complex networks, simulation modeling of CAS and the search of vast databases. Such convergence has conducted to a rejuvenation and growth in FTA METHODS and practice,
Cooperation, bpayoffs, Q networks, agents, and some other conceptual figures first originated in the reasoning about the social realm,
This suggests that a feature's integrity depends on a systemwide network of interactions involving other features.
The most important system's property unraveled by this method is the existence of scale-free networks,
Scale-free networks pervade technology: the Internet, power-grids and transportation systems are but a few examples. For a review on this field I suggest the reading of two recent review articles 29,30,
a review of recent books, Networks 4 (13)( 2003) 174 180.30 A l. Barabasi, E. Bonabeau, Scale-free networks, Sci.
and emergence in complex networks, SFI-Working Paper 02-07-029,2002. 32 S. Wolfram, A New Kind of Science, Wolfram Media, Inc.,2002.33 J. Goldenberg
and analyzed in their context as part of the Cost Action A22 network. 1 In doing so,
By consequence, innovation systems are described as networks of actors and institutions that develop, diffuse and use innovations 38.
Thus through trial-and-error and learning-by-doing 1 The Cost Action A22 network was a four year program (2004 2007) entitled Foresight methodologies Exploring new ways to explore the future and funded by the Individuals, Societies, Culture
One of the often-overlooked elements in the innovation process that hinders smooth communication and interaction within emergent networks is time 44.
Acknowledgments The authors are grateful to the COST Action A22 network, IPTS and different past and present foresight network initiatives such as the European foresight Platform and Forlearn for organizing creative discussion platforms on foresight and scenario initiatives.
The constructive comments of the anonymous reviewers were very helpful to better focus and shape this paper.
temporal harmony and dissonance in nanotechnology networks, Time Soc. 15 (2006) 121 139.45 M. Aaltonen, Multi-ontology, sense-making and the emergence of the future, Futures 41 (2009
and define research and innovation agendas of established science industry networks. The aim of the paper is to show what problems/challenges with regard to the innovation system have been addressed and
and is characterized by continuing interactions among network members 15. Today, future governance is seen as crucial for the development of nanotechnology 16.2.2.
Integrated vision-building and governance network-building in the US At the end of the 1990s, the US science policy community established an organizational structure around nanotechnologies
as in the case of emerging technologies, the diverse and dynamic environment enables the actors within the pluralistic system to use FTA to build up governance networks
included prospective studies of long-term opportunities as well as participatory activities such as building networks to access disparate sources of knowledge and to legitimate the governance of nanotechnology.
built up a network and opened the network gradually to new stakeholders and disciplines. 3. 2. Germany FTA for addressing the future of existing areas of strength In Germany,
a network of important actors was already in place revolving around one federal ministry. Priorities were set focusing on the positions, needs,
the VDI-TZ built and stabilized actor networks representing industry and science. 7 These early network activities did not involve other ministries or government agencies,
as opposed to the US case. In 2003, the BMBF developed a national strategy for future funding and support of nanotechnology.
7 These networks represent organizations that have been funded by the Ministry before. Especially industrial players such as Bayer, Degussa, Siemens, Zeiss, industry-oriented organizations of applied science such as Fraunhofer-Institutes,
build up policy networks, as well as shape and prepare funding programs. FTA in the governance of nanotechnology started with forecasting activities
On the other hand, the increase was triggered by critics coming from voices outside the networks established in both countries.
449 P. Schaper-Rinkel/Technological forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 444 452 In this later stage, heterogeneous stakeholders beyond the actors of the early established nano-policy networks
and reconfiguring the policy system) was enhanced by building networks among government departments, agencies, industry and a broad variety of academic disciplines.
Unlike in the US, the governance network in Germany is centralized around one ministry (the BMBF) lacking a continuously working governance structure to bring together the variety of actors involved in nano-related innovation processes.
It has established broad networks with a focal organization as the basis for implementing its strategic vision.
but also allowed the spreading of information, the extension of the expert network and the integration of very diverse perspectives.
Network buildingwas supported and additionally itwas advocated to avoid a bias by including only familiar experts.
or at most to try to stimulate R&d collaborations and networks. Priority-setting methodologies normally begin with a fixed choice set
how to build the capacity to reconfigure international networks and methods for appreciating global impact.
On the one hand the authors explore the use of FTA in the context innovation networks and innovation management.
The dense networks among major societal stakeholders may be strengthened. The research policy strategies that were agreed upon can be enforced as more legitimate and plausible.
and Networks, Polyteknisk Forlag, DK, 2011.14 E. H. Schein, Organisational Culture and Leadership, 3rd ed.,John Wiley & Sons, NY, 2004.15 G. Morgan
The third principle is capacity to reconfigure international networks This principle is about taking advantage of existing organisational structures
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 further shaping an exercise. 2. 3. Capacity to reconfigure international networks The ability to build upon both formal and informal international networks can help combine existing knowledge in novel ways.
regional and national systems as well as within international sectoral networks and institutions. The establishment of strong connections with existing formal and informal networks, 3 particularly those contacts cultivated over the years 18,
can provide a relevant starting point. 2. 4. A‘glocal'impact orientation Many researchers specialised in international management 20,21 have argued for‘glocalization'as the transformation of global and local interests into a new
visions and value networks. 2 This was the departure point in designing the first questionnaire in the IMS2020 project as described in Section 3. 3 Contractor
and Lorange 19 define three basic distinctions between formal and informal (international) networks. First formal ones are more visible among those who collaborate and also to other actors outside.
Third, informal networks are developed usually by those in the front line or carrying out the daily work,
whereas formal networks enter a higher management level and are often institutionalised. C. Cagnin, T. Ko nno la/Futures 59 (2014) 27 38 29 of results.
During the initial discussions many project partners argued that the best way to engage with their informal network of contacts would be through methods other than those initially proposed, such as interviews and smaller workshops.
or who do not share the same network security clearance. C. Cagnin, T. Ko nno la/Futures 59 (2014) 27 38 32 After the snapshots were developed within each of the four groups they were circulated to all project partners and IMS
in order to increase the network of stakeholders; and (iii) peer review articles and an edited book. 4. Revisiting the principles for global foresight The IMS2020 scenario
It was also highly useful in supporting the design of the exercise and in combining different ways of engaging diverse audiences in different phases across both formal and informal partner networks.
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
State-of-the-art and expectations Analysis of co-patents and co-publications Use common foresight framework User of partner contacts and established networks for outreach (survey, interviews,
and engaging stakeholders Dissemination of results through the networks Training Tailored dissemination to targeted stakeholders Dissemination in different levels of innovation systems 9 However,
Moreover, parallel group work with support from online tools was embedded in the process allowing the project to be kept within the planned schedule. 4. 3. Capacity to reconfigure international networks Table 2 below outlines how formal and informal
networks were used and how stakeholders were selected, engaged and informed of progress and outcomes. To interact with wider audiences'two online surveys
Stakeholders Selection process Type of network Methods for engaging and informing Project partners Expertise Formal Face-to-face meetings, video/teleconference, Groove, email,
from an indicator to a network and process perspective, Technology analysis and Strategic management 13 (4)( 2001) 533 553.19 F. J. Contractor, P. Lorange (Eds.
and was done together with the European Techno-Economic policy Support (ETEPS) Network. This International Seminar was founded on the success of the joint EU US Seminar on Future-oriented technology analysis (FTA) that was organised by JRC-IPTS in 2004.
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.
Former member of the Executive Committee of the European Science and Technology observatory (ESTO network) and of the Scientific Steering committee of The European Techno-Economic policy Support Network (ETEPS.
and (iii) investigation into the formal and informal networks and procedures, which may be in harmony or in conflict with other systems.
The second phase (strategic diagnostic) combines a method for analysing business environments (SWOT analysis) with a method for constructing scenarios (the Global Business Network.
The Global Business Network (GBN) method enables an assessment of the resources and competencies needed in relation to the trends that ought to mould the future of the business.
The analysis of strengths and weaknesses (SWOT analysis) stimulated an important reflection in terms of the future via the application of the Global Business Network scenarios.
P. Schwartz, Plotting Your Scenarios, Global Business Network (GBN), San francisco, 2004.28 C. W. Choo, Environmental scanning as information seeking and organizational learning, Information Research 7
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
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
and how they are practiced. For the former the Cyclic Innovation Model (CIM) is utilized as analytical framework
The cases are a collaboration between government agencies and a research organization and two inter-organizational networks of different size.‘
However, the rooting and openness of foresight activities in the three networks varies significantly. The advantages that‘networked foresight'entails could be exploited to a much higher degree for the networks themselves, e g.,
, the broad resource base and the large pool of people with diverse backgrounds that are available.
Furthermore, effective instruments for the reinteggratio of knowledge into the networks'partner organizations are needed. 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
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)
second, by explicating the link of futures research to innovation networks. Then, the approach for the analysis is outlined,
and feedback and feed-forward linkages are established. 4. Innovation in systems or networks: innovation processes are distributed among different organizations
networked foresight. 2. 2. Linking futures research to innovation networks 2. 2. 1. Trends driving corporate innovation toward open innovation processes Innovation, i e.,
However, systematic research about futures research in innovation networks as one form to embrace open innovation is lacking.
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.
while the EIT ICT Labs case made it possible to observe futures research activities in a large network of around 65 partner organizations.
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
which structures the partners involved in the innovation network and links them in a cyclic way.
, an image that the network did not envision for itself. Also, the CIM requires every concept to be made explicit, i e.,
, if a network does not have an explicit and formal process model, the conclusion would be networked that systematic foresight is practiced not.
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
In this article the network orientation of foresight is described and analyzed, but not formalized. The CIM provides a common basis for the analysis of the three cases
three different levels are used (visualized as gray-shading) for each component of the CIM to visualize their preference concerning openness and network orientation of futures research activities.
They merely reflect the state of each case concerning the planned and actual network orientation concerning futures research activities. 3. 2. 3. Categorizing the networked foresight activities The implementation of the identified networked foresight activities is structured according to the three roles of foresight
, contributors and beneficiaries of the activities (open network, closed network, contract-based partnerships or single organizations.
''Therein, Rijkswaterstaat aimed at acting as network manager and facilitator to integrate all interested parties.
the network manager had Table 2 The three roles of foresight as described by Rohrbeck
while also making sure that the internal components of the network were aligned. 4. 1. 5. Networked foresight activities Foresight activities inside Rijkswaterstaat
, becoming the leader in ICT innovation) as stated by the network partners emerges as the starting point for the network.
It is reflected in the mission of the network, i e.,, creating a highly visible innovation center in Europe in the ICT sector.
and Opera ASA joined the network. 6 See http://www. eict. de for more details about EICT.
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.
cost and profit projections in predefined cases to establish a basis of decision-making Project 2. 7 Networking on demand Identifies matching knowledge carriers in the partner network on demand,
Several collaborative instruments were established to support the identification and selection of activities for the future of the network, e g.,
it is aimed explicitly at establishing open innovation structures and an intraorganizzationa knowledge exchange between the network 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
Effectiveness and efficiency are addressed by several activities in the network: technology transfer activities, so-called spearhead research activities,
Eventually, the assessment of the outcome (network performance versus original expectations) will determine the partners'future commitment.
Clearly observable from the partners'actions and behavior within the network is their willingness to cooperate within the network.
and a strong ties across the locations of the network Program 3. 8 Yearly selection process Identifies underdeveloped technological
and network orientation. 5. 1. 1. Networked foresight activities Foresight activities were limited to workshops, moderated discussions and other meetings either as stand-alone events or as series of events (activity 1. 4). Predominantly,
The partner network could be used to a higher degree within mid-to long-term foresight instruments and recurring activities.
cohesion within the network and quality of results could be increased further. 5. 2. Case 2:
However, other large innovation networks that Fig. 2. Visualization of WINN managed by Rijkswaterstaat in terms of its openness and network orientation.
Thus, it is expected that the outcome of foresight is enhanced due to the partner network of EICT.
However, the partners do not use the full potential of the network. For example, closely integrated collaborative foresight processes based on the neutral platform provided by EICT could improve the partners'own internal foresight processes.
1. EICT applies foresight instruments mostly on a project basis for its network partners. Within the projects EICT's network is leveraged for information collection
and knowledge exchange. 2. Beneficiaries of networked foresight activities are the network partners within the predefined project settings. 3. For developing the process model,
adjusting the image of the future and the vision and strategy of EICT quarterly board meetings,
EICT's own foresight competences could complement these meetings. 4. The existing foresight activities could be utilized to capture external developments adequately to guide EICT prepare it for the future. 5. Foresight would benefit from additional network partners that add to the existing knowledge base.
& (&) Contract partners 1. 4 Series of future workshops & (&) Closed network &=Primary role of the activity,
Fig. 3. Visualization of the EICT concerning openness and network orientation. 8 During the revision of this article a regular strategy meeting took place
and vision for the network based on the image of the future of an open network of partners that fosters research and business opportunities.
and adjusting of the network's activities. 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.
First, regulations and specifications imprinted by the parent organization and frequent reporting duties equal to those of significantly larger projects subsidized in the European Framework Programs (FPS) not only significantly slow down the network's activities,
but also discourage the people who are active in the network. Second 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.
While the EIT ICT Labs partner organizations overcame the fear of opportunism to a degree that lead them to join the network at all,
managerial challenges develop due to the size of the network. While the shared vision of the EIT ICT Labs serves as a common denominator,
All activities use sources from the within network; five leverage additional information from outside organizations and one seeks to integrate end-users As well as can be expected,
the network is used to identify new needs, emerging technologies, and to a lesser degree competitors'concepts at an early stage (initiator role of foresight).
and help to identify new business models for either all network partners or those partners of the network that participate in the activity.
In contrast, strategic guidance, the assessment and repositioning of the innovation portfolio and vision creation are limited mostly to the network itself.
Some industry partners hesitated to disclose the use of information within their affiliation, especially concerning strategy development and core business.
Others revealed that they are unsure to this moment how to effectively reintegrate information from the network in internal processes (outside-in.
1. Within the EIT ICT Labs foresight that utilizes the network on various levels is practiced. 2. Beneficiaries of these activities are the network partners and the network itself.
& (&) Contract partners 2. 7 Networking on demand & Closed network &=Primary role of the activity,
the innovation radar, are used to provide the basis for the process model of the network especially
, the action lines (thematic fields) and the selection process, could be applied further to guide the transition path toward an open network that generates excellent research
and business results. 5. The existence of a management team within the network facilitates the use of results from networked foresight to define
and guide the future of the network. 5. 4. Cross-case evaluation 5. 4. 1. Toward networked foresight within the three cases In Fig. 5 the classification of the foresight activities in terms scope
The former are those activities that are conducted predominantly between the contract partners RWS and Deltares, the latter within the larger, loosely coupled network of experts.
In the sense of this article the WINN activities can be characterized as foresight supported by a loosely linked network.
'and on a project basis. When one of the network partners requests futures research for a selected topic EICT creates a network tailored for that topic
Activity Initiator role Strategist role Opponent role Scope 3. 1 Action lines (&) & Closed network 3. 2 Experience and living labs & (&) Open
(organizations and end-users) 3. 3 Testbeds and simulation tools & Closed network 3. 4 Spearhead research & (&) Closed network 3. 5 Business modeling & (&) Open
(organizations) 3. 6 Technology transfer program & (&) Open (organizations) 3. 7 Innovation radar & (&) Open (organizations) 3. 8 Annual selection process (&) & Closed network
3. 9 Best-practice benchmarking & Open (organizations) 3. 10 Business developer program & (&) Closed network &=Primary role of the activity,
Fig. 4. Visualization of the EIT ICT Labs concerning openness and networks for futures research activities.
/Futures 59 (2014) 62 78 75 the network of constant network partners or on a contractual basis. The strategic role of foresight for the corporate strategy of the partners is the focus of attention.
The EIT ICT Labs are a network as such. Networked foresight is driven endogenously in selected fields with dedicated funds.
They are either completely open to outsiders or limited to the network partners. On first sight it appears that strategic information is the focus of the activities as well.
and should be used to develop a suitable process model toward an envisioned future of an innovation network.
The networks can benefit from networked foresight especially due to its varying perspectives, diverse backgrounds of the involved people and broad information base.
Third, the management teams of the three networks need to establish ways to integrate and utilize the information that its partners contribute.
Furthermore, they should initiate instruments to help the networks'partners reintegrate the results into their organization.
1. In all three cases the foresight activities are used as information sources for initializing new activities internally within the network partner organizations (outside-in.
2. In all three cases the network partners contribute information to the foresight activities independently from further use therein (inside-out.
and refining product roadmaps and corporate strategy internally within the network partner organizations (outside-in). Additionally, foresight activities in the WINN and EIT ICT Labs cases are used to provide information for guiding,
shaping and modeling the future of the network itself, i e.,, in terms of the CIM especially the image (s) of the future, the vision and the process model of the network.
From the perspective of the network this is a coupled (outside-in 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
and analyzing foresight activities therein in terms of type, scope and role of each activity. The scope comprises contributors
and beneficiaries, ranging from individual organizations to networks of organizations and end-users. The role refers to three known roles that foresight plays:
the initiator, strategist and opponent role. Fig. 5. Foresight activities from the cases matched to foresight roles, scope and type of activity.
The application of the Cyclic Innovation Model shows that the envisioned and practiced openness of the three networks differs substantially.
Furthermore, the use of foresight within the networks could be increased (1) to address the future of the networks themselves
Doing this with the networks'partners promises to sharpen the results by including additional perspectives
The smaller networks of RWS and EICT concentrate on foresight with a focus on strategic implications, ideation or initiation of new business activities thus the strategist and initiator roles of foresight. 9 In contrast,
the opposition role of foresight is strengthened in the large network of the EIT ICT Labs. This appears to be explicable with the inevitably added new perspectives and consolidation of unconnected information through the network.
Long-term foresight activities are conducted predominantly within the large network of the EIT ICT Labs. The same is true for foresight activities that are open to new participants.
when conducted in the networks. It should be noted that this article is based on data from three cases.
Management 40 (2010) 213 221.13 S. Liyanage, Towards a fourth generation R&d management model research networks knowledge management, International Journal of Technology management 18 (1999) 372 393.14
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
15 (1995) 241 257.37 R. Cowan, N. Jonard, J.-B. Zimmermann, Bilateral collaboration and the emergence of innovation networks, Management Science 53 (2007
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.
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:
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011