IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v125y2017icp188-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A multiple correspondence analysis model for evaluating technology foresight methods

Author

Listed:
  • Esmaelian, Majid
  • Tavana, Madjid
  • Di Caprio, Debora
  • Ansari, Reza

Abstract

Technology foresight (TF) studies the appropriate extrapolation methodologies for predicting the most likely technology development scenarios in the future. Although there is a vast literature dealing with the classification and development of technology foresight methods (TFMs), the problem of selecting those that best reflect the characteristics of an organization is challenging and remains mostly overlooked. We propose a TFM evaluation procedure that allows decision makers and managers to successfully address this problem. The proposed procedure identifies the most relevant TFMs and organizational criteria and uses them in a multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) model to select the most suitable method(s) for implementation. The proposed MCA model combines the doubling data technique with a row principal scoring procedure to allow for the reduction of dimensionality and, consequently, the graphical analysis of the patterns of relationships among TFMs and evaluation criteria. We present a case study in a knowledge-based organization to demonstrate the applicability and efficacy of the proposed evaluation procedure. The results show that the proposed model can be properly adapted to allow for a wide range of applications involving business organizations and government agencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Esmaelian, Majid & Tavana, Madjid & Di Caprio, Debora & Ansari, Reza, 2017. "A multiple correspondence analysis model for evaluating technology foresight methods," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 188-205.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:125:y:2017:i:c:p:188-205
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516302499
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.022?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. Martin, Ben R. & Nightingale, Paul & Yegros-Yegros, Alfredo, 2012. "Science and technology studies: Exploring the knowledge base," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1182-1204.
    2. Chen, Ssu-Han & Huang, Mu-Hsuan & Chen, Dar-Zen, 2012. "Identifying and visualizing technology evolution: A case study of smart grid technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(6), pages 1099-1110.
    3. de Leeuw, Jan & Mair, Patrick, 2009. "Simple and Canonical Correspondence Analysis Using the R Package anacor," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 31(i05).
    4. Schubert, Cornelius, 2015. "Situating technological and societal futures. Pragmatist engagements with computer simulations and social dynamics," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 4-13.
    5. Lena Neij & Per Dannemand Andersen & Michael Durstewitz, 2004. "Experience curves for wind power," International Journal of Energy Technology and Policy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1/2), pages 15-32.
    6. Meijering, J.V. & Kampen, J.K. & Tobi, H., 2013. "Quantifying the development of agreement among experts in Delphi studies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1607-1614.
    7. Vishnevskiy, Konstantin & Karasev, Oleg & Meissner, Dirk, 2016. "Integrated roadmaps for strategic management and planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 153-166.
    8. Garimella, Suresh V. & Persoons, Tim & Weibel, Justin & Yeh, Lian-Tuu, 2013. "Technological drivers in data centers and telecom systems: Multiscale thermal, electrical, and energy management," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 66-80.
    9. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Andersen, Per Dannemand, 2014. "Innovation system foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 276-286.
    10. Tang, Yong & Sun, Honghang & Yao, Qiang & Wang, Yibo, 2014. "The selection of key technologies by the silicon photovoltaic industry based on the Delphi method and AHP (analytic hierarchy process): Case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 474-482.
    11. McPherson, Madeleine & Karney, Bryan, 2014. "Long-term scenario alternatives and their implications: LEAP model application of Panama׳s electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 146-157.
    12. Vishnevskiy, Konstantin & Karasev, Oleg & Meissner, Dirk, 2015. "Integrated roadmaps and corporate foresight as tools of innovation management: The case of Russian companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 433-443.
    13. Zimmermann, Martin & Darkow, Inga-Lena & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2012. "Integrating Delphi and participatory backcasting in pursuit of trustworthiness — The case of electric mobility in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(9), pages 1605-1621.
    14. 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.
    15. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    16. Lee, Woo Jin & Sohn, So Young, 2014. "Patent analysis to identify shale gas development in China and the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 111-115.
    17. Kudlats, Jerry & Money, Arthur & Hair, Joseph F., 2014. "Correspondence analysis: A promising technique to interpret qualitative data in family business research," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 30-40.
    18. Geist, Monica R., 2010. "Using the Delphi method to engage stakeholders: A comparison of two studies," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 147-154, May.
    19. 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.
    20. M. Rader & A. L. Porter, 2008. "Fitting Future-Oriented Technology Analysis Methods to Study Types," Springer Books, in: Cristiano Cagnin & Michael Keenan & Ron Johnston & Fabiana Scapolo & Rémi Barré (ed.), Future-Oriented Technology Analysis, chapter 3, pages 25-40, Springer.
    21. Choi, Jinho & Hwang, Yong-Sik, 2014. "Patent keyword network analysis for improving technology development efficiency," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 170-182.
    22. Foray, Dominique & Grubler, Arnulf, 1990. "Morphological analysis, diffusion and lockout of technologies: Ferrous casting in France and the FRG," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 535-550, December.
    23. Dubaric, Ervin & Giannoccaro, Dimitris & Bengtsson, Rune & Ackermann, Thomas, 2011. "Patent data as indicators of wind power technology development," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 144-149, June.
    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. Xiaoyu Liu & Alan L. Porter, 2020. "A 3-dimensional analysis for evaluating technology emergence indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 27-55, July.
    2. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Apreda, Riccardo & Fantoni, Gualtiero, 2020. "Expert biases in technology foresight. Why they are a problem and how to mitigate them," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Costa Climent, Ricardo & Haftor, Darek M., 2021. "Business model theory-based prediction of digital technology use: An empirical assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    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. Marinković, Milan & Al-Tabbaa, Omar & Khan, Zaheer & Wu, Jie, 2022. "Corporate foresight: A systematic literature review and future research trajectories," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 289-311.
    2. Costa Climent, Ricardo & Haftor, Darek M., 2021. "Business model theory-based prediction of digital technology use: An empirical assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Linares, Ian Marques Porto & De Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Porto, Geciane Silveira, 2019. "Patent-based network analysis to understand technological innovation pathways and trends," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    4. Roßmann, Bernhard & Canzaniello, Angelo & von der Gracht, Heiko & Hartmann, Evi, 2018. "The future and social impact of Big Data Analytics in Supply Chain Management: Results from a Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 135-149.
    5. Barrios, Maite & Guilera, Georgina & Nuño, Laura & Gómez-Benito, Juana, 2021. "Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Kopyto, Matthias & Lechler, Sabrina & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Hartmann, Evi, 2020. "Potentials of blockchain technology in supply chain management: Long-term judgments of an international expert panel," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    7. Tiberius, Victor & Gojowy, Robin & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Forecasting the future of robo advisory: A three-stage Delphi study on economic, technological, and societal implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    8. Christoph Markmann & Alexander Spickermann & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Alexander Brem, 2021. "Improving the question formulation in Delphi‐like surveys: Analysis of the effects of abstract language and amount of information on response behavior," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), March.
    9. Tobias Meyer & Heiko A. von der Gracht & Evi Hartmann, 2022. "Technology foresight for sustainable road freight transportation: Insights from a global real‐time Delphi study," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.
    10. Gershman, Mikhail & Bredikhin, Sergey & Vishnevskiy, Konstantin, 2016. "The role of corporate foresight and technology roadmapping in companies' innovation development: The case of Russian state-owned enterprises," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 187-195.
    11. von Briel, Frederik, 2018. "The future of omnichannel retail: A four-stage Delphi study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 217-229.
    12. Frevel, Nicolas & Beiderbeck, Daniel & Schmidt, Sascha L., 2022. "The impact of technology on sports – A prospective study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    13. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    14. Aengenheyster, Stefan & Cuhls, Kerstin & Gerhold, Lars & Heiskanen-Schüttler, Maria & Huck, Jana & Muszynska, Monika, 2017. "Real-Time Delphi in practice — A comparative analysis of existing software-based tools," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 15-27.
    15. Steininger, Dennis M. & Gatzemeier, Simon, 2019. "Digitally forecasting new music product success via active crowdsourcing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 167-180.
    16. Daim, Tugrul U. & Yoon, Byung-Sung & Lindenberg, John & Grizzi, Robert & Estep, Judith & Oliver, Terry, 2018. "Strategic roadmapping of robotics technologies for the power industry: A multicriteria technology assessment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 49-66.
    17. Spickermann, Alexander & Zimmermann, Martin & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "Surface- and deep-level diversity in panel selection — Exploring diversity effects on response behaviour in foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 105-120.
    18. Peppel, Marcel & Ringbeck, Jürgen & Spinler, Stefan, 2022. "How will last-mile delivery be shaped in 2040? A Delphi-based scenario study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    19. Gattringer, Regina & Wiener, Melanie & Strehl, Franz, 2017. "The challenge of partner selection in collaborative foresight projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 298-310.
    20. Pantano, Eleonora & Priporas, Constantinos-Vasilios & Stylos, Nikolaos, 2018. "Knowledge Push Curve (KPC) in retailing: Evidence from patented innovations analysis affecting retailers' competitiveness," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 150-160.

    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:125:y:2017:i:c:p:188-205. 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.