10. Modes of Strategic Policy Learning (partly based on Ken Guy, 2006) Policy development Parallell activities: Intelligent benchmarking etc. Future options: Foresight etc. Past experience: Impact analysis, History etc. Current context: Policy analysis, structure and dynamics
11. Source: APEC Center for Technology Foresight Futures Studies Strategic Planning Policy Development Foresight The Foundations of Foresight
12.
13. T he Johari Window KNOWN KNOWNS UNKNOWN KNOWNS KNOWN UNKNOWNS UNKNOWN UNKNOWNS Knowledge management e nvironment scanning trends imagination S trategic planning Foresight
14. The generic foresight process framework inputs analysis interpretation prospection outputs strategy Foresight Source : Voros (2003) Strategic intelligence scanning, Delphi Emerging issues/trends analysis Systems thinking, Causal Layered Analysis Scenarios, visioning, backcasts, roadmaps Reports, presentations, workshops, multimedia Strategy development & strategic planning: individual, workgroup, organisation, society, etc.
15. Global Strategic Trends Source: Global Strategic Trends – Out to 2040, Ministry of Defence UK (2010)
27. what might happen – need to understand this your vision – need to create this
28.
29.
30.
31. Causes … urbanization, rapid development, economic growth ( Solution: telecommuting or use mobile phones , Actors: corporations, int’l agencies )
32. Worldview … Industrialism, Big City Outlook, Colonialism ( Solution: transform development model, deep decentralization, focus on agriculture , Actors: public intellectuals, social movements )
39. Expert A Expert B Foresight Committee moderator anonymity answer answer feedback feedback x (Expert Panel) Foresight Committee
40. Consensus through Delphi Planning of social services for the elderly - seeking opinions of community- and hospital-based doctors about seriousness and prevalence of health problems From Delphi Techniques and the Planning of Social Services - The Prevention of Dependency Among the Old (Giovanni Bertin)
65. Realization of Past Forecasts of the Japanese Delphi conducted every five years after 1970 In 1996, the Sixth survey assessed the first and second surveys
71. Policy Delphi The same 3 key features apply: anonymity / iteration / controlled feedback Example: “Government should bear the burden of health care across the population by providing 100% financial support to ensure universal and equitable access to services.” Desirability assessment very desirable desirable undesirable very undesirable 1 2 3 4 Feasibility assessment definitely possibly probably not definitely not 1 2 3 4 Importance assessment very important important not very important completely_ _unimportant 1 2 3 4
90. “ Effect of uncertainty on objectives” ISO 31000:2009 - Perception that something could happen. - Likelihood of something happening. - Consequences if it does happen. RISK
103. Evolution of technology roadmapping 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Strategic planning Co-evolution Roadmapping approach supports integrated strategic planning Take up in electronics sector, defence and aerospace Semiconductor Technology Roadmap Take up in other sectors - companies - consortia - government Motorola develops technology roadmapping approach Forecasting Policy Foresight Futures & Scenario planning Science fiction 1997 Fast-start Generalisation Customisation Cambridge
104. Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, emi-web.inel.gov/roadmap/factsheet.pdf VISION PRESENT
105. A Technology Roadmap Links the future to present, and resources to market/applications Where do we want to go? Where are we now? How can we get there? Source: Centre for Technology Management, University of Cambridge Time Market M 1 M 2 Product P 1 P 2 P 3 P 4 Technology T 1 T 3 T 4 T 2 R&D programmes RD 1 RD 2 RD 4 RD 6 RD 3 RD 5 Resources Capital investment / finance Staff / skills Supply chain
106. Foresight Vehicle technology roadmap: architecture Time Market / Industry drivers Performance measures and targets Technical Group areas +5 years Now Vision +10 years +15 years S T E E P I +20 years Trends drivers, key issues and uncertainties Evolution of required and desirable functional performance of road transport systems of the future Required and desired technological response, including research requirements
112. LIQUID FUELS (conventional oil bitumen and heavy oil) Electricity And Heat 2005 2010 2030 GAS FUELS Electricity and Heat from renewable and gas fuels Stationary Transportation 2020 Biofuels GTL CG OIL BIOMASS NG Hydrogen LNG Renewable and Alternate Coal Gasification Coal bed methane Gas Hydrates
133. Three Scenarios TPA Corp. Concentrate on profit making activities, RBM, CEO, less synergy Value of Non-Profit Organization (NPO) From association to foundation, new dimension for learning, synergy and teamwork, Prime Minister’s Price in International Cooperation for NPO New Synergy Competition from universities, synergy spear-headed by consultancy, practical solution provider, expansion of service to provinces, closer relationship with China
134.
135. Should TPA become a private company since some of its operations are making profit?
W e are a group of practitioners (e.g. SWOT is given a bad name because mostly it fails in practice O ur strength is management skill W e train people CDG case is our return customer
T he role of foresight: Foresight is about creating insights , not information. A tool for policy learning. Strong overlap/synergy with other modes of policy learning.
T his chart explains how foresight is different from conventional strategic planning
Note possible loops of feedback throughout the process
It’s 2020, and India has been spectacularly successful in improving the quality of its water treatment systems. The Ganges, India’s sacred river, has benefited from this progress — as two students from England discover...
"Project Delphi" was the name given to a US Air Force-sponsored Rand Corporation study, starting in the early 1950's, concerning the use of expert opinion . The objective of the original study was to "obtain the most reliable consensus of opinion of a group of experts ... by a series of intensive questionnaires interspersed with controlled opinion feedback." Delphi may be characterized as a method for structuring a group communication process so that the process is effective in allowing a group of individuals, as a whole, to deal with a complex problem . Often, among a panel of geographically dispersed experts. The name Delphi was never a term with which the founders of the method were particularly happy. It was rather unfortunate that the set of procedures developed at RAND Corporation, and designed to improve methods of forecasting, came to be known as Delphi. The term implies something oracular, something occult, whereas precisely the opposite is involved; it is primarily concerned with making the best you can of a less than perfect fund of information. In 1969 the number of Delphi studies that had been done could be counted in three digits; today, in 1974, the figure may have already reached four digits.
The roadmap architecture is shown here, with a 20 year forward time horizon, comprising the following 3 broad layers: Market and industry drivers: the broad social, technological, economic, environmental and political trends and drivers that influence the automotive sector. The STEEPI factors were used to structure this layer. Performance measures and targets for the road transport system. The STEEPI factors were used to structure this layer, but with the Infrastructure replaced by ‘System’, on the basis that the remit of Foresight Vehicle does not include infrastructure, which is the responsibility of the Highways Agency in the UK. However, it is important to consider the road transport network as a system, including its interfaces with other systems, as some performance measures only make sense at the systems level. For example, being able to predict arrival time accurately depends on many different factors and sub-systems. Technology areas that can support the development of road vehicles, in response to the trends and drivers, and required road transport system performance. The Technology layer divided into five sub-layers, on the basis of existing Thematic Group activity within the Foresight Vehicle consortium: Engine & powertrain; Hybrid, electric & alternatively fuelled vehicles; Advanced software, sensors, electronics & telematics; Advanced structures & materials; and Design & manufacturing processes.
Version 1.0 of the Foresight Vehicle Technology Roadmap was published in 2002, as the final output of a project that involved 10 one-day workshops over a period of 10 months, bringing together a total of more than 130 participants representing more than 60 organisations from across the UK. The process involved the following steps: The first workshop (part of the Planning stage) was similar to the traditional ‘fast-start’ approach, covering the full scope of the Foresight Vehicle domain, providing an opportunity to test the concepts and techniques that would be deployed over the coming months. The second workshop focused on the top layer of the roadmap (market and industry trends & drivers). This was supplemented by desk research, incorporating published information (trends, forecasts and legislation). The third workshop focused on the middle layer of the roadmap (performance measures & targets for the road transport system). This was supplemented by additional desk research, incorporating published information (trends, forecasts and legislation). This was followed by a consultation workshop, involving a wider set of the Foresight Vehicle consortium, to test and refine the top two layers of the roadmap, prior to exploring technology. A set of five technology workshops, to identifying key technologies (and their evolution), in response to the trends, drivers, targets and performance measures identified in the previous workshops (as expressed in the top two layers of the roadmap), together with research priorities. A final workshop focused on synthesising the various components of the roadmap, and validating the emerging report. The final report was published in September 2002, as Version 1.0 of the roadmap. The roadmap was given a version number to demonstrate that it was still work-in-progress, and to encourage Version 2 to be developed.
A lot of information was gathered during the the Foresight Vehicle technology roadmapping project, and developing this to a level of quality and format that was suitable for publication was a challenge. The raw data collected in the workshops was ‘tidied up’, to ensure that each item of information was coherent, and where possible linked to a published source (e.g. forecast or legislation). The positioning of information was improved, in terms of timing, and also sub-themes. This diagram shows the final output from the first workshop (market and industry trends & drivers), for the ‘Social’ theme. Sub-themes are shown using colour. The information includes a vision statement, an assessment of the current position, a range of different forecasts, which represent the uncertainties associated with the future (for example, when oil demand might outstrip supply), together with some speculation and key questions. These ‘rich picture’ views represent more of a ‘landscape’ than a roadmap, in that clear routes to the future are not clear. This is necessary because the context within which industry, academia and government must innovate and act is complex, and there are many different stakeholders involved with many different aspirations and priorities. The set of ‘rich picture’ diagrams (28 in all) represent the lowest level of information in the roadmap (the finest level of granularity), and are included in the Appendices of the Roadmap as a resource.
A small part of the middle layer of the roadmap is shown here - the social aspects of the performance measures and targets for the road transport system.