ЭКСПЕРТНЫЕ ПРОЦЕДУРЫ В ФОРСАЙТЕ: ОСОБЕННОСТИ ВЗАИМОДЕЙСТВИЯ С ЭКСПЕРТАМИ В ПРОЕКТАХ ПО ДОЛГОСРОЧНОМУ ПРОГНОЗИРОВАНИЮ

Олег Игоревич Карасев; Арсений Евгеньевич Китаев; Ирина Игоревна Миронова; Татьяна Викторовна Шинкаренко

doi:10.21638/10.21638/11701/spbu12.2017.203

Authors

Олег Игоревич Карасев Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1-46, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation
Арсений Евгеньевич Китаев Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1-46, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation
Ирина Игоревна Миронова Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1-46, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation
Татьяна Викторовна Шинкаренко Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1-46, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21638/10.21638/11701/spbu12.2017.203

Abstract

The article addresses the key problems of professional procedures’ organization in long-term Science,
Technology & Innovation (STI) forecasting research. Within the framework of professional procedures in forecasting research, the problem of ensuring the required quality of expert professionals for each area of study has arisen. Qualitative examination can be achieved through optimal organization of the work of expert groups and the creation of expert panels with a high level of professional competence in a subject area. However, under a limited number of competent professionals within a specific subject area, it is crucial to use special qualification criteria for the selection of experts based on ex ante assessment. Besides, application of individual methods of motivation helps to improve the quality of technological forecasts. In the article the authors offer their own methods of ex ante assessment of expert’s competence. Special attention is also paid to the most common methods of motivating expert professionals engaged in forecasting research in the science and technology areas.

Keywords:

expert methods, expert professional qualification criteria, Science & Technology forecasting, foresight

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Литература

Брумер В., Коннола Т., Сало А. Многообразие в форсайт-исследованиях. Практика отбора инновационных идей // Форсайт. 2010. Т. 4, № 4. С. 56–68.

Popper R. How are Foresight Methods Selected? // Foresight. 2008. Vol. 10, N 6. P. 62–89.

Троцук И. В. Отрицание экспертности как методическая проблема // Социология: 4М. 2009. № 29. С. 155–171.

Ельмеев В. Я., Овсянников В. Г. Прикладная социология: Очерки методологии. 2-е изд., испр. и доп. СПб.: Изд-во СПбГУ, 1999. 296 с.

Baker J., Lovell K., Harris N. How Expert are the Experts? An Exploration of the Concept of «Expert» within Delphi Panel Techniques // Nurse Researcher. 2006. Vol. 14, N 1. P. 59–70.

Рогозин Д. М., Яшина А. В. Фальсификация экспертности экспертного интервью // Телескоп: Журнал социологических и маркетинговых исследований. 2007. № 4. С. 32–45.

Масленников Е. В. Эксперт в социологическом исследовании // Вестник Московского ун-та. Сер. 18: Социология и политология. 1995. № 4. С. 69–82.

Sharoda A. Paul. Find an Expert: Designing Expert Selection Interfaces for Formal Help-Giving // CHI ‘16 Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2016. P. 3038–3048.

Боков М. Б. Специфика и процедуры получения прогнозного знания в форсайте // Социологические исследования. 2013. № 3. С. 74–84.

Saritas O. Participation in Technology Foresight: Using Expert and Stakeholder Panels // Preprint. 2007. URL: http://www.forschungsnetzwerk.at/downloadpub/foresight_expert_panels_ozcan_071107_114.pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2017).

Meissner D., Gokhberg L., Sokolov A. Science, Technology and Innovation Policy for the Future // Potentials and Limits of Foresight Studies. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. P. 43–62.

Макарова Е. А., Соколова А. В. Лучшие практики оценки научно-технологического форсайта: базовые элементы и ключевые критерии // Форсайт. 2012. Т. 6, № 3. С. 62–75.

Makarova E., Sokolova A. Foresight Evaluation: Lessons from Project Management // Foresight. 2014. Vol. 16, N 1. P. 75–91.

Organization and Methods / UNIDO. Technology Foresight Manual, 2005.

Mapping Foresight. Revealing How Europe and Other World Regions Navigate into the Future / EFMN. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, European Commission, 2009. 128 p.

The Sixth Technology Forecast Survey — Future Technology in Japan Toward The Year 2025 // NISTEP (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy). 1997. Report N 52 URL: http://data.nistep.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/11035/650/1/NISTEP-NR052-FullE. pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2017).

Brandes F. The UK Technology Foresight Programme: an Assessment of Expert Estimates // Technological Forecasting & Social Change. 2009. Vol. 76, N 7. P. 869–879.

Доклад по результатам выполнения НИР по теме: «Формирование сети отраслевых центров прогнозирования научно-технологического развития на базе ведущих российских вузов по приоритетному направлению «Информационно-телекоммуникационные системы» / НИУ ИТМО. СПб., 2011. URL: https://www.hse.ru/data/2012/02/20/1263088841/Доклад_ИТМО. pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2017).

Карасев О. И., Вишневский К. О., Веселитская Н. Н. Возможности использования методологии форсайта для разработки стратегических прогнозов отраслевого развития // Труды МАИ. 2012. № 53. URL: http://www.mai.ru/upload/iblock/ee2/primenenie-metodov-forsayta-dlya-vyyavleniya-prioritetovtekhnologicheskogo-razvitiya-aviatsionno_promyshlennogo-kompleksa.pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2017).

Tichy G. The Over-optimism Among Experts in Assessment and Foresight // Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2004. Vol. 71, N 4. P. 341–363.

Поппер Р. Мониторинг исследования будущего // Форсайт. 2012. Т. 6, № 2. С. 56–74.

Рыбаков Ю. Л., Голубев В. П., Дивуева Н. А., Медведев В. И., Ефимов Б. И. Обзор существующих в научно-технической сфере экспертных технологий (из опыта работы отечественных экспертных систем) // Инноватика и экспертиза: научные труды. 2012. № 2. С. 173–182.

Масленников Е. В. Особенности отбора экспертов // Социология. 2010. № 2. С. 82–93.

Ambacher N. Corporate Foresight A Delphi Study on the Use of Methods of Future Studies // European Foresight Platform (EFP), 2012. Brief N 239 URL: http://www.foresight-platform.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/EFP-Brief-No.-239_Corporate-Foresight-–-A-Delphi-Study.pdf (дата обращения: 12.01.2017).

Петров А. Н., Рутковская И. Б., Мусатов А. А. Значимость факторов мотивации независимых экспертов при проведении экспертизы научно-технических проектов // Экономика науки. 2016. Т. 2, № 3. С. 231–236.

References

Brumer V., Konnola T., Salo A. Mnogoobrazie v Forsait-issledovaniiakh. Praktika otbora innovatsionnykh idei [Diversity in Foresight: a Practice of Selection of Innovation Ideas]. Foresight-Russia, 2010, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 56–68. (In Russian)

Popper R. How are Foresight Methods Selected? Foresight, 2008, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 62–89.

Trotsuk I. V. Otritsanie ekspertnosti kak metodicheskaia problema [Denial of expertise as a methodological problem]. Sotsiologiia: 4M, 2009, no. 29, pp. 155–171. (In Russian)

El’meev V. Ia., Ovsiannikov V. G. Prikladnaia sotsiologiia: Ocherki metodologii [Applied Sociology: Essays on Methodology]. 2nd ed. St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg University Press, 1999. 296 p. (in Russian)

Baker J., Lovell K., Harris N. How Expert are the Experts? An Exploration of the Concept of «Expert» within Delphi Panel Techniques. Nurse Researcher, 2006, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 59–70.

Rogozin D. M., Iashina A. V. Fal’sifikatsiia ekspertnosti ekspertnogo interv’iu [Falsification of the expertise of an expert interview]. Teleskop: Zhurnal sotsiologicheskikh i marketingovykh issledovanii. 2007, no. 4, pp. 32–45. (In Russian).

Maslennikov E. V. Ekspert v sotsiologicheskom issledovanii [Expert in sociological research]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, Ser. 18: Sociology. Politology, 1995, no. 4, pp. 69–82. (In Russian)

Sharoda A. Paul. Find an Expert: Designing Expert Selection Interfaces for Formal Help-Giving. CHI‘16 Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2016, pp. 3038–3048.

Bokov M. B. Spetsifika i protsedury polucheniia prognoznogo znaniia v forsaite [Specificity and predictive procedures for obtaining knowledge of foresight]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniia, 2013, no. 3, pp. 74–84. (In Russian)

Saritas O. Participation in Technology Foresight: Using Expert and Stakeholder Panels. Preprint. 2007. Available at: http://www.forschungsnetzwerk.at/downloadpub/foresight_expert_panels_ozcan_071107_114.pdf (accessed: 12.01.2017). (In Russian)

Meissner D., Gokhberg L., Sokolov A. Science, Technology and Innovation Policy for the Future. Potentials and Limits of Foresight Studies. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013, pp. 43–62.

Makarova E. A., Sokolova A. V. Luchshie praktiki otsenki nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo Forsaita: bazovye elementy i kliuchevye kriterii [Best practices of evaluating scientific and technological foresight: basic elements and key criteria]. Foresight, 2012, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 62–75. (In Russian)

Makarova E., Sokolova A. Foresight Evaluation: Lessons from Project Management. Foresight, 2014, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 75–91.

Organization and Methods. UNIDO. Technology Foresight Manual, 2005.

Mapping Foresight. Revealing How Europe and Other World Regions Navigate into the Future. EFMN. Luxembourg, Publications Office of the European Union, European Commission, 2009. 128 p.

The Sixth Technology Forecast Survey — Future Technology in Japan Toward The Year 2025. NISTEP (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy), 1997. Report N 52 Available at: http://data.nistep.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/11035/650/1/NISTEP-NR052-FullE. pdf (accessed: 12.01.2017).

Brandes F. The UK Technology Foresight Programme: an Assessment of Expert Estimates. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 2009, vol. 76, no. 7, pp. 869–879.

Doklad po rezul’tatam vypolneniia NIR po teme: «Formirovanie seti otraslevykh tsentrov prognozirovaniia nauchno-tekhnologicheskogo razvitiia na baze vedushchikh rossiiskikh vuzov po prioritetnomu napravleniiu «Informatsionno-telekommunikatsionnye sistemy». NIU ITMO [Report of the research: «Forming a network of industry centers for forecasting scientific and technological development on the basis of leading Russian universities in the “Information and Telecommunication Systems” area]. NIU ITMO St. Petersburg, 2011. Available at: https://www.hse.ru/data/2012/02/20/1263088841/Doklad_ITMO. pdf (accessed: 12.01.2017). (In Russian)

Karasev O. I., Vishnevskii K. O., Veselitskaia N. N. Vozmozhnosti ispol’zovaniia metodologii Forsaita dlia razrabotki strategicheskikh prognozov otraslevogo razvitiia [The possibility of using foresight methodologies for the development of strategic forecasts of sectoral development]. Trudy MAI, 2012, no. 53. Available at: http://www.mai.ru/upload/iblock/ee2/primenenie-metodov-forsayta-dlya-vyyavleniya-prioritetov-tekhnologicheskogo-razvitiya-aviatsionno_promyshlennogo-kompleksa.pdf (accessed: 12.01.2017). (In Russian)

Tichy G. The Over-optimism Among Experts in Assessment and Foresight. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2004, vol. 71, no. 4, pp. 341–363.

Popper R. Monitoring issledovaniia budushchego [Mapping Futures Studies]. Foresight-Russia, 2012, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 56–74. (In Russian)

Rybakov Iu. L., Golubev V. P., Divueva N. A., Medvedev V. I., Efimov B. I. Obzor sushchestvuiushchikh v nauchno-tekhnicheskoi sfere ekspertnykh tekhnologii (iz opyta raboty otechestvennykh ekspertnykh sistem) [A review of existing scientific and technical field of expert technologies (experience of the Russian expert systems)]. Innovatika i ekspertiza: nauchnye Trudy [Innovatics and Expert Examination: research work], 2012, no. 2, pp. 173–182. (In Russian)

Maslennikov E. Osobennosti otbora ekspertov [Features of selection of experts]. Sotsiologiia, 2010, no. 2, pp. 82–93. (In Russian)

Ambacher N. Corporate Foresight A Delphi Study on the Use of Methods of Future Studies. European Foresight Platform (EFP), 2012. Brief N 239. Avilable at: http://www.foresight-platform.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/EFP-Brief-No.-239_Corporate-Foresight-–-A-Delphi-Study.pdf (accessed: 12.01.2017).

Petrov A. N., Rutkovskaia I. B., Musatov A. A. Znachimost’ faktorov motivatsii nezavisimykh ekspertov pri provedenii ekspertizy nauchno-tekhnicheskikh proektov [The significance of the factors of motivation of independent experts when carrying out examination of scientific and technical projects]. Ekonomika nauki, 2016, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 231–236. (In Russian)