| Dialogue (193) |  |
| Effective dialogue (4) | |
| Strategic dialogue (57) | |
| Dialogue (193) | |
| Effective dialogue (4) | |
| Strategic dialogue (57) | |
as are promoting strategic dialogues among the stakeholders, initiating pilot foresight (prospective) projects; etc. The national 579 A. Havas/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 558 582 governments, international organisations and associations of universities can provide methodological and financial support for these initiatives.
as well as distinct viewpoints and approaches of the major stakeholders involved in these strategic dialogues, enrich the prospective discussion
therefore to initiate a process of strategic dialogue, bringing the growing number of diverse actors together in an open and self-critical debate.
whether the process of strategic dialogue and policy learning can be turned into a sustainable activity or not,
Strategic dialogues for research policy making in Germany Frauke Lohr, Sebastian Hallensleben and Amina Beyer-Kutzner Abstract Purpose The mere generation of foresight results is not sufficient in itself to influence research policy.
This paper aims to present such a process(‘‘strategic dialogue'')and illustrate it with recent examples from Germany.
Design/methodology/approach The authors compare strategic dialogues with existing dialogue instruments and investigate the relevance of their theoretical foundations to transferring foresight results into research policy making.
Findings Strategic dialogues have proved to be an effective and efficient instrument for achieving the transfer of results from strategic processes such as foresight into research policy making.
Keywords Foresight, Strategic dialogue, Research policy, Stakeholder alignment, Scenario planning, Germany, Innovation, Strategic planning, Governance, Management Paper type Case study 1. The challenge of transferring foresight results Through research policy,
In our work, we use the term‘‘strategic dialogues''to describe such processes. They are initiated wide-ranging dialogues by political sponsors of foresight activities
similar types of strategic dialogues can be employed as a method whenever consensus views of complex and controversial issues need to be generated based on constructive debate and mutual trust,
2006) for the four types of dialogues in their discussion be applied to strategic dialogues? Welp et al.
Table I their relevance to strategic dialogues for transferring the results of foresight activities and similar strategy processes into research policy development. 3. The situation in Germany To support research policy development the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
and impact of these activities on the innovation system strategic dialogues are used, both during the process of creating consensus views of future developments and during their translation into research policy and the creation of research infrastructure.
The main objectives of a strategic dialogue are the joint review of previous results, the definition of general conditions to push invention and innovation,
Key results of strategic dialogues are the development of recommendations for the BMBF as input for future research policy.
Additional results might be community building between stakeholders from various disciplines in academia as well as strengthening of networks between academia and industry. 4. Characteristics and use of strategic dialogues As a highly flexible tool
strategic dialogues have been employed on multiple levels in the process of research policy development: Firstly, strategic dialogues have helped to overcome the necessarily limited perspective of individual units within an organization such as a federal ministry by connecting units with each other in a loose network where ideas can VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 21
Table I Overview of theoretical frameworks developed by Welp et al. 2006) with relevance to strategic dialogues Model/framework Relevance to strategic dialogues Rational actor paradigm (RAP) The RAP assumes that all individuals maximize their personal benefit without communication with,
or consideration of, others Although the RAP is viewed skeptically by Welp et al.,it does provide guidance for strategic dialogues.
When designing such processes, it is easy to ascribe characteristics to stakeholders purely based on their affiliation to a specific group(‘‘Stakeholder X is responsible for Y at the University of Z,
a successful strategic dialogue does take into account that each individual has a very specific agenda, focus points,
and structuring the issues that need to be the subject of a strategic dialogue is a crucial element.
a strategic dialogue has succeed to in crystallizing the topic area into a concise definition of scope and goals.
2006) is a useful internal exercise for the facilitators of a strategic dialogue but not suitable in discussions with stakeholders since many of the issues are politically sensitive and/or inconsistent with the self-image of stakeholders.
Strategic dialogues can navigate the landscape of stakeholder beliefs, agendas, reservations and sensitivities but need to do so without assuming these can necessarily be influenced The process of beliefs being updated that is captured by the model of Bayesian learning applies in several contexts during a strategic dialogue.
In particular, research policy makers operate in the context of political priorities and guidelines that are set at higher levels of the government institutions they work in.
Strategic dialogues need to be flexible enough to cope with this kind of change Organizational learning In such models,
stakeholder dialogues are considered as social learning processes Strategic dialogues lend themselves well to being described in terms of organizational learning.
and‘‘dialogue''as a creative process aimed at generating insight and, in some cases, consensus In the case of strategic dialogues,
though, if research policy initiatives do result from the strategic dialogue, stakeholders in industry and academia might be aware and receptive of them
Secondly, strategic dialogues have been conducted on a larger scale involving outside stakeholders, typically from academia, industry, and society in addition to politics, combining their perspectives at an early stage to explore promising pathways for politic decision making.
Relevant stakeholders from politics need to be identified at the beginning of the process to ensure their involvement in initializing the strategic dialogue and clarifying relevant issues and expected results.
While strategic dialogues are tailored to the characteristics and requirements of stakeholders and research areas there are recurring patterns in the context of research policy making that can be structured in a seven-step framework shown in Figure 1 and described in the following sections. 4. 1 Step 1:
At this stage it is possible to map out in a first iteration the disputes that may hinder the strategic dialogues By its nature,
and of the criteria it uses to assess the value of future outcomes of the strategic dialogue.
The experts here are not necessarily stakeholders in the strategic dialogue but primarily sources of information.
In this step, a strategic dialogue may also explore the European and international context to identify best practice
This information is not always readily available given the wide range of possible funding bodies as well as the fact that the subject of the strategic dialogue is likely to be novel
and involve stakeholders from outside the BMBF the strategic dialogue enters a new phase. This is achieved in a series of workshops with stakeholder representatives selected for their familiarity and expertise in the subject area
the strategic dialogue has overcome the following challenges: B A heterogeneous set of stakeholders within and outside the BMBF with different agendas, value systems, interests and communication practices has been brought together
Overall, the strategic dialogue has resulted in a generation and translation of a joint view of the future into prerequisites and recommendations for a coherent research policy and its implementation through programs and/or dedicated institutional structures. 5. Illustration with recent examples As outlined above,
strategic dialogues consist of recurring standard elements that are combined and tailored depending on the subject as well as the specific requirements of the client.
and demonstrate the power of strategic dialogues as an instrument for a broad range of subject areas in the context of national research policy making.
and they show the application of this dialogue approach in a range of different situations. 5. 1 Strategic dialogue to transfer results from the BMBF Foresight process Strategic dialogues were conducted, for example, for focus areas from the latest BMBF Foresight process (German Federal Ministry
For the focus area‘‘Produzierenkonsumieren 2. 0''(Production Consumption 2. 0), the strategic dialogue involved seven organizational units within the BMBF drawn from the full range of BMBF departments concerned with research policy.
industry and society in identifying practical steps towards addressing the situation (step 5). This wider involvement is currently in progress in phase 3 of the Strategic dialogue
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
The final, seventh, step of the Strategic dialogue resulted in a pragmatic vision for a‘‘CO2-neutral,
5. 3 Strategic dialogue to develop a model for public private partnerships A third example of a successful strategic dialogue was the definition of a novel type of innovation cluster across academia and industry implemented as public private partnerships.
and B compatibility with existing strategic planning activities in individual units within the BMBF. 6. Conclusions Strategic dialogues have proved to be an effective and efficient instrument for achieving the transfer of results from strategic processes such as Foresight into research policy making.
From the perspective of research policy makers, strategic dialogues provide the missing link to transfer the results of foresight and similar strategy processes into research policy making.
In particular Warnke (2011) recommends the use of strategic dialogues to foster the embedding of suggested‘future fields'into the national research, technology and innovation (RTI) landscaape Ahlqvist et al.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011