Roadmapping: Comparing cases in China and Germany
Introduction
The Beijing Research Centre for Science of Science (BRCSS) under the Beijing Academy of Science and Technology and the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI investigated what kind of roadmapping processes are conducted and which methodologies are used in China and Germany, respectively. The project served as a basis for mutual learning activities in China and Germany and intended to clarify what is meant when both sides talk about “roadmapping”. Often the word “foresight” (which is in fact a concept) and “roadmapping” are used simultaneously, which leads to confusion by users and readers. Therefore, the starting point was a definition of the term “roadmapping”. The intention of the project's first phase was to generate a template to “compare” roadmaps in order to be able to generate similar data separately on the German and Chinese sides. The second part of the project was to work out differences and similarities by comparing the categories of the template. First results were summarized in a table and a presentation, which was discussed in a face-to-face-meeting in Beijing in August 2012. In a joint report, the differences and similarities derived from the cases chosen were described.
This paper starts off with methodological definitions from both the Chinese and the German research team in order to clarify the use of expressions and especially the word “roadmapping” in its context. Different cases are briefly described. The last chapters try to summarize and “compare” the cases. It is evident that a detailed comparison is not possible because of different understandings and that the differences have to be seen in the light of the small sample size — therefore it is attempted to show the variety of approaches used. It also turned out that the understanding of “roadmapping” is very broad in China and encompasses methods that are rather subsumed under the heading of “foresight” in Germany.
Section snippets
Roadmap and roadmapping: definitions and processes
Early in the project it became clear that roadmapping and the methods that are applied in foresight in general are understood differently by the Chinese and German researchers. For the German side, foresight is understood as the “the structured debate about complex futures” (ISI definition, derived from different European definitions, see also Cuhls, 2012) or as “the process involved in systematically attempting to look into the longer-term future of science, technology, the economy and society
Criteria and data for comparison (cases)
For the Chinese and German comparison, a general description of the project and the process were used. Additional data for comparison were selected if available. The following criteria guided the comparison:
- •
General: project title, project description (abstract), keywords (e.g., technology, smart grid, energy storage, telecommunication), project client/fund provider, and expenditure on the project (if possible to obtain the data)
- •
General Information about the roadmapping project: project manager,
Differences and similarities between roadmapping in China and Germany
In the following section, some of the criteria for comparing the Chinese and German roadmapping cases are looked at in more detail to discuss the differences and similarities between the roadmapping projects in China and Germany. It has to be kept in mind that the selection of the criteria was made in order to organize mutual learning in general. There were no criteria to evaluate the projects or their implementation. Since the study was of limited size and only a small number of roadmapping
Lessons learnt
The current findings indicate that both, China and Germany, can learn about the way the other side performs roadmapping workshops (“drawing the roadmap”) — we think this may be a lesson for others, too. This is not a matter of expenditures as a huge variety in the costs of a roadmap was found on both sides. It might be especially interesting for the Chinese roadmapping experts to have a look at the pictures which were professionally drawn based on the discussions during the roadmapping
Conclusions
In this paper, the definition and description of different roadmapping projects from China and Germany have been brought together for a comparative analysis with the goal of mutual learning. From this state of the art, further discussions about method combinations, participation, presentation of the output and the terminology in roadmapping projects from China and Germany, which varies a lot and has to be reflected upon, can be started.
However, already in this small sample, it has been shown
Kerstin Cuhls has been working at the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI) in Karlsruhe as a scientific project manager since 1992. She studied Japanology, Chinese Studies and Business Administration. From 2011 to 2012 she was Professor for Japanology at the University of Heidelberg, Center for East Asian Studies. She develops and tests foresight tools and their combinations, and from 2008 until 2010 was Head of the Business Area “Futures Research and Foresight”. She
References (31)
Perspectives on roadmaps: how organizations talk about the future
J. Prod. Innov. Manag.
(2001)Chinese Academy of Sciences
Foresight in federal government policymaking
Futur. Res. Q.
(1985)Zukunftsforschung und Vorausschau
Roadmap zur Kundenakzeptanz — Zentrale Ergebnisse der sozialwissenschaftlichen Begleitforschung in Modellregionen
(2012)Meta-Roadmap Nanomaterialien
(2009)
Roadmap for the German Health Research Program of the Federal Government
Research Report: Technology Roadmap and Enterprises Innovation
Technology Roadmap of Wind Power Equipment Industry of Hebei, Shijiazhuang
Cited by (6)
Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: A six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process
2019, Technological Forecasting and Social ChangeCitation Excerpt :In practice, Delphi surveys often form part of a larger process, as can be seen in the national-level foresight exercises used for Future-oriented Technology Analysis (e.g. Choi and Choi, 2015; Cuhls et al., 2002; Georghiou, 1996; Gheorghiu et al., 2017; Li et al., 2017; NISTEP, 2009). In such cases, the results of the Delphi survey must be analysed and presented in a format appropriate for the subsequent steps in that process, which may include workshops (Georghiou, 1996), a scenarios exercise (Choi and Choi, 2015), roadmapping (Cuhls et al., 2015) and/or other methods. An important issue to bear in mind when analysing and summarising data from a Delphi study is that of researcher bias, particularly when there is a large quantity of data produced (Hasson et al., 2000).
Obtaining advantages from technology revolution: A patent roadmap for competition analysis and strategy planning
2019, Technological Forecasting and Social ChangeCitation Excerpt :The usual roadmapping of the TRM consists of expert-based and computer-based methods, as well as approaches that use the two methods comprehensively (Kostoff and Schaller, 2001). The expert-based TRM usually adopts the Delphi method (Cuhls et al., 2015; Fenwick et al., 2009), Analytic Hierarchy Process (Jeon et al., 2011), expert judgment (Hooshangi et al., 2013), workshops (Tuominen and Ahlqvist, 2010), and so on. The generic TRM “T-plan” is an excellent example of this type of the TRM (Cowan, 2013; Phaal et al., 2004).
Modularity in Roadmapping – Integrated foresight of technologies, products, applications, markets and society: The case of “Lithium Ion Battery LIB 2015”
2017, Technological Forecasting and Social ChangeExploring the Evolution of Core Technologies in Agricultural Machinery: A Patent-Based Semantic Mining Analysis
2023, Electronics (Switzerland)Kick-Starting Roadmapping Implementation in Corporate Settings: Lessons Learned From IHI Corporation
2023, International Journal of Innovation and Technology ManagementKnowledge co-creation roadmapping for future industrial visions: Case study on smart infrastructure
2021, Foresight and STI Governance
Kerstin Cuhls has been working at the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI) in Karlsruhe as a scientific project manager since 1992. She studied Japanology, Chinese Studies and Business Administration. From 2011 to 2012 she was Professor for Japanology at the University of Heidelberg, Center for East Asian Studies. She develops and tests foresight tools and their combinations, and from 2008 until 2010 was Head of the Business Area “Futures Research and Foresight”. She was project manager of the national BMBF Foresight Process Cycle I, now manages follow-up projects and is involved in the second cycle. She teaches Methods of Foresight at the FU Berlin and Implications of Demographic Change at the University of Heidelberg. She is a member of several Advisory Boards of international foresight institutions and sits on the Editorial Boards of three journals about Futures.
Meike de Vries from the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI) completed her studies in business administration focusing on Technology and Innovation Management in 2007 and afterwards worked as a research assistant at the Institute of Project Management and Innovation (IPMI) at the University of Bremen. There, her work focused among other things on the strategic management of non-university research institutes. She wrote her doctoral thesis on “Innovation Communication with Roadmaps”.
Li Haili works at the Beijing Research Center for Science of Science, which is a subordinate unit of the Beijing Academy of Science and Technology (BJAST). She mainly engages in Technology Foresight, Technology roadmap, and S&T Project Management. She was in charge of a number of research projects such as Technology Foresight of Beijing's New Material Industry over the Next Ten Years, Technology Roadmap of Beijing's Gas System Security, and Roadmap of New Energy of Beijing. She has published 2 monographs and more than 10 papers in related journals.
Li Ling studied at the Institute of Policy and Management (IPM) of CAS from 2007 to 2010, focusing on S&T policy, Science, Technology and Society (STS). Since graduating from the IPM, she has worked as a research assistant at the Beijing Research Center for Science of Science. Her work focuses on Technology Foresight, S&T Management, and S&T Policy. She has participated in many projects in the field of Technology Foresight, such as the Technology Roadmap of Beijing's Gas System Security, and Roadmap of New Energy of Beijing.