Towards strategic management of complex
systemic innovation environments: Integrating
foresight, assessment, system dynamic
modelling and societal embedding into a
coherent model
Eu-SPRI Conference 2012: “Towards Transformative
Governance? Responses to mission-oriented
innovation policy paradigms” 12/13 June 2012,
Karlsruhe
Mika Nieminen, Toni Ahlqvist, Anu Tuominen & Heidi
Auvinen
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
08/04/2015
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Why do we need new methods?
Theoretical footing
Model
Case example
Summary
2
08/04/2015
3
Why do we need new methods?
There is a need for management models and tools to aid strategic decision-making in
complex socio-technical environments
Why?
The growth of a social complexity
 Societal problems have became increasingly complex (e.g. Grand Challenges) and
interdependency in social systems is increasing
 Also our understanding of society has become more complex.
Technologies are increasingly convergent and hybrid by nature
 Technologies are interlinked and build up increasingly complex technological
systems and business “ecosystems”
 The development of systems is based on complex interaction between people,
structures, and technologies
 Thus, the traditional “technology push” or “supply side” policies do not function any
more
This accentuates the need for horizontal decision-making and policy planning
 The decisions made at one policy sector are interlinked to the processes of the
other sectors and therefore innovation policy cannot be limited to only one sector or
a “silo”
08/04/2015
4
Why do we need new methods?
 In order to tackle with the increasing complexity of socio-technical
environments we need:
 Methods which strengthen horizontal approaches
 Steering mechanisms which are adaptive and able to respond
to the rapidly changing situations
 Approaches which support strategic thinking and interlink
activities with a view of strategic management
08/04/2015
5
Theoretical footing
 Complex social systems theory
 Self-organizing, adaptive and learning systems
 Multi-level perspective on socio-technical change
 Interaction of landscape, regime and niche levels
 Transition management
 Management of societal transition towards more sustainable
directions
 Idea of strategic intelligence
 Complementary use of information for strategic management
and decision-making
Value added of the different approaches in the model
6
08/04/2015
Objectives/ Rationale for the
data
Foresight
System
assessment
System
dynamic
modelling
Societal
embedding
Outcomes
Tools
• Forward-looking data and
dynamic, shared knowledge
creation processes
• Supports strategic choices of alternative
technological development paths
• Promotes networking of experts
• Contributes to insights and shared visions
of future developments and consequent
consensus of and commitment to future
investments
• Roadmaps
• Scenarios
• Facilitated vision
building
• Analysing the dynamics of the
system elements and their
development with a special view
on impacts.
• Analysis of the current status of the system
e.g. path dependencies, windows of
opportunities
• Identification of system elements and their
dynamics
• Strategic and operational targets to
support policy implementation
• Future-oriented impact assessment of
policy measures
• Follow-up of system development
•
•
•
•
• To solve a particular policy
problem
• The simulation model is theory of the
system, explaining its behaviour
endogenously through feedbacks
• Model results are used to design good and
robust policies
• Modelling
• Facilitating development and
introduction of new sustainable
innovations
• Active and continuous dialogue among
actors who set conditions for development
and diffusion of innovations
• E.g. network
building, and
facilitating problem
solution
Evaluation
Monitoring
Network analysis
Ex-ante, mid-term
and ex-post
assessment
Landscape
Foresight
Regime
Assessment Increased strategic
intelligence
Societal
embedding
Modelling
Niche
Time
Modified from original: Geels 2002
Generic knowledge creation structure
08/04/2015
8
CONTEXTUAL ORIENTATION
Open challenge
spectrum
CASE TYPE I:
Society
•Multiple potential
angles
•Multiple rule frames
and structures, multiple
contexts
•Multiple value bases
•Example: extensive
foresight exercise
Open technology
spectrum
TECHNOLOGICAL ORIENTATION
Partially focused
challenge spectrum
CASE TYPE II:
Sector or cluster
•Bounded sociotechnological system
•Several strategic options
•Entities are partially
bound by similar rules and
structures that condition
differing contexts
•Entities are under alike
pressures from the action
environment
Partially focused
technology spectrum
Focused challenge
spectrum
CASE TYPE III:
Organisation
•Several strategic
options
•Bounded context
•Internal activity
cultures
Focused technology
spectrum
Characterisation of the case types
08/04/2015
Case type I:
Society
Core
•
•
•
Integration of three
knowledge forms
(foresight
knowledge,
modelling
knowledge,
assessment
knowledge)
•
•
•
•
Case type II:
Sector or cluster
Identification of challenges
Scoping of imaginable
socio-technological
solutions
Initiation and channelling
of the societal
transformation process
•
Foresight oriented
Modelling knowledge is
integral part of the process
and (potentially) a way
depict results of foresight
(see separate slide)
Assessment knowledge
(e.g. indicators) is an
integral part of the
process, particularly when
defining the present state
of the art
Linkage to the embedding:
the same actors in the
process are the core
actors of the embedding
•
•
•
•
•
9
Case type III:
Organisation
Identification and
evaluation of potential
socio-technological
solutions
Charting strategic options
for a sector or a cluster
Engaging key actors
•
Foresight, modelling and
assessment are
somewhat balanced
Assessment knowledge is
in balance with foresight
and modelling knowledge,
e.g. path dependencies
and systemic lock-ins
Foresight means primarily
the production of visionary
solutions in a system
•
•
•
Embedding and
implementing of a
socio-technological
solution in a context
Endorsing strategic
decision-making at the
points of transformation
Embedding is in a key
role
Foresight, modelling
and assessment
endorse the setting for
the embedding
Characterisation of the case types
08/04/2015
Case type I:
Society
Process emphases
(examples)
•
•
•
Visionary process
•
Emphasis on
imaginable futures
and the formation of
explorative visions
•
Backcasting
orientation
Mapping the futures from
the present
•
Starts with the
existing sociotechnological
structures and
solutions
Driver oriented process
•
Starts with present
understanding of the
grand challenges
•
Fixing the process
against this view
Case type II:
Sector or cluster
•
•
•
•
Analysis of a sociotechnological system, e.g.
sector
Analysis of a specific
activity environment, e.g.
market
Production of
technological alternatives
•
Technology models;
modelling is in a key
role
Assessment of the
potential of technology
models
•
Based on panels
•
Plausibility; maturity;
market potential;
year of realisation
10
Case type III:
Organisation
•
•
•
Co-creation of the
socio-technological
solutions with the key
actors
•
Identification of
key actor and
topics;
mobilisation;
activation;
empowerment
Mapping the
organisational
dynamics and tensions
•
Different frames of
interpretation
Implementation of the
socio-technological
solution
•
Process target has
evolved during the
process of cocreation and
therefore the
implementation
phase is important
08/04/2015
Frame for assessing scale and methods
Long duration
2
1
Narrow
Broad
4
3
Short duration
11
Case type 1: Society
Long duration
2
1
Narrow
Broad
4
3
Short duration
08/04/2015
12
 1) Broad, long duration
 Duration ca. 1 year
 Ca. 50-100 experts
 Back-office
 Driver analyses (PESTEVL; matrices…); workshops;
questionnaires
 Delfoi, scenarios, roadmaps, modelling etc.
 Example: Broad and explorative foresight exercise, like
‘Roadmap for bioeconomy’
 2) Narrow, long duration
 Duration could be up to three years
 Quite focused expert panel
 Example: Monitoring a trend, e.g. TrendChart
 3) Narrow, short duration
 Duration ca. 1 month to 4 months
 Ca. 30 experts
 Focused roadmap or a model
 Focused drivers and technologies
 Example: Focused roadmap on a single energy source
 4) Broad, short duration
 Condensed version of the option 1
 Duration ca. 4 months to 6 months
 Several (5-7) researchers involved
 Activities simultaneously on multiple fronts
Case type 2: Sector or a cluster
08/04/2015
Long duration
2
1
Narrow
Broad
4
3
Short duration
13
 1) Broad, long duration
 Duration ca. 1 year
 Ca. 50-100 experts
 Interviews; workshops; document analysis; statistics;
modelling
 Example: Sectoral foresight exercise, like ‘Renewable
energy sources in the traffic system’
 2) Narrow, long duration
 Duration could be up to three years
 Quite focused expert panel
 Example: Monitoring sectoral indicators
 3) Narrow, short duration
 Duration ca. 1 month to 4 months
 Ca. 30 experts
 Focused roadmap or a model
 Focused drivers and technologies
 Example: Focused SHOK foresight or an assessment
 4) Broad, short duration
 Condensed version of the option 1
 Duration ca. 4 months to 6 months
 Several (5-7) researchers involved
 Activities simultaneously on multiple fronts
Case type 3: Organisation
Long duration
2
1
Narrow
Broad
4
3
Short duration
08/04/2015
14
 1) Broad, long duration
 Duration max 3 years
 Ca. 50-100 experts
 Emphasis on embedding
 Foresight and assessment knowledge endorse the process
 Modelling the health case system
 Qualitative methods: diaries and organisational narratives
 Example: Implementation of a technological innovation in a
health sector
 2) Narrow, long duration
 Long duration
 Example: Monitoring the results of embedding and
implementation
 3) Narrow, short duration
 Duration ca. 1 month to 4 months
 Example: Training sessions at the organisation, maybe even
embedding in a small organisation and a limited cases
 4) Broad, short duration
 More extensive training sessions
08/04/2015
15
CASE: EMISSION FREE TRANSPORT IN
CITIES 2050
08/04/2015
Socio-technical frame for transport system
16
08/04/2015
17
Questions to be answered with the case –study
1. What kinds of societal transitions are required to reach the principle vision?
→ Stakeholders involved, changes and transitions required, impacts and
implications…
2. How can the required transitions be made possible / assisted / sped up?
→ Vision paths, policies…
3. How can the collection of approaches (Foresight - Modelling - Impact
assessment – Embedding) be put into use to analyse and align required
transitions?
08/04/2015
18
Integrating different approaches into a coherent model
 Foresight
 Principle vision − emission free transport in cities in 2050
(EU White Paper on transport)
 Vision paths − three alternative ways to make it happen:
1. electric vehicles
2. public transport
3. biofuels.
 Impact assessment
 Identification of potential policy instruments and their impacts
to reach the vision
08/04/2015
19
Integrating different approaches into a coherent model
 System dynamic modelling
 Modelling of the transport system and the impacts of policy
instruments
 Dimensions to be modelled:
 environmental concerns
 developing key technologies and complementary technologies
 passenger transport, incl. public transport − user choices
 urban environments
 economic aspects
 societal issues
08/04/2015
Investments, cost
structure (purchase and
use costs, fuel price)
Attitudes,
values
Vehicle
characteristics
Users by user
segment
(transport demand)
Willingness to own
a car and use
private transport
Private
transport
(powertrains,
fuels,
ownership)
Infrastructure
coverage
Financing,
volumes
Public transport
characteristics
(service level)
Willingness to use
public transport
Infrastructure
availability
Infrastructure
requirements
20
Use,
expectations
Transport
infrastructure
(networks, fuelling,
charging, etc.)
Investments,
financing, business
models
Public
transport
(modes,
powertrains,
fuels)
Infrastructure
requirements
Infrastructure
coverage
08/04/2015
System dynamic model of a transport system
21
08/04/2015
22
5. Summary
 Increasing complexity necessitates horizontal policy-making, which takes into
account the systemic nature of innovation environments
 Complex & multi-level information needs
 We need
 to know the current status of the system (functional assessment) & the
possible future options (foresight)
 to create commonly shared policy & innovation options (foresight & societal
embedding);
 To have more precise information on the complex causal relationships &
feedback loops within the system in order to anticipate consequenses of policy
actions (system dynamic modelling)
 The proposed approach attempts systematically to combine the above mentioned
approaches into a coherent whole
08/04/2015
23
5. Summary (cont.)
 Challenging multi-approach project
 Work is still in progress
 Current status:
 A framework for combining approches in various societal &
innovation situations created
 Testing started in three different cases (bio-economy, social &
health care; emission free transport)
 Tailor-made combination of approaches for each case
 Emission free transport as an example
08/04/2015
VTT - 70 years of
technology for business
and society
24