A Three-Level Evaluation Process of Cultural Readiness for Strategic Foresight Projects

Abstract

A critical issue in Strategic Foresight approaches is the expected effect on the organizational and individual behavior change, as understanding, mapping, and influencing the desired future is a function of the group’s effort to adopt a more disruptive or conservative scenario in a long-term thinking and planning context. As a learning process, a Strategic Foresight experience, due to the nature of new knowledge co-creation, can foster mindset changes. However, at the same time, a Foresight project deals with the existing group assumptions due to national and organizational cultures, which can be more (or less) oriented to long-term or disruptive thinking, as well as the established managerial mentality about the future orientation in strategic thinking. These cultural assumptions can exert positive or negative influence in a Foresight mindset, and should be assessed and understood previously, as the overall cultural readiness can affect the performance of a Foresight project in general. Also, the analysis of the cultural aspect as an evaluation process can generate new learning, when compared a pre-assessment with a post-assessment. Thus, the posed question is, “How to assess cultural dimensions before and after Foresight projects?” Based on Hofstede National Cultural model, Cameron and Quinn Competing Values model, and Amsteus Managerial Foresight model, this article proposes to discuss the applicability of a three-level (national, organizational, and individual) evaluation process to assess the cultural environment readiness for Strategic Foresight projects and the influence of a Foresight project on participants’ perception of the future through a two-phase approach. This research contributes to Strategic Foresight methods by proposing a research agenda about the cultural perspective in Foresight assessment. Managerial contributions about the pre-assessment interpretations of the proposed three-level process to better understand the cultural profile of the participant group are also discussed in a hypothetical scenario application.

Creative Environment as a Factor of Professional Culture Formation of Journalists in the Digital Era

“…The evidence of the fact that cognitive factors associated with combining ideas from different cultures, including those broadcast through media texts, contribute to the development of liberal thinking [Cheng, 2012] has largely determined the importance of research into the role of new media in online discourse [Karasik, 2018]. Besides, in line with the tasks outlined in the latest research, we consider creativity with an emphasis on its human modality [Panizzon, 2019] and prove that the necessary changes should include increasing the technical accessibility of texts created by professional journalists, distributing media education programmes, and presenting more dialogue-oriented content in the digital environment. However, it is also necessary to take into account the fact that the current global trend is to increase the role of the state and public institutions in promoting these changes and thus helping to bridge the digital gap between generations [Digital Inequalities in the Global South' , 2020].…”

The Role of Strategic Foresight on Dynamic Capabilities

“…A critical issue in Strategic Foresight approaches is the expected effect on the organizational and individual behavior change, as understanding, mapping, and influencing the desired future is a function of the group's effort to adopt a more disruptive or conservative scenario in a longterm thinking and planning context. As a learning process, a Strategic Foresight experience, due to the nature of new knowledge co-creation, can foster mindset changes [14].…”

Critical Success Factors of the University of the Future in a Society 5.0: A Maturity Model

“…How will the external IT infrastructure, governmental policies for education and S&T, and the technological and environmental resources of each country affect the development of the University of the Future? Will the university’s culture favor strategic foresight competence to understand the future, map the future, and create possible futures (Bishop 2016; Miller et al 2018; Panizzon and Barcellos 2019)? What will be the implication of this model and the SDGs in the nature of the curricula, focusing on systemic thinking, anticipatory thinking, and critical thinking (Reickmann 2012)?…”