FORwiki - New pages [en] http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Special:NewPages From FORwiki en MediaWiki 1.14.0 Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:54:54 GMT Vision of the Crowds http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Vision_of_the_Crowds <p>Dan Grosu: </p> <hr /> <div> {| class=&quot;wpb collapsible innercollapse tmbox tmbox-notice {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|mbox-small}}&quot;<br /> |- class=&quot;wpb-header&quot;<br /> ! colspan=&quot;2&quot; class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | [[Project Visions and Visioning]]<br /> |-<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-image&quot; | [[File:Vision.jpg]]<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | This article is developed within the scope of the '''[[Project Visions and Visioning]]''', an effort to enhance Foresight learning through collaborative work.<br /> |}&lt;noinclude&gt;<br /> [[Category: Project banners|eLearning2.0]] <br /> &lt;/noinclude&gt;<br /> <br /> '''Vision of the Crowds''' is the forth lecture from a module on [[Project Visions and Visioning|Visions and Visioning]], first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).<br /> <br /> === Proiectus (latin) ===<br /> <br /> perfect passive participle of proicio<br /> from pro (“from, in the place of; for”) + ioacio (“throw, hurl”)<br /> I send forth, emit<br /> I bring forth, produce<br /> <br /> === Participatory Models ===<br /> <br /> ==== consensus conference ====<br /> <br /> a public meeting, which allows ordinary citizens to be involved in the assessment of technology - a dialogue between experts and citizens, open to the public and the media<br /> consensus on attitudes and recommendations is achieved through open discussion<br /> the conference provides politicians with information, which they normally do not have, either from the media nor from the experts themselves – there are limitations of expert knowledge and biases involved in experts’ assessment<br /> <br /> ===== actors =====<br /> <br /> the citizen panel <br /> plays the leading role<br /> it consists of about 14 people who are introduced to the topic by a professional facilitator<br /> formulates the questions to be taken up at the conference<br /> participates in the selection of experts to answer them<br /> has two weekends for this preparation<br /> the expert panel <br /> selected in a way that ensures that essential opposing views and professional conflicts can emerge and be discussed at the conference<br /> good experts, open-minded, good communicators, with an overview<br /> of their field<br /> advisory committee <br /> makes sure that all rules of a democratic, fair and transparent process have been followed<br /> <br /> ===== script =====<br /> <br /> day 1 - experts present their answers to the questions from the citizen panel, from the point of view of their field of expertise<br /> day 2 – morning: clarifying questions and discussions between the expert panel, the citizen panel and the audience; - afternoon: the citizen panel works on a final document, presenting their conclusions and recommendations<br /> day 3 - the citizen panel prepares the final document<br /> day 4 - the citizen panel reads the final document to experts and audience, including the press<br /> experts have the opportunity to correct misunderstandings and factual errors, but at this point they are not allowed to influence the views of the citizen panel<br /> <br /> ===== consensus =====<br /> <br /> only relevant in relation to that envisaged among the members of the citizen panel<br /> concerning the selection and formulation of main questions to be asked of the experts (i.e. the agenda for the whole conference)<br /> concerning conclusions and recommendations in the final document<br /> these are the decisive steps - the points when the panel is confronted with the outside world: press, experts, audience and so on<br /> sometimes the consesual conclusions are controversial according to other groups in society<br /> in all consensus conferences there have also been moments of conflict and sometimes negotiations until late in the night regarding one or more recommendations<br /> <br /> ==== negotiation workshop ====<br /> <br /> objective<br /> to select m statements, balanced among k categories, from a larger set of n visionary statements (m&lt;n) <br /> on the final list of m statements there should be statements from each one of the k categories<br /> preliminaries<br /> a large number of statements about the future are collected through interviews and on-line surveys<br /> they are grouped and merged into n visionary statements, and the n visionary statements are further grouped into k clusters <br /> participants <br /> 60-100 citizens, representing a diversity of societal actors: research system, policy-makers, public administration, private interests, civic society.<br /> <br /> ===== script =====<br /> <br /> organizers are forming k/2 heterogeneous groups, including participants with diverse affiliations<br /> groups are created according to each participant's interest for the topics of two clusters from the total of k clusters. <br /> groups select approximately m/2 statements from each one of the two clusters they are analyzing - at the end of the first session, each group will identify a list of m visionary statements from the two clusters<br /> representatives of each group present their selected list in a short plenary session. <br /> each group analyzes the lists selected by other groups, identifies possible trade-offs, and proposes an alternative for the final list of m statements<br /> representatives of each group negotiate the final list of m statements<br /> the final list is presented during a short plenary session<br /> <br /> [[File:NegotiationWS.png]]<br /> <br /> ===== lessons =====<br /> <br /> the script is based on a negotiation formula that proved its efectiveness in international negotiations<br /> consequently, it is not intuitive and quite difficult to implement<br /> quality facilitation during group meetings is a must<br /> <br /> ==== scenario workshop ====<br /> <br /> starts with a problem looking for solutions - technological, regulatory or maybe a new way of organising and managing certain problems<br /> is a local meeting that includes dialogue among four local groups of actors: policy-makers, business representatives, experts and citizens<br /> participants carry out assessments of technological and non-technological solutions to the problems, and develop visions for future solutions and proposals for realising them<br /> <br /> ===== script =====<br /> <br /> before the workshop can take place, a set of scenarios is written, describing alternative ways of solving the problem <br /> they have to be different with respect to both the technical and organisational solutions described and the social and political values embedded in them<br /> in the workshop, the scenarios are used as an inspiration in the process<br /> participants are asked to criticise and comment to enable them to develop visions of their own<br /> the workshop process <br /> may last for one or two days<br /> three principal steps<br /> to comment and criticise the scenarios by pointing out barriers to realising the visions; <br /> to develop the participants’ own visions and proposals; <br /> to develop plans of action<br /> <br /> ==== incasting ====<br /> <br /> Goal: Elaborate fixed, multiple scenarios<br /> Characteristics:<br /> Easiest for client/audience participation because scenario kernels/logics are done for them<br /> Provides in-depth elaboration of alternative scenarios<br /> Generic scenario kernels/logics might not be relevant to client/audience; therefore less buy-in<br /> Many have an intuitive sense of the best-case and worst-case scenarios already; filling in the cells of the matrix with many rows (domains/issues) might become tedious<br /> <br /> ===== script =====<br /> <br /> Participants, possibly divided into small groups, read a paragraph that describes a rather extreme version of an alternative future. <br /> Examples would be: <br /> A Romanian R&amp;D system that is strongly connected to the international community, but ignoring national needs and priorities<br /> A Romanian R&amp;D system that is focused on innovation, and the creation of wealth<br /> A Romanian R&amp;D system that prioritizes social needs, largely ignoring international cooperation if it does not answer those needs<br /> A Romanian R&amp;D system that sees itself as a citadel of knowledge, and a social elite<br /> Participants are asked to describe the impact of such futures on a series of issues, such as the research infrastructure, the development of human resources, or the science governance model<br /> <br /> [[File:Incasting.png]]</div> Thu, 13 Dec 2012 09:53:28 GMT Dan Grosu http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Talk:Vision_of_the_Crowds Visionary Project http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Visionary_Project <p>Dan Grosu: /* Concept */</p> <hr /> <div> {| class=&quot;wpb collapsible innercollapse tmbox tmbox-notice {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|mbox-small}}&quot;<br /> |- class=&quot;wpb-header&quot;<br /> ! colspan=&quot;2&quot; class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | [[Project Visions and Visioning]]<br /> |-<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-image&quot; | [[File:Vision.jpg]]<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | This article is developed within the scope of the '''[[Project Visions and Visioning]]''', an effort to enhance Foresight learning through collaborative work.<br /> |}&lt;noinclude&gt;<br /> [[Category: Project banners|eLearning2.0]] <br /> &lt;/noinclude&gt;<br /> <br /> '''Visionary Project''' is the third lecture from a module on [[Project Visions and Visioning|Visions and Visioning]], first taught to graduate students from the Communication Faculty of the National School for Political and Administration Studies (Romania).<br /> <br /> === No Vision, No Projects ===<br /> <br /> [[File:Vision-project.png]]<br /> <br /> ==== project management - a troubled discipline ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;optimization school - how to plan a project?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;factor school - what determines a project’s success?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;contingency school - why do projects differ?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;behavior school - how do projects behave?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;governance school - how are projects governed?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;relationship school - how are projects generated?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;decision school - why do projects continue to live?&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== cross-fertilization ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;a simple and clear-cut definition of project and project management would be a difficult feat&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;projects are defined as complex sets of activities, complex tasks, organizational structures, organization processes, transactions, networks, large-scale investments&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;some overlap and shared ideas are discerned regarding project definition, such as temporarity, complexity, and interdisciplinary&lt;/li&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> === Temporary Social Systems ===<br /> <br /> ==== temporary organisation ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the time dimension is reflected by various concepts that are being used: temporary work, temporary systems, projectification and temporary organisations<br /> &lt;li&gt;groups of people collaborating to accomplish a joint task with the duration of the collaboration explicitly fixed, either by a specific date or by the attainment of a predefined task or condition<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== some features of TOs ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;a set of diversely skilled people working together on a complex task over a limited period of time<br /> &lt;li&gt;limited in duration and membership, and in which people come together, interact, create something, and then disband<br /> &lt;li&gt;structures of limited duration that operate within and between permanent organisations.<br /> &lt;li&gt;bringing together a group of people who are unfamiliar with one another’s skills, but must work interdependently on complex tasks<br /> &lt;li&gt;separate legal and financial entities set up for a specific task and dissolved upon its completion<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== communalities &amp; variables ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;four common elements: <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;limited duration <br /> &lt;li&gt;one or more tasks to achieve, which are the reason for which the TO is set up <br /> &lt;li&gt;one or more teams interacting and working on the task(s) <br /> &lt;li&gt;the production of change through action and the completion of tasks(s)<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;variables: <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the complexity of the tasks <br /> &lt;li&gt;the level of uncertainty as to whether the objective will be met <br /> &lt;li&gt;the interdependence of team members <br /> &lt;li&gt;limited resources (time, instruments, budget)<br /> &lt;li&gt;the degree of red tape within the TO<br /> &lt;li&gt;leadership style <br /> &lt;li&gt;methods and styles of communication <br /> &lt;li&gt;levels of complexity of intra- or inter-organisational TOs<br /> level of isolation and/or interdependence of the TO with respect to the organisational contexts<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== interorganisational TOs ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;composed of independent and sovereign organizations collaborating mainly to contribute to a common task<br /> characteristic elements:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;partnerships<br /> &lt;li&gt;team structure<br /> &lt;li&gt;goals<br /> &lt;li&gt;roles<br /> &lt;li&gt;responsibilities<br /> &lt;li&gt;products<br /> &lt;li&gt;paperwork<br /> &lt;li&gt;assessment criteria<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== trans-national European projects ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;pre-project - the preparation and planning of the project proposal and the establishment of the consortium<br /> &lt;li&gt;implementation, monitoring and on-going evaluation of the project work-plan<br /> &lt;li&gt;reporting – sets out and clarifies achieved, on-going and final results and deliverables and their consistency with planned aims, objectives, defined resources and timing.<br /> &lt;li&gt;exploitation and mainstreaming - criteria in assessing the projects’ effectiveness and results<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== ITOs organizational dimension ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;micro: core partners - information, decision-making, co-ordination flows, work flows are most stable over time<br /> &lt;li&gt;meso: partner’s consortium - competences and roles are defined during the bid preparation stage<br /> &lt;li&gt;macro: stakeholder network - fragile with respect to external stresses<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> === Shrinking Time ===<br /> <br /> ==== life in the dromosphere ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt; in this new world of accelerated reality, traditional planning becomes in many ways a contradictory effort<br /> &lt;li&gt; planning requires a model that structures the world and allows change to be studied in a context that is assumed to remain stable<br /> &lt;li&gt; planning works best when the dimensions of the problem remain the same<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== strategic information systems ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;IS developed with the intention of furthering or enabling a specific strategy<br /> &lt;li&gt;most important SIS applications are those which enable an organization to form its future relationship with its environment<br /> &lt;li&gt;the challenge is to break the rules of the past and structure IS to meet a variety of changing information requirements, some of which cannot even be known before the systems are built<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== vision failures =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the problem is that, by modeling processes and structures as they are at present, SIS developments are failing to take into account future requirements<br /> &lt;li&gt;detrimental effects:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the organisation's SIS development effort will be diverted or wasted<br /> &lt;li&gt;the SIS will not support the organisation's long-term strategy<br /> &lt;li&gt;the organisation's strategic flexibility may be compromised<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 1: conception =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;creative, generative mental process, probably with a high degree of originality and with relatively little formality or routine<br /> &lt;li&gt;potential techniques may support the process:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;creativity methods – ”blue-sky thinking”, ”brainstorming”, ”world caffe”<br /> &lt;li&gt;abstractization – SWOT, TOWS, STEEP, PESTE analysis<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 2: interpretation =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;abstract and intuitive qualities of vision are at odds with the precision which is necessary for analysing, specifying and designing information systems<br /> &lt;li&gt;support:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;focussing techiques – SODA (Strategic Options Development &amp; Analysis), SCA (Strategic Choice Approach)<br /> &lt;li&gt;giving meaning - semantic analysis techniques<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 3: intention =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;interpretation of the abstract vision onto achievable objectives, define targets and levels of performance<br /> &lt;li&gt;techniques for:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;objective-setting – Strategic Options Generator, ICA model<br /> &lt;li&gt;target-setting – CSF (critical success factor analysis)<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 4: synthesis =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;contributions of the various participants and the various strategic options which have been identified at the previous stage are synthesized into ”a single ambition”<br /> &lt;li&gt;practices<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;participation – soft systems methodology<br /> &lt;li&gt;consensus-building – Delphi technique<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 5: integration =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;communicating the agreed values, norms, behviours and having them accepted as the ”cultural norm”<br /> &lt;li&gt;components:<br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;communication techniques<br /> &lt;li&gt;inspiration - inspiring the participants to accept and follow the vision; team-building techniques<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ===== step 6: implementation =====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the information system would be designed as it should be, not as it is presently<br /> &lt;li&gt;architectures and models are based largely on normal analysis and design techniques such as entity-relationship models, data flow diagrams and a variety of referential matrixes<br /> &lt;li&gt;the approach may be forward-looking, but the techniques for developing requirements don’t support it<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== what about the nature of projects? ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;the structural relation between project and vision crumbles, as the vision implodes into a project that is both determined by the vision and its container<br /> &lt;li&gt;the project is re-shaped into an evolutionary endeavor, in which even the word “project” is recursively re-imprinted<br /> &lt;li&gt;the reason for “project” proves to be internal, rather than external, while dissatisfaction is revealed to result from alienation, rather than stress factors<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> === Concept ===<br /> <br /> ==== probing the future ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;a concept car is a car prototype made to showcase a new vehicle’s styling, technology, and overall design before production<br /> &lt;li&gt;they are often shown at motor shows to gauge customer reaction to new and radical designs which may or may not have a chance of being produced<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;<br /> <br /> ==== concept vehicles ====<br /> <br /> &lt;ul&gt;<br /> &lt;li&gt;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94jBukpqCgM Toyota Concept Car]<br /> &lt;li&gt;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_o_v47fzHQ Mercedes Concept Car]<br /> &lt;li&gt;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owPFH53rtbM BMW Concept Car]<br /> &lt;li&gt;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9Z-aT4oBl0 Chevrolet Concept Car]<br /> &lt;li&gt;[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xmuSCT6FnE Dacia Concept Car]<br /> &lt;/ul&gt;</div> Wed, 12 Dec 2012 07:58:24 GMT Dan Grosu http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Talk:Visionary_Project Repository: Deliberating Foresight Knowledge for Policy and Foresight Knowledge Assessment http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Repository:_Deliberating_Foresight_Knowledge_for_Policy_and_Foresight_Knowledge_Assessment <p>Dan Grosu: /* Foresight, Deliberation and its relevance to policy */</p> <hr /> <div> {| class=&quot;wpb collapsible innercollapse tmbox tmbox-notice {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|mbox-small}}&quot;<br /> |- class=&quot;wpb-header&quot;<br /> ! colspan=&quot;2&quot; class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | [[Project Visions and Visioning]]<br /> |-<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-image&quot; | [[File:Vision.jpg]]<br /> | class=&quot;mbox-text&quot; | This article is developed within the scope of the '''[[Project Visions and Visioning]]''', an effort to enhance Foresight learning through collaborative work.<br /> |}&lt;noinclude&gt;<br /> [[Category: Project banners|eLearning2.0]] <br /> &lt;/noinclude&gt;<br /> <br /> {{stub}}<br /> <br /> {{sidebox <br /> |text='''META-DATA''' &lt;br&gt;'''Author(s)''': von Schomberg R., Guimarães Pereira A., Funtowicz S.; &lt;br&gt;'''Year''': 2005; &lt;br&gt;'''Title''': Deliberating Foresight Knowledge for Policy and Foresight Knowledge Assessment; &lt;br&gt; '''Publisher''': European Commission, Directorate-General for Research, Information and Communication Unit; &lt;br&gt;'''ISBN''': 92-79-00678-9<br /> }}<br /> <br /> '''Deliberating Foresight Knowledge for Policy and Foresight Knowledge Assessment''' is a working paper authored by René von Schomberg, Ângela Guimarães Pereira and Silvio Funtowicz, and published by the European Commission, Directorate General for Research in November 2005. This report was included in the mandatory bibliography of the module [[Project Visions and Visioning |Visions and Visioning]] that was thought to graduate students from the National School for Political and Governance Studies (Romania) as part of the course on the ''Management and Implementation of Research Projects''.<br /> <br /> === Description ===<br /> <br /> The paper is a bold attempt to provide fresh clarifications on the nature of foresight knowledge and its relevance for policy-making. In itself, this audacious enterprise would have been reason enough to place this text in a central position within the current dialog on future research. However, the authors go even further, and attempt to provide an approach to the problem of assessing foresight knowledge.<br /> <br /> ==== Foresight, Deliberation and its relevance to policy ====<br /> <br /> The authors perceive a shift towards foresight in the early 1980s, when it had begun to be generally acknowledged that technological developments are not linear and autonomous, and thus technology forecasting lost credibility. Foresight knowledge offered the promise to guide and support the policy process by means of exploring possible futures, identifying impacts on society (particularly, on certain categories of stakeholders or sectors of society), and developing visions based on such futures. At the same time, foresight activities seemed to be more suitable to deliberative process that characterize modern societies, allowing deliberation based on foresight knowledge that takes place in the sphere of policy-making and at the interface between science and policy. The first level of deliberation assumes a political consensus on the need of long-term planning, as well as foresight activities capability to early anticipate and identify threats, challenges and opportunities. At a second level, there is the deliberation of shared objectives, build upon the outcomes of political deliberation. A third deliberation level capitalizes a diverse range of knowledge inputs by applying foresight (scenario workshops, foresight techniques/studies/panels etc) to particular issues of concern.<br /> <br /> === External links ===<br /> <br /> The paper is available for download.<br /> &lt;br&gt;[http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/deliberating-foresight-knowledge_en.pdf Deliberating Foresight Knowledge for Policy and Foresight Knowledge Assessment]</div> Sat, 04 Aug 2012 07:07:32 GMT Dan Grosu http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Talk:Repository:_Deliberating_Foresight_Knowledge_for_Policy_and_Foresight_Knowledge_Assessment Repository:Scenarios: The Art Of Strategic Conversation http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Repository:Scenarios:_The_Art_Of_Strategic_Conversation <p>Dan Grosu: Created page with '{{stub}}'</p> <hr /> <div>{{stub}}</div> Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:45:54 GMT Dan Grosu http://forwiki.eu/wiki/Talk:Repository:Scenarios:_The_Art_Of_Strategic_Conversation