workshop

Workshop

Expert workshop (10)
Future workshop (8)
Interactive workshop (11)
Workshop (500)
Workshop discussion (7)
Workshop results (3)

Synopsis: Workshop:

ART10.pdf

where workshops and expert panels are taken as the main source of information for constructing scenarios.

It is our experience that a good initial focal issue is important for a successful first workshop,

drafting of exploratory framework scenarios25 The first forward-looking and interactive element of an AF project is typically a workshop with experts and stakeholders.

Depending on the available time such a workshop can be used to start off several of the phases,

but exploration of external drivers26 is always a useful exercise to include in such an initial workshop.

The workshop methodology is inspired also by Eden and Ackerman 48.26 As mentioned under Phase 1 this boundary is not always clear

or bad. 27 An external drivers'workshop is performed in a structured brainstorming format where participants first get to upload their ideas on drivers.

or enhanced by the use of electronic workshop tools. 30 After discussions in plenary and possibly syndicate work,

Often the scenario ideas are developed further at the initial workshop in syndicate work where each group takes care of one embryonic scenario.

However, the work of scenario specification must always be continued back-office after the workshop. A part of this work is to sharpen the driving logic of each scenario and the contrasts in this regard within the whole scenario set.

It is not uncommon that the scenario ideas derived at the workshop have to be modified considerably at this stage,

formulation of collective visions and objectives The normative dimension can also be addressed usefully at the initial workshop.

when workshop participants are feared to have a (too) high degree of initial consensus (e g.,the only thing we need to get innovation going is lower taxes;

Their exploration could usefully be started at the initial workshop, based on the scenario ideas developed in Phase 2

and if possible continued at a subsequent workshop when well worked-out framework scenarios are available.

Proceedings of the SCORE Workshop, Copenhagen, 20 21 april 2006, TNO, Delft, 2006.30 H. Van Zuylen, K. M. Weber, Opportunities and limitations of European innovation policy

ART11.pdf

and facilitated workshops where the results of Internet-based activities where discussed, validated and synthesized.

, Internet-based group-support systems, facilitated workshops, RPM Screening) were employed to foster vision-building, networking and priority setting in the development of a shared research agenda for an international research program. 3. Shaping of research agendas in Woodwisdom-Net Woodwisdom-Net4 was started in 2004 as one of the ERA NETS supported by European union.

on the other hand, was carried out in workshops, in order to i) identify similarities and interdependences between proposed research issues, and to ii) generate more holistic perspectives on the emerging agenda.

, workshop activities), because it was expected that results from the earlier phases would be helpful in planning these tasks 17.3.2.

scheduling, provision of IT infrastructure, compilation of results from Internet-based consultation activities, facilitation of workshops.

from each participating country, prominent Researchers and Industrial leaders were invited to three interactive workshops to discuss

and synthesized through extensive Internet-based consultations and carefully planned workshops. The main phases are summarized in Table 1. Over 400 stakeholders from all participating countries participated in the process.

screening of research issues Project team January February‘06 5. Three one-day workshops for Researchers and Industrial leaders 10 12 Researchers and Industrial leaders

/workshop Mid-february,‘06 6. A one-day workshop for funding organizations Representatives from funding organizations End of March‘

and especially those that were evaluated favorably were discussed in a series of four workshops. Based on the results of the last workshop for funding organizations, three working groups were formed such that each consisted of funding organizations with shared interests in the topic of the working group.

To some extent, network-building was supported also by listing the registered participants on the website of the consultation process. 7 3. 2. 2. 1. Solicitation of research issues.

Within each sub-area, it was envisaged that the identification of the 5 10 most relevant issues would be useful in building the workshop agendas;

the participants in the ensuing workshops (as described below) did not have to delve into all proposed issues;

This, however, did not mean that only issues with high CI value would have been discussed in the workshops:

and the workshop participants were welcome to highlight any other issues that they regarded interesting on any other grounds. 3. 2. 2. 5. Workshops for researchers and industrial leaders.

In Mid-february, three workshops were organized to take stock of results fromthe Internet-based activities and to develop tentative recommendations about

In each country, thenational Coordinators identified one representative from wood-material-based industry and one member of the research community and invited these to the workshops.

Thus, a total of 16 experts were invited to each workshop. Most of them could attend,

and the workshops were attended by 10 15 experts on wood material science. Thematically, the workshops focused on the following topics:

i) New value added products and production, ii) Sustainable forestry and iii) Wood products. This structure differed somewhat from the framework that was employed in the structuring of research areas and sub-areas.

In effect, the thematic titles of the workshops were somewhat more traditional than those employed in the framework,

which was helpful in lending a coherent agenda to each workshop. Before the workshops, results from the Internet-based activities were compiled

and distributed to the participants so that they could become familiar with the proposed research issues, experts assessments and corresponding CI values.

A separate set of background materials was prepared for each workshop based on the workshop theme. Some sub-areas (e g.,

, creating new functionalities or improved to materials/products) were covered in several workshops, which helped bring in complementary perspectives to the proposed issues.

The director of the TKK group (the third author of this paper) facilitated the workshops, with support from thewoodwisdom-Net Coordinator.

At the beginning, the workshop agenda was presented briefly to the participants. Then, the participants were invited to comment on the proposed solicited issues and their assessments (approx. 1. 5 h),

whereby all research areas and sub-areas that were relevant to the workshop were covered. Within each sub-area

the workshop participants were asked expressly i) to comment on issues with a high CI value, ii) to highlight issues

which had a low CI value but which seemed nevertheless interesting, iii) to suggest other research topics that were not among the proposed issues (approx. 2. 5 h). After these discussions,

the workshop participants filled a questionnaire form where they were asked to evaluate the relevance of each research sub-area for European collaboration by using a seven-point Likertsccal

based on the quality of solicited research issues and the workshop discussions (approx. 1 h). Towards the end of the workshop, the results from these questionnaires were compiled separately for each country

and presented to the participants who were invited then to discuss them (approx. 1 h). 3. 2. 2. 6. Workshop for funding organizations.

Based on the results from all preceding phases, a workshop for funding organizations was organized at the end of March 2006 to examine these results and, more specifically,

Practically all funding organizations in Woodwisdom-Net attended this workshop. Before the workshop, all results from earlier activities were compiled

and disseminated to the workshop participants. For example, the average value of evaluations with regard to suitability for WW-Net and proposed distribution of fundingwere calculated.

Also, research issues that had been regarded as particularly interesting in the preceding workshops were listed explicitly. Separate analyses were presented at the aggregate level (i e.,

, by taking into account all evaluations) and at the country level (i e.,, results from the preceding three workshops.

Thus, the funding organizations could see how the results based on the representatives of their own country may have differed from those of all expert assessments.

Amajor goal of this workshop was proceed to towards the development of calls for proposals. The agenda of the workshops consisted of three parts.

First, results from all preceding tasks were discussed briefly, whereby the participants were invited to put forth their thoughts on them (approx. 1. 5 h). Second, within each 492 V. Brummer et al./

the workshop participants (and thus funding organizations) were divided into a three working groups with shared interest (approx 1. 5 h). These working groups,

From the administrative perspective, the geographical distances between participants from many countries make it impossible to organize participatory workshops for them all:

/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 483 495 participants will be invited to workshops and in what phases of the process.

ART12.pdf

we can only list some exercises, like surveys and trend workshops, which tried to identify future needs in regulation in already existing

in the final section we will present some results of a small-scale Delphi study among participants of an ITU (International Telecommunication Union) expert workshop on Adjusting Forecasting methods to the Needs of the Telecommunication Sector organised in September 2004.

in The netherlands, Proceeding of the First Interdisciplinary Workshop on Standardization Research, Universität der Bundeswehr, Hamburg, 1997, pp. 311 333.33 H. J. De vries, Standardization:

ART13.pdf

The FP6-NEST‘ATBEST'project addressed this problem in a workshop with practitioners but at a too general level. 7 3 We note in passing that‘roadmaps'in the public sector often seem to be no more than outlooks on the future of a field or sector,

and (MPM-2) was used in an interactive way with practitioners as part of a workshop on bridging gaps in the innovation chain from the perspective of practitioners.

The workshop was used for the co-construction of the organizational dimension of the MPM where the underlying path dynamics could 525 D. K. R. Robinson,

we facilitated a practitioner strategy articulation workshop. The workshop focused on mapping possible innovation chains and challenges for progressing down the number of possible options.

The two aims of the workshop were: 1. Developing strategic information for the Frontiers network to include within the framework of MPM-1

in order to direct research and seek out possible actors who could co-construct an innovation chain based on the Strategic research Areas of Frontiers. 2. Broadening the perspectives of the practitioners participating in the exercise to test the robustness of MPM as part of a strategy support system

Their purpose was also to prepare participants to the kind of anticipatory work that was one of the workshop's aims.

Fourteen selected practitioners attended the workshop on 12 june 2006 in Amsterdam. Due to the aims and constraints of this paper we have to 529 D. K. R. Robinson,

T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 describe the details of the workshop process elsewhere. 17 Here we focus on the results relating to the MPM-2. The group identified a number of existing

Major issues here were agreed in the workshop to relate to the relationship between MNC and start-ups:

The workshop participants agreed that the attractiveness of this innovation chain would be tempered again by IP issues a large number of companies, distributed IP,

The workshop participants pointed out that there are attempts at all four innovation chains. Innovation chain 1 has been attempted by large companies such as Siemens for relatively simple integrated microfluidics.

the workshop participants recognized the difficulty of researchers in public institutions getting credit in developing integrated platforms.

workshop participant. 20 http://www. yole. fr/./21 www. minacned. nl. 22 Examples are targeted drug delivery, implants,

The outcome of the workshop was that innovation chain 4 is agreed to be the most promising approach to creating an integrated lab-on-a-chip platform.

We organized a highly interactive workshop following the premises of Constructive technology assessment (CTA) 69, where insights into technology dynamics are explored with actors

Because of the exploratory nature of this first project of Frontiers'FTA programme, we positioned ourselves as experts in the field of S&t dynamics and path creation vis-à-vis the field-level expertise of the workshop participants.

because the conceptual development and refinement of the MPMS was linked up with an interactive workshop. The workshop participants accepted our diagnosis given in MPM-1 and scenarios as well as the MPM-2 tool as relevant.

This allowed discussion to go ahead on forms of innovation chain and ways of bridging 534 D. K. R. Robinson, T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 the gaps.

We would like to thank also the practitioners who participated in the workshop. This work was done also under the framework of the Frontiers Technology assessment Program.

EIASM Workshop on organising paths paths of organising, Berlin, November 2006, pp. 3 4. 33 J. J. Deuten, Cosmpolitanising Technologies:

. K. R. Robinson, The use of the path concept and emerging irreversibilities in the analysis and modulation of nanotechnologies, EIASM Workshop on organising paths paths of organising, Berlin, November 2006, pp. 3 4

ART15.pdf

thanks to the richness of literature and the number of projects and workshops analysing the future of universities:

as well as the findings presented at workshops organised by EC JRC IPTS on the Future of European University. 564 A. Havas/Technological forecasting

Policy 30 (3)( 2001) 509 532.36 B. Kehm, Governance and Strategy, Presentation at a Workshop on Driving forces and Challenges for the European University, Brussels, March 23 24 2006.37

and given invited lectures at international conferences and workshops. He has advised national governments and international organisations on the above issues. 582 A. Havas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 558 582

ART16.pdf

This involved the inclusion of pre-engagement analysis of potential co-evolutions in the form of scenarios into interactive workshop activities, with the aim of enabling multi-stakeholder anticipation of the complexities of co-evolution.

ART18.pdf

but also acted as process facilitators and moderators of the workshops and sessions in the empirical application cases.

and to evaluate workshop results. The stakeholders are included in two workshops. At the end of the process, the results are transmitted to the decision makers who then decide about specific strategies. 3. 1. 2. Foresight generation Phase in the generation phase, the exploration of context uncertainties,

values and options is structured highly. First, the core team elaborates a system representation of the regional wastewater system.

They are condensed highly graphical devices synthesizing the trade-off structure among the options as they were elaborated in the different workshops.

therefore be based on the explicit arguments that have been raised in the core team and workshop discussions. The diagrams remain almost meaningless if isolated from this content.

uncertainties, trade-offs and decision making The data generated in the workshops and core team sessions are synthesized finally by the core team into a recommendation for strategic planning.

The report of the core team is handed finally over to the political decision makers in a final presentation accompanied by the workshop participants.

In the first workshop, the stakeholders elaborated four alternative scenarios describing context conditions in the year 2030+based on the set of influencing factors

ii) In the second workshop, participants carried out the same assessments by taking the perspective of typical future citizens or industry representatives.

The inclusion of selected additional stakeholders in the workshops was appreciated for tapping into a broader knowledge base

ART19.pdf

while future workshops are interactive and expert panels more for addressing expert opinions. Popper 9 lists and describes 33 different foresight and assessment methods altogether.

discursive technology assessment, consensus conferences, brainstorming, expert workshops, Delphi questionnaires and expert Fig. 1. Popper's diamond 9. 1165 R. Koivisto et al./

models, workshops, brainstorms, interviews, literature reviews and other such methods are used in both approaches. However, risk assessments utilize more systematic and standardised methods, especiaall in risk identification phase.

expert workshops and interviews Development and future expectations of the approach New approaches like inherent safety and resilience engineering address the complex nature of industrial processes.

ART21.pdf

As there is not a single methodology for searching procedures, the methods contained quantitative methods like bibliometrics as well as qualitative approaches like workshops, expert interviews, internet and qualitative literature searches.

As an input to the first workshop in November 2007, a first set of scientific papers describing the developments in the fields were written

The milestones of the process are described in Fig. 2. The first workshop was held as a starting point in the process to define those topics which should be elaborated in more detail,

Services Science In a first workshop with 110 participants in November 2007, these 14 thematic fields were discussed with respect to emerging topics

During the workshops'group work, which were facilitated by the expert topic coordinators, some new foresight and working techniques were applied.

The workshops themselves addressed the 14 thematic fields themselves and tried to structure them. First future science and technology trends were mentioned

already at this point in time, five new thematic fields were derived from the first workshop results and further search

and implementation phase An international workshop at the beginning of October 2008 marked the link to generate ideas for recommendations concerning policies

The workshop took place in Hamburg and gathered international and German experts with experience in implementing new

The purpose of the workshop was to discuss what kinds of measures are successful in the implementation of new

These talks centered around the topics themselves and the preparation of potential workshops. These talks and first workshops took place in spring 2009.

All of them were tailor-made adapted to the needs of the BMBF departments (as a kind of service)

which described the starting points in the thematic fields as discussed in the first workshop of the process.

The workshop in autumn 2008 is supposed to directly contribute to the theoretical and case study discussion for the translation of outcomes from the collective process into specific options for policy definition and implementation.

Also for them, in joint workshops and discussions, the topics and outcomes will be worked into recommendations for policy options.

Nevertheless, because of the workshops, interviews and survey, it was known in the research scene. It was very important to include BMBF from the start

The process is a fully fledged process that takes into account the sponsor and implementor of the results in different feedback loops, different internal discussions and internal workshops.

ART22.pdf

This article combines preliminary findings from a review of evaluative scenario literature with workshop discussions among scenario practitioners, using environmental relevant policies as a case study. Subject to the nascent evaluative scenario literature

We would also like to thank the participants of the April 2008 BLOSSOM workshop in Copenhagen

or several aspects of using scenario planning 2. This article merges the findings from this review with the results from a workshop with environmental scenario practitioners and policy-makers.

Section 4 complements this discussion with the findings from workshop discussions and takes the discussion one step further

As part of this analysis we organised a two-day international workshop gathering thirty environmental scenario practitioners from governments

Prior to the workshop a questionnaire was distributed among participants to investigate the importance of different objectives

In addition, survey instruments in workshop settings are useful tools to measure how different types of scenarios can affect decision makers'understanding of the challenges they face and preferences for response options 27.

elaborating upon results of a series of workshops with practitioners and policy-makers the authors conclude that new approaches are necessary to increase the relevance

One example is the study of Groves et al. who presented decision aids incorporating scenario concepts in a series of workshops to managers

On the basis of their personal experience, workshop participants were asked to rate the direct and indirect forms of scenario-based decision support both on a scale from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high) with regard to the specific relevance (importance)

Workshop participants were much more cautious in attributing relevance and success here. In particular, scenario planning was considered less relevant

Workshop participants also acknowledged the general difficulties of evaluating impacts of scenario planning. However, there was a common agreement among workshop participants that the potential of scenario planning is currently underutilized in dayttoday policy-making.

Apparently, a rather ad hoc use is still prevalent. Scenario planning and futures thinking in more general terms,

This perhaps reflects the view expressed in the workshop that a simple tool discussion is not possible as the very notion of an appropriate methodology is contested complex

ART23.pdf

formal public enquiries of limited scope and invited workshops are the most frequently encountered processes used to extend the deliberations of the committee charged with the Foresight study.

Telephone surveys The Internet Postal surveys Public meetings Public enquiries Invited workshops Interactive television Videoconferencing Electronic meetings or surveys based on:

ART24.pdf

and workshop within a programme of future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) in a nanotechnology research network called Frontiers. 3 The FTA ACTIVITIES in this network revolve around multi-(potential) stakeholder workshops where the aim is to explore the complex dynamics in and around specific areas of nanotechnology important for the Frontiers

3 such interactive workshops are not an easy task. The focus topics are complex, uncertain and involve multiple actors working at multiple levels shot through with anticipatory strategies and expectations on risks and benefits of the emerging technology field.

This creates a requirement for rich and easy to digest strategic intelligence for which can prepare the ground for interactive workshops on complex and highly uncertain topics such as nanotechnology.

Scenarios have often been used to create a synthesis of future-oriented aspects prior to an interactive workshop,

and the discussions and interactions in the workshop will, in a sense, be a further, albeit small, element in the co-evolution of innovation and the surrounding selection landscape.

These provided input into a daylong multistakeeholde interactive workshop where the complex interactions of potential governance arrangements

At the time of the workshop (December 2007) the situation in and around nanotechnology involved mostly the discussion of Environment, Health and Safety aspects (EHS/HES) and other nanotoxicity related discussions,

and workshops on the nano governance issue. 9 For example the nanoelectronics industry coordination efforts described in 34 which would lie in the coordinating bodies box of the IC+diagram.

I position (in the IC+framework) the actors that were active at the time of the workshop

Working with such scenarios in strategy articulation workshops is a means of testing the scenarios while probing and modulating participants'worldviews. 1230 D. K. R. Robinson/Technological forecasting

& Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 3. 2. The scope of the workshop and the nano context at the time From the situation outlined in Section 3. 1,

This shows the status of the IC+game board at the time of the workshop and was the starting point for the development of realistically complex scenarios.

and fed into a Constructive TA workshop. The scenarios hang together with many elements being interchangeable.

especially in this workshop due to the focus on governance. What mechanisms should be modulated or augmented? Can we include forms of anticipatory actions

Below I summarise the three scenarios developed for and in the workshop in the form of key threads and storylines.

For reasons of space only one example (scenario 3) is given in full in Section 5. The example helps to illustrate elements such as paths and endogenous futures. 4. 1. The three scenarios At the time of the workshop

The scenario in Box 4 will be shown in more detail in Section 5. 4. 2. The effect of these scenarios in the workshop The three scenarios together covered the various positions and expectations of those actors active in the debate around RRI.

The daylong workshop was comprised of a number nanotechnology researchers, a ministry of health representative, a large chemical company, a trade union representative, a nanotechnology industry association,

Analysing the scenarios in depth in the workshop was not part of the exercise, but the participants were asked which elements they found the most striking or important.

These provided the basis for the discussions in the workshop which covered locating the responsibility of risk evaluation in the value chain,

The co-evolution of regulatory approaches and technology options was discussed also throughout the workshop, although not directly quoted in the discussions,

A full analysis of the workshop interactions will be given elsewhere. 33 In the following section I will give a full scenario (Scenario 3) with annotations showing the key elements in the narrative.

which are accepted as legitimate and controlled speculations by participants of Constructive TA workshops. In this case they were used by participants as a resource for discussing the complexities of potential multi-actor multilevel de/re alignments and the effects on nanotechnology emergence.

Because of this, participants in the workshop can't dismiss them, they have to reflect on them.

Participants in the workshop recognized the dynamics given in the scenario narratives. Elements were picked up,

The scenarios also worked well in terms of stimulating productive discussion in the workshop. This can be seen as a stakeholder endorsement of the approach (which is an important indicator how well workshops like these are working.

The evaluation of my workshops for Frontiers show that learning about other perspectives occurs, however it does not yet mean that the scenario method has proved practical in the long term (in the practices of the participants),

this is part of ongoing assessment 33. However, as mentioned in Section 4. 2, these types of scenarios do stimulate discussions,

and are productive as an input in Constructive TA type workshops. Their productivity depends on the trade-off between the need to reduce complexity to make it manageable

In workshop situations they act as a way to provide controlled speculation into easier to handle forms,

As is already clear from the evaluation of the workshop such scenarios support strategic anticipation.

ART26.pdf

and at a workshop with the participation of research council members and civil servants affiliated to some of the relevant research councils and research programmes.

In Proceedings from MUSCIPOLI Workshop One. Aarhus: Danish Institute for Studies in Research and Research policy.

< Back - Next >