|
Second Foresight Training
Successfully Run
REPORTon
Foresight Training Workshop, Tools for Managing the Future:
A Portfolio
Approach, February 17-21, 2003, Pathumwan Princess Hotel, Bangkok
by Kasina Limsamarnphun
Following the success of the first Foresight
Training Workshop in 2002, APEC Center for Technology Foresight, together
with Prof Ron Johnston, the core facilitator, refined the course and repeated
the workshop again this year.
Evaluation confirmed high satisfaction
of participants, giving an average 3.8 points out of 4 on course content.
In total, there were 20 participants for both parts. 19 from 6 economies
took part I, an intensive training in various foresight tools. 13 took
part II which was optional and designed for those who had a plan to apply
their new skills to a project planning of their own.
Areas of interest for application among
participants:
- Learning & university management (6)
- Science & technology (5)
- Industry, consumer and lifestyle (5
- Public health (3)
- Methodology (1).
While the number of participants reduced
from last year, from 30 to 20, the number was more manageable, in term
of interaction. Having satisfied with the outcome of sponsorship last
year, the Commonwealth Science Council (CSC) decided not to send participants
this year, instead discussing with CTF for another course for a particular
target group and theme. Last year’s workshop was also attended by
many participants from economies with national foresight programs; some
economies even sent team of 3-4 to update foresight skills. This year
there were no representatives for such mega projects, most were projects
at the sectoral and corporate levels. In a way, the changing group of
course participants, implied a gradual change of foresight worldwide towards
sectoral and organizational planning.
Products of Part I could be judged by participants’
self evaluation of their foresight competency. 18 out of 19 replied the
survey.
Competency |
Average Rating (out
of 4) |
| 1. Situate foresight in the portfolio of knowledge management tools |
3.4 |
| 2. Identify the drivers of change in the 21st century |
3.5 |
| 3. Recognise the limitations on knowing the future |
3.5 |
| 4. Understand the range of tools in the portfolio
for managing the future, their strengths, limiatations and assumptions |
3.2 |
| 5. Be able to make informed selection among portfolio
tools |
3.2 |
| 6. Environmental scanning |
3.5 |
| 7. Delphi polling |
3.1 |
| 8. Normative foresight techniques (eg. Technology
Roadmapping) |
3 |
| 9. Scenario plannning |
3.5 |
| 10. Design, logistics and management of foresight
activities |
3.3 |
| 11. Implement the findings of foresight projects |
2.8 |
PARTICIPANTS’
SELF EVALUATION
Participants also evaluated the course
and management (15 responses). They were extremely satisfied with the
content of the workshop, at an average of 3.8 out of 4 points. In terms
of materials, opportunity to participate, information and knowledge obtained
and expected future utilization, all topics were highly rated at an average
of 3.3. Some comments include “Good exercise in each session. Good
discussion among participants both inside and outside workshop room”,
“the nature of the workshop of this kind is thought provoking and
stimulating”.
The average rating of ‘time schedule’
topic was a little lower at 3.0. From those who responded ‘fair’
at this topics, their additional comments did not provide specific explanation
on this, but their call for ‘case studies’ implies their call
for more time to make linkage from theory to real practices; for example,
“…limited number of these (case studies). Also the depth of
each one is not satisfactory”. A few more participants also mentioned
that more case studies will be useful to them, “A 3-day workshop
for this is just nice. Perhaps citation of examples of real foresight
cases should be provided, i.e. a-z experience of a case study”.
In fact, case descriptions were provided in the manual but participants
clearly found it difficult to find time to study these during the course.
It is also worth mentioning that many participants this year had limited
experience with foresight and some were complete beginners. They therefore
mentioned hard ‘time’ for absorbing many tools in 3 days.
Some suggestions include opening of a more advanced course and a course
for each technique; “Time is too short. One tool should last 3 days
at least (it can be more advanced stage of the workshop.”, “…at
some point in the future it might be worth considering a course for people
who already have some experience and want to spend more time on the finer
points”.
FORESIGHT
PLANS OF PART II PARTICIPANTS
Skeleton project plans were developed in 2 days in consultation
with facilitators and other participants. Below are some of the projects.
On Education
Welcome alumnus. An alumnus from Hong Kong attended Part
I last year and came back this year for part II to design a project on
a Delphi survey on the future of e-learning at a university.
Another university is moving towards
the second phase of development under the university’s master plan.
The team planned to apply foresight to chart out technology platforms
such as intelligence building, smart card technology, for the growing
university.
On Health
Public health is one of the key concerns among this group of participants.
Three foresight projects were developed during this workshop with varying
degree of complexity. One participant prepared a study-cum-learning foresight
project to introduce the new methodology and planning model to its institution.
The learning foresight program would articulate health issues in 2015
in order to identify broad research areas for funding support.
Another health project was on pharmaceutical
systems. Foresight was hopeful to merge knowledge of separated professional
groups to see possibilities of how systems could be changed in the next
10 years. The new knowledge could then be used to plan long term research
needs on services management and other study areas.
The final project on health sought to
use foresight tools to explore factors impacting on pregnancy in the next
5 years and generate new policy options to combat high abortion rate among
teenagers.
On Industry and Science and Technology
An experienced foresight practitioner in the private sector had already
developed global scenarios in the next 25 years and sought to draw implications
for various sectors such as forestry and farming.
A ministry of industry sent 2 participants
to learn foresight in order to plan a study for a 5-year strategic plan
for electrical and electronic sectors. Foresight would be used to complete
the plan in one year using close consultation and Roadmapping.
A participant from the Department of
Science and Technology produced a plan to create technology roadmaps in
advanced materials and advanced manufacturing, in close cooperation with
industry. She will use scenario planning to help identify suitable targets
for the roadmaps. Another participant from a different country aimed to
collect and disseminate data and information on science and technology
management and to use foresight to build up partnerships among the users
and data providers.
Appendix: List of Participants
Chinese Taipei
Dr Shio-Jean Lin
Deputy Director General
Bureau of Health Promotion, Department of Health
Hong Kong, China
Assoc Prof Craig Blurton
University of Hong Kong
c/o Centre for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT)
Ms Anita Chi-Kwan Lee
University of Hong Kong
Centre for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT)
Malaysia
Ms Anita Bahari
Malaysian Science and Technology Information Centre (MASTIC)
Dr Tze-Ming Ho
Acarology Unit, Institute for Medical Research
Universiti Teknologi Petronas
Mr. Hasbullah Hj Ihsan, Director of Finance & Fund Management
Mr. Mohammad Zahir Abd Khalid, Manager of Planning Business Development
Dr. Mohd Noh Karsiti, Programme Head of Electrical & Electronic Engineering
New Zealand
Ms Susan Bates
New Zealand Forest Research Institute Ltd
South Africa
Ms Pontsho Maruping
Department of Science and Technology, Government of South Africa
Thailand
Mr Chaiyaporn Manakitchongkol
Industrial Technical Officer
Dr Chatwarun Ongkasing
Policy Researcher
APEC Center for Technology Foresight
Dr Kitipong Promwong
Policy Researcher
Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Research
National Science and Technology Development Agency
Dr Manit Boonprasert
VP for Development
Rangsit University
Mr. Niwat Pantusilapakom
Electrical and Electronics Institute
Dr Pattarapong Intarakumnerd
Policy Researcher
Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Research
National Science and Technology Development Agency
Ms Sakul Sinchai
Research Manager
Health Systems Research Institute
Ms Supatra Sriliko
Business Planning Manager
Visteon (Thailand) Limited
Mr. Thepnarong Noppagornvisate
Assistant Researcher
National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (BIOTEC)
Ms Walailak Noypayak
Director, Research and Statistics Division
Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT)
|
