for instance by improving the stakeholders'understanding of the R&i system or by fostering collaboration processes within innovation networks (cf.
and explicit expectations that are placed on them by diverse several stakeholders. These expectations can rarely be met
2) exclusive vs extensive engagement of stakeholders;(3) consensual vs dissensual development of recommendations; and (4) fixed vs autonomous management of the process. 4. 1. Instrumental vs informative use of foresight results In terms of alternative modes of harnessing foresight conclusions,
CSP 12, Malta Fabiana Scapolo1 European commission Directorate General Joint research Centre (JRC), Programmes and Stakeholders Relations, Square de Meeu s, 8, Office
/Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 234 with extensive formal and informal consultation of stakeholders including scientists and research organisations.
Arenas of governance Foresight objective Priority-setting Networking Building visions Strategic orientation Macro policy priority setting National/EU level stakeholders networks Overall political
level vision building Programming Programmes scientific priority setting Programmes stakeholders networks Sectoral vision building, context of roadmaps Performing Research institutions strategic processes Research institutions
partners and stakeholders networks Research institutions first step in strategic process A. Schoen et al.//Futures 43 (2011) 232 242 236 For instance, the progressive sliding of the field of biocatalysis away from‘catalysis'within chemistry towards biotechnologies illustrates an actual reconfiguration of a current knowledge area that is combining splitting and merging
The European Technology platform (ETP)‘‘Plants for the Future''is a stakeholder forum for the plant sector,
The immediate conclusion for Foresight is need the for consensus building among stakeholders from industry and civil society for a further development of the European research and innovation system.
and goals that was developed with a broad range of stakeholders including consumer and environmental organisations (Plants for the Future 2005).
The paradigm shift from the one gene one function towards a holistic approach that is one the one hand challenging the safety assessment of commercialised GM plants offers on the other hand a cognitive opportunity for modifying stakeholders alignment of interests.
The generation of socio-technical scenarios in a stakeholder dialogue may well create a more reliable ground for transferring research results into successful nano-innovations.
and industrial research programs and much looser connections with social stakeholders. However the pattern of proliferating growth
and more precisely the paradigmatic shift away from the one-gene-one-function approach offers an opportunity for modifying stakeholders'alignment of interest for tackling persistent social concerns.
Presentation at the 2nd PRIME Indicators Conference on STI Indicators for Policy Addressing New Demands of Stakeholders, Oslo, 28 30,may 2008. 47 A. Bonaccorsi, The dynamics of science in the nano
Beyond this if we expand the vision to innovation policy the focus is very much upon using foresight methods to achieve alignment of the principal stakeholders around an agenda for the future.
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.
and a process of participation or consultation with either external experts or extending to broader stakeholders.
need to be brought into the range of engaged stakeholders if the user producer learning space is to be appreciated properly 32.
and other stakeholders represents a further barrier which may be rooted in institutional structures and limited human resource capabilities among other reasons 33.
and towards that facilitation and monitoring of stakeholder processes that do not necessarily have a central agent.
both for the quality of results and to convince the regulatory bodies and other stakeholders of their utility.
, Calle Vi'ctor Andre's Belaunde, 36,4 C, 28016 Madrid, Spain b European commission Directorate General Joint research Centre (JRC), Programmes and Stakeholders Relations
And finally, the fourth dimension deals with different ways of engaging stakeholders in the project. In each of the four dimensions archetypal dichotomies are conceptualised for the further characterisation of a foresight project.
engagement towards to extensive and open engagement of stakeholders. Extensive stakeholder engagement refers to the approach in
and open for all the interested stakeholders and many kinds of stakeholders are invited to participate in the process.
Exclusive stakeholder engagement means that stakeholder participation is not extensive and thus not open for all the stakeholders interested.
Extensive stakeholder engagement in a foresight process in which experts are involved also allows stakeholders to become better aware of signals of change
and threats and consequently to put in place preparedness mechanisms to act on time. Anticipation of intelligence (or knowledge) is a contribution to improve the knowledge base for the designing of policies.
In the security, sustainability and information society fields, stakeholders have the possibility to develop scenarios on
Exclusive Intensive stakeholder engagement in core group Extensive Cooperative idea and concept creation among stakeholders from different Nordic organisations and firms;
Autonomous Autonomous scenario work among the stakeholders. The experience of stakeholders‘‘overwrote''the methodological rigidity in some points.
Exclusive The work was carried out among the project partners. Extensive The results were tested against available expertise outside the project consortium.
Extensive The process involved a network of security stakeholders. These were coming from different government departments, private companies, and research organisations.
Instrumental Identification of innovation ideas and promoting stakeholder networking. Diverse Analysis of diverging views on innovation ideas among stakeholders.
Fixed Robust portfolio modelling, online surveys. Autonomous Stakeholder workshops. Extensive Wide stakeholder participation in online surveys. Exclusive Limited but open stakeholder participation in the workshops.
Extensive There was an extensive engagement of stakeholders. More than 500 experts including policy makers, business actors and researchers from all EU Member States responded to the on-line Delphi study.
In addition, more than 600 stakeholders in a various EU Member States were addressed in a series of national seminars.
The scenario building step involved around fifteen external experts and stakeholders. At various steps of the projects
Extensive There was an extensive engagement of diversified stakeholders. About 2239 experts participated in Delphi survey. Also, many experts of social sciences participated in scenarios analysis
Extensive There was an extensive engagement of diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry. T. Ko nno la et al./
Extensive There are broad engagement of diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry. National Technology foresight in China Informative Understanding future S&t developments and needs.
Extensive Very diversified stakeholders from government academia and industry have participated in NTFC. Technology foresight towards 2020 in China Informative TF2020 aims to provide necessary information for making long term strategy for science and technology development in China,
Extensive Diversified stakeholders from government, academia and industry are very active in the process of TF2020. a Commissioned by the Nordic council. b Commissioned and conducted by VTT Technical research Centre. c Commissioned
However, it has aspects of extensive engagement of stakeholders as outcomes are tested against the views of international panel of peer experts through exposure of results in conferences
and be used to stimulate a wider discussion among stakeholders. 3. 4. Agora foresight (diverse perspectives
network with other stakeholders and in general enhanced their innovation capabilities. The foresight projects identified in Asia seemed to be all consensual;
and communicating this characteristic to stakeholders may create difficulties in attracting those stakeholders who wish to be closer to decision-making.
because the innovation system is constituted by numerous social practices, networks, institutions, and stakeholders. The latter, for instance, extend well beyond the‘‘usual suspects''of R&d-performing firms and public bodies,
and quite often non-governmental organisation and civil society stakeholders 1. FTA, especially in the form of Foresight programmes, has come to be applied in the form of a mutual learning process,
involving more or fewer of these stakeholders across different cases. Learning implies the production and reproduction of knowledge
involving stakeholders and experts of many kinds. Such FTA calls for crossing the boundaries of disciplines, research traditions,
Since FTA involves engaging with stakeholders or at least with the decision-makers that the exercise is intended to inform the scope of knowledge management (KM) has to extend 1 The application of evolutionary theory within theology has led to notions of an‘‘evolving god''(or gods) too,
concerning, for example, the methods of stakeholder mapping that are employed, the ways in which suggestions for participants and dissemination approaches are elicited. 3. Methods and tools So,
trend extrapolation, stakeholder mapping, eliciting expert opinion, and so on are among the panoply of FTA METHODS. Indeed, each of the sets of tools just mentioned can be used in applications other than FTA in demographic forecasting,
It uses of methods such as roadmapping and scenario development relevant to the particular organisation/stakeholder. An important point stressed in this context is the vital role that third parties can play in interpretation
however, that many governmental foresight exercises fail to provide the necessary support for interpretation to a wide range of stakeholders,
or in the organisations from which stakeholder participants have been drawn. Saritas (2007) provides a rathermore detailed account of five stages in FTA
and engage key stakeholders. The two dimensions might be seen as reflecting the balance between knowledge from experts and knowledge within communities,
and‘‘fully fledged foresight''as an ideal, 8 FTA often involves much wider engagement and involvement of stakeholders,
The knowledge and mental models of practitioners and stakeholders may have to be brought into play in such cases.
Engaging a wider range of stakeholders is also important as a means of providing more legitimacy for FTA PROCESSES,
of the key judgements and assumptions that entered into it, of the perspectives and likely reactions of other stakeholders,
as the posits are put into the context of specific stakeholders'circumstances, and in turn used for formulating explicit priorities, recommendations and decisions.
In the Nordic H2 energy foresight, the appropriation of the knowledge from the foresight process into various stakeholder organisations was seen as being accomplished through such activities as pilot projects
Through most of the exercise's life, some members of stakeholder organisations were engaging with the foresight activity
This is particularly evident in multi-stakeholder and extensive activities such as scenario workshops where a number of activities are organised into a sequence in
Steering committee Stakeholder groups Expert networks Conferences & seminars Participants'and stakeholders'pilot projects 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
and other tangible outputs that may enter into the processes of the sponsor and other stakeholders,
held oral evidence sessions and workshops (aiming to include key stakeholders) and elicited public views via survey research and qualitative workshop methodologies.
However, the discussion about multiple stakeholders'participation in public policy and corporate decision making has received very little attention from the FTA COMMUNITY who have taken for granted that FTA ACTIVITIES are participative.
However, the stakeholders, their perspectives, and the representations of the participants involved are analysed usually not in a systematic way.
Available online 26 november 2010 A b s T R A c T FTA and equity addresses the need for multiple stakeholders'participation in public policy and corporate decision making thus leading to more democratic societies.
It explains the involvement of stakeholders in sharing responsibility for the political, economic and juridical decisions in a dialogue process with the political authorities.
and to their (institutional) stakeholders. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law. 4. Transparency,
and processes try to serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe. 6. Effectiveness and efficiency
One of the reasons for this is that not all stakeholders have the resources to be involved in policy making processes.
Ulrich's 12 Critical systems Heuristics (CSH) recognises that various stakeholders in society may see situations 14 in radically different ways because different stakeholder values and behavioural characteristics lead to different boundary judgements.
Ulrich's‘radical'view accepts that these stakeholders may be in conflict or confrontation with each other on unequal power terms 15, status and other behavioural characteristics relevant to (i) above.
inclusive and effective participation process it isimportant tounderstandwhat ismeant by the term‘‘stakeholder''.''Fromfreeman's 17 definition, Saritas et al. 18 define stakeholders as‘‘any group of individuals who can affect
or are affected by the policy decisions taken''(p. 3). The newgovernance and stakeholder approach has various implications for the relationships between the society, corporate industrial activities and public governance.
The implications of this approach for relationships between the society and public policy explain the shift from the government to governance.
and beyond regulation to balance the needs of stakeholders with the need to make a profit 24.
From a stakeholder perspective, strategic management needs to create a satisfactory balance of interests among the various stakeholders who contribute to
and its stakeholders when integrated with business strategy and operations 26. Hence, a core issue to CSR is partnership development. 2()TD$FIG Fig. 1. The new governance landscape.
communities and other stakeholders to do business offering a concrete way for a business to identify social issues that matter to its stakeholders
Although the views of stakeholders are important, these groups can never fully understand a firm's capabilities, competitive positioning,
CSR's numerous and highly fragmented stakeholder demands and lack of basic organisational capacities to collect
For this reason stakeholders put firms'under additional pressure to internalise more of the social and environmental externalities that they create.
The assumption that CSR can be defined as business decision linked to ethical values 37 presupposes that stakeholders
it is developed the means by a firm to build a proper dialogue with stakeholders so that there is a real understanding of what needs are being
Therefore, stakeholders need to have a say or at least to understand the strategic decisions of a company
and openness of decision making procedures to stakeholders while acknowledging the relevance of knowledge other than science,
attuned to the evolving social concerns of stakeholders, and mitigating existing or anticipating adverse effects from business activities.
and other stakeholders taking into consideration social impacts and social dimensions of its value chain in a competitive context as well as its relationships with employees, customers, governments and society at large.
This also raises the need for board evaluation measures against corporate and societal objectives as well as on the effect of stakeholders'communication and participation on management, transparency, performance (economic, environmental and social),
A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Boston, 1984.18 O. Saritas, L. Pace, S. Stalpers, Stakeholder participation and Dialogue in Foresight, From Oracles to Dialogue:
25 E. Freeman, Stakeholder theory of the modern corporation, in: M. Hoffman, R. E. Frederick, M. S. Scwartz (Eds.
What is often apparent is that most stakeholders are relatively powerless alone to affect the direction
factors and uncertainties that are accessible by stakeholders and create or drive change within one's business or institutional environment.
These tend to be more immediate and relevant and distinct to different types of stakeholders
and also they can be adapted both by and/or strongly impact stakeholders, sometimes rapidly. Driver of change examples Climate policies and resource practices;
and forces that change from year to year and may be amenable to stakeholder actions and strategic choices by way of one's investments, new alignments, infrastructure, R&d,
and opportunities that most stakeholders may not have considered previously or prepared for. Arguably the best known work in wild cards comes from Petersen 7 author of‘‘Out of the blue How to Anticipate Big Future Surprises''.
Within international projects, he has contributed to cross-cultural comparative research, stakeholder involvement, sustainability and foresight research by applying monitoring and evaluation systems,
and stakeholders towards achieving a common understanding on non-sustainable trends, offering scenarios and integrated solutions to support policy-makers.
which they seek to PAGE 286 jforesight jvol. 14 NO. 4 2012 integrate knowledge of experts, stakeholders and also of laypeople in the process of policy making.
stakeholders or lay people Mainly quantitative Help to structure arguments and to separate facts from norms Focus on effects inside the predefined system Help getting a rough understanding on effects Effects outside the system cannot be detected Open in principle to detect effects beyond system boundaries Specifications
This could have been structured a workshop with experts and/or stakeholders. Even if in the meantime this highly optimistic view towards the‘‘predict
Such a method could have been interviews with experts or stakeholders from different fields not only form the transport sector.
A wide range of stakeholders have been involved as well as, on a smaller scale, the wider public in form of an online survey.
nevertheless lead to significant future rigidities (in terms of technologies, applications and stakeholders). If one does not just await the outcomes,
Nowadays, citizen participation and collaboration amongst public and private stakeholders have become milestones in the planning realm.
it is obviously very hard to generate future visions with the support of a broad array of local stakeholders.
Second, the social debate inherent to urban planning and the need for stakeholder collaboration can be facilitated through a mutually beneficial symbiosis between futures studies and urban planning (Cole, 2001.
participatory methods that foster debate and analysis with a wide variety of stakeholders. 5. Networking.
innovative territorial strategies that can reconcile the viewpoints of a wide range of stakeholders. Third, it forms expert networks to exchange
and disseminate knowledge deriving from the foresight exercises amongst stakeholders and political decision-makers. In spite of the above-mentioned advantages, territorial foresight has clear limitations.
when there are deep disagreements between territorial stakeholders. Third, foresight is not a quick remedy for urgent problems
This first step should normally use qualitative tools that facilitate participation by stakeholders. 2. Determination of functional implications.
socioeconomic flows and local stakeholders. This step should be undertaken with semi-qualitative analytical tools and should be restricted mostly to urban experts. 3. Determination of parametric implications.
Nevertheless, the final product will be understood easily by stakeholders as well as the general public. 5. Strategy formulation. After determining all kinds of implications across the territorial system, the analyst should be able to perceive the gap between the proposed future vision and the present situation of the territory
Once again, this step requires involvement by stakeholders. Although this approach is not new in the strict sense,
and sectorialised because stakeholders'interests prevail over the basic sustainability criteria. The development process is dominated by hardcore elements such as transport and basic infrastructures.
frequent disputes between political, social and economic stakeholders hinder consensus. Horizontal elements such as legislation, technology and management are weak in the first stages of the planning stages,
B Build a governance model that is capable of effectively integrating politicians, stakeholders, social movements and citizens on an equal footing.
2009 More than 40 local stakeholders participated in the study through eight thematic groups and determined the scenario implications for the city's future development.
and stakeholders searching to respond to future challenges. A dynamic and sometimes turbulent environment puts enormous pressure on rational planning systems,
Make clear communications with sponsors and stakeholders. T. Fleischer et al.//Technological forecasting & Social Change 72 (2005) 1112 1121 1118 Besides this, a successful implementation of this concept could also help to overcome some of the argumentative asymmetries that can be found in many debates about chances
A focus on stakeholder interaction. The netherlands: Royal Tropical Institute. Feigenbaum, M. 1978. Quantitative universality for a class of nonlinear transformations.
and particular stakeholders, and sectors of society probabilistically to express their relevant uncertainties How to deepen dialogue with society How to improve governance Because of the dominant role of subjective opinion,
and the review article of Porter (2004) lists the nine families of foresight methods including quantitative and qualitative explorations and forms of stakeholder involvement.
ensuring more involvement of stakeholders and help to implement the policy (Harper et al. 2008). The special issue of Technology analysis & Strategic management in 2008 provides a good overview of these intended benefits.
as well as new networks among stakeholders Embedding participation in policymakkin Facilitating the participation of civil society in the policymakkin process,
Arenas of governance Foresight objective Priority-setting Networking Building visions Strategic orientation Macro policy priority-setting National/EU level stakeholders networks Overall political
level vision building Programming Programmes scientific priority-setting Programmes stakeholders networks Sectoral vision building, context of roadmaps Performing Research institutions strategic processes Research institutions
partners and stakeholders networks Research institutions first step in strategic process Source: Schoen et al. 2011). ) by universities and firms, the production, diffusion and transfer of knowledge;(
For direct stakeholders between these two positions, such as clients or prospective users, the uncertainty is relatively small:
as a means to involve stakeholders, or as tools to corroborate policy agendas. In companies, public organisations and in ministries foresight exercises are conducted for many reasons and with different effects.
because stakeholders may be new, but their contribution will draw from a more general repertoire (Nahuis and Van Lente 2008).
when it concerns stakeholders at distance from the knowledge production. Third, the sociology of expectations claims that estimates of the future are rooted deeply in the developments
to shareholders and to stakeholders within society, value has to be redefined. To do so, the research outlined in this paper builds upon a critical view of value creation and competitive advantage in both supply chain management and corporate social responsibility (CSR.
In this context, Section 2 outlines that current models responsible for moulding a business's competitive advantage sustainably are weak in the nature of stakeholders'involvement in strategic partnerships.
Hence, there is still a latent need to understand howother stakeholders can bring value to a firm
stakeholder dialogues; organisational change, fair and ethical negotiations; fair work conditions; training and education of human resources;
as well as monitoring the business and its stakeholders'performance. Operation performance: verifying and reporting the business performance improvement through established and specific indicators
which a firm creates products and services valuable to its stakeholders: value chain activities are divided into primary activitiie (physical creation of a product)
and interaction, being transparent and accountable to stakeholders (Brinch-Pedersen 2003). Hence, firms should use the evolutionary lessons as a main step in integrating sustainable development into the business model.
which stakeholders are perceived by one another and also the ways that they are involved in decision processes. In turn, these lead to further mutual experimentation and collaborative learning.
stakeholders can then identify their expectations and attach concrete meaning and actions to the business's values (Giversen 2003).
According to Losada (1999), high-performance teams need an inclusive dialogue approach for all stakeholders in the network.
which includes the need for an inclusive dialogue approach with all stakeholders in the network with FTA permeating all processes:
'and stakeholders'views of what the future might entail. It also considers where all actors see themselves both individually and collectively within these alternative futures.
opportunities and system capabilities, together with returns to stakeholders. In these ways, FTA can lead to the development of new (or enhanced) networks or linkages (stronger interactioons with the achievement of common ground, joint visions and enhanced responsiveness among the network members.
and proactive collaboration starts to be felt-Selection driver Is distributed quality coordination structure where structured collaboration starts to be felt-Stakeholders'engage
and engage with stakeholders Motivation Identify and define actions needed to enable the creation of motivation
The ability to communicate with different audiences (all stakeholders) and in diverse specific languages becomes critical in this context Competencies There is a latent importance of building an organisational culture that stimulates knowledge generation
to enable business networks 819 Appendix 4. Business broad management system Stages PDCA Cycle Meaning Stakeholders Participation Based on Inclusive Dialogue
all the cases dealt with topics that are likely to spur different interpretations among the actors and stakeholders.
we devise a means to help extract intelligence on key technology components and functions, major stakeholders,
and stakeholders (Step G). Convening a workshop with multiple perspectives can anchor Step G exploration of alternative innovation pathways.
eliciting information on stakeholders and potential applications from text mining (Steps D and E; and consolidating empirical
We developed this initial DSSC TDS by mining our database search results for leads on importaan stakeholders
Their expert workshops involve a wider spectrum of experts and stakeholders for a more extended interaction (e g. full day.
and reform of stakeholders'way of thinking. In the USA,‘‘A Strategy for American Innovation:
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,
and the necessary steps to move forward based on an overall perspective that integrates individual stakeholders'points-of-view.
effective alignment of stakeholders can be regarded as one of the prerequisites for national wealth and well-being.
2006) have investigated this area for science-based stakeholder dialogues. Their analysis is relevant because the motivation and the challenges of those dialogues tie in with those of transferring foresight results,
2006) contrast science-based stakeholder dialogues with other types of dialogues. In an overview, they cover:
B science-based stakeholder dialogues initiated by scientific institutions with the aim of increasing knowledge
PAGE 20 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 B multi-stakeholder dialogues for governance on an international level, for example in the environmental area;
and similar strategy processes and involve stakeholders from politics, academia, industry and society. The overall aim lies in making foresight results as usable and useful as possible in the work of research policy makers and in turning the transfer into an integral part of policy development.
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
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,
framing and structuring cannot be achieved in a single well-defined step it is an iterative process throughout the life of the dialogue To involve a wide range of stakeholders in a topic area that is initially rather fuzzy,
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.
stakeholder dialogues are considered as social learning processes Strategic dialogues lend themselves well to being described in terms of organizational learning.
Learning happens at multiple levels, both within groups of similar stakeholders and across groups. The‘‘dialogue''aspect is in line with the definition of Bohm (1996) who draws a clear distinction between‘‘discussion''as an exchange of views aimed at winning an argument
It also has a long-term effect in that stakeholders who have been involved in the dialogue change their thinking
stakeholders in industry and academia might be aware and receptive of them since they have had already a stake in shaping them PAGE 22 jforesight jvol. 15 NO. 1 2013 be discussed
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.
Stakeholders from academia might, for example include university departments, scientific networks, non-university research organizations, polytechnics, and academies.
Industry stakeholders may be small to medium-sized enterprises as well as global multinational companies, industry associations or research partnerships.
External stakeholders are being identified in the course of the process based on input from political stakeholders complemented by input from our own research as well as established networks into academia and industry.
In a heterogeneous field of stakeholders, contrarian interests and different value propositions might be encountered. Therefore, it is essential to create an atmosphere of mutual understanding where different perspectives are being honored amongst the stakeholders involved.
This can be achieved by neutral and experienced facilitation. Language problems and lack of trust can also become issues that require the intervention of an‘‘interpreter''and the conscious facilitation of cooperation leading to agreement on binding rules for all parties.
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:
Thus, a basic common understanding amongst political stakeholders of the topic and its challenges is achieved. Well-structured summaries based on desk research help to prepare the discussion
stakeholders need to be assured of our neutral role as facilitators of the process. However, stakeholders must not get the impression that the facilitator is‘‘on their side''.
''Again, we draw on insights from the Harvard Negotiation Project (Fisher and Ury, 1991. 4. 3 Step 3:
Furthermore, relevant activities in the field are mapped, such as pilot projects, existing networks and stakeholders in an international context.
The experts here are not necessarily stakeholders in the strategic dialogue but primarily sources of information.
Expansion towards external stakeholders Based on the collected information from various sources the issues to be addressed in the further course of the process can be expressed with greater precision.
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
their ability to add a unique perspective, their openness to consider and explore a broad range of possibilities and viewpoints,
Scenarios and exploration in depth Given that future-looking activities of the BMBF often span time periods of ten to 20 years it can be fruitful to engage all stakeholders in building normative and/or exploratory scenarios as a guide and framework
and a half days) that stakeholders can afford to spend on supporting policy making in this way.
B A heterogeneous set of stakeholders within and outside the BMBF with different agendas, value systems, interests and communication practices has been brought together
B The potential lack of experience amongst stakeholders in dealing with other parties who have a different background
B Conflicts between stakeholders have been resolved with proven techniques such as the Mutual Gains approach applied by a facilitator.
Because of the wide involvement of stakeholders up to this point policy initiatives are highly likely to meet stakeholder requirements
and ultimately achieve their goals. 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,
and is supported by all stakeholders in the BMBF. Most recently, a workshop with 65 stakeholder representatives was conducted (step 6). The objectives of the workshop were:
B generating concrete topics with a need for further research and development and with high potential that have not sufficiently been addressed by governmental support so far;
B defining necessary prerequisites and requirements for additional cooperation from the perspective of external stakeholders;
A range of views on numerous aspects of cooperation models was collected from selected stakeholders from academia
B a careful selection and engagement of stakeholders considering their potential contribution, their role in developing research policy,
Also, they result in the creation of new informal VOL. 15 NO. 1 2013 jforesight jpage 27 networks within the BMBF, between BMBF units and external stakeholders,
and among external stakeholders. These networks persist beyond the end of the actual dialogue and can facilitate the interplay of actors in research as well as research policy.
Welp, M.,de la Vega-Leinert, A.,Stoll-Kleemann, S. and Jaeger, C. C. 2006),‘Science-based stakeholder dialogues:
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011