Experts and foresight: review and experience

Loveridge, Denis

doi:10.1504/ijfip.2004.004651

Cited by 28 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There have been several forays to the challenges of this hermeneutic stance, which futures and foresight literature in general have failed to take into account, for example Sackman's (1974) criticism of the Delphi method and Loveridge's (2004) survey of use of expert knowledge and the inherent challenges, as well as the long standing research on human psychology and bias in foresight and forecasting (see below, section 3.2.2). In the light of this literature it seems that lay and expert knowledge is most readily suited for positioning foresight in relation to existing attitude climate and power structures, and getting cues for describing the present.…”

Section: Interpretive and Critical Epistemology Of Foresightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theory of and within foresight — “What does a theory of foresight even mean?”

Piirainen

González

2015

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Interpretive and Critical Epistemology Of Foresightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theory of and within foresight — “What does a theory of foresight even mean?”

Piirainen

González

2015

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Furthermore, this research is based on the input provided by a selection of expert participants. As Loveridge (2004) argues, although expert opinions are helpful in offering fundamental foresight, their underlying nature is poorly understood. Input from experts is indispensable, as has become clear from similar exercises in England (Keenan, 2003), France (Durand, 2003) and the USA (Wagner and Popper, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Futures research, communication and the use of information and communication technology in households in 2010: a reassessment

Bouwman

Duin

2007

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication studies pay little attention to futures research, while there is a lack of communication knowledge in futures research.This article discusses the function of futures research and ways to embed domain knowledge in predictions. First, it looks at futures research in relation to the use of information and communication technology (ICT) in households in 2010. Second, it incorporates communication knowledge based on the vision of experts. It is interested in the ways in which the contextual factors of the adoption and use of ICT can be taken into account. Scenarios take social changes, political and regulatory trends into account and draw alternative, divergent pictures of a future context within which the adoption, domestication, use and effects of new technologies will take place.Through the use of scenarios different contexts can be described in which the impact of specific technologies can be analysed, making use of the know-how of communication scholars.

show abstract

“…(4)Determine AAV model input parameters ( S , S′ , X , T , σ , r , I , and E ). The modeling teams used a collaborative, consensus‐building approach with a Delphi‐based (Cooke, ; Loveridge, ) technology forecasting procedure (Khadke & Gershenson, ) to estimate each input parameter (Engel & Reich, ). First, the large, periodic, research meetings provided opportunities to establish the coherent, common approach necessary to build the models.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Products for Adaptability: Insights from Four Industrial Cases

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing products that are more easily adaptable to future requirements can increase their overall value. Product adaptability is largely determined by choices about product architecture, especially modularity. Because it is possible to be too modular and/or inappropriately modular, deciding how and where to be modular in a cost‐effective way is an important managerial decision. In this article, we gather data from four case studies to model effects of firms’ product architecture decisions at the component level. We optimize an architecture adaptability value (AAV) measure that accounts for both the benefits of more architecture options and the costs of interfaces. The optimal architecture prompted each firm to rearchitect an existing product to increase its expected future profitability. Several insights emerged from the case evidence during this research. (i) Although decomposing an architecture into an increasing number of modules increases product adaptability, the amount of modularity is an insufficient predictor of the adaptability value of a system. AAV, which also accounts for interface costs, provides an improved measure of appropriate modularity. (ii) Managers can influence the path of architectural evolution in the direction of increased value. This influence may diminish but does not disappear as products become more mature. Also, modularity and innovations coevolved, as the new modularizations suggested by AAV optimization prompted and guided searches for further innovations. (iii) When presented with the concepts of options, interface costs, and AAV, the firms’ designers and managers were initially skeptical. However, in each case, the modelers were able to rearchitect an actual product not only with increased AAV by our model (theoretical improvement) but also with actual future benefits for their firm. Postproject reports from each firm confirmed that the AAV modeling and optimization approaches were indeed helpful, equipping them to increase the adaptability, cost‐efficiency, lifespan, and overall value of actual products. The evidence suggests that firms can benefit from designing products for adaptability, but that how they do so matters. This study expands our understanding of modularity and adaptability by illuminating managerial decisions and insights about appropriate approaches to each.

show abstract

Experts and foresight: review and experience

Cited by 28 publications

References 103 publications

Theory of and within foresight — “What does a theory of foresight even mean?”

Theory of and within foresight — “What does a theory of foresight even mean?”

Futures research, communication and the use of information and communication technology in households in 2010: a reassessment

Designing Products for Adaptability: Insights from Four Industrial Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About