Sulaiman Khaldi Al Hadhrami - Strategic Foresight - Literature Review Assignment Help

Assignment Task

Strategic Foresight

Sulaiman Khaldi Al Hadhrami

There are many reasons to draw researchers for strategic foresight. Firstly, prospecting and foresight are well-known fields and long-standing practical applications. However, strategic foresight is very recent and stresses the strategic decision-making method with these forward-looking techniques. Strategic foresight offers insight into the competitive environment of companies regarding threats and opportunities and recognizes developments. Secondly, strategic foresight must be anchored in a multidisciplinary strategic management area that attracts experts in management, economics, organizations, sociology, and psychology. Thirdly, while there is still limited research into strategic foresight (Jissink, Huizingh & Rohrbeck, 2014), the field has been showing increasing interest. However, the current literature is fragmented and not incorporated sufficiently. There is no structure in the academic sector (Rohrbeck et al . 2015).
Several literature studies have discussed the topic of organizing methods and strategic foresight approaches. Some studies propose alternate approaches, while others focus more on some phases or elements in the process of foresight. A methodology may be described as a process-oriented approach to strategic foresight. In the analyzed contributions, it isn't easy to find a common denominator.  Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the strategic foresight approach is not "only" (A25). We found studies in the former community (alternative approaches), which showed that there could be many alternative ways of achieving a good result. However, many of these findings are inconsistent with which strategy is better or favored. One exception is A13, in which the authors make claims for various corporate wave paradigms.
In an inquiry of 152 major companies in Europe, strategic forecasting is usually framed by a dominant logic or model named by the authors.  By analyzing corporate prospect creation from the mid-1970s, the authors suggest "three distinct phases or waves. These are all based on the (hidden) assumptions, can be identified expressing the dominant thinking of future studies/foresight and the more broad socio-cultural context of the respective phase."  Therefore, this study promotes a new and up-to-date approach and organization of corporate prospects through open dialogue that anticipates the dynamic interplay among social, technological, and economic powers. However, it is worth noting that, apart from observing how soft factors play a more critical role in assessing corporate foresight, there is no apparent correlation between survey results and opens up prospects as a new wave. The authors use qualitative content analysis and a search grid to collect data from various sources in a case study of 30 biotechnology companies in Germany (A25). Based on this study, six different approaches to strategic, forward-looking activities have been identified: I scientific approach; (ii) a network approach; (iii) a market-driven approach; (iv) a gatekeeper approach; (v) a controlling financial approach; and (vi) no forward-looking strategic approach at all. Based on this study, six different approaches to strategic, forward-looking activities have been identified: I scientific approach; (ii) a network approach; (iii) a market-driven approach; (iv) a gatekeeper approach; (v) a controlling financial approach; and (vi) no forward-looking strategic approach at all. The authors are, however, not in a position to guide the best method. The Author's insight into the general foresight organization includes a number four essential features: structure, teamwork, decision-making, and control structures, as presented by such renowned scholars as Henry Mintzberg (1979) and Gareth Jones (2007). The case studies helped define the most critical organizational strategies for foresight, according to the Author. Based on an analysis of the case studies, how the four organizational elements referred to above are related to forecasting results (efficacy/efficiency) could be calculated. The study produces five theoretical ideas, all connected to one or more successful elements.  The Author's insight into the general foresight organization includes a number four essential features: structure, teamwork, decision-making, and control structures, as presented by such renowned scholars as Henry Mintzberg (1979) and Gareth Jones (2007). The case studies helped define the most critical organizational strategies for foresight, according to the Author. Based on an analysis of the case studies, how the four organizational elements referred to above are related to forecasting results (efficacy/efficiency) could be calculated. The study produces five theoretical ideas, all connected to one or more successful elements. 
The theoretical and empirical context for strategic foresight is presented in this chapter; potential options to choose the importance of future strategic foresight. In this second chapter, a detailed theoretical history and the empirical background of strategic foresight are provided.
A variety of theoretical frameworks and reference theories are used for strategic foresight research. However, there seems to be no specific theoretical basis for 25 of the 59 contributions (42%). Some of the other contributions include strategic thinking and theory, including strategic management, strategic flexibility, policy planning, strategic discussions, and dynamic theory of capacity; (25 percent). Organizational theories are well represented, including several papers dealing with environmental instability, in strategic foresight research (10 percent). Organizational and psychological behavior, including decision theory and sensory management, also often appear (15 percent). We identified individual contributions based on concepts and theories such as actor-network theory, narration, autoethnography and developmental biology. Finally, innovation management is based on two contributions, and nearly 10 percent of the contributions show a more philosophical focus, including social constructionism and other social science approaches. 
Strategic foresight provides a potential understanding and applying forward-looking perspective in the organization's strategic processes and decision-making. Rohrbeck et al. ( 2015) provide a historical context to the field of foresight work, from its birth to organizational integration from 2000 to the present. Various terminology was used to connect forward-thinking to strategic organizational decision-making. The industry foresight is described by Hamel and Prahalad (1994) as a profound insight into trends to build new and competitive space. Slaughter (1997) used the term strategic foresight to describe the convergence of future approaches and strategic management. The use of foresight as personal foresight by Ahuja et al. ( 2005). Management foresight can be described as the ability to predict how managers' behaviour can bring competitive benefits. The term corporate foresight is used by Rohrbeck et al. ( 2015) as a strategy that helps a business create a potential competitive advantage by generating value. A special issue was dedicated in 2010 to strategic foresight by the journal Technical Forecasting and Social Change.
According to Coates et al. (2010), strategic foresight is when foresight adding an adjective strategy. It emphasises human decision-making, the action implications of a future state, and the Frenchapproach's involvement in the prospective approach. In this perspective, strategic foresight has a strong relationship with strategic management and should be interpreted as "processes that enable decision-makers to determine their potential course of action" (Vecchiato 2012). Based on this, we decided to conduct a literary analysis of the word "strategic foresight." Along with the various terms of foresight listed above, strategic foresight constitutes a dual-purpose mission. It is to observe, perceive, and catch factors that are likely to induce future changes; According to the la-forward approach, the foresight part of the futurist and decision-maker part of the plan must not be discussed separately in two phases. The decision-maker participates in the foresight process and vice versa in an integrated process.
In the 1950's Herman Kahn's work at the RAD company used strategic foresight and scenarios in particular to explore the future. Kahn has been researching various strategic tactics to involve the Soviet Union in the Cold War by utilizing scenarios. He is known for telling tales about the future in the future. Slaughter (1997) implemented foresight conceptualization as an organizational capacity:
Although an increasing interest in strategic foresight appears to be evident (Schwarz, 2016, 2008; Daheim and Uerz, 2006), corporate strategic foresight systems remain limited in execution (Liebl, 1996; Day and Schoemaker, 2005; Roll and Weber, 2006). This may be because of concerns about investment returns or, more specifically, skepticism about the production of value of strategic foresight activities. Since the late 1980s, "foresight" has been used to describe practices that inform decision-makers through increased input on an organization's long-term future (Keenan et al. 2003). Pro sight aims to offer business managers and government policymakers various views to see the future and completely understand alternative technological/social routes' possible impacts. "Makridakis (2003 ) notes that:" Or as Tsoukas and Shepherd (2004) placed it, forecasting is the capacity to see trends before they evolve into patterns, to recognize patterns before they emerge, and to consider social currents' features that will possibly affect. Given that people are unlikely to prevent forecasting, one goal of forecasting must be to reduce future forecasting momentum (Johansen, 2007).

Foresight is associated with critical thinking in the French tradition of prospective decision-making and action. In the American tradition, foresight is used to describe an image of the future and is therefore much smaller than prediction. 

"For" the prospective" (Coates et al., 2010). Academic studies have provided details on (Ruff, 2006) he needs for strategic foresight (Day and Schoemaker, 2005), organizational foresight systems and their processes (Schwarz, 2005) and design features (Rohrbeck, 2010), as well as how they are tailored to various contingency factors (Müller and Müller-Stewens, 2008).

"Daft and Weick's (1984)" Organizations as Interpretation Structures "model guides our literature review. According to these writers, organizations perceive their environment, translate what they find into organizational effects, and create responses based on their environmental insights. According to these authors, organizations perceive their environment.

The words foresight and strategic foresight need to be briefly addressed regarding the literature review on strategic foresight. Since the late 1980s, the term foresight has been used to describe the inherent human activity (H.A. von der et al. 2008). The terms strategic, organizational, or corporate foresight have been used to describe potential research practices in corporations (H.A. von der et al. 2008) or organizations (it has been suggested that these terms can be used somewhat synonymously (Liebl and Schwarz, 2010). Martin (2010) and others ( Coates, 2010) stress that foresight is about the long-term future, and Vecchiato et al. are consciously using strategic foresight to emphasize the close relationship between foresight and the formulation of strategies.

Strategy can be divided into three practices that are very distinct but mutually interdependent: strategic thought, development of strategy, and strategic planning (Voros, 2003). Voros (2003 ) argues that the creation of strategy is the connection that connects strategic thinking with strategic planning in the decision-making of organizations. Since foresight is an input into the strategic process, which guides strategic planning by making more insightful decisions, the term foresight, as seen in Figure 3.1, is an aspect of strategic thinking (ibid).

Miles and Keenan (2002) also emphasize that its systemic, participatory, future-intelligent, and medium-to-long-term vision-building mechanisms and directing current decisions and 36 mobilizing joint efforts are the power of foresight. Berger, Bourbon-Busset, and Massé (2008 ) claim that three hypotheses are based on foresight: many futures are possible, change can be identified, and it is possible to affect the future. In comparison to conventional forecasting, which in uncertain times seldom attempts to predict the future, foresight provides a medium for shaping possible futures (Magruk, 2015). One of the most common meanings of foresight, suggested in 1983 by Ben Martin and John Irvine (Magruk, 2011), is the following:

Furthermore, the European Commission (2012 ) points out that foresight is defined by the following characteristics: long-term orientation, the analysis of a broad range of factors, and the use of formal methods and techniques which allow legitimacy and consistency to be achieved. Becker (2002 ) describes two drivers and overarching priorities for the strategic foresight operations of businesses. They are either (1) a consequence of the particular features of the business activity of the organization, which inevitably involve a long-term orientation, or (2) proactively carried out to better concentrate on the responsiveness of the enterprise to general uncertainties in its business environment (ibid).
The use of terms within foresight is vague, as in many developing research fields. Kuosa (2011 ) defines and distinguishes some of the most common principles and behaviors relevant to future sectors, each with the corresponding primary, secondary and tertiary goals or aspects.
The interrelationships between these various definitions are not clarified by Kuosa (2011), however. In comparison, Rohrbeck et al. ( 2015) differentiate between two of the main principles, strategic foresight and corporate foresight, two words that do not differentiate enough from each other. Corporate foresight is the stream that seeks to highlight an organization's emphasis on strategic foresight by combining management theory's theoretical basis with empirical evidence from strategic foresight studies. In contrast, the other stream focuses more on national policymaking (ibid). However, commonalities such as generic processes and methods are expressed by both streams (ibid). This study's authors have chosen to primarily use the term strategic foresight to prevent the exclusion or disregard of processes or approaches typically used for policies, which could theoretically also be extended in an organizational context. Moreover, the current research on corporate foresight is slim because secrecy frequently restricts its performance and the techniques used since they are used as a basis for gaining a competitive advantage (Daheim & Uerz, 2008).
It has already been suggested that the use of a much larger pool of knowledge from other sources of knowledge management could support strategic foresight research (Major et al. 2001). We conclude that the literature on strategic management and innovation management is incredibly insightful to recognize the contribution in the value of strategic forward-thinking. The use of resources in strategic management contributes to an appreciation of how organizations profit from a competitive edge (Penrose, 1959) by seeing the organization as a collection of corporate resources (humans, processes, operations, etc.) that could translate into a competitive edge about other corporate groups (Amit and Schoemaker, 1993).

Similarly, leadership is motivated by achievement and developing a culture of strategic foresight and organizational learning (Black, Morrison, et al . 1999). The leaders need to continually exercise this skill until it becomes shabbitish to impress this in the organization's culture. The best way to accomplish this is through regular scenario planning by Slaughter (1990). Scenario planning (Bootz 2010) suggested is not to formulate or define the future but instead to provide images that make it possible for decision-makers to see and respond by creating action plans and strategies. These images should provoke decision-makers to challenge the organization's current position, the state of play, and the imminent future environment (Ringland 2010).
Such scenario planning is also seen by Wilkinson and Kupers (2013) as engaging and extending decision-makers' thoughts. New and less easy and weaker signals of change in preparation for discontinuity and surprises can be obtained. It challenges politicians to learn by connecting modern causality to a learning community with contextual decision-making, backed by evidence and a thorough study instead of "I am the boss, make it a syndrome." The planning of scenarios is also an instrument of communication. It facilitates a shared language and exchanges between individuals who know the culture of learning organizations.
The elements of unpredictability instilling in scenario planning are not apparent by Bootz (2010). The future is extrapolated from the present and the knowledge collectively shared by the organization, according to Ketonen (2009). Extrapolation in scenario planning is only necessary to recognize particular previous patterns or responses (Piirainen, Gonzalez, et al., 2012). The challenge for strategic foresight lies in the unpredictable and unforeseen occurrences – "black swans" – that need to be interpreted1. The key is to recognize unpredictability and the absence of correct or incorrect responses to scenarios' preparation. To achieve unpredictability in scenario planning, policy-makers must consider uncertainty as part of their learning, planning, and creativity. Strategic foresight calls for both research and imagination. The analytical aspect has been covered by Bootz (2010) in scenario planning, but imagination and innovation were not listed partly because of strategic foresight institutional limits.

This Literature Review Assignment has been solved by our Literature Review Experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.