Advertisement

Roadmapping as a Responsive Mode to Government Policy: A Goal-Orientated Approach to Realising a Vision

  • Clive I. V. Kerr
  • Robert Phaal
  • David R. Probert

Abstract

Government policy documents such as white/command papers embody a country’s future vision for its public services (e.g. defence, energy, health, transport). It is then the task of specific government departments/agencies to realise such visions through their strategic planning activities. To aid departments in their crafting of responses to newly issued policies, the use of roadmapping is proposed as a visual tool to facilitate the elicitation process of determining the most appropriate course of action. To demonstrate this goal-orientated approach, a case study based on the Australian Government’s Defence White Paper and the Royal Australian Navy’s fleet plan will be presented. The developed roadmap employed a new form of architecture, which consisted of a composite structure, in order to provide a logical decomposition of the government’s future vision against the major projects to be conducted as the route to policy implementation. The process to populate the roadmap will be outlined together with a description of the roadmap canvas with its associated visual objects. It is hoped that the roadmap presented in this chapter will act as a graphical datum/prototype for utilising roadmapping in a responsive mode to policy directives.

Keywords

Concept Mapping Gantt Chart Military Capability Policy Vision Semiconductor Industry Association 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ackoff, R.L.: Creating the corporate future: Plan or be planned for. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1981)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ANAO – Australian National Audit Office, Defence Materiel Organisation: 2007-08 major projects report. Report Number: 9, Australian National Audit Office. Canberra, Australia (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson, K.L.: Reconciling the electricity industry with sustainable development: Backcasting, a strategic alternative. Futures 33(7), 607–623 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arthur, B.: Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Economic Journal 99(394), 116–131 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bardach, E.: The implementation game. MIT Press, Cambridge (1977)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bennett, L., Kinloch, A., McDermid, J., Muttram, R., Price, P., Stein, P., Stewart, W., Churchill, A., Jordan, G., Graeme-Morrison, B., Oxenham, D., Raby, N., Smith, H.: Key issues for effective technology insertion. Journal of Defence Science 9(3), 103–107 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Börjeson, L., Höjer, M., Dreborg, K.H., Ekvall, T., Finnveden, G.: Scenario types and techniques: Towards a user’s guide. Futures 38(7), 723–739 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bruggeman, D.: NASA: A path dependent organization. Technology in Society 24(4), 415–431 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bryson, J.M., Ackermann, F., Edin, C., Finn, C.B.: Visible thinking: Unlocking causal mapping for practical business results. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chandrasekaran, B., Kurup, U., Banerjee, B., Josephson, J.R., Winkler, R.: An architecture for problem solving with diagrams. In: The 3rd International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Cambridge, United Kingdom, March 22-24 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Churchill, A.: The DSAC view on technology insertion. Distillation – The Science Journal for Dstl Staff 6, 5–8 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Clarke, A.E.: Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cosner, R.R., Hynds, E.J., Fusfeld, A.R.: Integrating roadmapping into technical planning. Research-Technology Management 50(6), 31–48 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Crosby, B.L.: Policy implementation: The organizational challenge. World Development 24(9), 1403–1415 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    David, P.: Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review 75(2), 332–337 (1985)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davies, A.: ADF capability review: Royal Australian Navy. Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Barton (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    DoD – Department of Defence, Defending Australia in the Asia Pacific century: Force 2030, Department of Defence, Canberra, Australia (2009a)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    DoD – Department of Defence, Defence annual report: Volume 1. Department of Defence, Canberra, Australia (2009b)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    DoD – Department of Defence, Defence capability plan. Department of Defence, Canberra, Australia (2009c)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dreborg, K.: Essence of backcasting. Futures 28(9), 813–828 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eckerson, W.W.: Performance dashboards: Measuring, monitoring and managing your business. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken (2006)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eppler, M.J., Platts, K.W.: Visual strategizing: The systematic use of visualization in the strategic-planning process. Long Range Planning 42(1), 42–74 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Few, S.: Information dashboard design: The effective visual communication of data. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gindy, N.N.Z., Cerit, B., Hodgson, A.: Technology roadmapping for the next generation manufacturing enterprise. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 17(4), 404–416 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goffman, E.: Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harper and Row, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Höjer, M., Mattsson, L.G.: Determinism and backcasting in future studies. Futures 32(7), 613–634 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Huff, A.S.: Mapping strategic thought. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1990)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huff, A.S., Jenkins, M.: Mapping strategic knowledge. Sage Publications, London (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jackson, M.C.: Russell Ackoff’s Jerusalem. Systems Practice 3(2), 177–182 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jenkins, M.: Cognitive mapping. In: Partington, D. (ed.) Essential Skills for Management Research, pp. 181–198. Sage Publications, London (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kahler, M.: International financial institutions and the politics of adjustment. In: Nelson, J.M. (ed.) Fragile Coalitions: The Politics of Economic Adjustment, pp. 139–160. Overseas Development Council, Washington (1989)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kane, M., Trochim, W.M.K.: Concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2007)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: A framework for strategic military capabilities in defense transformation. In: The 11th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2006) - Coalition Command and Control in the Networked Era, Cambridge, United Kingdom, September 26-28 (2006)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kerr, C.I.V., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: Technology insertion in the defence industry: A primer. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 222(8), 1009–1023 (2008a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: A strategic capabilities-based representation of the future British armed forces. International Journal of Intelligent Defence Support Systems 1(1), 27–42 (2008b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kerr, C.I.V., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: Cogitate, articulate, communicate: The psychosocial reality of technology roadmapping and roadmaps. In: The R&D Management Conference 2009 – The Reality of R&D and its Impact on Innovation, Vienna, Austria, June 21-24 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: Inserting Innovations In-Service. In: Finn, A., Jain, L.C. (eds.) Innovations in Defence Support Systems – 1. SCI, vol. 304, pp. 17–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2010a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kerr, C.I.V., Phaal, R., Probert, D.R.: Ranking maritime platform upgrade options. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment 224(1), 47–59 (2010b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kerr, C., Phaal, R., Probert, D.: Depicting options and investment appraisal information in roadmaps. In: The 19th International Conference on Management of Technology (IAMOT 2010) – Technology as the Foundation for Economic Growth, Cairo, Egypt, March 8-11 (2010c)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lidwell, W., Holden, K., Butler, J.: Universal principles of design. Rockport Publishers, Gloucester (2003)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lovins, A.B.: Energy strategy: The road not taken? Foreign Affairs 55(1), 65–96 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lovins, A.B.: Soft energy paths: Toward a durable peace. Penguin Books, London (1977)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lynch, R.: Corporate strategy, 4th edn. Pearson Education, Harlow (2006)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ma, T., Liu, S., Nakamori, Y.: Roadmapping as a way of knowledge management for supporting scientific research in academia. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 23(6), 743–755 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mann, W.C.: Dialogue games: Conventions of human interaction. Argumentation 2(4), 511–532 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mander, S.L., Bows, A., Anderson, K.L., Shackley, S., Agnolucci, P., Ekins, P.: The Tyndall decarbonisation scenarios: Part 1 development of a backcasting methodology with stakeholder participation. Energy Policy 36(10), 3754–3763 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Masrani, S.K., McKiernan, P.: Addressing path dependency in the capabilities approach: Historicism and foresight meet on the ‘road less travelled’. In: Costanzo, L.A., MacKay, R.B. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Strategy and Foresight, pp. 485–504. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2009)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mazmanian, D.A., Sabatier, P.A.: Implementation and public policy. Scott Foresman and Company, Glenview (1983)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    McDowall, W., Eames, M.: Forecasts, scenarios, visions, backcasts and roadmaps to the hydrogen economy: A review of the hydrogen futures literature. Energy Policy 34(11), 1236–1250 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    MoD – Ministry of Defence, Defence industrial strategy. Report Number: Cm 6697, The Stationery Office, London, United Kingdom (2005)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Montjoy, R.S., O’Toole, L.J.: Toward a theory of policy implementation: An organizational perspective. Public Administration Review 39(5), 465–476 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    NASA – National Aeronautics and Space Administration, NASA strategic plan. Report Number: NPD-1000.1a, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington DC, United States of America (1998), http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codez/plans.html
  53. 53.
    Petrick, I.R., Provance, M.: Roadmapping as a mitigator of uncertainty in strategic technology choice. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning 1(2), 171–184 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Phaal, R., Muller, G.: An architectural framework for roadmapping: Towards visual strategy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76(1), 39–49 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Phaal, R., Farrukh, C.J.P., Probert, D.R.: Technology roadmapping – A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 71(1-2), 5–26 (2004a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Phaal, R., Farrukh, C., Probert, D.: Customizing roadmapping. Research-Technology Management 47(2), 26–37 (2004b)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Phaal, R., Simonse, L., den Ouden, E.: Next generation roadmapping for innovation planning. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning 4(2), 135–152 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Pidd, M.: Tools for thinking: Modelling in management science, 2nd edn. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2003)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Pressman, J., Wildavsky, A.: Implementation. University of California Press, Berkeley (1973)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Robinson, J.B.: Energy backcasting: A proposed method of policy analysis. Energy Policy 10(4), 337–344 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Robinson, J.B.: Unlearning and backcasting: Rethinking some of the questions we ask about the future. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 33(4), 325–338 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Robinson, J.: Futures under glass: A recipe for people who hate to predict. Futures 22(8), 820–842 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Robinson, J.B.: Future subjunctive: Backcasting as social learning. Futures 35(8), 839–856 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Sabatier, P., Mazmanian, D.: The conditions of effective implementation: A guide to accomplishing policy objectives. Policy Analysis 5(4), 481–504 (1979)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Sabatier, P., Mazmanian, D.: The implementation of public policy: A framework of analysis. Policy Studies Journal 8(4), 538–560 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Saritas, O., Oner, M.A.: Systemic analysis of UK foresight results: Joint application of integrated management model and roadmapping. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 71(1-2), 27–65 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Schön, D.A.: The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books, New York (1982)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    SIA – Semiconductor Industry Association, Semiconductor technology workshop conclusions. Semiconductor Industry Association, San Jose, United States of America (1992a), http://public.itrs.net
  69. 69.
    SIA – Semiconductor Industry Association, Semiconductor technology workshop working group reports. Semiconductor Industry Association, San Jose, United States of America (1992b), http://public.itrs.net
  70. 70.
    Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.: Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology 1907-39. Social Studies of Science 19(3), 387–420 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 18(7), 509–533 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    van Notten, P.W.F., Rotmans, J., van Asselt, M.B.A., Rothman, D.S.: An update scenario typology. Futures 35(5), 423–443 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    van Meter, D.S., von Horn, C.E.: The policy implementation process: A conceptual framework. Administration and Society 6(4), 445–488 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Voros, J.: Introducing a classification framework for prospective methods. Foresight 8(2), 43–56 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Wainer, H.: How to display data badly. The American Statistician 38(2), 137–147 (1984)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Walton, D.: Informal logic: A pragmatic approach, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Watzman, S., Re, M.: Visual design principles for usable interfaces: Everything is designed, why we should think before doing. In: Sears, A., Jacko, J.A. (eds.) The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook – Fundamentals, Evolving Technologies and Emerging Applications, 2nd edn., pp. 329–353. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wernerfelt, B.: A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal 5(2), 171–180 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Whalen, P.J.: Strategic and technology planning on a roadmapping foundation. Research-Technology Management 50(3), 40–51 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clive I. V. Kerr
    • 1
  • Robert Phaal
    • 1
  • David R. Probert
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Technology Management, Institute for Manufacturing, Department of EngineeringUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations