Fourth International Seville Conference on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA)
FTA and Grand Societal Challenges – Shaping and Driving Structural and Systemic Transformations
Seville, 12-13 May 2011
Constructing systemic transformation capacities in a research and technology organisation: Applying diversified roadmap concept at VTT, Finland
Ahlqvist, Toni, Halonen, Minna, Eerola, Annele, Kivisaari, Sirkku, Kohl, Johanna, Koivisto, Raija
Myllyoja, Jouko
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
E-mail: forename.surname[at]vtt.fi
Keywords:systemic transformation, capacity, research and technology organisation (RTO), anticipatory culture, roadmapping, diversified roadmaps, strategy process
Introduction
Currently the organisational and geographical scales of innovation systems are more interlinked than ever. It means that ramifications of systemic transformations flow through this meta-system faster than beforeand these flows have complex effects. Because of this systemic complexity, the implications are also harder to anticipate. This is why research and technology organisations (RTOs), as key nodes in the meta-system, should develop at least two systemic capacities: 1) partial structural openness and fluidity that endorse rapid alterations in the organisational structures enabling flexibility in responding to the systemic flows, and 2) horizontal and pervasive anticipatory culture that in a networked fashion integrates the critical knowledge in a RTO to reflexively construct an internal future-oriented agency, i.e. proactive and bottom-up participatory approach which leads to action.
Methodology
In this paper we explore the questions of systemic transformations and the building of anticipatory culture in the context of a Finnish RTO, namely VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Firstly, we discuss VTT’s internal R&D approach that emphasises the so-called parallel innovation process. In the present model, the function of foresight is to be the first step when entering this process. We suggest a shift in this thinking by transforming the foresight into a horizontal organisational function that permeates all levels of the parallel innovation process. Secondly, we propose that principles of technology roadmapping could be applied in building the strategic capacities and in constructing what we call a horizontal foresight function.
We present a diversified roadmap concept that widens the scope of traditional technology roadmapping towards such directions as visionary strategic management, network building and development, and organisational learning and adaptation. Thirdly, we exemplify these diversified roadmapping concepts by analysing twoVTT case studies: Building Service roadmapping process and Service Science and Business (SSB) Network roadmapping process.The case studies have two aims: 1) to present and assess the diversified roadmap methodand 2) to evaluate roadmapping as a catalyst of systemic changes in a RTO.
Results and policy impact/implications
The case studies reflect on the questions of how to build a required level of systemic openness and stimulate the construction of horizontal anticipatory culture in a RTO. Thus our results are threefold: Firstly, the paper provides paths to enable anticipatory culture in RTOs and other organisations. Secondly, the paper widens the scope of roadmapping towards the field of organisational development and visionary planning. Thirdly, the paper presents a diversified roadmap model that can be applied in specific organisational settings. The key issue from the policy perspective is that the generic ideas of this paper can be utilised also in several policy fields.
Conclusions
Constructing systemic transformation capacities in organisations requires novel organisational capacities: the capacityfor structural opennessand capacity for anticipatory culture. These capacities are dependent on the organisational tradition - this is why it is important to realise that foresight sensibility also requires contextual historical understanding.
References (selected)
Ahlqvist, T., Bäck, A., Heinonen, S. & Halonen, M. (2010). Road-mapping the societal transformation potential of social media. Foresight 12:5, 3–26.
Ahlqvist, T., H. Carlsen, J. Iversen, & E. Kristiansen. (2007). Nordic ICT foresight. Futures of the ICT environment and applications on the Nordic level. VTT Publications 653. Edita Prima Oy, Helsinki.
Blackwell, A.F., Phaal, R., Eppler, M. & Crilly, N. (2008). Strategy roadmaps: new forms, newpractices. In Stapleton, G., Howse, J. and Lee, J. (Eds.). Diagrams 2008. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg,127–140.
Farrukh, C., Phaal, R.D.& Probert, R. (2003). Technology roadmapping: linking technology resources into business planning. International Journal of Technology Management 26: 12–19.
Kostoff, R.N. & Schaller, R.R. (2001). Science and technology roadmaps. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48:2, 132–143.
Kostoff, R.N., Boylan, R. & Simons, G.R. (2004). Disruptive technology roadmaps. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 71:2, 141–59.
Könnölä, T., Ahlqvist, T., Eerola, A., Kivisaari, S. & Koivisto, R. (2009). Management of foresight portfolio: analysis of modular foresight projects at contract research organization. Technological Analysis & Strategic Management 21:3, 381–405.
Lee, S., & Y. Park. (2005). Customization of technology roadmaps according to roadmapping purposes: overall process and detailed modules. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 72: 567–583.
Summary
The paper suggests that research and technology organisations (RTOs), as key nodes in the meta-system, should develop at least two systemic capacities: 1) partial structural openness and fluidity that endorse rapid alterations in the organisational structures enabling flexibility in responding to the systemic flows, and 2) horizontal and pervasive anticipatory culture that in a networked fashion connects the critical knowledge in a RTO to reflexively construct an internal future-oriented agency, i.e. proactive and bottom-up participatory approach which leads to action.
In this paper we explore the questions of systemic transformations and building of anticipatory culture in the context of Finnish RTO, namely VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Firstly, we start by discussing the VTT’s internal R&D perspective that emphasises so-called parallel innovation process. In the present model, function of foresight is the first step of the process. We suggest a shift in this thinking by transforming the foresight into a horizontal organisational function that permeates all levels of the parallel innovation process. Secondly, we propose that principles of technology roadmapping could be applied in building strategic capacities and in constructing the horizontal foresight function. Thirdly, we exemplify these novel roadmapping directions by analysing selected development projects at VTT as case studies.
1Introduction
Currently the organisational and geographical scales of innovation systems are more interlinked than ever. It means that ramifications of systemic transformations flow through this meta-system faster than before, and these flows have complex effects. This interrelatedness poses specific challenges to the organisations striving to steer in this landscape of myriad impulses. Navigation calls for a specific strategic capabilities and resilience. Organisations should, firstly, crystallise their own purpose and role in this landscape. Secondly, they should have a kind of filtering mechanism to identify the important impulses from the less important ones. And thirdly, since this landscape is constantly evolving, they should possess an adaptive capability to alter their course. In other words organisations face a somewhat paradoxical situation: strategies should be robust and spring from unique organisational culture, yet they should simultaneously foster openness and adaptability. Hence the starting point for our paper is the question: how to construct these kinds of paradoxicalstrategic abilities in an organisation.
In this paper we focus on specific type of organisations in this landscape, namely research and technology organisations (RTOs). As argued by Arnold et al. (2010: 9–10), the definition and origins of RTOs are manifold. However, they (2010: 10) utilise the broad definition of EARTO, which can be summarised as follows: RTOs are organisations whose predominant activities are to provide research and development, technology and innovation services to enterprises, governments and other clients. Arnold et al. (2010: 7) assert that RTOs play important roles in the European innovation system and in de-facto ERA (European Research Area) policies, especially by increasing the innovation activities in industry through technology platforms, stretching the abilities of technological capabilities of companies and connecting research-based theoretical knowledge with practical knowledge through applications. It could thus be stated, even though Arnold et al. (ibid.) note that RTOs are “misunderstood” and somewhat forgotten players in the official ERA policies, RTOs can be viewed as a key nodes in the European innovation system.
Also RTOs navigate the rugged landscape briefly depicted above. This is why we suggest that it would beneficial for RTOs to put some effort at developing two systemic capacities: 1) partial structural openness and fluidity that endorse rapid alterations in the organisational structures enabling flexibility in responding to the systemic flows, and 2) horizontal and pervasive anticipatory culture that in a networked fashion connects the critical knowledge in a RTO to reflexively construct an internal future-oriented agency, i.e. proactive and bottom-up participatory approach which leads to action.
In this paper we explore these questions of systemic transformations in the context of Finnish RTO, namely VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland. Firstly, we start by discussing the VTT’s internal R&D perspective that emphasises so-called parallel innovation process. In the present model, function of foresight is to be the first step when entering this process. We suggest a shift in this thinking by transforming the foresight into a horizontal organisational function that permeates all levels of the parallel innovation process. Secondly, we propose that principles of technology roadmapping could be applied in building the strategic capacities and constructing the horizontal foresight function inside a RTO. We present a diversified roadmap concept that adapts the scope of traditional technology roadmapping and widens its horizon towards such directions as visionary strategic management, network building and development, organisational learning and adaptation. Thirdly, we exemplify these novel roadmapping directions by analysing selected development projects at VTT as case studies. These cases utilise some combination of these novel roadmapping features and, hence, open a perspective to evaluate the coherence and change-inducing capacity of foresight approach in these projects as such, but also allow the assessment of diversified roadmap method.
The paper proceeds through five sections. In the following section 2 we briefly outline strategic development paths in a RTO. In the section 3 we discuss the idea of anticipatory culture and itsrelations to systemic transformation capacities and horizontal foresight function. In the fourth section we provide a selective glance to the roadmapping as a method of fostering the systemic transformation capacities. In this section we propose a diversified roadmapping concept that is based on identification of knowledge space and roadmap scale. The section 5 presents two case studies that demonstrate the themes developed in the section 4. The final sixth section shortly wraps up the argument.
2Strategic development paths in a research and technology organisation
An important starting point when building an anticipatory culture is the realisation that organisations live under a constant tensions between past, present and future knowledge. These tensions can be characterised with an evolutionary model of an organisation presented in Figure 1. Three basic temporal levels condition the strategic options of an organisation:1) future development options in the context of anticipated and unknown challenges,2) past decisions that affect explicitly and implicitly and 3) present, in which all the actions and decisions are made.It is critical to understand that also the unrealised options in the past, as well as the potential ones in the future, also affect the present decisions.
Organisations thus face a temporal dilemma which can be spelled out as a following managerial dictum: “In every decision, we always choose the path of success.”However, we all know that the success that is aimed at in every decision does not always realise. What are the basic reasons for this?Why is it that some unforeseen trajectories prove to be so important? How to answer this temporal dilemma? We suggest that first step is to adopt a foresight rationale in the organisation: “by having an informed view about the future and about how the past decisions affect us, it is possible to make more informed decisions”. The second step is to adopt a visionary rationale: “by having a strong and explicit vision of the future, it is possible to modify or even shape the future”. Third step would be to engage in an anticipatory culture in the organisation.
A crucial thing is that, in order to beembedded into unique structures of an organisation, the adoption of anticipatory culture does not mean that historical development pathsareerased. Quite the opposite: anticipatory culture, as we propose it, calls for historical understanding and appreciation of historical paths in an organisation. Figure 1 presents some ideal examples of the varied historical paths. Every organisation is faced,from time to time, with strategic watersheds – decision moments when organisation has to go to the basics and ponder, if it is going to continue with the business-as-usual, try modest renovations or change its logic completely. In the process, some path gets eventually chosen, either explicitly or implicitly, and the realised path then leads either to growth, even development or decline. When thinking about organisation’s capacity to learn and adapt, it is important to realise that it is not only the realised path that affects the present development and the future possibilities. Also unrealised options, at least to some extent, “haunt” the present in the organisation’s memory. And further, the causality between decisions made and paths realised is not always linear: in other words, it is not always clear that themade decisionand realised path are correspondent. In fact, it could be suggested that most of the decisions are realised only partially. In sum, it is crucial to conceptualise organisation not as a “closed node” in the present, but as a kind of “continuum” that is constructed out of future options, present, realised path in the past, decisions made in the past and unrealised past options.
Figure 1. Interplay of past, present and future knowledge in an organisation.
3Towards anticipatory culture: systemic transformation capacities and horizontal foresight function
Engaging the anticipatory culture, and concomitant construction of systemic transformation capacities, means to understand the organisations as a kind of ”continuum” between future options, present decisions and past development paths. Organisations navigate, as argued above, in the rugged strategic landscape that increasingly requires specific systemic capacities. In the relevant scientific literature, innovation activity, and indeed the whole activity field of organisations, has been increasingly understood as a relational activity, i.e. activity in relation to other organisations and impulses streaming from users and large-scale macro-currents. For example, Geels (2004: 900) uses the term ‘socio-technical system’ to describe a complex systemic interaction that encompasses production, diffusion and use of technology. His (2004: 915) insight is to connect micro-scale technical niches into macro-scale currents he called “landscape developments” through a middle-scale of socio-technical regime. The idea of the model is that singular, user-based instances can be dynamically connected to institutional trajectories which then feed into the large-scale landscape developments.Smits and Kuhlmann (2004: 11) argue that innovation is a systemic activity that “involves a variety of actions within the system, of which the innovating organisation or innovator forms part”. They (2011: 11–12) propose a notion of “systemic instruments” that endorse the building of what we here call systemic transformation capacities. They propose following systemic instruments: the management of interfaces; building and organising (innovation) systems; providing a platform for learning and experimenting; providing an infrastructure for strategic intelligence; and stimulating demand articulation, strategy and vision development.
We propose that the ideas of systemic innovation policies and systemic instruments require that an organisation creates a novel anticipatory capacity, and foster an anticipatory culture. We define anticipatory capacity as a capacity to continuously reflect ones own actions against a systematically formed strategic view of the future, and change ones behaviour and/or strategic view of the future when necessary. Anticipatory culture, on the other hand, is an extension of the anticipatory capacity. To adopt an anticipatory culture means that organisation endorses foresight as a horizontal structural feature that penetrates all its activities.
In the following, we demonstrate this idea by providing a brief adaptation of VTT’s innovation model. Figure 2 presents VTT’s parallel innovation process model, as formulated by Koppinen et al. (2010). The key in this model is the parallel development and management of technology R&D, applications research, and development of business models in the context of changing business landscape of the customers. In this model, foresight is the very first stepwhen entering the parallel innovation process. It is a kind of a preliminary checkpoint, or warming up, for the strategic moves (Figure 2). We suggest that foresight function should be transformed into a horizontal function that permeates all levels of the parallel innovation process. This horizontal foresight function would be implementedby different methods, with an expert community chosen across the organisation and clients, and it would be activated in chosen checkpoints.
Figure 2. VTT’s parallel innovation process model: towards a future-oriented model (adapted from Koppinen et al. 2010).
We propose that systemic transformation capacity is built on, at least, two components. First is a partial structural openness that endorses rapid alterations in the organisational structures enabling flexibility in responding to the systemic flows (i.e. changes in the business environment and in customers’ innovation processes). Second is a horizontal and pervasive anticipatory culture that in a networked fashion connects the critical knowledge in a RTO. The aim of anticipatory culture is to stimulate an internal future-oriented agency, i.e. proactive and bottom-up participatory approach which leads to action.
We further suggest that in the context of roadmapping, building systemic transformation capacitycan be realised via following three steps: 1) identification of relevant roadmap knowledge spaces, 2) specifying relevant roadmap scope, and 3) building a managerial orientation to deal with the results. These ideas and concepts will be elaborated below.