The general idea of technology scouting is simple: Use a network of experts to scan the technological environment, monitor key technologies and channel the information into the company. On the basis of the information companies might react in different ways:

• assessing the risk from a new and disruptive technology
• planning own research and development (R&D) activities in the new technological field
• preparing the acquisition of the emerging technology by for example licensing, acquiring the Intellectual Property Right (IPR) or buying the company

In all cases the company will have to get additional information, reach out the the source of the initial information and start interacting with the respective organization. Therefore Technology Scouting is a combination of Foresight and Technology Management (see figure 1).

Figure 1: Definition of technology scouting, source: Rohrbeck 2010, p.3

To ensure effective inflow and utilization of insights on emerging technologies the companies build internal and external networks of scouts. These scouts can be internal employees or external consultants. Desired characteristics are lateral thinker, knowledgeable in science and technology, respected inside the company, cross-disciplinary orientated, and imaginative. The scouts serve as central nodes within a network that channel information and create links that can be used to trigger collaborations between partners within the network (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Generic scouting network, source: Rohrbeck 2010, p. 6

The primary difference between an effective and an ineffective scouting network is its ability to create value creating relationships between the participants. Many companies create scouting activities with the expectation that (1) external sources will always be happy to share their insights into emerging technologies or that (2) they just have to pay consultants to search and retrieve the needed information. Often these endeavours end when the company is tired of paying large amounts of money for information that is neither good nor usable to create a competitive advantage.

Another way to organize is shown in figure 3. Here the four primary actors within the scouting network are linked through value adding relationships that create stability. Particularly crucial for long-term sustainability is the relationship between the internal stakeholders, who are the ones that take the actions (e.g. acquire technologies) and the external experts, that supply the information and are eager to engage into joint R&D projects.  Figure 3: Value adding relationships in a scouting network, source Rohrbeck 2010, p. 7

For more details read the full article: Rohrbeck, R. 2010. Harnessing a network of experts for competitive advantage – Technology Scouting in the ICT Industry. R & D Management, 40(20): 169-180. (open access version)

My paper was discussed in the Organizational Development and Change (ODC) track. For presentation of the findings within the round table presentation I was asked to provide a handout which you can download here. It gives a brief overview of our research and shows our Maturity Model on Organizational Future Orientation and the barriers and process model how weak signals are translated in managerial action.

I also want to express my gratitude to the ODC division for honoring our research with the Rupe Chisholm Best Theory to Practice Paper Award.

• scan for discontinuous change and reduce uncertainty
• trigger organizational responses through integration with strategic management, R&D, marketing, corporate development or strategic controlling
• lay the basis to influence others, such as your customers, your suppliers, public opinion or legislation
• enhance the value of your company by providing a future story to your shareholders and stakeholders

Today we want to get your feedback on what you expect from corporate foresight activities and we invite you to take part in our poll on the the right hand side of our main page.

Please share also your view on how corporate foresight can add value to your company by leaving comments to this post.

He identifies five application fields of foresight in firms:

• predicting long-term market developments, by analysing mega-trends (such as demographic change, increasing individualism. etc.)
• identifying changes in customer needs, by anticipating not-articulated needs and actively shaping future customer needs
• prospective evaluation of innovations, by proactive scanning of technologies and market opportunities
• facilitating business process and organizational change, by linking environmental changes with change in internal processes and organizational structures
• scanning and monitoring of the environment, by multi-disciplinary teams that are highly networked

For the first four application fields he provides short examples to illustrate the implementation at Daimler and to show the contributions to the business. He explains that the foresight projects were able to contribute to

• strategic planning for the Chinese market (long-term market developments)
• understanding the target group for the Smart “ForTwo” (identifying customer needs)
• identification of new product features in Daimler Vans (evaluation of innovations)
• enhancement of internal IT management (business process and organizational change)

These findings relate also on our view (discussed in our post and article) that corporate foresight contributes to the innovation success of a company through

• providing strategic guidance (Frank’s “strategic planning“)
• initiating innovations (Frank’s “identifying customer needs“, “evaluation of innovations”, “business process and organizational change”, “scanning and monitoring”)
• challenging ongoing R&D projects

Only the last point of our model seems not to be implemented at Daimler. One reason for that could be that the Society and Technology Research Group seems to have more the character of a internal “think tank”, while we observed the challenging (or Opponent role as we call it) task with foresight units that were part of the R&D organization.

Full reference of the article: Ruff, F. 2006. Corporate foresight: integrating the future business environment into innovation and strategy. International Journal of Technology Management, 34(3-4): 278-295.

To increase the ability to make reliable predictions about trajectories of emerging markets it might be a good idea to talk to your neighbours or to people you know who might have a different perspective. Following this logic firms have started to collaborate on joint foresight capabilities. In our research we came across three different ways:

• executive circles where typically the CEO meets with other CEOs to identify and discuss changes in the environment
• joint foresight projects with typically two firms that have a buyers-suppliers relationship
• multi-organizational foresight circles that combine companies from different industries to discuss emerging change from different perspectives

The first two examples we discuss in our article  “Opening up for competitive advantage – How Deutsche Telekom creates an open innovation ecosystem” (you can access the article as an open pre-print version or as the  final article published in R&D Managment). If you are more the visual type, you can also access a presentation given at the OECD.

The example of multi-organizational foresight projects is discussed in our book and illustrated below, from the perspective of one firm.

We are looking forward to your views on the feasibility and good practices of collaborative foresight projects.

Explaining their motivation they emphasize that foresight research has been focused to a large extent on proposing methods and processes to identify and interpret trends (what they call reducing “state uncertainty”). More research is needed to understand how firms can create insights into the implications of trends for their own business (what they call “reducing effect uncertainty”) and help to trigger adequate responses (“reducing response uncertainty).

For their empirical research they build on case studies that provide  successful examples. They chose four firms that were able to identify and interpret trends and produce adequate responses to enhance their competitive position. Their sample includes Kodak, Nokia, Luxottica and Starbucks.

They show that for understanding the impact of change companies can follow two approaches:

• analysing first the current industry structure and then assessing the impact of a trend or
• analysing first the trend, deducing what kind of industry such a trend might create and then deriving their need to change.

Concluding the authors suggest that the second approach is superior, because it helps decision makers to break out of their mental models. They expect that managers will only be able to decide on measures that are decisive enough, after they have been challenged to change their mental models.

To produce responses Vecchiato and Roveda see to options:

• betting on the trend, for example developing a new business field that emerges around the possibility to handle digital images or
• developing strategic options, for example through corporate venturing activities, where the firm invest money in multiple business concepts that would profit from the emerging trend and waits to see which one will be successful

The authors conclude that both are valid approaches and that in some cases betting the future of the company on one completely new business field might be the only option to ensure long-term survival of the company.

Full reference and link to the article: Vecchiato, R., & Roveda, C. 2010. Strategic foresight in corporate organizations: Handling the effect and response uncertainty of technology and social drivers of change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, In Press, Corrected Proof.

The full reference information are:

Rohrbeck, R. (2010) “Corporate Foresight: Towards a Maturity Model for the Future Orientation of a Firm“, Physica-Verlag, Springer, Heidelberg and New York.

Topics in the strategic foresight track include, peripheral vision, prospective sense making, methods of foresight, and foresight for decision making.

The three roles can enhance the innovation capacity of a firm in different ways:

• In the strategist role, corporate foresight directs innovation activities by creating a vision, providing strategic guidance, consolidating opinions, assessing and repositioning innovation portfolios, and identifying the new business models of competitors.
• In the initiator role, corporate foresight triggers innovation initiatives by identifying new customer needs, technologies, and product concepts of competitors.
• In the opponent role, corporate foresight challenges the innovators to create better and more successful innovations by challenging basic assumptions, challenging the state-of-the-art of current R & D projects, and scanning for disruptions that could endanger current and future innovations.

To access the article you have two options: free pre-print and final article from science direct

To tackle the questions how companies become future oriented and thus ensure long-term survival and success, scholars have worked on different levels (see figure below). Some have done research on

• foresight methods such as scenario technique, delphi analysis, etc., that allow us to explore the future, identify alternative futures or make predictions and
• others have worked on corporate foresight as a process. These scholars imply that there is a corporate foresight function, possibly also a corporate foresight unit that generates insights into the future and channels these to other corporate functions such as innovation management, strategic management, corporate development, marketing, or controlling.
• When we talk about organizational future orientation we appreciate that this ability can be build upon a corporate foresight unit, that utilizes foresight methods, but we also include the possibility that a firm builds its future orientation upon other means, such as encouraging all employees to look for external change and empowering them to respond to this change with individual initiative, possibly through corporate venturing schemes.