Adopting Diverse Perspectives in the Fostering of Innovation Activities

Although foresight has often supported shared vision-building and generic priority-setting, it can also foster diversity in perspectives, collaborative relations and ideas on innovations. While such diversity can be supported by soliciting weak signals from different stakeholders, the mere mapping of weak signals may result in an extensive set of fragmental issues that are difficult to compare and interpret in terms of suggested actions. In contrast, novel ideas about prospective innovations can be viewed as more focused and action-oriented reflections of weak signals which can be more readily interpreted in the context of innovation processes. In this paper, we describe a novel foresight method for the Internet-based generation and multi-criteria evaluation of innovation ideas; we also report experiences from a pilot project where this method was employed in the Finnish Foresight Forum established by the Finnish Ministry of Trade and Industry. Specifically, the method provides a systemic anonymous process which fosters col-laborative work among multiple stakeholder groups (eg, researchers, industrialists, administrators, users, students). It consists of (i) the generation of innovation ideas, (ii) mutual commenting and elaboration, (iii) evaluation of ideas with regard to the several criteria (eg novelty, feasibility and societal relevance), and (iv) multi-criteria portfolio analysis towards the identification of most inter-esting ideas. The encouraging results from the pilot project suggest that this kind of an Internet-based process can foster diversity within innovation activities.

[1]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Preference programming for robust portfolio modeling and project selection , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  Totti Könnölä,et al.  Prospective voluntary agreements for escaping techno-institutional lock-in , 2006 .

[3]  Weblog Wikipedia,et al.  In Wikipedia the Free Encyclopedia , 2005 .

[4]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Emergent foresight processes: industrial activities in wireless communications , 2004, Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

[5]  Totti Könnölä,et al.  Responsiveness in foresight management: reflections from the Finnish food and drink industry , 2004 .

[6]  Ahti Salo,et al.  A group support system for foresight processes , 2004 .

[7]  Jari Kaivo-oja,et al.  Wild cards, weak signals and organisational improvisation , 2004 .

[8]  M. Meyer,et al.  Technological generalizations and leitbilder—the anticipation of technological opportunities , 2002 .

[9]  Gregory C. Unruh Escaping carbon lock-in , 2002 .

[10]  D. Kline,et al.  Positive feedback, lock-in, and environmental policy , 2001 .

[11]  James P. Kahan,et al.  Experiences with National Technology Foresight Studies , 2001 .

[12]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Incentives in technology foresight , 2001, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[13]  Gregory C. Unruh Understanding carbon lock-in , 2000 .

[14]  Keith Smith Innovation as a Systemic Phenomenon: Rethinking the Role of Policy , 2000 .

[15]  Osmo Kuusi Teknologisen kehityksen heikot signaalit , 1999 .

[16]  Ben R. Martin,et al.  Technology foresight for wiring up the national innovation system: experiences in Britain, Australia and New Zealand , 1999 .

[17]  Jeffrey Katz Winning Through Innovation , 1997 .

[18]  D. North Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance: Economic performance , 1990 .

[19]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technical Change and Economic Theory , 1989 .

[20]  O. Wells,et al.  Picking winners. , 1987, Journal of medical engineering & technology.

[21]  B. Martin,et al.  Foresight in Science: Picking the Winners , 1984 .

[22]  Olaf Helmer,et al.  Looking Forward: A Guide to Futures Research , 1983 .

[23]  H. Ansoff,et al.  Managing Strategic Surprise by Response to Weak Signals , 1975 .