IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v124y2017icp203-213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From foresight to impact? The 2030 Future of Work scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Rhisiart, Martin
  • Störmer, Eckhard
  • Daheim, Cornelia

Abstract

Several factors have been identified as important in generating policy-related impact from foresight work, including an effective communications strategy, engagement with relevant stakeholders, creating partnerships, and alignment with the policy-making agenda. The aim of this paper is to explore the use and impact of a scenarios project on the future of work in the UK, undertaken by the UK Commission for Employment and Skills (Future of Work: Jobs and Skills in 2030). The paper presents the results of a post-project study, where data from UKCES has been collected in two rounds in the first two years after the conclusion of the project. The evidence indicates that it has been an impactful project on many levels. Eight factors linked to foresight impact have been identified. The two most critical of these factors are the role of the ‘foresight frontman’, a high-profile and esteemed individual who is able to engage audiences widely and effectively; and a multi-channel communications strategy that encompasses diverse aspects such as professional design, visualisation and social media. Foresight impact is considered as a key design issue for projects ab initio; dynamic and iterative engagement processes support co-production and facilitate impact prospects.

Suggested Citation

  • Rhisiart, Martin & Störmer, Eckhard & Daheim, Cornelia, 2017. "From foresight to impact? The 2030 Future of Work scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 203-213.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:124:y:2017:i:c:p:203-213
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516307144
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.11.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1990. "Strategy, Complexity, and Economic Rent," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(10), pages 1178-1192, October.
    2. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & Matthias Weber, 2010. "The impact of foresight on innovation policy-making: recent experiences and future perspectives," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 91-104, June.
    3. Perren, Lew & Sapsed, Jonathan, 2013. "Innovation as politics: The rise and reshaping of innovation in UK parliamentary discourse 1960–2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1815-1828.
    4. Jonathan Calof & Jack E Smith, 2010. "Critical success factors for government-led foresight," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 31-40, February.
    5. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    6. Keller, Jonas & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "The influence of information and communication technology (ICT) on future foresight processes — Results from a Delphi survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 81-92.
    7. Jan de Wilt & Barend van der Meulen & Hans Rutten, 2003. "Developing futures for agriculture in the Netherlands: a systematic exploration of the strategic value of foresight," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2-3), pages 219-233.
    8. Magda Pieczka & Oliver Escobar, 2012. "Dialogue and science: Innovation in policy-making and the discourse of public engagement in the UK," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 113-126, September.
    9. Ralph D. Stacey, 1995. "The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(6), pages 477-495.
    10. Rhisiart, Martin & Jones-Evans, Dylan, 2016. "The impact of foresight on entrepreneurship: The Wales 2010 case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 112-119.
    11. Karel Haegeman & Jennifer C Harper & Ron Johnston, 2010. "Introduction to a special section: Impacts and implications of future-oriented technology analysis for policy and decision-making," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 3-6, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gordon, Adam Vigdor, 2020. "Limits and longevity: A model for scenarios that influence the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Flick, Catherine & Zamani, Efpraxia D. & Stahl, Bernd Carsten & Brem, Alexander, 2020. "The future of ICT for health and ageing: Unveiling ethical and social issues through horizon scanning foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    3. Amorim-Lopes, Mário & Oliveira, Mónica & Raposo, Mariana & Cardoso-Grilo, Teresa & Alvarenga, António & Barbas, Marta & Alves, Marco & Vieira, Ana & Barbosa-Póvoa, Ana, 2021. "Enhancing optimization planning models for health human resources management with foresight," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Andreani, Stefano & Kalchschmidt, Matteo & Pinto, Roberto & Sayegh, Allen, 2019. "Reframing technologically enhanced urban scenarios: A design research model towards human centered smart cities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 15-25.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haegeman, Karel & Marinelli, Elisabetta & Scapolo, Fabiana & Ricci, Andrea & Sokolov, Alexander, 2013. "Quantitative and qualitative approaches in Future-oriented Technology Analysis (FTA): From combination to integration?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 386-397.
    2. Battistella, Cinzia, 2014. "The organisation of Corporate Foresight: A multiple case study in the telecommunication industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 60-79.
    3. Maxim A. Afanasyev & Mario Cervantes & Dirk Meissner, 2014. "Towards FET Concept: Pathway To Evaluation Of Foresight Effectiveness, Efficiency And Validity," HSE Working papers WP BRP 31/STI/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. Merit Tatar & Tarmo Kalvet & Marek Tiits, 2020. "Cities4ZERO Approach to Foresight for Fostering Smart Energy Transition on Municipal Level," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-30, July.
    5. Rhisiart, Martin & Jones-Evans, Dylan, 2016. "The impact of foresight on entrepreneurship: The Wales 2010 case study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 112-119.
    6. Haegeman, Karel & Spiesberger, Manfred & Könnölä, Totti, 2017. "Evaluating foresight in transnational research programming," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 313-326.
    7. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    8. Davide Consoli & Pier Paolo Patrucco, 2011. "Complexity and the Coordination of Technological Knowledge: The Case of Innovation Platforms," Chapters, in: Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Jarratt, Denise & Ceric, Arnela, 2015. "The complexity of trust in business collaborations," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 2-12.
    10. Havas, Attila & Weber, K. Matthias, 2017. "The 'fit' between forward-looking activities and the innovation policy governance sub-system: A framework to explore potential impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 327-337.
    11. Gary Spraakman & Julie Margret, 2005. "The transfer of management accounting practices from London counting houses to the British North American fur trade," Accounting History Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 101-119.
    12. Estibaliz Sáez de Cámara & Idoia Fernández & Nekane Castillo-Eguskitza, 2021. "A Holistic Approach to Integrate and Evaluate Sustainable Development in Higher Education. The Case Study of the University of the Basque Country," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Luciana Maines da Silva & Claudia Cristina Bitencourt & Kadígia Faccin & Tatiana Iakovleva, 2019. "The Role of Stakeholders in the Context of Responsible Innovation: A Meta-Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, March.
    14. Monika Winn & Manfred Kirchgeorg & Andrew Griffiths & Martina K. Linnenluecke & Elmar Günther, 2011. "Impacts from climate change on organizations: a conceptual foundation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 157-173, March.
    15. Ivan Ligardo-Herrera & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Edurne A. Inigo & Vincent Blok, 2018. "Addressing Climate Change in Responsible Research and Innovation: Recommendations for Its Operationalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-20, June.
    16. Prokopenko Olha & Omelyanenko Vitaliy, 2017. "Priority Selection Within National Innovation Strategy in Global Context," Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 31(1), pages 5-18, August.
    17. Tina C. Ambos & Katherine Tatarinov, 2022. "Building Responsible Innovation in International Organizations through Intrapreneurship," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 92-125, January.
    18. Iman Seoudi & Matthias Huehn & Bo Carlsson, 2008. "Penrose Revisited: A Re-Appraisal of the Resource Perspective," Working Papers 14, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    19. Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
    20. Wang, Chun-Ju & Wu, Lei-Yu, 2012. "Team member commitments and start-up competitiveness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(5), pages 708-715.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:124:y:2017:i:c:p:203-213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.