Assessing immediate learning impacts of large foresight processes

Abstract

Purpose -Foresight often encompasses participative approaches for decision making. This paper aims to give a first overview of the authors' research on immediate learning and networking in the context of foresight. The paper seeks to introduce a practical concept for an accompanying social research of a participatory foresight process for empirically identifying and mapping impacts; and to present empirical results from the study of a specific foresight process.Design/methodology/approach -The authors apply three approaches to analyze impacts. Accordingly data were gathered in moderated workshops for process analysis; structured telephone interviews for qualitative analysis; and surveys for social network analysis.Findings -The accompanying social research produced direct insights on experiences and knowledge acquisition of participants in a large, complex foresight process, as well as a measurable increase of personal ties in this process. This research shows that the perception of the wider spectrum of actors in a social system, as well as their rationales and approaches, are one identifiable and crucial achievement of participative foresight processes.Research limitations/implications -This research focuses on immediate learning impacts, while additional impacts of mid-or longer-term scales were not captured in this study. Accompanying social research (e.g. longitudinal studies) of broader scale would be beneficial to foresight research and process design.Originality/value -The authors use a specific foresight process to analyze its immediate impacts. They introduce and demonstrate ways forward to use practical concepts for impact description, empirical data acquisition, and how it relates to underlying process design. The results are relevant for foresight project managers, process counselors and accompanying social research.

Metodologia de avaliação para projetos de prospectiva estratégica a partir do conceito de topologia da teoria ator-rede: painel de avaliação como espaço relacional

“…Piirainen, Gonzales e Bragge (2012), sugerem uma avaliação sistêmica para pesquisa em futuros composta de três níveis: utilidade/entrega, técnico e ético, sendo que há perguntas de avaliação para as fases pré-atividade, pós-atividade e avaliação de longo prazo. Schartinger et al (2012), olham para o curto prazo sugerindo avaliar o aprendizado como impacto imediato em grandes e complexos processos de prospecção; demonstram a possibilidade de utilizar a análise de redes sociais como método quantitativo para determinar o aumento de aprendizado. Sokolova e Marakova (2013) sugerem uma abordagem integrada para a avaliação de prospecção e destacam como fatores chaves para a avaliação os objetivos, a equipe do projeto, o cliente, os stakeholders, a metodologia, a organização, os recursos, os resultados e os impactos.…”

“…Para uma avaliação geral do processo de prospecção, três temas podem orientar a avaliação: accountability, justificativa e aprendizado ou, na ordem, avaliação da eficiência, avaliação dos efeitos e avaliação da melhoria do processo (POTERALSKA e SACIO-SZYMANSKA, 2013). Além disso, uma vez que os projetos de prospecção são uma possibilidade de auxiliar no processo de tomada de decisão de empresas e governos porque possibilitam estratégias antecipatórias, a questão do impacto imediato do aprendizado, bem como a formação de redes, são variáveis a serem avaliadas (SCHARTINGER et al, 2012).…”

Foresight evaluation: lessons from project management

“…Methods applied for impact assessment depend on its types (immediate, intermediate, ultimate; on system or on individuals, etc.) (Schartinger et al, 2012) as well as on generation of evaluated foresight study .Four types of impacts (including awareness raising, informing, enabling and influencing) form a foresight impact schema (Johnston, 2012). For the purpose of impact evaluation, researchers determined several directions of the most considerable foresight influence.…”

Praktikabilität und Leistungsfähigkeit von E-Health-Anwendungen bei der Erhebung von Patient Reported Outcomes: Forschungsstand und -bedarf

“…Unter Berücksichtigung der bereits beschriebenen Um setzungskomplexitäten stellt sich auch aus rein informatischer Sicht die zentrale Frage nach den zukünftigen technischen Herausforde rungen von ePROErhebungen[40]. Kommt die ITgestützte Erhe bung methodisch und forschungspraktisch in Frage, kann bei der frühen Programmierung der nutzerfreundlichen Eingabemaske zu nächst auf Erfahrungen aus dem Bereich der Patientenbefragung MeSH-basierte Recherche I: (electronic) patient reported outcomes OR electronic measurement of QoL AND acceptance OR feasibility OR practicability OR reliability OR validity OR willingness OR hurdles MeSH-basierte Recherche II: (electronic) patient reported outcomes OR electronic measurement of QoL AND (technical) implementation MeSH-basierte Recherche III: (electronic) patient reported outcomes OR electronic measurement of QoL AND regulation AND requirements PRISMADiagramm zur Literaturrecherche[61].im Rahmen der Qualitätssicherung[40][41][42][43][44][45], des PublicReporting[40] und der eEntscheidungsunterstützung[41,42] zurückgegrif fen werden. Aspekte der Usability, also der Verständlichkeit und Eindeutigkeit und der geeigneten Nutzerführung, definieren die Eignung des elektronischen Erhebungsinstruments[43].…”

“…Auch die berichteten praktischen Erfahrungen großer epidemiologischer Studien, die bereits Touchscreen und webbasierte Fragebögen für die Probandenerhebung integrieren, bieten eine gute Basis für die notwendige technische Weiterentwicklung. Eine ausreichende Eva luation der ePROInstrumente wird nach der technischen Entwick lung jedoch unverzichtbar sein, da bisher kaum Erfahrungen zur Umsetzung bei der Erhebung von PRO bestehen[40][41][42][43][44][45].…”