see science - cvti sr > hlavná stránka · related document(s) ... appendix 1 - scs´ inner...
TRANSCRIPT
Project Title SEE Science
Project Number SEE/B/0048/1.3/X
Document Title SEE Science SWOT Methodology
Document Version 4.0
Document Origin National Centre for Popularization of Science and
Technology in Society, SCSTI
Document Date 14 May 2012
Character of Document Partnership Internal Document – Draft
Related Document(s)
(Origin Partner, Date)
- SEE Science Project AF / WP3
- Draft SWOT Methodology 1.0 , SCHOLA LUDUS Sept. 2011
- Draft SWOT Methodology 2.0 , SCSTI November 2011
- Draft SWOT Methodology 3.0 , SCSTI December 2011
- Draft Benchmarking Methodology 3.0 , SCSTI April 2012
Target Group SEE Science Project Partners
Developed by Katarina Teplanova
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
2
Outline of The SEE Science SWOT Methodology
Preface
1. Introduction to the SEE Science SWOT methodology 4.0
2. Introduction to the SEE Science SWOT tool
3. The SWOT Method for the SEE Science project
3.1 Classic SWOT
3.2 Relational SWOT
3.3 Choice and determination of the SC´s development issues
4. Science Centers´ Coding
4.1 Coding the Science Centers´ development issues
4.2 Coding the Science Centers´ indicators
5. Summary of SWOT Method and Coding
6. Operational forms
7. SWOT procedure in the frame of the SEE Science
7.1 Common definition of the partners´ task on SWOT
7.2 Common definition of the partners´ task on Feasibility Study
8. Approaching Science Centers´ objectives
8.1 Approaching Science Centers´ operational areas
8.2 Approaching Science Centers´ indicators
8.2.1 The Science Centers´ indicators for S-W
8.2.2 The Science Centers´ indicators for O-T
Appendix 1 - SCs´ inner Indicators (Tables 6) and content behind indicators
Appendix 2 – SCs´ outer Indicators (Tables 7) and content behind indicators
Abbreviations: AF –Application Form of the project, PP – SEE Science project partner, TSAR – Transnational State of the Art Report, SC – Science Center, existing SC/ planned SC/ SCs´network (considering institutional factors etc.)
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
3
Preface
In this document the fourth version for the SEE Science SWOT Methodology is given.
The ideas from previous versions are utilized.
The 1.0 draft on SWOT Methodology was a bit ahead, assuming that each partner is
familiar with SWOT and has also deeper insight of the SC field. Hence, there were
expectations to get SWOTs from both sides, from each project partner focusing on its
development issues regarding operations behind the SC services, and from the respective
project partner’s “strategic partners” asking them to focus on their needs regarding
science popularization and possible collaboration with the SC. – It was expected that, by
having SWOTs from both sides, we can develop more relevant SEE Science program
reflecting all local opportunities and needs, and - there would be a chance to gain
“strategic partners which not only speak about SC“, but via their own identification of
their needs see the SC as an important (potential) partner for collaboration.
The 2.0 Draft SWOT Methodology represents a straightforward methodology including
steps for preparation of local SWOTs studies and involvement of strategic partners into
process via round-tables. Important parts of the methodology were annexes with common
definition of SCs considered as a reference to SC operations; glossary regarding main
concepts behind the SC operations; starting lists of factors on S, W, O and T considered
as potential common indicators for local comparative SWOTs. The partners were
expected to take part at drafting the final version.
However, there is a variety of potential indicators and the project partners differ already
in basic aspects - in type and structure of their organizations, in operational areas, in local
environments, in knowledge and skill of staffs, in targets, hence the application of ad-hoc
method for defining significant indicators was questionable.
The 3.0 Draft SWOT Methodology brought an advanced methodology on SWOT Method
and studies including factors´ valuation methods by weighting and rating the potential of
indicators and developing issues. The valuation methods were completed by examples on
how to use the respective method in the frame of the science centres, and by exemplar
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
4
lists of general indicators for an organization; general indicators regarding decisions on
new developing issues resp. projects, general (unusual) indicators on identification of
threats from risk analysis; common indicators on examining the quality of an science
centre’s exhibition resp. science centre’s program. Also, there were given hints for
drafting general development areas of a SC with regard to its sustainability, survival, and
further developments including lists of possible indicators to each area. The lists were
open, expecting partners modifications. The 3.0 draft was presented at the PCT1 meeting.
The project partners decided to go back to the 2.0 draft.
Several ad-hoc attempts were done to define appropriate lists of indicators. However with
regard to real cases those lists of factors seem artifical and restrictive with regard the
SWOT studies..
Afterwards the coordinator allowed us to propose a compromise:
- regarding SWOT indicators, to follow the idea from the 1.0 draft, i.e. that
indicators should be derived from real cases from partners local SWOTs (but not
also from stakeholders);
- regarding SWOT objectives, to follow the idea from the 2.0 draft, i.e., the SWOTs
should focus on the 5 main objectives of the SCs according to the joint definition
for SC;
- regarding identification of the development issues to use the methods for
weighting factors from the 3.0 version (this is just a recommendation),
and to ask the project partners to realize 5 classical SWOTs on objectives relevant to the
5 main project goals. The idea behind was to gain current factors which determine the
operation of the SCs in the SEE region and, on this basis, to try to derive the common
indicators of the SCs.
The resulting 4.0 draft methodlogy was presented first at the SEE Science PCT2 meeting
in Patras (March 2nd, 2012) and partners suggested to go on but to use boosting
innovations and sustainability of the SC as the objectives for further SWOT analyses.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
5
The presented 4.0 version on the SEE Science SWOT Methodology contains indicative
areas of SCs´ common indicators and draft on SCs´common indicators derived from
factors pointed out in 25 SWOTs created by 5 partners (each partner created 5 SWOTs,
one to each SCs´ objective), and in agreement of previous project partners´ discussions.
After agreement by all partners the indicators should be used by project partners at their
local SWOT analyses so that the SWOT studies prepared by the project partners could be
comparable
The joint objective of SEE Science SWOT, supplemented with Benchmark studies on
European SCs, and studies on SCs´ services, is to find common development issues on SC
operations, the development of which can support both, each partner individually and the
SEE Science Partnership.
Identification of preferred development issues is a very important, but subjective decision
process that can significantly influence the future of any partner’s organization!
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
6
1. Introduction to the SEE Science SWOT methodology 4.0
The 4.0 methodology for development of SWOT study is defined for the transnational
project Boosting innovation through capacity building and networking of science
centres in the SEE region with acronym SEE Science.
The methodology is designed for PPs developing a local State of Art Study on own SC
operations, on SCs´networks resp. a Feasibility Study on SC for those PPs which are
planning to establish a SC or its part in short future. PPs with no science centres will
analyse what conditions are needed to build and operate a SC using the same internal and
external indicators of factors as those PPs having a running SC. Relevant stakeholders of
each PPs should be involved in the analysing process through roundtable.
The aim of the SWOT analysis is to get a clear picture on the current operational issues
of SCs in the field of human, technical, operational capacities, development
opportunities, innovation environment, financing, policy framework regulating SCs’
operation, to set what the State of the Art is.
The data from local SWOT studies will be combined with data from Benchmarking
Studies and SC services into the Transnational State of Art Study, defining common
development opportunities for SCs in the SEE region. The TSAR should also contribute
to the definition of local/ regional Policy Recommendations and serve as a knowledge-
base for SC Agents.
For the creation of high quality TSAR there has to be high correlation between the factors
/ indicators applied in the SWOT and Benchmark studies, and the Benchmark study
should reflect the development issues that will come out from the SWOT study.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
7
2. Introduction to the SEE Science SWOT tool
The SWOT analysis belongs to management tools.
The purpose of SWOT application depends on considered actual objective to which the
SWOT analysis is referred.
Having objective on a strategic level, the SWOT can be used as an effective strategic tool
in order to identify the main development issues related whole SC and its sustainability.
Having objective on an operational level, the SWOT can be used as an effective
innovation tool in order to identify the actual development issues regarding both, the
provision of inner institutional operations of the SC including stakeholders, and SC´s
outwards operations as are development and provision of exhibitions, programs or any
activity related to SC´s targets.
The concrete application of the SWOT tool is based on identification of current inner and
outer factors (classical SWOT) which could influence and condition the achievement of
the respective objective, and identification of potential development issues based on the
mutual relations between that inner and outer factors in the next steps (relational
SWOT). Processing classical SWOT the factors are divided into Strengths and
Weaknesses of the SC, and Opportunities and Threats. In the process of relational
SWOT the potential development areas are identified for the respective SC or SCs´
network (on the base of relations between respective couples of an inner and an outer
factor) creating a “a tank of ideas” for future effort and desired areas of operations.
Ćonsidering SCs as a specific branch there can be identified typical operational aspects
of SCs, typical operational areas and indicative areas of SC, and SWOT factors, and
sets of factors´ indicators. Having SCs´ indicative areas and SCs´ indicators, they could
be used as an undividable part of the SWOT tool supporting identification of appropriate
current SWOT factors, and classification of the development issues. Hence, the indicators
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
8
are universal while the SWOT factors should reflect the real SC, resp. SCs´ network resp.
the envisaged SC´s to which the SWOT relates.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
9
3. The SWOT Method for the SEE Science Project
The SWOT Method for the SEE Science project contains three levels:
(1) Classical SWOT - Identification of inner and outer factors (2) Relational SWOT - Identification of potential development issues (3) Choice and determination of development issues
The process within each SWOT level is governed by typical SWOT questions and SWOT
tables that have to be filled in, answering those questions, and supported by given
factors´ indicative areas and indicators.
The method seems simple, but in fact, the answers on the questions cannot be linear and
proper application of SWOT Method requires deep understanding of own SC operations,
SC branch, Science, Education, Business as well as developing areas of the whole
Society, as SC are considered central for boosting innovation in general.
3.1 CLASSICAL SWOT
The classical SWOT analysis can be used anytime when thinking about the possibilities
regarding realization of an objective by an organization.
Identification of inner and outer factors
The SC´s task is to realize classic SWOT with regard to concrete current SC´s objective
(Table 1) For this study the partners have agreed to use boosting innovations and
sustainability of the SC as the SWOT objectives. The SC´s objective becomes the SWOT
objective and the SC, resp. the SCs´ network has to identify its most important inner
characteristics and outer conditions distinguishing between
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
10
- those inner characteristics in which it is really good, getting “SC´s inner Strength
factors” (further only S), and those that can be considered as “inner Weaknesses
factors” (further only W), and similarly considering
- the most important “outer Opportunities factors” (further only O) and “outer
Threats factors” (further only T) related to the SC´s complex operational
environment.
In order to find the respective factors the straightforward questions related to the
determined objective can be:
- What are our current S with which we could achieve that objective?
- What are our current W that could keep us from the achievement of that
objective?
- What are the current O that we could focus in order to achieve the respective
objective?
- Which threats we should take into consideration when thinking to achieve the
respective objective?
By putting S, W, O and T into separate frames of the Table 1 we get 4 lists of factors.
One list for strengths and one list for weaknesses of the SC´s operation, and one list for
opportunities and one list for threats coming out from the SC´s environment.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
11
Table 1Classical SWOT form
SWOT objective:
......
2.2.
1.1.
ThreatsWeakness
......
2.2.
1.1.
OpportunitiesStrength
3.2 Relational SWOT
Identification of potential development issues based on relations between couples of
one inner factor and one outer factor
The relational SWOT is carried out in Tables 2a, 2b. The task is to identify those
relations between the S resp. W on one side, and O, resp. T on the other side, which tend
to potential development issues. The shape of tables helps to visualize the substantial
relations.
After putting the respective lists from the Table 1 into the Table 2 the thought process can
start. The cross questions are applied:
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
12
– Matching that S with that O what development issues (possibilities) can come
out for the SC? Building on our respective Strength can we exploit the respective
Opportunity, and how? etc.
– Matching that S with that T what development issues (possibilities /
necessities) can come out for the SC? Building on our respective Strength can
we avoid the respective Threats? etc.
– Matching that W with that O what development issues (possibilities) can
come out for the SC? How can our respective Weakness hinder us in exploiting
the considered Opportunity? etc.
– Matching that W with that T what development issues (necessities) can come
out for the SC? Because of the given Weakness is there a high probability that
the given Threat will happen? etc.
The considered potential development issues between respective couples of S-O, S-T, W-
O or W-T are marked in the fields in the Table 2a by “x” and the idea behind each
marked node, is put into the Table 2b.
...
X2
X1W
...
XX2
1S
...21...21
TO
...
...
...
...
Idea behindNode
S2
S2
W1
W2
T2
T1
O2
O2
Tables 2a, 2b
Relational SWOT general example
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
13
What is essential for proper relational SWOT
The ideas behind each node (see marks “x” in the Table 2b) should hint to the potential
development issues, and should be formulated in such a way that hint to envisaged
benefit for the SC behind the respective relation S-O, S-T, W-O, W-T. Also, indirectly to
hint to the tasks needed to be solved in order to exploit the considered challenge. In other
words, the “ideas behind” must be clear enough to be turned into requirements on
operational capacities and future actions.
3.3 Choice and determination of the SC´s development issues
Having potential development issues (Tables 2a, 2b), choosing process on SC´s
development issues can start. The leading questions have to concern valuation of the
potential development issue in relation to the envisaged SC´s benefits and envisaged
investment into operational capacities of the SC. For example:
- Is the related S strong enough for development of that issue (to exploit that O
in the suggested way)? What additional effort should be invested into the
respective operational capacities (which are behind that factor of S)? etc.
- Building on our S can we decrease / depress / avoid the respective T
sufficiently in order to achieve success in development issue? What
additional effort should be invested? etc.
- Is that factor of current W so important with respect to the considered
development issue (coming out from that O) that we should invest effort to
change W into its S? And if so, then how? etc.
- Is the development issue coming out from the respective relation of W and T
so important that we should consider to invest into W? And if so, then how?
etc.
What is essential for proper choice of development issues
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
14
On the base of positive answers on those questions, reformulations of the potential
development issues are needed focusing on the development of operational
capacities.
In the Table 3a the relational nodes related to the positive answers should be marked and
the reformulated development issues should be placed in the (Table 3).
...
X2
X1W
...
XX2
1S
...21...21
TO developmentissues
node
S2
S2
W1
W2
T2
T1
O2
O2
Tables 3
Relational SWOTThe green fields mark the chosen development issues.
Processing choice of development issues, tools for valuation the relative weights (e.g.
weight matrices) of the respective inner and outer factors can be used. (These tools are
not a part of the presented SWOT methodology.)
4. Science Centers´ Coding
The role of nodes in the Tables 2 and 3 is important for respective SC (partners)
developing SWOT in order not to loose the thread of the process but for purpose of SCs´
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
15
comparisons via SWOTs, feasibility studies (and also benchmarking), development issue
have to be coded (Table 4).
......
Wm-On......
Wo-Tp
indicativearea code
......
Sk-Tl
......
Si-Oj
Idea behind/ development issue
SWOTnode
Table 4: Relational SWOT forms
Filling in the Relational SWOT form there are needed - the nodes position in the Relational SWOT (Tables 2a, 3a) and - the ideas behind the respective node S-O, S-W, W-O, W-T, - the codes of the indicative area classing the development issue by
common indicative areas. Glosses - couple (Si-Oj) marks the node position in the table, the node is at i-line
of S, and j-column of O; similarly the other couples. - code (SW-OT) consists of two sub-codes, one for respective SC aspect
and one for considered operational area (see further the Table 5)..
4.1 Coding the Science Centers development issues
Each idea behind the nodes (Table 2b), and behind the development issues (Table 3b) has
to be marked with a code (see Table 4). The codes have to point out the SCs´ common
indicative areas and SCs´ common indicators to which the respective development issue
belongs (Table 5).
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
16
The codes of indicative areas are given as combinations of codes of one typical SCs´
aspect and one typical SCs´ operational area (Table 5).
W-CW-IW-BW-EW-Spolicy
framework
7
F-CF-IF-BF-EF-Sfinancing6
I-CI-II-BI-EI-Sinnovation
environment5
D-CD-ID-BD-ED-Sdevelopment
opportunity4
O-CO-IO-BO-EO-Soperational
capacities3
T-CT-IT-BT-ET-STechnical
capacities2
H-CH-IH-BH-EH-SHuman
capacities1
SC
SpecialInnovationBusiness
Edu &
SocietyScience & Technology
Table 5: The codes of SCs indicative areas for both the SW-factors and OT-factors
For coding the first letters of the typical SCs´ aspects and SCs´ operational areas are used.
Examples of Codes reading
H-S: SC´s HUMAN CAPACITIES in the operational area Science& Technology.
H-E: SC´s HUMAN CAPACITIES in the operational area Education &Society.
T-S: SC´s TECHNICAL CAPACITIES in the operational area Science& Technology etc.
The codes of the SCs´ indicative areas are aimed for coding the SWOT factors, and
development issues behind relations in the relational SWOT, as well as for the
comparisons of SCs´ benchmarking. To each indicative area belongs a set of indicators.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
17
In the Table 5 we present 35 indicative areas, derived
from the 7 main aspects of the SCs considered in the frame of the SEE Science project
(AF)
1. human aspects
2. technical aspects
3. operational capacities
4. development opportunities
5. innovation environment
6. financing
7. policy framework regulating SCs’ operation setting, and
from the 5 main goals of the SEE Science project (AF)
1. to bridge research, education and business;
2. to improve the social climate for new developments;
3. to increase public awareness on the importance of natural sciences,
technology and innovation;
4. to increase visibility and accessibility into science for young people;
5. to influence and facilitate innovation capacities in general,
resulting in 5 SCs´ operational areas:
1. Science & Technology
2. Education & Society,
3. Business,
4. Innovation
5. Science Centre Special.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
18
4.2 Coding the Science Centers´ indicators
An integral part of the SEE Science SCs´ SWOT Method is the set of SCs´ common
indicators to which the SCs´ factors are related.
SCs´ indicators can be used at classing SWOT factors, and also at precising coding of
ideas on development issues in relational SWOT, for purpose of SWOT comparisons
from different project partners and benchmarking of SC, respectively.
In seven tables (Tables 6 – Appendix 1) and in one table (Table 7 – Appendix 2) are
given SCs´ indicators to each indicative area introduced in the Table 5.
The Tables 6 contain common indicators on SCs´ outer factors (Tables 6), each Table
related to one main SCs´ aspect (i.e. to one line in the Table 5):
Table 6/1: Indicators to SCs´ HUMAN CAPACITIES
Table 6/2: Indicators to SCs´ TECHNICAL CAPACITIES
Table 6/3: Indicators to SCs´ OPERATIONAL CAPACITIES
Table 6/4: Indicators to SCs´ DEVELOPMENT OPORTUNITIES
Table 6/5: Indicators to SCs´ INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT
Table 6/6: Indicators to SCs´ FINANCING
Table 6/7: Indicators to SCs´ POLICY FRAMEWORK
The Table 7 brings common indicators on outer SCs´ factors (Table 7) focused on SCs´
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT. This focus was chosen with respect to the SEE
Science main goal - Boosting innovations via building capacities for SC and SCs´
network and was agreed by the project partners.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
19
The common indicators given in Tables 6 and Table 7 are further divided according to
the operational areas Science & Technology, area of Education & Society, area of
Business, area of Innovation and per se Science Centre Special.
One row in each table brings indicators hinting to factors of the same / similar character
relevant for respective operational area. (See for example Table 6/1 for HUMAN
CAPACITIES, in the first row there are Type /number of position in S&T, and also Type
/number of position in E&S etc.).
Considering application of indicators at SWOT analyzing, inner factors from the seven
indicative areas – HUMAN CAPACITIES, TECHNICAL CAPACITIES,
OPERATIONAL CAPACITIES, DEVELOPMENT OPORTUNITIES, INNOVATION
ENVIRONMENT, FINANCING, POLICY FRAMEWORK (related to the indicators
from those areas), will be successively related to outer factors from always the same
outer indicative area (indicators related to the outer INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT.
Accordingly we can code the indicators, and the belonging factors using three sub-
codes:
(ASPECT): (NUMBER OF THE ROW) (OPERATIONAL FIELD),
whereby the number of the row hints to the character of the indicator.
E.g. factor with index (H: 1S) in the Table 6/1 means that it describes / relates to human
resources, and it is about the Type / position of employees in the operational area Science
& Technology.
The Tables 6 and Table 7 are elaborated into Excel Operational forms 1 and 2 which are
also part of this methodology. Under each indicator there is its code and an empty frame
which should be filled with relevant factor. For more factors new rows can be added.
Some cells may remain unfilled.
5. Summary of SWOT Method and Coding
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
20
A summary of SWOT Method including coding is given in the Scheme 1.
SWOT Scheme 1
Table 1Classical SWOT form
SWOT objective:
......
2.2.
1.1.
ThreatsWeakness
......
2.2.
1.1.
OpportunitiesStrenght
1. Classical SWOT:
Setting factors – listing S, W, O, T
...
X2
X1W
...
XX2
1S
...21...21
TO
...
...
...
...
Idea behindNode
S2
S2
W1
W2
T2
T1
O2
O2
Tables 2a, 2b
Relational SWOT general example
2. Relational SWOT:
Identifying and describe connections
(nodes)
...
X2
X1W
...
XX2
1S
...21...21
TO developmentissues
node
S2
S2
W1
W2
T2
T1
O2
O2
Tables 3
Relational SWOTThe green fields mark the chosen development issues.
3. Choice and determination
of development issues:
Marking “nodes” relevant for changes
......
...Wm-On
......
...Wo-Tp
SW - OT code of
the indicative area
......
...Sk-Tl
......
...Si-Oj
Idea behind/
development issue
Node
Table 4: Relational SWOT forms
4. Coding the development issues
Good setting of indicators and appropriate formulated factors allow classifying each one
factor just by one relevant indicator.
6. Operational Forms for SWOT analyses
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
21
To carry out SWOT analyses and feasibility studies special operational forms are
available at the SEE Science Portal.
Forms 1: A form for setting outer SC factors on current innovation environment
(the form follows the Tables 7 of SCs´ Indicators).
Forms 2: Seven forms for setting factors related to the operational aspects of the SC
(the form follows the Tables 6 of SCs´ Indicators).
Forms 3: Seven forms for setting classical SWOT related to the operational aspects
of the SC (the forms follow the Table 1 in the methodology).
Forms 4A, 4B: Seven couples´ of forms for setting relational SWOT, “nodes”
and “development issues”. (The form follows the Tables 2 and 3 of the SCs´ Indicators).
Forms 5: Seven forms for setting Feasibility study to each SC operational aspect.
The Operational Forms are prepared in the Excel 2010 enabling dynamic marking of the
potential SWOT factors by use of Styles positive / negative.
All forms are labeled with the full name of the respective operational aspect and marked
also with colors typical for the respective aspect for more simply working.
In the Figure 1 (see below) is presented only the shape of the empty Form 1. The Forms 1
and 2 contain SCs´ common indicators. Under each indicator is its code. The white free
frames under the codes are prepared to be filled in by factors, whereby the size of the
frame is flexible. New rows for further factors can be added by putting the cursor into the
last frame in the row. For all factors under one indicator one code is valid.
The factors and their codes from the filled in Form 1 and Forms 2 have to be further used,
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
22
- in the classical and relational SWOTs (Form 3, 4A and 4B) by partners carrying out
the SWOT analyses, and
- in the Feasibility Study (Form 5) by partners carrying out their feasibility studies.
Figure 1
Analyzing factors in the Form 1 and 2,
- some of the factors in Tables 7 will become O, some T, and some will be not
considered any further,
- some of the factors in Form 2 will become S, some W, and some will not be
considered any further, while some missing factors (empty indicators´ cell, yet not
covered with any factor) can be considered as W.
Using the Forms 3 and 4 the SWOT Method described in the chapter 3 (Scheme 1) has to
be used properly.
At coding partners can use two ways how to implement the codes:
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
23
a) either considering the factors for the classical SWOT freely, and successively
coding the factors (resp. nodes in the relational SWOT) by indicators´ codes, or
b) setting factors in accordance the indicators´ tables (ensuring rather complete view
of the SC).
7. SWOT procedure in the frame of the SEE Science
The presented Methodology is given for the second round of the SWOT procedure in the
frame of the SEE Science project.
The SEE Science project partners are very different in nature but they have common
goals in boosting innovations via SCs and each one can contribute with its either SWOT
analyses, or feasibility studies to the Transnational State of Art Report in the SEE
Science region.
The project partners agreed on two common objectives: Sustainability of the Science
Centre and Boosting innovation that are further joined into one objective that should be
considered behind each SC´s operation: Sustainability of the Science Centre operating
as a catalyst for innovations, reflecting the common vision of science centers given in
SEE Science AF.
Further, the common objective is slightly modified to each type of partners.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
24
7.1 Common definition of the partners´ task on SWOT
The SWOT analyses within the SEE Science project is relevant for project partners with
operational SCs, networking project partners, and research centre project partner.
Partners of different types have different tasks but concerning the same goal. Partners of
the same type have the same task.
The objective to which the project partners with operational SCs will carry out its SWOT
is given as:
The objective to which the SWOT analyses will be carried out is Sustainability of the
Science Centre which has the vision to become a catalyst of innovations.
Going on the procedure the seven aspects of the SC will be analyzed in accordance with
indicators for SW given in the Table 6, and the innovation environment indicators for
OT given in Table 7. For carrying out their SWOTs the project partners will use the
respective common forms and uniform factors´ coding to express the connections
between the network programs and SCs.
The objective to which the “networking project partners” will carry out their SWOT
analyses is given as:
The network supporting sustainability of Science Centers having a common vision:
to become a catalyst of innovations.
Going on their SWOT procedures the seven aspects of the SC expressed by indicators for
SW given in the Table 6, and the innovation environment indicators for OT given in
Table 7 will be taken into consideration. For carrying out their SWOTs the project
partners will use the respective common forms and uniform factors´ coding to express the
connections between the network programs and SCs.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
25
The objective to which the “research centre project partner” will carry out its SWOT /
feasibility study is given as:
Universities and research institutions collaborating / cooperating with science centers
as catalysts of innovation (in conditions of Economic crises).
Going on their SWOT procedures the seven aspects of the SC expressed by indicators for
SW given in the Table 6, and the innovation environment indicators for OT given in
Table 7 will be taken into consideration. For carrying out their SWOTs the project
partners will use the respective common forms and uniform factors´ coding to express the
connections between the network programs and SCs.
At the same time, because any SC has seven operational aspects (fields), the partners
have to relate their objectives to each single aspect of SCs´ operation separately. Hence,
to each partner objective there are seven sub-objectives to which seven partial SWOT
analyses have to be carried out!
Each partner has to carry out seven partial SWOT analyses due to seven operational
aspects of the SC.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
26
Summary of tasks for partners carrying out their SWOT analyses.
Carrying out SWOT analyses two different strategies can be applied.
Alternatively:
Form 3 and 4
a) Setting SWOTs without common indicators but developing partial SWOTs to each
aspect and operational field (i.e. there will be prepared 7 SWOTs), and afterwards to
identify indicators by use of Tables 6 and 7, and/or Forms 1 and 2.
Form 1 -4
b) Starting with setting factors into Forms 1 and 2 (mapping the factors using the
indicators as poles) and afterwards using the significant indicators for carrying out 7+7+7
SWOTs (Form 3 and forms 4A, 4B) .
Forms 5 have to be used for more detailed description of the potential development issues
referring to the set of indicators related the currently focused operational aspect
(minimum 1000 characters without space).
.
The partners will put on the common portal filled in and closed (only for Reading)
7 forms – classical SWOTs (Forms 3)
7 duad- iny vyraz forms – relational SWOTs with nodes and development issues (Form
4A, 4B)
Form 5 – description of development issues.
At the same time, the partners will provide the coordinator with the same list of
files, but the files will be open for Reading and Writing, for purpose of elaboration
into the TSAR.
Important
It is expected that before sending the final SWOT studies, each partner will realize round
tables with stakeholders in order to involve them into the SC issues and enhance the
studies.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
27
7.2 Common definition of the partners´ task on Feasibility Study
The project partners who want to establish the SC will draw up feasibility studies with the
same objective as valid for carrying out the SWOT by project partners operating the SC.
Also carrying out the feasibility study the partners will use the same list of indicators
given in the Tables 6 and 7, and will apply the common forms for setting factors, to make
a comprehensive analysis and final decision on what kind of SC they want or can afford.
The objective for partner carrying out their feasibility studies on building a science centre
will is defined as
Sustainability of the planned Science Centre, with the vision to become a catalyst of
innovations.
For carrying out their Feasibility studies the project partners will use the respective
common forms with uniform indicators and coding for factors.
But, unlike the SWOTs, the feasibility study must contain also the long term view, show
the ability to identify new trends, assimilate scientific and technological information as a
base for innovative branches of science (natural, technical), point out the activities in
science communication and dissemination) and describe the process how public
awareness will be influenced to increase.
Also, there has to be data on how much working capital is needed, where are the financial
sources and also how to ensure self-sustainability.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
28
Summary of task for partner carrying out their feasibility studies
Forms 1 and 2 (Tables 6 and 7)
The forms 1 and 2 are prepared for factors. The indicators should be used as poles to
build up a complex vision of the considered SC, its parts and relations.
Forms 3 and 4 (classical and relational SWOT, Tables 1, 2, 3) )
In the case of feasibility study SWOT forms could be used with advantage as support for
decisions at writing the Feasibility study.
Forms 4A related to seven SCs´ aspects have to be presented to partners, understood as
summary information on the Feasibility study, to be easily compared with SWOTs and
Feasibility studies prepared by partners and the benchmarking studies.
Forms 5
The Forms 5 are determined for Feasibility studies. There are seven forms related to
seven SCs aspects, plus one concerning the whole. The forms are divided into frames,
introduction plus operational areas. The description should be related to the factors given
in Forms 3 and 4 . The frames on operational area have to contain minimum 1000
characters without space per frame.
The partners will put on the common portal filled in and closed (only for Reading) :
8 forms with factors (Forms 1 and 2)
8 forms – sheets of feasibility study (Forms 5)
7 forms – sheets (with tables of nodes) (Form 4A)
At the same time, the partners will provide the coordinator with the same list of
files, but the files will be open for Reading and Writing, for purpose of elaboration
into the TSAR.
Important
It is expected that before sending the final SWOT studies, each partner will realize round
tables with stakeholders in order to involve them into the SC issues and enhance the
studies.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
29
8. Approaching Science Centers´ objectives
The objectives of project partners are complementary, and relate common operational
areas and indicators. To achieve an amplified effect common understanding of
operational areas and indicators is a must.
8.1 Approaching Science Centers´ operational areas
Both indicators for the SW and indicators to the OT relate to the same 5 operational
areas: Science (Research) &Technology, Education & Society, Business, Innovation and
SC Special.
The indicators should be read dynamically, the questions from the point of view of the
respective operational field can be, in general, formulated as follows:
1. At indicators from the operational area: Science, Research &Technology the
general questions can be
What do you call innovative science? What kind of Science and Technology do you
apply / consider to be applied in the SC frame? In which direction do you want to bring /
to change science in your SC?
While answering you should keep in mind that Science and Technology are undergoing
rapid changes, becoming more complex, transdisciplinary and interactive, and that the
importance of international cooperation on global issues increases. Basic research
produces new knowledge and major breakthroughs. Applied research can help to solve
an existing crisis and forego possible future crisis but may also cause big harm. Increase
of public understanding of S&T, engagement of the public and especially young people in
S&T is a challenge for SC.
Note 1: The operational area Science & Technology, and the indicators under this
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
30
area, concerns also all issues on Innovation within the Science & Technology field,
and issues on bridging Science with Education, Business, and Society.
2. At indicators from the operational area Education & Society the general questions
can be
What do you call innovative learning / teaching / communication? What kind of
educational and communicational practices, methodologies etc. do you apply/ consider to
be applied in the SC frame?
While answering you should keep in mind that the educational systems in almost all
European countries undergo reforms. The system of formal education is rather rigid.
Changing societal relations, needs and values due to new technologies shifts the core of
education into non-formal learning, and here is also a perspective operational area for
opening new issues and innovative approaches, methods, formats, content that can be
mediated in a SC through different forms– exhibits, workshops, discussions, shows /
theatres, competitions, lab-works etc.
Note 2: The operational area Education & Society, and the indicators under this
area, concerns also issues on Innovation within the Education & Society field, and
issues on bridging with Science and Business.
3. At indicators from the operational area Business the general questions can be
What do you call innovative business? What kind of business issues, models,
approaches etc. do you bring / do you consider to be presented in the frame of SC,
and why?
While answering you should keep in mind that the world economic crisis calls for
innovative solutions and radical changes. In a global world, the cooperation is a
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
31
necessity. Science and technology (S&T) is an essential engine of economic growth, leads
to new products, firms and markets, but also to its consequences.
Note 3: The operational area Business, and the indicators under this area,
concerns issues on bridging Business with Science and Education, while issues
related SC´s business belong under the operational area SC Special.
4. At indicators from the operational area Innovations the general questions can be
What do you call serious innovation? In which way do you envisage to bring
innovations in SC? Why do you consider the respective way effective?
While answering you should keep in mind that Innovation itself is not a field but rather a
process, which a psychological, educational, economical and global influence. SCs are
both participants and leaders in innovation as they influence SCs visitors and through
them the society as a whole. In order to stay up-to-date and be prepared to respond to the
needs of tomorrow’s society SCs should be constantly evolving by innovating content,
addressing new composition of visitors, be prepared to respond to visitors, feedback etc.
Note 4: The operational area Innovation, and the indicators under this area,
concerns issues on process of Innovation itself and bridging Innovation with
Science, Education and Business, while issues related SC´s innovation belong
under the operational area SC Special.
5. At indicators from the operational area SC Special the general questions can be How is the SC equipped to fulfill its missions/ visions? In which direction do you want to
innovate your SC? Can the innovation program influence the maximal instant operational
(visitors´) capacity of the SC? How much?
Note 5. The operational area SC Special, and the indicators under this area,
concerns issues on Science Centre as a whole, relating its both inwards and
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
32
outward relations and unique functions.
.
While answering you should keep in mind that the atmosphere in the science center is
determined both through tangible factors (architecture, design and its realization) and
psychological factors such as SCs philosophy on communications with visitors and can
significantly contribute towards achievement of SCs vision. An innovative choice of
content, communicational channels, technological shift in design may significantly
increase the influence of the SCs on the society in general.
8.2 Approaching Science Centers´ indicators
The SCs´ indicators are summarized in the Tables 6 and 7 (see Appendix 1 and 2). The
effort was done to find universal and complete set of indicators. However, the choice is
limited and very probably doing SWOT each partner will find factors which will require
new indicators. These factors should be coded in Table 4 as “other“.
8.2.1 The Science Centers´ indicators for S-W
Considering SC inner factors of the SC they have to relate to the current State of Art. The
inner indicators, and the conception of inner indicators (the attributes of factors which
belongs under the respective indicator) are given in seven tables (Table 6/1-6/7) –
Appendix 1.
A remark related to SC´s factors with numbers
Many factors considered at SWOT analyses, feasibility studies and benchmark studies
can be expressed by numbers, absolute and relative, as appropriate.
Note: The very first intention for SEE Science SWOT methodology was to find common
indicators, and parameters, that would express the reality in numbers. But with respect to
too many different local factors influencing the SC´s numbers, their value for
comparisons in the frame of the SEE Science project could be doubtful. However - for
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
33
each SC separately, e.g. “price for development an exhibition” and numbers like “price of
an exhibition / per visitor” are surely significant.
8.2.2 The Science Centers´ indicators for O-T
Considering SC outer factors they have to relate to the current innovation environment on
local, regional and global level, covering the local conditions for the SC´s operations,
regional collaboration framework and the global trends in each operational area of the
SC. The content behind each SCs´ outer common indicator is very complex and wide.
The common current outer SCs´ indictors are presented in the Table 7 – Appendix 2. In
addition, the Appendix 2 contains also Tables 7/1-7/5 with hints towards factors
belonging under respective indicators divided into five SCs´ operational areas.
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
34
Appendix 1
Table 6/1-6/7: Science Centers´ inner indicators. Respective tables bring common
SCs´s indicators divided in according to the SCs´operational areas.
otherotherotherotherother8
Managers Programs / exchange
Programs / exchange of staffs in Inn
Programs / exchange of staffs in B
Programs / exchange of staffs in E&S
Programs / exchange of staffs in S&T
7
Students, volunteers in S&T
Students, volunteers in S&T
Students, volunteers in S&T
Students, volunteers in S&T
6
External employees in Management
External employees in Inn
External employees in B
External employees in E&S
External employees in S&T
5
Investment in managers
Investment in employees for Inn
Investment in employees for B in SC
Investment in employees for E&S
Investment in employees for S&T/
4
Special Abilities for SC Agent
Special abilities for SC´s innovators
Special abilities for SC´s B
Special abilities for educators
Special abilities for SC´s researchers
3
Profile / background ofSC´s Managers
Profile/background ofSC´s employeesInn
Profile/background ofSC´s employeesB
Profile/background ofSC´s employeesin E&S
Profile/background ofSC´s employeesin S&T
2
Type / number of SC managers
Type / number of position in Inn
Type/numberof position in B
Type/number of position in E&S
Type/number of position in S&T
1
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation & Society
Science & Technology
HUMAN CAPACITIES
Table 6/1 SCs´ inner indicators on Human Capacities
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
35
Table 6/2 SCs´ inner indicators on Technical Capacities
OtherOtherOtherOtherOther6th indicators
Networking systems
Partners, stakeholders technical capacities for Innovation
Partners, stakeholders technical capacities for Business
Partners, stakeholders technical capacities for E&S
Partners, stakeholders technical capacities for S&T
5th indicators
Technical space for SC
Technical space for Innovation
Technical space for Business
Technical space for E&S
Technical space for S&T
4th indicators
IC technologies for SC
IC technologies for Innovation
IC technologies for Business
IC technologies for E&S
IC technologies for S&T
3rd indicators
Technical equipment for SC
Technical equipment for Inn
Technical equipment for Business
Technical equipment for E&S
Technical equipment for S&T
2nd indicators
Technical issues on SC
Technical issues on Innovation
Technical issues on Business
Technical issues on E&S
Technical issues on S&T
1st indicators
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation &
SocietyScience &
TechnologyTable 2
Table 6/3 SCs´ inner indicators on Operational Capacities
OtherOtherOtherOtherOther7th indicators
Special services of SC
Special serviceon Innovation
Special serviceon Business
Special services on E&S
Special serviceon S&T
6th indicators
SC´s maximalinstant and dailyoperational capacity of SC
SC´s maximalinstant and dailyoperational capacities in Innovation
SC´s maximal instant and dailyoperational capacities in Business
SC´s maximalinstant and dailyoperational capacity in E&S
SC´s maximalinstant and dailyoperational capacity in S&T
5th indicators
Know-how for SC innovation
Know-how for innovation in Innovation
Know-how for innovation in Business
Know-how for innovation in E&S
Know-how for innovation in S&T
4th indicators
Programs´changing in SC
Programs´changing in Innovation
Programs´changing in Business
Programs´changing in E&S
Programs´Changing in S&T
3rd indicators
Programs for visitors on SC development
Programs for visitors on Innovation
Programs for visitors on Business
Programs for visitors on E&S
Programs for visitors on S&T
2nd indicators
Zones for visitors in SC
Forms of visitors´programs in Innovation
Forms of visitors´programs in Business
Forms of visitors´programs in E&S
Forms of visitors´programs in S&T
1st indicators
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation &
SocietyScience &
TechnologyTable 3
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
36
Table 6/4
SCs´ inner indicators on Development Opportunities
OtherOtherOtherOtherOther7th indicators
Hosting specialHosting Innovation
Hosting Business
Hosting E&SHosting S&T6th indicators
SC networks with stakeholders
Stakeholders on Innovation
Stakeholders on Business
Stakeholderson E&S
Stakeholderson S&T
5th indicators
Projects on SC sustainability and development
Projects on Innovation in SC
Projects on Business of SC
Projects on E&S in SC
Projects s on S&T in SC
4th indicators
SC info systemInnovation scope structure in SC
Business scope structure in SC
E&S scope structure in SC
S&T scope structure in SC
3rd indicators
Board of SC Trustees
Innovation advisory board
Business advisory board
E&S advisory board / educational committee
S&T advisory board / scientific committee
2nd indicators
SC Management and structure
Departments for Innovation in SC
Departments for Business in SC
Departments for E&S in SC
Departmentsfor S&T in SC
1st indicators
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation &
SocietyScience &
TechnologyTable 4
Table 6/5SCs´ inner indicators on Innovation Environment
otherotherotherotherother6th indicators
SC culture, friends
Innovation visitors actions, behavior
Business visitors actions, behavior
E&S visitors actions, behavior
S&T visitors actions, behavior
5th indicators
Involvement of new users
Innovation target groups
Business target groups
E&S target groups
S&T target groups
4th indicators
Content Supports
Innovation Content
Business Content
E&S ContentS&T Content3rd indicators
Communication channels
Facilities for Innovation
Facilities for Business
Facilities for E&S
Facilities for S&T
2nd indicators
Architecture, design, art
Alive environment for Innovation
Alive environment for Business
Alive environment for E&S
Alive environment for S&T
1st indicators
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation &
SocietyScience &
TechnologyTable 5
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
37
Table 6/6 : SCs´ inner indicators on Financing
OtherOtherOtherOtherOther8th indic.
SC´s efficiency indexes per year/ per longer period
SC´s indexes on assessment of financing efficiency in I
SC´indexes on assessment of financing efficiency in B
SC´s indexes on assessment of financing efficiency in E&S
SC´s indexes on assessment of financing efficiency in S&T
7th indicators
Volunteers work in I(financial equivalent)
Volunteers work in B (financial equivalent)
Volunteers work in E&S (financial equivalent) in
Volunteers work in S&T (financial equivalent)
6th indicators
State/regional/ local contributions on SC
State/regional/ local contributions on personal expenses in Innovation
State/regional/ local contributions on personal expenses in B
State/regional/ local contributions on personal expenses in E&S
State /regional/ local contributions on personal expenses in S&T
5th indicators
SC´s working capital per year
Minimal working capital on I in SC per year
Minimal working capital on Business in SC per year
Minimal working capital on Education in SC per year
Minimal working capital on Science in SC per year
4th indicators
SC´s financial sustainability
Project’s financing in I
Project’s financing in B
Project’s financing in E&S
Project’s financing in S&T
3rd indicators
SC´s revenues from own activities
Own revenues from activities in Innovation
Own revenues from activities in Business
Own revenues from activities in E&S
Own revenues from activities in S&T
2nd indicators
SC fundraising policy
Acquired finances except own revenues on Innov. issues
Acquired finances except own revenues on Business issues
Acquired finances except own revenues on E&S issues
Acquired finances except own revenues on S&T issues
1st indicators
SC SpecialIBE & SS & TTable 6
Table 6/7
SCs´ inner indicators on Policy Framework
OtherOtherOtherOtherOther5th indicators
Characteristic parameters of SC as a whole
Characteristic parameters on Innovation issues
Characteristic parameters on Business issues
Characteristic parameters on E&T
Characteristic parameters on S&T
4th indicators
Scope strategy for SC
Scope strategy for Innovation in SC
Scope strategy for Business in SC
Scope strategy for E&S in SC
Scope strategy for S&T in SC
3rd indicators
Common SEE Science Vision:Being understood as catalyst for innovations
Vision on Innovations in SC
Vision on Business in the SC
Vision on ways of learning in SC
Vision on S&T exposure in SC
2nd indicators
Mission related SC as a whole
Mission related Innovation in SC
Mission related Business in SC
Mission related E&S in SC
Mission related S&T in SC
1st indicators
SC SpecialInnovationBusinessEducation &
SocietyScience &
TechnologyTable 7
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
38
Science Centres internal indicators on HUMAN CAPACITIES
General Type/number of position - How many persons in your SC are employed in the given operational area? What is the composition of the operational area (manager, project leaders, project assistants, secretary, etc.)? Profile / background of SC’s employees - Which qualifications and educational background does your SC consider essential for the employees in the given operational area? Special abilities – Which special skills are required for the optimal operation of the considered operational area in your SC? These can be abilities to identify new trends, to digest modern science to be comprehensive for the general public and education, to assimilate S&T information, to develop long-term projects, to communicate, to scaffold people at learning. Investment in employees – How does your SC invest in its employees? Does it offer special internal courses? Does it pay for external courses which increase the qualification of its employers? Does it pay for study trips or send its employees to conferences and workshops? External employees - What is the SCs position on external employees? How many external employees are employed in the specified operational area? What are their tasks and responsibilities? What are their special skills or qualifications? Students, volunteers – Does your SC work with students or volunteers? What is their contribution to the operation of your SC? How does your SC choose successful candidates? Programs / exchange of staffs – Does your SC rotate its employees to other operational areas? Do you have a staff exchange program partnership with another organization? SC special Type / number of SC managers – How many SC managers are employed in your SC? Which operational areas do they supervise? SC´s Managers profile / background - Which qualifications and educational background do the SCs managers in your SC possess? Are they economists, managers, pedagogical advisors, scientists, media communication experts, etc.? Special Abilities for SC Agent – What are the special abilities of the SC Agent in your institution? These may include innovative thinking, good facilitator, networking and communication skills, scientific background, affinity towards economic mindset, etc. Investment in managers - How does your SC invest in its managers? Does it offer special internal courses? Does it pay for external courses which increase the qualification of its managers? External employees in Management – Does your SC employ external employees in management? If so, what are their tasks and responsibilities? Managers Programs / Exchange - Does your SC rotate its managers to other operational areas? Do you have a staff exchange program partnership with another organization? Science Centres internal indicators on TECHNICAL CAPACITIES General Technical issues – What is the technical conception of the considered SC operational area? What are the main technical issues that need to be resolved in the given SC
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
39
operational area? Which technical issues is the given operational area of your SC proud of? Technical equipment – Which technical equipment is available in your SC to assist the given operational area? IC technologies – What kind of IC technologies does the given operational area use for programs´ creation? What kind of ICT is used by the visitors in the given operational area. (touch-response terminals, interactive black-boards, 3D television, etc)? Technical space – What is the design of your technical space? How does it affect the quality of work in the considered operational area of your SC? What realistic changes would make a big positive contribution? Partners, stakeholders technical capacities – Can your partners’ and stakeholders provide some technical support to the given operational area of the SC? If so, in which area and with which kind of applications can your partners assist you? What are their technical capacities? SC special Technical issues on SC – What is the technical conception of your SC? Which technical issues are a major achievement of your SC? (experimental labs for the staff, experimental labs for the general public, multimedia equipment, own workshop for exhibit manufacture, etc.) Which technical issues present a bottleneck to the further development of your SC (out-of-date equipments, lack of experimental equipment, lack of multimedia equipment, lack of own workshop for exhibit design and manufacture, etc)? Technical equipment for SC - Do you have a special projection system, special equipment to create models / prototypes / new exhibits, to prepare demonstrations or workshops for the general public, experimental equipment, etc)? In which extend and on which occasions do your SC use these technologies? In which forms and programs for visitors are they integrated? IC technologies for SC – What kind of IC technologies does your SC uses for visitors? To which extend and on which occasions do your SC use these technologies? In which systems are they integrated? Technical space for SC – What is the design of your technical space? How does it affect the quality of work in the considered operational area of your SC? What realistic changes would make a big positive contribution? Does your SC have enough technical space at its disposition? Networking systems – What kind of networking systems does your SC use? Do you maintain libraries, virtual SC, etc.? Does your SC interact remotely with its potential visitors? Do you use social media to communicate with the general public? Science Centres internal indicators on OPERATIONAL CAPACITIES General Forms of visitors´ programs - Which forms does your SC use to work with visitors in the given operational area (permanent / temporal / travelling exhibitions, labs, special demonstrations, shows, workshops, interactive courses, discussion panels, etc.)? What are the typical features of the respective forms in the given operational field? Which are the most popular forms among the visitors? Which form is the SC proud of? Programs for visitors – What programs in the specified operational area are available for the visitors? How are they composed? What is their range? What target groups are
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
40
addressed by these programs? Is their composition sufficient to attract the desired number of visitors (optimal daily operational capacity)? Does the current program composition in the specified operational area satisfy visitors of the SC? Does the program composition in the given operational area encourage the visitors to additional visits to the SC? Programs´ Changing - How many different programs on this operational area are available in your SC? How often do you change the program? Are the different programs rotated on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis? How often does your SC create / install new programs? How much time is needed for development of a program (exhibition etc.) related to its extent, size, importance? Know-how for innovation – What is the key know-how in the respective operational field? How does your SC implement innovation in the given operational area? How is the know-how for innovation acquired (developed by itself, by own experience, systematic regular brainstormings, attendance of courses, attendance of conferences, organisation of conferences, organisations of competitions, etc.?) Which know-how for innovation is the specified operational area is your SC proud of? Maximal instant and daily operational capacity - What is the SC’s maximal instant operational capacity in the considered operational area? Is it sufficient to meet the needs of the SC (for example during special events, new exhibitions, workshops)? Is it sufficient to satisfy the visitors´ interests and needs? What is the daily operational capacity of the SC in the considered operational area? Is it sufficient to meet the needs of the SC? Is it sufficient to satisfy the visitors? Special service – What special services in the given operational area does your SC provide? Is the offer sufficient to meet the needs of visitors, partners, stakeholders and to reach the goal of the SC vision? SC special Zones for visitors in SC – How is the visitors space in the SC divided? What kind of zones are available (quiet observing zones, interactive zones, loud show zones, zones for children, etc.)? How does the division of the SC into zones affect the visitors? What are the major advantages of the current arrangement? What should be changed? Programs for visitors on SC development - What programs are available for the visitors? How are the programs composed? What is their range? What target groups are addressed by these programs? Is their composition sufficient to attract the desired number of visitors (optimal daily operational capacity)? Does the current program composition satisfy visitors of the SC? Does the program composition encourage the visitors to additional visits to the SC? Are the visitors directly involved in the process of innovation? Programs´ changing in SC - Which key does your SC use for program composition? How many different programs are available in your SC? How often do you change the program? Are the different programs rotated on a daily, weekly, monthly, etc. basis? How often does your SC create new programs? Do you exchange programs with another organisation? Does your SC create programs with an external partner? Know-how for SC innovation - Which know-how for innovation is your SC proud of? What are new ways of thinking, acting, performing does your SC use for its own operations and/or introduces to the general public? How does your SC implement know-how? How is the know-how for innovation acquired (regular brainstormings, attendance of courses, attendance of conferences, organisation of conferences, organisations of competitions, etc.?)
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
41
SC´s maximal instant and daily operational capacity of SC - What is the SC’s maximal instant operational capacity? Is it sufficient to meet the needs of the SC? Is it sufficient to satisfy the visitors? What is the daily operational capacity of the SC? Is it sufficient to meet the needs of the SC (reach the desired number of visitors, influence the desired number of visitors at a time, et.)? Is it sufficient to satisfy the visitors´ ? Special services of SC - What special does your SC provide? Is the offer sufficient to meet the needs of visitors, partners, stakeholders and to reach the goal of the SC vision? Science Centres internal Indicators on DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES General Operational areas in SC - Which departments in your SC are working within the considered operation area? What are their main responsibilities with respect to the developing opportunities? Is the current arrangement flexible enough to follow development opportunities? Which departments in your SC should be incorporated in to the considered operational area and why? Which departments in your SC should be removed from the considered operational area and why? Advisory board/scientific committee – What is the composition of the advisory board or scientific committee on the given operational area? What are the responsibilities of this body with respect to the developing opportunities? Is the current arrangement flexible enough to follow development opportunities?? How do the body as a whole and its members as individuals contribute to the development of the given operational area? What should be improved? What works perfectly? Scope structure in SC – What is the structure of the given operational area in the framework of your SC with respect to the developing opportunities? Is the current arrangement flexible enough to follow development opportunities? Should it position be strengthened or weakened? What would be the consequences of such actions? Projects in SC – Which projects are carried out in the given operational area of your SC? What is the expected impact of the realization of these projects? Is the amount and content of the projects optimal to meet the vision of the SC? What should be improved or modified? Stakeholders - Which stakeholders are involved in the given operational area of your SC? Is their composition optimal or does the SC plan to win over some additional stakeholders? Is the cooperation of the SC with its stakeholders in the given operational area mutually beneficial? Hosting – Does your SC host important conferences on subjects in the given operational area? Does your SC host important or well-known personalities in the given operational area? Does your SC prepare special events to address visitors with special needs (handicapped, children from orphanages, socially disadvantaged families, etc.)? SC special SC Management structure - What is the composition of SC management? What is the overall management structure of your SC? What are the responsibilities of this body with respect to the developing opportunities? Is the current arrangement flexible enough to follow development opportunities? How do the body as a whole and its members as individuals contribute to the development of the SC? Board of SC Trustees - What is the composition of the board of the trustees of your SC? What are the responsibilities of this body with respect to the developing opportunities? Is the current arrangement flexible enough to follow development opportunities? How do
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
42
the body as a whole and its members as individuals contribute to the development of the SC? How does the Board of SC Trustees interact with the SC Management? What functions well? What should be improved? Communicational - assimilation potential / Art – Which communicational channels and tools (social media, web page, newspaper articles, lectures for the general public, etc.) could be used to help the SC to fulfil its mission? What are the advantages and drawbacks of the current communication strategy? Projects on SC sustainability and development - Which projects on the sustainability and development of your SC are carried out? What is the expected impact of the realization of these projects? Is the amount and content of the projects optimal to meet the vision of the SC? What should be improved or modified? SC networks with stakeholders - Which stakeholders are involved in the operational of your SC? Is their composition optimal or does the SC plan to win over some additional stakeholders? Is the cooperation of the SC with its stakeholders in the given operational area mutually beneficial? Hosting special - Does your SC host important conferences and events? Does your SC host important or well-known personalities? Does your SC host students, provide internships, etc.? Does your SC prepare special events to address visitors with special needs (handicapped, children from orphanages, socially disadvantaged families, etc.)? Science Centres internal indictors on INNOVATION ENVIROMENT General Alive environment for – Is the atmosphere in the specified operational area open for innovation? How does the specified operational area evolve through interaction with visitors and based on their response? Does the SC offer room for new ways of science development (through new research equipment, new access to research equipment, new models of cooperation, etc.)? Does the SC develop new forms of education, new evaluations of education, etc.? Is the SC active in new business models? Is the SC interested in and contributing to the theories of innovation? Facilities for – Which facilities in your SC are available for the specified operational area? Are these facilities used efficiently? Are they sufficient to meet the needs of the specified operational area? Do they offer room for further development of the specified operational area? Content – Which topics are being addressed within the given operational area? Is the focus on scientific or technical issues or on something else? Is the SC emphasis on historical aspects, recent developments or current hot-topics? Does the content meet the SC quality expectations? Is it attractive for the target audience (schools, children, families, grown-ups)? Target groups –What are the target groups of the specified operational area of your SC? Are the services provided customized to the specific needs of the individual target groups? What are the expectations of the different target groups? How does the SC respond to the expectations of these groups? What are their needs? How does the SC respond to the needs of these groups? What are the assets of these target groups? How does the SC take advantage of the assets of these groups? Are the individual target groups satisfied with the provided services? How can the specified operational area reach further target groups (if desired)?
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
43
Visitors actions, behaviour – How do visitors of the specified operational area of your SC contribute to the innovation? Can the visitors participate in innovative projects and create new content? Does the staff of the specified operational area analyze the behaviour, actions and needs of the visitors and improve the offered content accordingly? Does the SC carry out surveys or responds to visitors ideas on innovation? SC special Architecture, design, art –Does the visual aspect of the SC (architecture, inner design, preferred art decorations) encourage innovation? Can the placement of the exhibits and the zones division of the SC be modified to make room for new key elements? Communication channels – What are the communication channels used by the SC (TV, radio, web-page, word of mouth, social media, blogs, face to face communication, etc.)? Does the SC reach the desired audience? What are the weak spots of the current communication strategy of the SC? What works perfectly (excellent media network, large number of followers on the facebook, etc.)? Content Supports – Which topics are being addressed by the SC? Does the SC use a central permanent or a temporal central topics, scientific, technical issues or another? Are the topics of current programs mutually connected? Does the SC place emphasis on historical aspects, recent developments or current hot-topics? How does the SC innovate its content and stays up-to-date (employment of experts, external advisors, attendance of courses and lectures, hosting of festivals and competitions, etc.)? How often is the available content analyzed on its actuality, didactical quality and attraction to the constantly evolving visitors? Involvement of new users – How are new visitors attracted to the SC? Are the new visitors directly involved in the process of innovation? What is the potential outreach radius of your SC (local area, town, country, etc.)? SC culture, friends – How can friends of the SC contribute to the process of innovation? Can they propose a specific innovative project which they would prefer to support? Is the circle of friends important to the SC? Science centres internal indicators on FINANCING General Acquired finances except own revenues – What is the current relative proportion of the finances acquired externally for the operation of the specified operational area? Is this proportion sufficient? Does it offer potential for growth? Are these finances acquired in accordance with the mission and vision of your SC? Does your SC thrive for a financial independence in the given operational area or does it require more investments? Own revenues from activities – What is the current relative proportion of the finances acquired by your SC from its activities in the specified operational area? Is this proportion sufficient? Does it offer potential for growth? Is this amount satisfactory? Which activities contribute the most? Are these activities in accordance with the mission and vision of your SC? Project’s financing – How are the projects in the given operational area of your SC financed? What are the relative proportions of contributions from different sources (external and internal)? What sources mainly contribute to the individual projects? Is your SC satisfied with the current source distribution? Does it offer potential for innovation? How should it be modified? What are the relative proportions of the current
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
44
expenses distributions (administrative, fund-raising, didactical, technical, etc.)? How should they be modified? Minimal working capital per year - What minimal amount of money does your SC require annually to cover all of its expenses (rent, wages, supplies, etc.) in the given operational area? Can your SC afford this from the long-term perspective? State /regional/ local contributions on personal expenses – Does your SC use different state/regional/local programs (e.g. to finance creational of new work places, employment programs for socially disadvantaged citizens, regional development programs, etc.) to partly finance the personal expenses in the given area? If so, what is the relative contribution compared to the total personal costs? Which programs suit the SC most? Volunteers work (financial equivalent) – How many working hours per year do volunteers donate within the specified operational area of your SC? What is the financial equivalent of their contribution? Can your SC efficiently invest more volunteer work in the specified operational area? How can your SC address more potential volunteers? SC´s indexes on assessment of financing efficiency – How does your SC assess its financial efficiency in the specified operational area? How financially efficient is the specified operational area of your SC? What are the relative proportions of the current expenses distributions (administrative, fund-raising, didactical, technical, etc.) in the specified operational area? Is your SC satisfied with the current situation? How should the relative proportions be modified? SC special SC fundraising policy – What is the fundraising policy of your SC? What kind of grants does the SC apply for? What are the guidelines (if any) for accepting donations from sponsors? What is the current relative proportion of the finances acquired externally for the operation of the SC? Is this proportion sufficient? Does it offer potential for growth? Does your SC thrive for financial independence or prefers to expand the services offered to the public as much as possible? Is the current fundraising policy of your SC in line with this vision? SC´s revenues from own activities – What is the current relative proportion of the finances acquired by your SC from its activities? Is this proportion sufficient? Does it offer potential for growth? Is this amount satisfactory? Should it be increased to gain more financial independence of the SC? Or should it be decreased in order to make a visit of the SC more affordable to the general public? Which activities contribute the most? Are these activities in accordance with the mission and vision of your SC? SC´s working capital per year – What minimal amount of money does your SC require annually to cover all of its expenses (rent, wages, supplies, etc.) Can your SC afford this from the long-term perspective? If not, which costs should be reduced? SC´s financing efficiency indexes per year/ per longer period - How does your SC assess its financial efficiency? How financially efficient is your SC? What are the relative proportions of the current expenses distribution? Is this ratio in accordance to the SC vision and mission? Is your SC satisfied with the current situation? How should the relative proportions be modified? How do the admission fees compare to the activity cost per visitor? Is the SC satisfied with this state? Science Centres internal indictors on POLICY FRAMEWORK General
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
45
Mission related – How does the specified operational area relate to the mission of your SC? Does the mission of the given operational area reflect modern trends and address current needs of the society? Does it correspond to the focus of your SC (raise awareness, bridge society, education and business, increase understanding, disseminate knowledge, motivate, stimulate, etc.)? What are the main successes of the specified operational area with respect to the SCs mission? Where is room for improvement? Vision on exposure in SC – How does the SC view the specified operational area? How is it currently perceived by the society? How should it be perceived under ideal conditions? Which concrete steps lead towards that goal? Scope strategy – Describe the framework related scope strategy of the given operational area. What is the SC strategy for interaction with its visitors in the specified operational area (informal learning, non-formal learning, engagement in science)? How are the visitors motivated? Which educational methods are used? Which didactical principles are preferred by the SC? Which research methods are used? What is the appropriate depth of the presented subject areas? Characteristic parameters – How do you measure/determine the specified operational are of your SC? Describe the defined constrains of the specified operational area of your SC through its characteristic numbers: what kind of forms, programs, activities and to which extend are currently used for interaction with the visitors within this operational area. Do these parameters meet the expectations of your SC? Do these parameters satisfy the visitors of your SC? SC special Mission related SC as a whole –Does the mission of your SC reflect modern trends and address current needs of the society? How does it correspond to the current operation of your SC (focus, environment, used technologies, formats, local interest, international level)? Where does your SC see an opportunity for improvement? Common SEE Science Vision - Being understood as catalyst for innovations – How does the SC view itself? Is your SC acting as a catalyst for innovation? How? How is it currently perceived by the society? How should it be perceived under ideal conditions? Which concrete steps lead towards that goal? Scope strategy for SC attraction – How does your SC plan to attract visitors? What is the SC strategy for interaction with its visitors? Which educational methods are used? Which didactical principles are preferred by the SC? Which research methods are used? What is the appropriate depth of the presented subject areas? Does your SC focus on local and or international visitors? How does it address the respective groups? Does the SC see itself as an educational oriented and or leisure time activity oriented? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current “market” positioning? Characteristic parameters of SC as a whole – How do you determine/measure your SC as a whole? What are the characteristic parameters (what kind of forms, programs, activities and to which extend are currently used for interaction with the visitors) of your SC as whole? Do these parameters meet the expectations of your SC? Do these parameters satisfy the visitors of your SC? If not, what should be improved?
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
46
Appendix 2
Table 7: Science Centers´ outer common current indicators, and
Table 7 SCs´ outer indicators on Innovation Environment
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
47
New paradigm in Innovation Social innovation, innovation for survival
Innovation
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT1stindicators
New paradigm in Business Economic crisis, new economic systems: new economic models, processes, perspectives;
Business
New paradigm in E&SLearning Society, new access to knowledge, new people´s values regarding education, new non-formal lifelong learning, new educational focuses, new educational communication, new evaluation of people´s education (formal and non-formal)
Education & Society
New paradigm in S&TScience 2.0, new ways of science development; new issues from new scientific discoveries; new databases;new ways of communication, channels, formats;exploitation of new IC technology in research; new knowledge flows,new exchange of information
Science & Technology
Need on bridging S-E-BSCs as a new branch, in the midle of / joining S+E+B, changes in policy and administrative system
SC Special
Table 7.1: Content behind the first SCs indicators from Table 7
New leading approaches in S&TComplexity, transdisciplinarity, simulations, new research equipment, new research methods
Science & Technology
New leading approaches in InnovationNew theories of innovation, theory of networking, theory on sustainability and smart development
Innovation
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT2nd indicators
New leading approaches in BusinessNew systems on science and technology transfer, new exploitation of row material, new cycles of products´ life
Business
New leading approaches in E&Sopening of education, new educational goals, new educational criteria, new forms of education, new steps in education, new ways of education, new students´ evaluation, new assessment in education, new educational issues
Education & Society
Need to bring new approaches to peopleTransformation of presentation centers to SCs: museums to SC,companiescenters to SC; transformation of educational institutions to SCs: new leading modes of thinking
SC Special
Table 7.2: Content behind the first SCs indicators from Table 7
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
48
New awareness and values related to E&Snew initiatives in non-formal science education
Education & Society
New collaboration framework in S&TNew Integration efforts: new research policy: European Research Area, Strategy 2020;The European Charter for Researchers; new ways of collaboration: new access to research information: new assessment in science,new evaluation of science
Science & Technology
New awareness and values related InnovationEssential need of innovation
Innovation
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT3rd indicators
New awareness and values related Businessnew local needs
Business
New public / Society expectations SCs for all; new Science-Society dialogue
SC Special
Table 7.3: Content behind the first SCs indicators from Table 7
Growing importance of non-formal educationNew initiatives in non-formal science education limits of formal edu system;amount and quality of information: lifelong learning, e-learning, virtual reality, social nets; discrepancies between scientific and non-scientific, new alternatives to scientific education, mental health
Education & Society
Growing importance of S&TNew issues due to new technologies; new issues due to environmental changes; new issues due to social innovations;
Science & Technology
Growing importance of InnovationInnovation for survival
Innovation
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT4th indicators
Growing importance of BusinessGrowing importance of business systems on local level
Business
Growing challenge on SCNew discoveries, new technologies, new open issues, essential need of changes - new culture
SC Special
Table 7.4: Content behind the first SCs indicators from Table 7
SEE Science SWOT Methodology, second round, May 2012
49
New awareness and values related to E&SNew initiatives in non-formal science education
Education & Society
New awareness and values related to S&TOpen sources; environmental issues
Science & Technology
New awareness and values related InnovationEssential need of innovation
Innovation
INNOVATION ENVIRONMENT5th indicators
New awareness and values related BusinessNew local needs
Business
New public / Society expectations new culture for all;new Science-Society dialogue
SC Special
Table 7.5: Content behind the first SCs indicators from Table 7