IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v7y2025i2ne70011.html

Participatory Methods in Corporate Foresight: A Systematic Literature Review of Case Studies and Guidelines for Reporting

Author

Listed:
  • Jörg M. Delhaes
  • Ana C. L. Vieira
  • João F. Pimenta
  • Mónica D. Oliveira

Abstract

Case studies developed in real settings are essential to generate insights into Corporate Foresight research, as they provide evidence of the relevance of foresight approaches in practical contexts while inspiring new approaches and applications. Proper reporting of methods used in case study publications is necessary to communicate the results' validity, enable studies' replicability, and learn from practice. A key component of case studies in Corporate Foresight is the design and implementation of participation. Aiming to show how participation has been utilized in the Corporate Foresight field, this study presents a systematic literature review that examines the participatory component of Corporate Foresight case studies published between 2003 and 2023. The review was designed to inform about which contexts have case studies been applied to and which decisions have been supported; which participatory processes and methods have been adopted over time, and whether new processes and methods are being used and shaped by emerging technologies; and whether participatory processes and methods have been documented to enable study replicability and an understanding of participatory processes. For this later purpose, we built a taxonomy to enable analysis of the level of documentation of participation in the reviewed case studies. Results show (i) literature is diverse and growing, but the application of participatory methods is often limited to traditional setups; (ii) few case studies comprehensively describe their participatory component, revealing significant gaps in the documentation required to understand how and why it was designed and implemented. An integrative review helped understand the reasons for these findings and make a case for improving the documentation of participation and exploring the use of novel technologies in Corporate Foresight research. We propose guidelines to help future researchers better document their case studies, enable research replicability, and generate more insights and learnings for future studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jörg M. Delhaes & Ana C. L. Vieira & João F. Pimenta & Mónica D. Oliveira, 2025. "Participatory Methods in Corporate Foresight: A Systematic Literature Review of Case Studies and Guidelines for Reporting," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), August.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:7:y:2025:i:2:n:e70011
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.70011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.70011
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.70011?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bolger, Fergus & Wright, George, 2017. "Use of expert knowledge to anticipate the future: Issues, analysis and directions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 230-243.
    2. Snyder, Hannah, 2019. "Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 333-339.
    3. Mark De Reuver & Harry Bouwman & Timber Haaker, 2013. "Business Model Roadmapping: A Practical Approach To Come From An Existing To A Desired Business Model," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-18.
    4. Alessandro Fergnani & John A. Sweeney, 2021. "Identity Wind Tunneling: A method for discovering an organization’s strategic identity using scenarios," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    5. Kayser, Victoria & Blind, Knut, 2017. "Extending the knowledge base of foresight: The contribution of text mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 208-215.
    6. Lehr, Thomas & Lorenz, Ullrich & Willert, Markus & Rohrbeck, René, 2017. "Scenario-based strategizing: Advancing the applicability in strategists' teams," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 214-224.
    7. Mingers, John & Brocklesby, John, 1997. "Multimethodology: Towards a framework for mixing methodologies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 489-509, October.
    8. Elizabeth Gibson & Tugrul Daim & Edwin Garces & Marina Dabic, 2018. "Technology Foresight: A Bibliometric Analysis to Identify Leading and Emerging Methods," Foresight and STI Governance, National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(1), pages 6-24.
    9. Husam Arman & Nabil Gindy & Mohammad Kabli & Shirley Cavin, 2014. "Integrated Technology Roadmapping Tool To Aid The Decision-Making Of R&D Investments," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(02), pages 1-21.
    10. Heger, Tobias & Rohrbeck, René, 2012. "Strategic foresight for collaborative exploration of new business fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 819-831.
    11. Claudio Chauke Nehme & Marcio de Miranda Santos & Lelio Fellows Filho & Gilda Massari Coelho, 2012. "Challenges in communicating the outcomes of a foresight study to advise decision-makers on policy and strategy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 245-257, March.
    12. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    13. Michael Gibbert & Winfried Ruigrok & Barbara Wicki, 2008. "What passes as a rigorous case study?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1465-1474, December.
    14. Christian Mühlroth & Michael Grottke, 2018. "A systematic literature review of mining weak signals and trends for corporate foresight," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(5), pages 643-687, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Taferner, Stefan Gerhard, 2023. "Strategic Foresight Capability and its Impact on Firm Performance: A systematic, AI-based Literature Review," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 8(3), pages 658-681.
    3. Gordon, Adam Vigdor & Ramic, Mirza & Rohrbeck, René & Spaniol, Matthew J., 2020. "50 Years of corporate and organizational foresight: Looking back and going forward," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    4. Culot, Giovanna & Battistella, Cinzia, 2024. "Future ecosystem business model tool: Design science and field test in the efuel ecosystem towards the sustainability transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    5. Amber Geurts & Ralph Gutknecht & Philine Warnke & Arjen Goetheer & Elna Schirrmeister & Babette Bakker & Svetlana Meissner, 2022. "New perspectives for data‐supported foresight: The hybrid AI‐expert approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.
    6. Montijn Ven & Paola Lara Machado & Alexia Athanasopoulou & Banu Aysolmaz & Oktay Turetken, 2023. "Key performance indicators for business models: a systematic review and catalog," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 753-794, September.
    7. Thomas Moellers & Lars von der Burg & Bastian Bansemir & Max Pretzl & Oliver Gassmann, 2019. "System dynamics for corporate business model innovation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(3), pages 387-406, September.
    8. 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).
    9. White, Leroy, 2026. "Fifty years of Soft Operational Research: The contribution of EURO and EJOR to its foundation and development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 328(3), pages 735-748.
    10. Müller, Julian Marius & Buliga, Oana & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2018. "Fortune favors the prepared: How SMEs approach business model innovations in Industry 4.0," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 2-17.
    11. Johannes S. Schwarz & Christine Legner, 2020. "Business model tools at the boundary: exploring communities of practice and knowledge boundaries in business model innovation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 30(3), pages 421-445, September.
    12. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    13. Sakellariou, Evy & Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2022. "Foresight, sensemaking, and new product development: Constructing meanings for the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Amr S. Abdallah & Hala Amin & Mohammed Abdelghany & Ahmed A. Elamer, 2025. "Antecedents and consequences of intellectual capital: a systematic review, integrated framework, and agenda for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 3067-3118, December.
    15. Maryono, Maryono & Killoes, Aditya Marendra & Adhikari, Rajendra & Abdul Aziz, Ammar, 2024. "Agriculture development through multi-stakeholder partnerships in developing countries: A systematic literature review," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    16. Lepore, Dominique & Frontoni, Emanuele & Micozzi, Alessandra & Moccia, Sara & Romeo, Luca & Spigarelli, Francesca, 2023. "Uncovering the potential of innovation ecosystems in the healthcare sector after the COVID-19 crisis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 80-86.
    17. Ali Zackery & Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Zahra Heidari Darani & Shiva Ghasemi, 2022. "COVID-19 Research in Business and Management: A Review and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-32, August.
    18. Rao, Amar & Sharma, Gagan Deep & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Hossain, Mohammad Razib & Dev, Dhairya, 2025. "Crude oil Price forecasting: Leveraging machine learning for global economic stability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    19. Eusebius Pantja Pramudya & Lukas Rumboko Wibowo & Fitri Nurfatriani & Iman Kasiman Nawireja & Dewi Ratna Kurniasari & Sakti Hutabarat & Yohanes Berenika Kadarusman & Ananda Oemi Iswardhani & Rukaiyah , 2022. "Incentives for Palm Oil Smallholders in Mandatory Certification in Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, April.
    20. Peter Schnell & Phillip Haag & Hans Christian Jünger, 2022. "Implementation of Digital Technologies in Construction Companies: Establishing a Holistic Process which Addresses Current Barriers," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:fufsci:v:7:y:2025:i:2:n:e70011. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2573-5152 .

    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.