to open up their innovation processes. The primary goal is to create
Futures research and open innovation Futures research aims at systematically exploring predicting and/or explaining future developments with the means of different methods and techniques, e g.,
The link between futures research and open innovation became apparent in past research. Rohrbeck and Gemu nden 5 link three of the above-listed trends driving open innovation shortening life cycles
fast technological change and innovation speed to corporate foresight through the necessity of companies to renew their strategic resources as a result of these factors.
The link is deepened through various studies that discuss foresight methods as means to embrace the open innovation paradigm.
Heger and Rohrbeck 39 describe the collaborative application of a set of foresight methods for exploration of new business fields,
Rohrbeck, Ho lzle and Gemu nden discuss the role of futures research for corporate innovativeness in the form of foresight workshops 8. These workshops are identified as one instrument of Deutsche telekom for embracing the open innovation paradigm
and as an instrument to increase the number of new innovations the second of the key roles described above.
They are described as instruments for open innovation as part of the ideal generation stage of the innovation process
and as inside-out and outside-in processes (see 40 for three open innovation process archetypes) where external knowledge is brought into the company
while clearly embracing the open approach by using outside sources within the corporate innovation process. In this section we have shown two paths that led us to believe that networked foresight is the next generation of futures research:
First, the close connection between innovation management and futures research and analogies in their past developments hint at networked foresight as a logical next generation of futures research.
Second, past studies on foresight, collaboration in innovation and open innovation reveal the link between foresight and collaborative innovation,
However, systematic research about futures research in innovation networks as one form to embrace open innovation is lacking.
In this paper, this relationship is investigated by applying the Cyclic Innovation Model to three cases. Moreover, activities observable in the three cases are Table 1 Generations of innovation management and futures research (based on van der Duin 3
see also Daheim and Uerz 23. Innovation processes Futures research Generation 1 Technology push Technology forecasting Generation 2 Market pull Technology assessment Generation 3 Coupled innovation processes Exploratory futures research Generation
4 Innovation in systems or networks Networked foresight P. van der Duin et al.//Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 64 investigated in terms of type, scope and foresight role.
and innovation networks and assessing the use of networked foresight activities this study uses a multi-case design.
and its innovation partner Deltares were interviewed in addition to analyzing key documents. For analyzing the future orientation
and openness of the three networks we applied the Cyclic Innovation Model as an analytical framework.
the link of future orientation, futures research and the network is analyzed by connecting the CIM analysis with the character of the foresight activities. 3. 2. Analytical framework 3. 2. 1. The Cyclic Innovation Model The main
principles of the Cyclic Innovation Model are (1) that innovating is predominantly a cyclic interaction between different actors who exchange knowledge
and information in the‘innovation arena'and (2) that every well-functioning innovation process should be based on one or more images of the future 47,48.
which structures the partners involved in the innovation network and links them in a cyclic way.
since it comprises a direct link between futures research and innovation. Level 1 of the CIM is illustrated in Fig. 1. This future-oriented part of the CIM consists of four components:
which function as a kind of‘Leitmotiv'for all innovation-related activities. It is fed by the organization's internal ambitions for the future
Since the use of futures research in innovation networks is not yet mature it can be expected that the application of the CIM to the cases reveals that the focal networks have not explicated
Thus, RWS is continuously searching for innovations in their Fig. 1. Level 1 of the Cyclic Innovation Model:
the connection between innovation and the future. For details see 48. P. van der Duin et al./
One of the RWS's programs, the Water INNOVATION (WINN) program, aimed at detecting, exploring and developing innovations in the Dutch water infrastructure and management.
The program had two main slogans:‘‘‘‘To inspire, to challenge, to do''and‘‘Long-term thinking, short-term action''.
and steer the innovation process from an early stage onwards. Other interviewees, in contrast, were not aware of any vision at all.
and the overall manager to define a set of‘themes'that together should constitute the vision for the innovations developed in WINN.
The transition from RWS-internal activities to open innovation projects and programs was facilitated through the integration of Deltares in 2007.4.1.3.
Transition path The transition toward an open innovation program has undergone several steps: from an initially government-internal planning program to an externally supported innovation program.
This program also integrated external parties starting in 2007 to a new innovation program that is facilitated
and managed by RWS but draws heavily from external knowledge starting in 2010.4.1.4. Leadership WINN operated as part of a government organization.
(2) establishing a common understanding of innovation,‘openness'and involved risks, and (3) coordinating partner expectations.
and reposition of innovation portfolio Provide strategic guidance Identify new business models Consolidate opinions Vision creation Opponent role Challenge basic assumptions Scan for disruptions that could endanger current
and communication technology. 5 The aim of pooling innovation activities in the ICT market was based on three considerations at the time of its foundation:(
The EICT was founded to concentrate innovation activities of its partners in Europe. In practice, the EICT supports collaborative projects in futures research, basic research, applied research,
and new product development with expertise in innovation management, project management, and IT infrastructure. 2) All the founding partners had a strong international focus.
Accordingly, EICT aims at facilitating open innovation by providing a setting that is conducive to the flow of information between industry and research in information and communication technologies (ICT),
, becoming the leader in ICT innovation) as stated by the network partners emerges as the starting point for the network.
, creating a highly visible innovation center in Europe in the ICT sector. The internal ambitions of the partners involved being successful in international markets
and the external trend that ICT is becoming increasingly important in all business areas provided the foundation for this vision. 4. 2. 2. Process model The activities of the EICT itself can be interpreted as an innovation process model.
The founding partners decided on a public private partnership (PPP) as their preferred framework to support collaborative innovation activities
and industry (DTAG, DAG, Opera), the entire innovation process is covered. To coordinate and organize the PPP, a German company with limited liability (German:
and platform for collaboration covering the entire innovation process, from inception to successful completion. It aims at providing an innovative environment where knowledge is pooled,
and potential new products and services within WINN Singular activity 1. 4 Series of future workshops Determined relevant societal developments and innovation needs that the activities originating from WINN give rise to Project 5 In 2008
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 68 innovation process, from futures research, topic identification and business field exploration to consortia building,
'which facilitates the activities and support of EICT toward its partners and speeds up the creation of new innovation activities. 4. 2. 3. Transition path The foundation of EICT represented a major step for all involved
partners on their way to actually conducting open innovation. By establishing the public-private partnership and founding the Gmbh as its legal form
With clearly defined processes and rules and the focus on open innovation EICT is supposed to support the innovation capabilities of its partners. 4. 2. 4. Leadership Two aspects require special attention within the EICT:(
1) linking the innovation capabilities and resources of all partners adequately. The full potential of networked innovation projects can only be exploited
if complementary capabilities are bundled together. Also, the risk and investments involved in taking innovations to the market can be shared.
Here, collaborative futures research activities supported by EICT make it possible to identify risks and opportunities in the very early stages of product development (see below).(
The integration of new partners with additional competences, ideas and insights broaden the innovation potential of the network. 4. 2. 5. Networked foresight activities Futures research activities are conducted in particular within the innovation management unit of EICT.
and EICT as an innovation network is addressed not within the foresight activities of the innovation management unit.
EIT ICT Labs The European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT) is the latest attempt of the European commission (EC) to increase European innovation performance.
Consortia of partners from academia, industry and research institutes were encouraged to create open innovation ecosystems that integrate the knowledge triangle consisting of education
research and innovation. So-called Knowledge and Innovation communities (KICS) were to‘‘become key drivers of sustainable growth and competitiveness across Europe through world-leading innovation''52.
Each KIC had to bring together three independent partners from at least three different EU member states, with at least one partner from higher education and one private company 53.
and other studies Program 2. 2 Business field exploration Explores predefined business fields with various innovation management methods, i e.,
, scenario analysis, multi-issue actor analysis, roadmapping Project 2. 3 Thematic innovation radar Identifies new technologies, trends and topics in a predefined thematic field Project 2. 4 Working group Provide a setting to explore future topics
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 69 Innovation Agenda (SIA), reviewed and revised with support of the KICS once they were established.
and the internal ambitions of multiple companies resulted in the shared vision of an integrated organization designed to drive innovation in ICT that would benefit from the different yet complementary assets and resources of industrial and academic partners.
The EIT ICT Labs envision their operations to substantially improve various fields related to innovation in ICT:
and higher education. 4. 3. 2. Process model In the innovation framework instruments for sharing, exchanging and developing knowledge were created,
2) Innovation catalysts that aim at supporting existing activities methodological. They receive direct funding from the EIT ICT Labs
Until 2010, the selection of innovation activities was made by the management team in various workshops based on proposals that were submitted by the partner organizations.
, an innovation radar 56 and best-practice benchmarking 57. The innovation radar identifies external trends
and developments in preselected fields, provides images of the future, identifies innovation opportunities and potential for commercialization,
and creates cohesion within the ICT Labs about current trends. Experts of the partner organizations provide input.
and find innovation opportunities. Thus it is aimed explicitly at establishing open innovation structures and an intraorganizzationa knowledge exchange between the network partners.
Thom provides an overview of the EIT ICT Labs Innovation Radar in 58. The best-practice benchmarking activity aims at identifying best practices for (1) disseminating innovations among the partners,
(2) overcoming innovation barriers,(3) meeting the expectations of the various partners, and (4) recommending practices to improve the activities within the network.
A project team with members from education, research and industry and from several partner organizations identifies
and evaluates the best practices in close cooperation with the network's management team. The aim is to create a continuously developing organization by establishing state-of-the-art methodologies
and support the collaborative innovation efforts 57.4.3.3. Transition path For this case, a transition path has yet to develop due to its relatively short existence of three years at this point.
the aforementioned innovation radar helps ensure that the EIT ICT Labs and the partners are engaged in domains that will drive the future.
and an annual selection process (quality assurance) add to the aforementioned foresight instruments innovation radar and best-practice benchmarking.
Interview partners from the program confirmed that the innovation teams consisting of members from the governmental agency Rijkswaterstaat,
and therefore Rijkswaterstaat as its agency was interested in unique onetime innovations whereas companies were interested more in exploiting and diffusing innovations to a broader market.
Also Rijkswaterstaat was interested primarily in innovations that addressed societal challenges while companies inherently seek to satisfy shareholders,
thus predominantly aiming for business performance. Table 5 Networked foresight activities in the EIT ICT Labs. No.
and research institutes Program 3. 7 Innovation radar Identifies new technologies, trends and developments in selected fields, establishes a common outlook on the future of ICT
and explore innovations for Dutch water management. While the process model was adopted to integrate multiple parties as well,
outsourcing parts of the innovation process is considered still a bridge too wide for Rijkswaterstaat. Fig. 1 visualizes the analysis of WINN in terms of its openness
but also by the many new innovations that originate from WINN, such as‘‘The sand motor'',Energy from water,
First, external participants of WINN were chosen because of their background in innovation and their apparently open mindset.
Beneficiaries of foresight were primarily the innovation activities originating from WINN and partly WINN itself. The latter in terms of identification of relevant developments and strategic guidance.
and vision were developed based on the aim to create a highly visible innovation center in ICT in Europe.
when it comes to conducting and supporting collaborative innovation among its partners, the image of the future,
However, other large innovation networks that Fig. 2. Visualization of WINN managed by Rijkswaterstaat in terms of its openness and network orientation.
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 72 provide frameworks for open innovation emerged in the last few years, e g.,
, Joint Technology initiatives (JTIS), the European Alliance for Innovation and the EIT KICS (case 3). Thus, the image of the future for EICT seems to be need in of an update. 8 The partner structure of EICT of a research institute, a university
innovation management and IT appears to be suitable to perform collaborative innovation activities in selected topics.
and IT knowledge and to provide the suitable tools for the early steps of innovation from topic identification to execution of large-scale R&d projects.
Thus, EICT appears to be well equipped to support collaborative innovation projects, including networked foresight. Fig. 3 visualizes EICT in regard to its openness
However, informal talks with network members showed that the transition toward an open innovation network is threatened potentially by inertia, rigid mindsets and a fear of opportunism.
the management of the organization cannot impose open innovation processes on its employees; it can only create an adequate environment with supporting instruments.
Beyond that, collaborative innovation requires a change in the mindset of the people within the organizations.
The EIT ICT Labs are an attempt to create an environment of open innovation, but the people therein still appear to be need in of adapting to the new notion of sharing results.
In contrast, strategic guidance, the assessment and repositioning of the innovation portfolio and vision creation are limited mostly to the network itself.
(&) & Contract partners 2. 3 Thematic innovation radar & Contract partners 2. 4 Working groups
, the innovation radar, are used to provide the basis for the process model of the network especially
(organizations) 3. 6 Technology transfer program & (&) Open (organizations) 3. 7 Innovation radar & (&) Open (organizations) 3. 8 Annual selection process (&) & Closed network
Futures research in the EIT ICT Labs can be characterized as thematically driven networked foresight conducted by equal partners. 5. 4. 2. Networked foresight linked to open innovation
When recalling the application of the Cyclic Innovation Model to the three cases at least three issues are noticeable:
and should be used to develop a suitable process model toward an envisioned future of an innovation network.
When combining the differences in networked foresight with further research on collaboration in innovation at least two known‘process archetypes of open innovation'are observable in the cases:
and inside-out) information flow from the perspective of the partners it is an inside-out information flow. 6. Conclusions This paper aimed at exploring futures research in innovation networks by applying the Cyclic Innovation Model as analytical framework to three cases
first, the close connection and analogies of innovation management and futures research hint at networked foresight as the logical next generation of futures research;
second, the close connection between foresight, collaborative innovation and open innovation suggests that networked foresight is already being practiced,
The application of the Cyclic Innovation Model shows that the envisioned and practiced openness of the three networks differs substantially.
factors in new product success, European Journal of Marketing 14 (1980) 277 292.2 J. Tidd, Managing Innovation Integrating Technological, Market and Organization Change
, Hoboken, 3rd ed.,2005.3 P. van der Duin, Qualitative Futures research for Innovation, Eburon Academic Publishers, Delft, 2006.4 U. Lichtenthaler, H. Ernst, External
its three roles in enhancing the innovation capacity of a firm, Technological forecasting and Social Change 78 (2009) 231 243.6 H. Chesbrough, Open innovation:
and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, 2003.7 M. Dodgson, D. Gann, A. Salter, The role of technology in the shift towards open innovation:
creates an open innovation ecosystem, R&d Management 39 (2009) 420 430.9 O. Gassmann, Opening up the innovation process:
towards an agenda, R&d Management 36 (2006) 223 228.10 C. Edquist, Systems of Innovation Technologies, Institutions and Organizations, Routledge, Oxon, 1997.11 D. Rigby, C
. Zook, Open-market innovation, Harvard Business Review 80 (2002) 80 89.12 O. Gassmann, E. Enkel, H. Chesbrough, The future of open innovation, R&d
P. van der Duin, The evolution of innovation management towards contextual innovation, European Journal of Innovation Management 11 (2008) 522 538.16 P. van der Duin, R
. J. Ortt, M. Kok, The cyclic innovation model: a new challenge for a regional approach to innovation systems, European Planning Studies 15 (2006) 195 215.17 H. A. von der Gracht, C. R. Vennemann,
I. L. Darkow, Corporate foresight and innovation management: a portfolio-approach in evaluating organizational development, Futures 42 (2010) 380 393.18 F. Phillips,
On s-curves and tipping points, Technological forecasting and Social Change 74 (2007) 715 730.19 K. Cuhls, Foresight with Delphi surveys in Japan, Technology analysis & Strategic management 13 (2001) 555 569.20 K
Impact of fta Approaches on Policy and Decision-making, Seville, 2006.24 J. Hausschildt, S. Salomo, Innovations Management, 4th ed.,Vahlen, Munich, 2007.25 R. Solow, Technical change
a new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (1990) 128 152.27 S. A. Zahra, G. George, Absorptive capacity:
Strategic management Journal 21 (2000) 1105 1121.31 A. Sood, G. J. Tellis, Technological evolution and radical innovation, Journal of Marketing 69 (2005) 152 168.32 G
Fakulta t fu r Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Rheinisch-Westfa lische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, 2004p.409.9 In the context of innovation networks, the allocation of two aspects of the strategist role
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 77 33 E. H. Kessler, A k. Chakrabarti, Innovation speed: a conceptual model of context, antecedents,
15 (1995) 241 257.37 R. Cowan, N. Jonard, J.-B. Zimmermann, Bilateral collaboration and the emergence of innovation networks, Management Science 53 (2007
) 1051 1067.38 H. Chesbrough, The era of open innovation, Sloan Management Review 44 (2003) 35 41.39 T. Heger, R. Rohrbeck, Strategic foresight for collaborative exploration
Towards a theory of open innovation: three core process archetypes, in: R&d Management Conference (RADMA), Lisboan, Portugal, 2004.41 C. Jasner, Walk of pain, Mckinsey Wissen 17 (2006) 44 49.42 W. G. Dyer
optimizing description and generalizability, Educational Research 12 (1987) 14 19.47 A j. Berkhout, The Dynamic Role of Knowledge in Innovation.
An Integrated Framework of Cyclic Networks for the Assessment of Technological change and Sustainable growth, Delft University Press, Delft, 2000.48 G. Berkhout, The Cyclic Nature of Innovation.
H.-J. Bullinger (Ed.),Beschleunigte Innovation mit regionalen und industrienahen Forschungsclustern, Fraunhofer IRB Verlag, Stuttgart, 2007, pp. 146 157.51 European commission
Communication from Commission President Barroso (COM 2005), 2005.52 EIT ICT Labs, European Institute of Innovation and Technology:
Centres EIT ICT Labs, EIT ICT Labs, 2012.55 T. Heger, U. Bub, The EIT ICT labs towards a leading European Innovation Initiative, Information technology
54 (2012) 288 295.56 EIT ICT Labs, Innovation Radar, EIT ICT Labs, 2012.57 EIT ICT Labs, Best-Practice Benchmarking, EIT ICT
Labs, 2012.58 N. Thom, Foresight in innovation networks: the EIT innovation radar example, in: ISPIM Innovation Symposium, Wellington, 2011.59 R. Rohrbeck, L. H. Pirelli, The European Institute of Innovation and Technology:
how to steer a multi-stakeholder innovation ecosystem, in: DIME Conference Organizing for Networked Innovation, Milano, 2010.60 P. van der Duin, M. Sule, W. Bruggeman, Deltas for the future:
lessons learned from a water innovation programme, Irrigation and Drainage 60 (2011) 122 128. P. van der Duin et al./
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 78
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011