the long list of research domains was tested first in five themaati junior researcher workshops, 5 but their full assessment was undertaken through an online questionnaire survey of much of the Luxembourg research landscape (around 300 participants), Online Questionnaire Young Res.
Workshop Exploratory Workshop‘Long list'of research domains Initial assessment Selection of broad research fields Stakeholder workshops No formal input General Challenges for Luxembourg Expert workshops per field SWOT Analysis Initial
13 workshops one Stakeholder workshop and two expert workshops for each of six thematic fields6 were conducted. As a starting point for assessing research domains, representatives from Luxembourg society,
The subsequent series of thematic field workshops aimed to (redefine or review7 the research domains identified in Phase 1,
and advice of an international group of eight science policy experts (including one of this paper's authors) through a one day workshop.
This was particulaarl apparent in the Exploratory Workshop (EWS), which presented the first opportunity that participants in the exercise had to discuss the future of the research system together.
Accordingly, the online survey and subsequent workshops invited participants to nominate new research axes as well. Despite its apparent elegance, there were problems with this schema.
even though the list was derived almost solely from the responses of that same community to the online survey. 10 In the subsequent workshops held in Phase 2,
but with so little time to work with, they decided to rely upon a single deliberative forum the Exploratory Workshop (EWS) near the end of the process to validate the domain rankings derived from analysis of the online survey. 12 This was always going to be problematic as it left too much to be achieved in a single one-day
On top of this, the workshops were often the first opportunity that people had to discuss the future of the research system together
and the outcomes of the workshops depended on the composition of the workshop participants. In some areas
In these areas, the composition of workshop participants was much more uniform and the level of personal conflicts (trench wars) was much lower.
or another in the online survey (Phase 1) and in the thematic group workshops (Phase 2). This meant that expert assessments of domain areas against the criteria were readily available to draw upon.
the workshops had unequal starting points and their methodology had to be adapted to the degree of progress made up to that point. 8. Other elements included the review analysis by the OECD on Luxembourg's public research apparatus, the multiannnua development programmes of the public research centres and the University of Luxembourg,
In addition, a series of young researchers'workshops were held earlier in the process, but these were judged to have been largely a failure,
and an inappropriate workshop format used (see Glod, Duprel, and Keenan 2006). 13. In fact, interdisciplinarity had been underplayed somewhat throughout the conduct of the exercise.
workshops conducted with different stakeholders, internal meetings of the department responsible of the project and open hearings in the community council related to the project.
as well as interviews with schoolteachers, politicians, municipal employees in the planning and social development department, visioning workshop participants and foresight practitioners.
The finished stories were then to be discussed in workshops, one with participants from different service compartments of the municipality and one with politicians.
These future pictures were presented then in a workshop with communal and cultural organisations to discuss which of these were most desirable.
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
The meetings were facilitated by the two chairmen who had plenty of liberty in guiding the workshop discussions.
The internet-based questionnaires before the workshop meetings offered many benefits. First, the panellists could contribute equally to the process
This workshop-based process focused on 11 themes of which addressed structural issues (e g. regional innovation policy;
in terms of its methodological approach, Finnsight was unique thanks to the extensive combination of internet-based questionnaires and facilitated workshops.
and deconstruct the scenario workshop process in detail to illustrate the organisational learning and spirals involved.
Examples are the EU FP6 Nanologue project14 where different products for different socio-technical scenarios were envisaged or the strategy articulation workshops in the framework of the Dutch Nanoned initiative (e g. 49 51.
Acknowledgements This paper is based on a workshop organised by the JRC-IPTS European foresight Action at Seville, Spain, June 2008.
those seeking to engage key stakeholders through shortduraatio activities such as scenario workshops, and on the other hand ongoing activities such as horizon scanning activity which provides the basis for informing the first type of approach.
The 2 This section of the paper was developed initially for a presentation Foresight in Priority Setting Towards a European Initiative at a workshop‘‘Shaping the European Dimension of Foresight"28 february 1 march 2005, Brussels ftp://ftp
Fixed Structured discussion and the generation of new ideas in the workshops Autonomous Creative brainstorming and ideation in the different scenario and roadmapping workshops.
defined agenda for workshops and structured priority-setting. Autonomous Flexible use of methods in working groups.
Exclusive VTT expert engagement in steering group and workshops to enable intensive communication. Extensive Networking among VTT experts on water related R&d through questionnaires, co-writing.
Autonomous The overall process was based on workshops. Creative workshop discussions. Extensive The process involved a network of security stakeholders.
These were coming from different government departments, private companies, and research organisations. Exclusive Only invited participants. Generation of innovation ideas in Finnish Foresight Forumf 20 Informative Identification of future developments in nutrigenomics,(ii) health care and social services and (iii) services for the provision of personal experiences.
Exclusive Limited but open stakeholder participation in the workshops. T. Ko nno la et al.//Futures 43 (2011) 252 264 256 Table 1 (Continued) Project Outcomes Future perspectives Management Stakeholder engagement FISTERA:
Fixed Scenario workshops, on-line Delphi study, on-line forum, national seminars(‘‘FISTERA road show'')supported by desk research.
A number of scenario workshops were held, each involving in average 25 participants. Future Impact of ICTS on Environmental Sustainabilityh 22 Informative Explore how ICTS will influence future environmental sustainability (time horizon:
and six fields were discussed by workshops independently. Autonomous There is freedom in discussion for social scenarios in each field,
This challenge was dealt with in the brainstorming workshops, intensive e-mail communication, commenting and co-writing.
We explore this in the case of scenario workshops, below. Yet other methods are brought into play in the broader design,
Methods such asworking within panels, workshops (scenario workshops in particular), are critical here, and in designing the FTA PROCESS it may be effective to appoint very senior members of key organisations to steering or advisory committees,
with less seniormembers of the organisations embedded into panels and workshops. The senior actorswill thus be primed to receive the detailed knowledge that is gained by the more junior actors.
The joint construction of knowledge by participants may result in a great deal of the key knowledge being shared within the team or workshop involved.
Specific methods Delphi surveys, brainstorming, scenario workshops, etc. may be used to elicit and share such information, although it may be less easy to capture in a structured way as would be the information from, for example, statistical data or trend extrapolations.
and extensive activities such as scenario workshops where a number of activities are organised into a sequence in
I. Miles/Futures 43 (2011) 265 278 272 management in a scenario workshop are discussed in the next section,
in order to illustrate the relevance of thekmapproach even in the context of individual/specific FTA METHODS. 6. Scenario workshops as knowledge processes Scenario workshops typically feature a sequence of activities.
This kind of scenario workshop usually extends over at least one day, and may involve several dozen participants.
Larger workshops employ‘‘break out groups''of say 6 12 people exploring different subscenarios or aspects of scenarios in detail.
The workshop will be conducted with inputs from at least one facilitator, and often other helpers will take notes, record material from flip charts,
though they may have received some training in facilitation processes and workshop methods (from T-groups through management workshops to academic seminars).
Before the scenario workshop is implemented, there will typically be a design process, to: identify participants for the scenario workshop it is vital to include the right range of interests, knowledge and expertise,
and as far as possible key end-users of the results. determine what background research might need to be conducted. define the workshop procedures (what scenario methodology is to be deployed;
what areas of study within the domain of interest should be selected, what specific questions might be used in the workshop),
allocate roles to facilitators and others. This design process applies and often gathers knowledge it may be undertaken with KM objectives firmly in mind,
The scenario workshop is supported typically by background research, to provide workshop participants with a common information base (and sometimes some shared terminology),
or materials collated, to provide participants with some common informational resources and orientation materials externalisation in the Nonaka terminology.
R &d activities and strategy work Regional and national strategies and priority setting International agreements/strategies/priority setting Expert interviews Delphi surveys, questionnaires Interactive workshops focusing on SWOT
/visions/scenarios/roadmaps/and/or action recommendations Reports on desktop surveys Background reports for focused workshops Reports on the results of SWOT/scenario/roadmap/action Integrative reports
As well as background reading, provision of information from research and analysis is included often formally in the workshop,
etc. it is typical for a scenario workshop to begin with participants reviewing the background material, and then proceeding to draw on this (critically) in subsequent activities where this formally presented material is added to by information and opinions input by participants,
Yet already some‘‘combination''of information is likely to have been performed outside of the workshop, in the course of the preparation of the background material.
A common starting point in scenario workshops is to examine‘‘drivers and shapers''factors that could be critical to influencing the course of events,
Other frameworks may be designed for specific workshops, and workshop participants themselves may be asked to or request to develop their own grouping of factors early on in the workshop.
Brainstorming or other ways of generating these‘‘drivers and shapers''may be seen as an act of‘‘externalisation,
''but the grouping of ideas into STEEPV or other categories is more like‘‘combination'';''often the two knowledge activities are hard to demarcate.
Furthermore, throughout the scenario workshop, including this step of identifying and classifying drivers and shapers, there are liable to be moments of‘‘internalisation''as participants become more familiar with working with the background material and fitting it into their own conceptual frameworks and constellations of interests and also, perhaps,
The analysis of drivers and shapers may be conducted in plenary (in smaller workshops, in particular) but will often be approached by asking subgroups to elaborate lists of those falling into specific STEEPV categories
''Major‘‘combination''moments come in the scenario construction sessions that constitute the heart of the workshop.
In conventional multiple scenario workshops, a set of alternative scenarios are developed. Often each one is constructed by each of a number of break out groups.
In more aspirational‘‘success scenario''workshops or vision workshops it is more common for breakout groups to examine what a desirable future would look like in detail within specified subdomains,
In both types of workshop, plenary sessions will bring together the break out groups to compare their results
At any of these points, members of the workshop may be introducing new insights and considerations, and linking the discussion of posits to practical actions in their own organisations.
It is common for a scenario workshop to conclude with some effort at defining key actions
This is typically a result of a major‘‘socialisation''process in the workshop that can be externalised and published in form of reports
so that they can seriously incorporate the thinking of the workshop in their own decision-A. Eerola,
or been in some way close to the workshop process. As discussed earlier, they will have much deeper knowledge of the underlying knowledge base,
Thus the scenario workshop is in many ways a microcosm of a larger FTA programme.
And conventional meetings and workshops can benefit from technical support, for example to capture ideas and allow for rapid collation of views.
and statistical analysis and less use of qualitative workshops and judgements that comes from some parts of the FTA user community.
held oral evidence sessions and workshops (aiming to include key stakeholders) and elicited public views via survey research and qualitative workshop methodologies.
''12 The dark scenarios were developed, via workshop and expert group analysis, on the basis of posits about technology development (how realistic these are given current knowledge
future workshops, planning workshops with citizens, focus group exercises etc. These methods in general have a structure,
More structured approaches could be workshops, where a predefined set of key questions is used to guide the discussion.
Brainstorming Quantitative models Open space Cost-benefit analysis Expert workshops Multi-criteria analysis Focus groups pta methods Explorative (qualitative) scenarios VOL. 14 NO. 4 2012 jforesight jpage
In general, several tools are combined in a scenario process (workshops, CBA, trend analyses, models, Delphi, roadmaps and others.
This could have been structured a workshop with experts and/or stakeholders. Even if in the meantime this highly optimistic view towards the‘‘predict
which consisted of two rounds of web questionnaires and of two futures workshops, which were connected closely to each other via their phrasing of questions and goals.
Invitations to the two futures workshops were sent to a slightly smaller group (N1 and N2 about 40.
A major reason to run the workshops for a more exclusive group of experts was to enable deeper dialogue within the workshops.
The people invited to futures workshops were selected in co-operation with the scenario team of the Prime minister's Office
designing the first questionnaire Defining the expert group involved in the futures workshops together with the Prime minister's Office's scenario team 1st Delphi round October 2008 Delphi:
which climate and energy policy should focus Futures workshop October 2008 Futures workshop, ACTVOD futures process Building alternative scenarios that all fulfil the two-degree target 2nd Delphi round November 2008 Delphi:
and specifying the development paths constructed in the first futures workshop: what actions and which actors play key roles After this round the preliminary versions of the result of the scenario process,
four distinctive scenarios, are constructed Futures workshop November 2008 Futures workshop, ACTVOD futures process Analysing and specifying the four designed scenarios Final report December 2008 Final report in electronic format Report gathering together the results of the process:
In this scenario task the participatory process was carried out as futures workshops (see chapters 2. 2 and 2. 4). Here,
VOL. 14 NO. 4 2012 jforesight jpage 307 First futures workshop The goal of the first futures workshop soon following the first Delphi round was to collect views
The results of the first questionnaire were sent in advance to those who had confirmed their participation to the workshop.
For the workshop, people were divided into groups of eight to ten persons, and each group had the same task to solve.
The workshop took up an entire working day and consisted of three consecutive elements as well as application of subsequent methods:
This sequence of three main phases in the workshop was a modification of Jungk's (1987) workshop formula,
Jungk emphasises that ordinary citizens should be invited to participate in futures workshops to elaborate issues that affect their lives.
The workshop produced a considerable amount of material concerning the workings of the Finnish society
Second round of Delphi questionnaire The second questionnaire was based on the material of the previous two stages (i e. the first Delphi round and the first futures workshop)
Second futures workshop By the second futures workshop the FFRC team had taken into account the results of the second round questionnaire and,
In this second workshop, the task was to envision the necessary steps and actions leading to these futures to come back to the present from the future
The goal of the second workshop was to view, assess, and complete the scenarios. As with the first workshop, the results so far were sent beforehand to those who had confirmed their participation in the workshop.
This way the participants were able to assess the pros and cons of the constructed scenarios before the workshop,
thus making work in the futures workshop more effective. Results and policy implications The final results of the foresight process were four scenarios that all fulfil the targets of reducing GHG emissions by at least 80 per cent from the 1990's levels
and thus for their part influence that the expected rise in global temperature does exceed not two degrees Celsius.
Another mention concerning FFRC's input speaks of the role of expert workshops which in the evaluation are thought to be a very effective tool to find the right questions
Jungk, R. 1987), Futures Workshops: How to Create Desirable futures, Institute for Social Invention, London. Lauttama ki, V. and Heinonen, S. 2010), Va ha isten pa a sto jen Suomi 2050.
The second phase was the roadmapping (Figure 4). Roadmapping was realised in three consecutive workshops. The first workshop was about drivers and technologies.
The second workshop considered the future markeets business potential, and actors in the sector of building services.
The third workshop focussed on and verified the constructed roadmap drafts. The building services roadmap was constructed through two roadmap levels.
The first level was a metaroadmap that crystallised the project's results. The metaroadmap formed an umbrella for the second level thematic subroadmaps.
foresight and organisational learning methods were integrated in a workshop process. During the workshops in 2009, some 30 VTT researchers and management representatives built shared understanding of the field.
The workshops were designed to facilitate dialogue between the users of the research potential collaborators such as universities, funding agencies and the societal actors in the field of service science (Halonen, Kallio, and Saari 2010.
The process was based on a novel combination of methods. The integrative methodology rested on the model of expansive learning (Engeström 2001.
This workshop was dedicated to identifying opportunities and challenges for service research in the long term; and to link, scale,
In both workshops, the participants were divided into four thematic groups:(1) measuring and enhancing productivity,(2) innovative service concepts,(3) learning and education,
The fourth phase, the roadmapping workshop, created roadmaps on selected socio-technical visions. In the final research phase, the action workshop, a set of actions to be taken by the key players in the Nordic countries was depicted.
Knowledge spaces and systemic capacities Nordic ICT Foresight can be perceived as a systemic II type of policy-oriented foresight process,
and forecasting workshops. This paper explores the systematisation of the FIP analytical approach through the application of Tech Mining.
in depth involvement of a limited number of knowledgeable individdual (plus a workshop, discussed later). We distinguish that from formalised involvement of many experts (e g.
and stakeholders (Step G). Convening a workshop with multiple perspectives can anchor Step G exploration of alternative innovation pathways.
After a stage of open brainstorming workshop activities, it is desirable to elicit ideas from the experts on‘issues'.
A second round of contacts focused on identifying workshop participants. Again our collaborratin material science doctoral student helped the social science organisers identify
and Porter) in the workshop, for a total of 10 persons. This focused on mapping likely innovation avenues,
Their expert workshops involve a wider spectrum of experts and stakeholders for a more extended interaction (e g. full day.
Figure 6 shows an introductory slide to initiate the workshop process. It presents some key elements that we established in our desk research,
Such visualisattion stimulate workshop interactions and create a framework for drawing out the intelligence held by the experts in the workshop,
a scaffold upon which to locate their knowledge. Figure 7 presents a post-workshop depiction of main alternative development pathways.
Doug Robinson crafted this (Porter et al. 2010. 4. 6. Explore innovation components (Step G) Figure 7 provides the framework to explore sensitivities and options.
monitored, and circulated to the experts in the workshop (and others) for verification and expansion.
and conducting a forecasting workshop. Our FIP approach, which combines qualitative and quantitative tools in the‘Profile,
scenario and workshop were conducted independently in consideration of four global or national challenges. The points of the studies are diversified interdisciplinary
and B workshop is used with literature review, expert panel, and scenario. VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 7 Scenario requires extensive knowledge of the field under investigation,
and 3. workshop that aims for the participation of citizens. The exercise was conducted by the National Institute of Science and Technology policy from 2008 to 2010.
and B workshop provides tangible examples of the challenges on a regional scale as well as the technological and social conditions involved.
VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 9 2. 4 Workshop Workshops were held in eight local regions in Japan,
and workshop in consideration of the four global or national challenges. They provided information about scientific and technological possibilities
This can be achieved in a joint meeting or interactive workshop session. The subject area is examined with respect to its relevance to individual units
and guiding questions in workshop are framed in terms of needs and interests rather than positions. Thus, a constructive framework for further discussions throughout the process can be established. 4. 2 Step 2:
This is achieved in a series of workshops with stakeholder representatives selected for their familiarity and expertise in the subject area
Step 6 would be an initial workshop aimed at verifying challenges and assumptions, identifying obstacles and key success factors,
Part of the workshop could also be to reflect on possible roles of academia, industry, politics and society and to develop recommendations for further supporting activities.
The size of such workshops ranges from 30 to 80 participants. 4. 7 Step 7:
The scenarios are turned subsequently into prose based on the results of discussion in the workshop. The draft is circulated for review and completion by the experts over the course of two feedback loops.
The scenario process as described can also be followed by further workshops to explore and detail certain aspects.
Depending on the workshop format and the number of participants in step 6 and step 7 it can be helpful to conduct individual interviews in preparation of an event.
This cannot replace the workshop itself but rather ensures that fact-finding does not take up any of the valuable time (maximum of one
Furthermore, prior interviews allow the facilitator to set the right focus in the workshop, anticipate relevant topics, sensitivities, and group dynamics.
and presented in structured form at the beginning of the workshop to kick-start discussions. At this stage the strategic dialogue has overcome the following challenges:
Often workshop events have helped to initialize short-and long-term cooperation activities between parties involved. B Conflicts between stakeholders have been resolved with proven techniques such as the Mutual Gains approach applied by a facilitator.
Most recently, a workshop with 65 stakeholder representatives was conducted (step 6). The objectives of the workshop were:
The results of this workshop event are currently being evaluated and translated into next steps. PAGE 26 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 5. 2 Strategic dialogue to generate a joint vision for forward-looking projects Another strategic dialogue was conducted for a so-called‘‘Forward-looking Project''in the framework
energy-efficient and climate-adapted city''that was developed in a scenario workshop with a cross-disciplinary panel of 20 experts.
elements for a coherent vision were created in the workshop by the experts. A first draft of the vision created from the workshop results was refined in a number of feedback loops.
The vision is now a key element for communicating the Forward-looking Project in the media
and preparation of step 6). The results were addressed then in a tightly structured workshop with about 35 experts (step 6 with elements of step 7). Points of agreement became transparent as well as issues of potential conflict.
and a series of meetings and workshops, served to validate and contextualise the principal themes and questions raised for the nation as a whole and the more specific dimensions of research, technology and enterprise.
but the engagement with workshop participants indicated that there was a need for greater understanding of the pathways,
interviews, workshops), and analytical research. All in all, 50 in depth interviews, two expert surveys and over 20 workshops were held to prepare this national foresight.
More than 300 experts from the S&t and business communities, as well as government officials, took part in the exercise.
Visualisation of quantitative data 36 can be a useful way of bringing these data to a workshop or another qualitative process.
or a foresight practitioner identifying the right stakeholders to invite to a workshop). Second, when FTA and especially foresight is addressing the intrinsically uncertain challenge of devising possible futures,
/Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 408 418 operationalizing the Adaptive Policy-making Framework is structured through workshops 35.
This paper reports on the reflexive inquiry that originates from several workshops with scientists and practitioners where the case studies have been articulated
the workshops allowed for a systematic ex-post evaluation of similarities and differences between the chosen scenario projects.
The program was operationalized through a series of eight workshops, followed by an open scientific conference in July 2007.
and discovery Expert panels Technocratic Stakeholder driven Shaped by interaction Future workshops Evolutionary 4 The groups are intended not to be) a typology.
Workshop Proceedings, OECD, Paris, 2011.16 EC, Innovation Union Competitiveness Report 2011. Executive Summary) European commission, DG Research and Innovation, Brussels, 2011.17 G. Hamel, C. K. Prahalad, Competing for the Future, Harvard Business school Press, Boston, 1994.18
OECD (Ed.),Fostering Innovation to Address Social challenges, Workshop Proceedings, OECD, Paris, 2011, pp. 59 64.80 M. Godet, The art of scenarios and strategic planning:
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011