Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight
Technology roadmapping has become an important foresight tool for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy and technology strategy development. There are, however, challenges in translating evidence from foresight into the strategies of STI agencies and the planning of research & technol...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Foresight and STI governance 2021-01, Vol.15 (2), p.65-81 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 81 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 65 |
container_title | Foresight and STI governance |
container_volume | 15 |
creator | O’Sullivan, Eoin Phaal, Rob Featherston, Charles |
description | Technology roadmapping has become an important foresight tool for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy and technology strategy development. There are, however, challenges in translating evidence from foresight into the strategies of STI agencies and the planning of research & technology development (RTD) organizations. While the foresight evaluation literature identifies methodological issues related to evidence granularity, scope, and stakeholder confidence, there is limited guidance on how to ensure roadmapping outputs are strategically relevant, appropriately detailed, and credible. This paper highlights the potential of using structured visual roadmapping frameworks to anticipate potential strategic foresight evidence failures and using the adaptive and iterative nature of roadmapping processes to address them. In this paper, we distinguish between: the roadmapping framework ‘canvas’; the foresight evidence captured on the canvas; the process of generating the evidence; and any final strategic plan developed using that evidence (with goals, milestones, actions, etc). We investigate efforts to use the roadmapping canvas as a research tool and diagnostic to explore emerging technology trajectories and innovation ‘pathways’. We demonstrate that key patterns of evidence distribution on the roadmapping canvas have the potential to reveal where further evidence may need to be gathered, or where further triangulation of stakeholder perspectives may be required. We argue that by adaptively addressing these patterns at key stages within the roadmapping process (and appropriately re-scoping, re-prioritizing, and re-focusing foresight effort and resources), the granularity, coverage, and consensus of the roadmapping evidence can be greatly enhanced. We conclude the paper by summarizing a set of novel principles for adaptive agile roadmapping, reflecting on the implications for foresight more generally, and outlining a future research agenda to test and refine this approach to agile foresight. |
doi_str_mv | 10.17323/2500-2597.2021.2.65.81 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2545945153</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2545945153</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-9437daf16140edf47e20963f864e43e893ae4a82e839bf9e6092bcaf22d71bc73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpNkF9LwzAUxYMoOOY-gwGfW5Obf40vUoZTYSDIfA5Zm3QdW1OTTti3t3MiPp0D53Du5YfQLSU5VQzYPQhCMhBa5UCA5pBLkRf0Ak3-gst__hrNUtoSQkBQYEpO0GPZtDuH34Ot97bv2655wGWHy9r2Q_vlcNn3Mdhqg4eAV67adGEXmiNehOhS22yGG3Tl7S652a9O0cfiaTV_yZZvz6_zcplVjPEh05yp2noqKSeu9lw5IFoyX0juOHOFZtZxW4ArmF577STRsK6sB6gVXVeKTdHdeXd85_Pg0mC24RC78aQBwYXmggo2ttS5VcWQUnTe9LHd23g0lJgfYObEwpxYmBMwA0YKU1D2DU6xXLI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2545945153</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><creator>O’Sullivan, Eoin ; Phaal, Rob ; Featherston, Charles</creator><creatorcontrib>O’Sullivan, Eoin ; Phaal, Rob ; Featherston, Charles ; University of Cambridge ; UK Government Office of Science</creatorcontrib><description>Technology roadmapping has become an important foresight tool for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy and technology strategy development. There are, however, challenges in translating evidence from foresight into the strategies of STI agencies and the planning of research & technology development (RTD) organizations. While the foresight evaluation literature identifies methodological issues related to evidence granularity, scope, and stakeholder confidence, there is limited guidance on how to ensure roadmapping outputs are strategically relevant, appropriately detailed, and credible. This paper highlights the potential of using structured visual roadmapping frameworks to anticipate potential strategic foresight evidence failures and using the adaptive and iterative nature of roadmapping processes to address them. In this paper, we distinguish between: the roadmapping framework ‘canvas’; the foresight evidence captured on the canvas; the process of generating the evidence; and any final strategic plan developed using that evidence (with goals, milestones, actions, etc). We investigate efforts to use the roadmapping canvas as a research tool and diagnostic to explore emerging technology trajectories and innovation ‘pathways’. We demonstrate that key patterns of evidence distribution on the roadmapping canvas have the potential to reveal where further evidence may need to be gathered, or where further triangulation of stakeholder perspectives may be required. We argue that by adaptively addressing these patterns at key stages within the roadmapping process (and appropriately re-scoping, re-prioritizing, and re-focusing foresight effort and resources), the granularity, coverage, and consensus of the roadmapping evidence can be greatly enhanced. We conclude the paper by summarizing a set of novel principles for adaptive agile roadmapping, reflecting on the implications for foresight more generally, and outlining a future research agenda to test and refine this approach to agile foresight.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2500-2597</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2500-2597</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.17323/2500-2597.2021.2.65.81</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Moscow: National Research University Higher School of Economics</publisher><subject>Stakeholders ; Strategic planning ; Technological planning ; Trends</subject><ispartof>Foresight and STI governance, 2021-01, Vol.15 (2), p.65-81</ispartof><rights>Copyright National Research University Higher School of Economics 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-9437daf16140edf47e20963f864e43e893ae4a82e839bf9e6092bcaf22d71bc73</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27903,27904</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>O’Sullivan, Eoin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phaal, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Featherston, Charles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Cambridge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>UK Government Office of Science</creatorcontrib><title>Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight</title><title>Foresight and STI governance</title><description>Technology roadmapping has become an important foresight tool for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy and technology strategy development. There are, however, challenges in translating evidence from foresight into the strategies of STI agencies and the planning of research & technology development (RTD) organizations. While the foresight evaluation literature identifies methodological issues related to evidence granularity, scope, and stakeholder confidence, there is limited guidance on how to ensure roadmapping outputs are strategically relevant, appropriately detailed, and credible. This paper highlights the potential of using structured visual roadmapping frameworks to anticipate potential strategic foresight evidence failures and using the adaptive and iterative nature of roadmapping processes to address them. In this paper, we distinguish between: the roadmapping framework ‘canvas’; the foresight evidence captured on the canvas; the process of generating the evidence; and any final strategic plan developed using that evidence (with goals, milestones, actions, etc). We investigate efforts to use the roadmapping canvas as a research tool and diagnostic to explore emerging technology trajectories and innovation ‘pathways’. We demonstrate that key patterns of evidence distribution on the roadmapping canvas have the potential to reveal where further evidence may need to be gathered, or where further triangulation of stakeholder perspectives may be required. We argue that by adaptively addressing these patterns at key stages within the roadmapping process (and appropriately re-scoping, re-prioritizing, and re-focusing foresight effort and resources), the granularity, coverage, and consensus of the roadmapping evidence can be greatly enhanced. We conclude the paper by summarizing a set of novel principles for adaptive agile roadmapping, reflecting on the implications for foresight more generally, and outlining a future research agenda to test and refine this approach to agile foresight.</description><subject>Stakeholders</subject><subject>Strategic planning</subject><subject>Technological planning</subject><subject>Trends</subject><issn>2500-2597</issn><issn>2500-2597</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNpNkF9LwzAUxYMoOOY-gwGfW5Obf40vUoZTYSDIfA5Zm3QdW1OTTti3t3MiPp0D53Du5YfQLSU5VQzYPQhCMhBa5UCA5pBLkRf0Ak3-gst__hrNUtoSQkBQYEpO0GPZtDuH34Ot97bv2655wGWHy9r2Q_vlcNn3Mdhqg4eAV67adGEXmiNehOhS22yGG3Tl7S652a9O0cfiaTV_yZZvz6_zcplVjPEh05yp2noqKSeu9lw5IFoyX0juOHOFZtZxW4ArmF577STRsK6sB6gVXVeKTdHdeXd85_Pg0mC24RC78aQBwYXmggo2ttS5VcWQUnTe9LHd23g0lJgfYObEwpxYmBMwA0YKU1D2DU6xXLI</recordid><startdate>20210101</startdate><enddate>20210101</enddate><creator>O’Sullivan, Eoin</creator><creator>Phaal, Rob</creator><creator>Featherston, Charles</creator><general>National Research University Higher School of Economics</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210101</creationdate><title>Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight</title><author>O’Sullivan, Eoin ; Phaal, Rob ; Featherston, Charles</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-9437daf16140edf47e20963f864e43e893ae4a82e839bf9e6092bcaf22d71bc73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Stakeholders</topic><topic>Strategic planning</topic><topic>Technological planning</topic><topic>Trends</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>O’Sullivan, Eoin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phaal, Rob</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Featherston, Charles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Cambridge</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>UK Government Office of Science</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Foresight and STI governance</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>O’Sullivan, Eoin</au><au>Phaal, Rob</au><au>Featherston, Charles</au><aucorp>University of Cambridge</aucorp><aucorp>UK Government Office of Science</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight</atitle><jtitle>Foresight and STI governance</jtitle><date>2021-01-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>65</spage><epage>81</epage><pages>65-81</pages><issn>2500-2597</issn><eissn>2500-2597</eissn><abstract>Technology roadmapping has become an important foresight tool for science, technology, and innovation (STI) policy and technology strategy development. There are, however, challenges in translating evidence from foresight into the strategies of STI agencies and the planning of research & technology development (RTD) organizations. While the foresight evaluation literature identifies methodological issues related to evidence granularity, scope, and stakeholder confidence, there is limited guidance on how to ensure roadmapping outputs are strategically relevant, appropriately detailed, and credible. This paper highlights the potential of using structured visual roadmapping frameworks to anticipate potential strategic foresight evidence failures and using the adaptive and iterative nature of roadmapping processes to address them. In this paper, we distinguish between: the roadmapping framework ‘canvas’; the foresight evidence captured on the canvas; the process of generating the evidence; and any final strategic plan developed using that evidence (with goals, milestones, actions, etc). We investigate efforts to use the roadmapping canvas as a research tool and diagnostic to explore emerging technology trajectories and innovation ‘pathways’. We demonstrate that key patterns of evidence distribution on the roadmapping canvas have the potential to reveal where further evidence may need to be gathered, or where further triangulation of stakeholder perspectives may be required. We argue that by adaptively addressing these patterns at key stages within the roadmapping process (and appropriately re-scoping, re-prioritizing, and re-focusing foresight effort and resources), the granularity, coverage, and consensus of the roadmapping evidence can be greatly enhanced. We conclude the paper by summarizing a set of novel principles for adaptive agile roadmapping, reflecting on the implications for foresight more generally, and outlining a future research agenda to test and refine this approach to agile foresight.</abstract><cop>Moscow</cop><pub>National Research University Higher School of Economics</pub><doi>10.17323/2500-2597.2021.2.65.81</doi><tpages>17</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2500-2597 |
ispartof | Foresight and STI governance, 2021-01, Vol.15 (2), p.65-81 |
issn | 2500-2597 2500-2597 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2545945153 |
source | DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals |
subjects | Stakeholders Strategic planning Technological planning Trends |
title | Agile Roadmapping: An Adaptive Approach to Technology Foresight |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T01%3A01%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Agile%20Roadmapping:%20An%20Adaptive%20Approach%20to%20Technology%20Foresight&rft.jtitle=Foresight%20and%20STI%20governance&rft.au=O%E2%80%99Sullivan,%20Eoin&rft.aucorp=University%20of%20Cambridge&rft.date=2021-01-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=65&rft.epage=81&rft.pages=65-81&rft.issn=2500-2597&rft.eissn=2500-2597&rft_id=info:doi/10.17323/2500-2597.2021.2.65.81&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2545945153%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2545945153&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |