Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The rapid acceleration of technological change can lead business and public administration decision-makers to have difficulties in choosing the right tools. In this case it is a question of having difficulty choosing between a plethora of foresight methods without clear operational guidance. The aim of this research is to solve such a complexity by creating a taxonomy of technology foresight techniques based on contingency principles. A systematic literature review of 177 business and management publications was conducted, identifying 42 core studies for in-depth analysis. Using Nickerson’s method, we constructed a taxonomic framework based on six dimensions, composed of adaptivity, collaboration level, technology focus, approach type, sector field, and region. These dimensions were synthesized into two operational matrices, called “Context-Method Fit” matrix and “Operational Dimensions” matrix. The results reveal significant divergences, such as the preference for scenario planning in developed economies versus trend analysis in developing contexts, and highlight a gap between academic theory and industrial practice (e.g., the use of the Futures Wheel). This taxonomy provides public administrators and managers with a sensemaking tool to investigate the most effective foresight method based on their specific environmental constraints and strategic goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Coppoletta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: