The use of co-nomination analysis in real-time evaluation of an R&amp;D programme

Giusti, W.L.; Georghiou, Luke

doi:10.1007/bf02020079

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Subsequently, personal informal networks were mapped following a multi-step approach. Individuals identified as technological leaders within the participating main contractors were sent postal questionnaires and each was asked to nominate up to seven other individuals who had provided information of significant value for innovation related to the specific Esprit project (see Giusti and Georghiou, 1988). In the second round, these nominated individuals were themselves contacted and asked the same question.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

ESPRIT: Europe's Response to US and Japanese Domination in Information Technology

Assimakopoulos¹,

Marschan-Piekkari²,

Macdonald³

2004

Information Technology Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Strategic Programme for Research in Information Technologies was created as a defensive response to the US and Japanese lead in information technology. Esprit was driven by the belief that intra-EU collaboration is an effective means to enhance the competitiveness of the European IT industry. Esprit has undergone a number of changes to facilitate collaboration and innovation. Yet, only after eighteen years of Esprit did the European Commission appreciate the need to encourage worldwide cooperation within its new Fifth Framework Information Society Technologies Programme. In the emerging Information Society it is conceded that new ideas are as likely to be found outside Europe as within. This chapter seeks to demonstrate that successful Esprit projects maintained valuable external links with many unacknowledged partners worldwide throughout the 1990s. It argues that the world of innovation is borderless and 1 that Commission policies to impose boundaries to collaboration are unlikely to contribute to successful innovation. ESPRIT: EUROPE'S RESPONSE TO US AND JAPANESE DOMINATION IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 1. Introduction Established in 1983, Esprit (the European Strategic Programme for Research in Information Technologies) is the oldest of the European Commission's research and technology development (RTD) programmes. It is also the largest and has been a model for all the Commission's other RTD programmes. Esprit arose from the fear that Europe was lagging far behind the US and Japan in vital information technologies (IT) (Georghiou, 1999; Mytelka and Delapierre, 1987). Collaboration, rather than competition, among Europe's IT companies, it was imagined would yield synergies, the flexibility to adapt in volatile markets, and the shorter product cycles essential to international competitiveness (Assimakopoulos and Macdonald, 1999). The complementary notion of pre-competitive research allowed the Commission to subsidise RTD while avoiding the accusation of interfering in the market (Quintas and Guy, 1995). The collaboration of Esprit has attracted considerable academic attention (e.g., Hagedoorn and Schakenraad, 1993; Hagedoorn et al., 2000); whatever Esprit's success in encouraging innovation, it has become a classic in innovation policy. Esprit in the 1980s was very much the child of the large firms of the European IT industy, the Big Twelve. Some would argue that Esprit was still fulfilling their requirements in the

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

ESPRIT: Europe's Response to US and Japanese Domination in Information Technology

Assimakopoulos¹,

Marschan-Piekkari²,

Macdonald³

2004

Information Technology Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To the best of our knowledge, this is the first paper that explicitly incorporates SNA in foresight -an attempt that we are continuing now. What makes this study interesting is its methodological advance compared to the previous paper (Giusti and Georghiou, 1988), in that it makes clear the methodological feature is based upon ''asking each respondent . .…”

Section: Betweennessmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…A quick literature review indicates that the earliest explicit work linking SNA and foresight was carried out in the late 1980s by Giusti and Georghiou (1988) where they apply co‐nomination analysis (ego network) to map the structure of a research community as part of the evaluation of the UK national IT program. In their attempt, they generate co‐nomination networks based on the sociogram of the ego network of researchers who were asked to nominate other researchers whose work is similar or relevant to their own (Giusti and Georghiou, 1988, pp. 267‐268).…”

Section: Understanding Foresight and Network Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Where co‐nominations recur in two or more responses the likelihood of such a link is increased. At the same time, the fact of being nominated is related to the influence or impact the nominee is having on the respondent and hence the hypothesis is that frequent co‐nomination will yield a network consisting of the main researchers in a field and show their inter‐relationship (Giusti and Georghiou, 1988, p. 267).…”

Section: Understanding Foresight and Network Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incorporating network perspectives in foresight: a methodological proposal

Nugroho

Sarıtas

2009

Foresight

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeA particular feature that makes foresight powerful is its capability to learn from past trends to help guide decision‐making for future policy. However, in studying both past and future trends, network perspectives are often missing. Since networks are capable of revealing the structure that underpins relationships between stakeholders, key issues and actions in the past, they are powerful to help envisage the future. The purpose of this paper is to propose a methodological framework to incorporate network analysis in foresight.Design/methodology/approachThe paper develops a generic framework to incorporate network analysis into foresight's five stages. Trends identified by respondents of the Big Picture Survey are used to demonstrate how we operationalize this framework.FindingsA network perspective can enrich foresight analysis in that it helps reveal structural linkages between trends and thus can better identify emerging future issues, both of which are critical in foresight.Research limitations/implicationsThe inclusion of network analysis can shed light on the process of understanding complex data and assist in building a model based on links and relationships. Network analysis can reveal otherwise unobservable structural features of the data and can help boundary setting discussions in foresight.Practical implicationsNetwork concepts and measures could usefully enrich the interpretation of foresight data for further analysis, or plausible scenarios.Originality/valueNetwork analysis offers a new way of looking at the foresight data by disentangling complicated issue webs. As shaping the future becomes more essential because of the complexity of science, technology and society interrelationships, the incorporation of network perspectives in foresight might be one of the ways to propel future studies.

show abstract

“…с целью оценить результативность национальной программы Великобритании по информационным технологиям [Giusti, Georghiou, 1988]. Тогда для картирования струк-туры исследовательского сообщества был использован метод кономинации.…”

Section: мастер-классunclassified

Untitled

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of co-nomination analysis in real-time evaluation of an R&D programme

Cited by 13 publications

References 1 publication

ESPRIT: Europe's Response to US and Japanese Domination in Information Technology

ESPRIT: Europe's Response to US and Japanese Domination in Information Technology

Incorporating network perspectives in foresight: a methodological proposal

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About