Corporate Foresight: Real or Ideal?
- 1 May 2022
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Academy of Management in Academy of Management Perspectives
- Vol. 36 (2), 851-856
- https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2021.0049
Abstract
Wenzel's response to Fergnani (2022) is a laudable effort to advance the study of corporate foresight practices and processes, an important yet underinvestigated area of research in management and strategy scholarship. Wenzel's arguments encourage us to reflect not only on the arguments made by Fergnani (2022) but also on the core tenets of the futures studies and foresight literature(1)-tenets that could be misapprehended. Such reflection opens opportunities to clarify the construct of corporate foresight and further integrate it with existing management and strategy scholarship, which can encourage conceptual and empirical research in this domain. This rejoinder elaborates on these points in more detail as follows.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Managing Complexity in Social SystemsPublished by Springer Science and Business Media LLC ,2019
- Editor’s Comments: Developing Propositions, a Process Model, or a Typology? Addressing the Challenges of Writing Theory Without a BoilerplateAcademy of Management Review, 2017
- Organizing strategic foresight: A contextual practice of ‘way finding’Futures, 2013
- Constructing futures: A social constructionist perspective on foresight methodologyFutures, 2009
- What difference does ‘integral’ make?Futures, 2008
- Six pillars: futures thinking for transformingForesight, 2008
- Toward a Theory of Social PracticesEuropean Journal of Social Theory, 2002
- Dynamic capabilities: what are they?Strategic Management Journal, 2000
- Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as methodFutures, 1998
- Multiple scenario development: Its conceptual and behavioral foundationStrategic Management Journal, 1993