Accelerat ing t he world's research.

Forecasting core competencies in an

R&D environment
Jairo E. Borges-Andrade

R & D Management

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Proposal for a t echnology vigilance syst em for a Technology License Office

IJAERS Journal

13. LESSONS FROM T ECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT ST UDY IN

Cene Bavec

Tailoring Foresight t o field specificit ies

Ant oine Schoen
Forecasting core competencies in an
R&D environment
Tomas Aquino Guimaraes,1 Jairo Eduardo
Borges-Andrade,2 Magali dos Santos Machado3 and
Miramar Ramos Maia Vargas4
1
Management Department, University of Brasilia, SQN 116, Bloco I, Apto. 305, 70773-090, Brasilia, Brazil.
tomas@unb.br
2
Work and Social Psychology Department, University of Brasilia, SQN 106, Bloco I, Apto. 605, 70742-090,
Brasilia, Brazil.
jeborges@linkexpress.com.br
3
Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research. QI 25, Lote 14, Bloco E, Apto. 630, 71060-250, Brasilia, Brazil.
msm@nutecnet.com.br
4
Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research. SHIN QL 15, Conj. 7, casa 19, 71535-275, Brasilia, Brazil.
mvargas@linkexpress.com.br

This study, carried out in 1998, aimed to develop a method of forecasting core competencies in an
agricultural research organization, using the Delphi Technique. First, based on a survey of internal
documents and interviews, nine organizational core competencies and their specific components (human
competencies) were defined, and expert judges identified. These judges responded to a questionnaire, in
which the importance of the future human competencies was assessed and the organization's existing
human capacity was evaluated. Means were calculated for both judgements and changes were made in
various definitions, based on the experts' comments. Another questionnaire was designed and sent out to
an expanded panel of judges to confirm or to revise the priority mean scores obtained or to add scores in
the case of competencies that entered later. Factor analysis and reliability scores have demonstrated
internal and inter-competency consistencies. Technological Innovation Management and Geo-processing
appeared as the top priorities and Plant Pathology as the least priority. Priorities for each human
competency were also calculated and they have been helpful for decision-making concerning the selection
and graduate training of researchers on the organization studied.

Introduction innovation process. This process is composed of a group

of activities that begins with the forecasting of market

K nowledge and information have become strategic

production resources for organizations, especially
in light of the current economic globalization process.
These assumptions become more absolute in organiza-
tions of applied research because their main objective is
to generate technological innovations aimed to alter
production processes. The generation of innovations
must be viewed as the result of a technological
demands, goes through planning, organizing, research,
developing and testing of prototypes, and ends when the
production sector incorporates the innovations.
In order to avoid the dispersion of effort and the
waste of resources, R&D organizations need to clearly
define what to research. This definition must be made
after studying priorities that can assist the decision-
making process of these organizations. However, this

R&D Management 31, 3, 2001. # Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2001. Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 249
108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
T.A. Guimaraes, J.E. Borges-Andrade, M. dos S. Machado and M.R.M. Vargas
decision-making process is not enough. It is certainly
feasible for the organization as a whole, to guide
efforts of pinpointing priorities and definition of goals
on a macro level. The decision is still too broad and
unable to accurately support definitions or policies
about selection, training and evaluation of researchers.
This paper describes the methodology of a research
project carried out in 1998 at the Brazilian Corpora-
tion for Agricultural Research ± Embrapa, to diagnose
its human core competencies. Identifying and ranking
human core competencies, termed human competen-
cies from here on, is probably a more appropriate
support for the research management needs. Such
competencies can assist (or be standards for) the
process of formulating goals and teaching strategies in
training programs and developing methods to evaluate
researchers' performance.
Embrapa was founded in 1973 and it is the main
Brazilian government organization in the agricultural
research field. It has 39 research centres located all
over the country, carrying out research projects on
subjects such as livestock, crops, soil, genetic resources,
environment, aiming to develop knowledge and
technological options to solve Brazilian agricultural
problems. The corporation has around 8,500 employ-
ees, 2,000 of them being researchers.
The concept of core competency in R&D
organizations
There is a consensus in the organizational literature
that the competitive advantage of a firm is directly
related to its management capability and the amount
of knowledge used in its productive process. According
Organisation Strategy
Framework
Definition of Organisational
Vision, Business and
Management Model
Human
Organisation Core Competencies
Competencies Diagnosis Diagnosis
Definition of Objectives and
Organisation Performance
Indicators
Follow-up and Evaluation
Figure 1. Competency-based management process.
250 R&D Management 31, 3, 2001
to Hamel and Prahalad (1995), the organization's
ability to compete is a result of its capacity to identify
and develop its core competencies. Prahalad and
Hamel (1990) conceived core competency as a set of
skills, knowledge, technology, and physical, manage-
rial and value systems that generate the competitive
advantage of the organization. Ferlie, et al. (1996)
suggest that the strategy of a competitive organization
of high performance must include internal develop-
ment of its core competencies and not only a
replacement of necessities to respond to market signals.
Thus, according to these authors one of the character-
istics of core competency is that it must be nurtured by
the organization, the reason being that it is not easily
identified or acquired on the market.
Although it is not a new concept, the core
competency approach seems to have an easily assimi-
lated conceptual structure that in turn facilitates the
process of formulating organizational strategies. This
approach could be used by R&D organizations as a
subsidy to formulate strategies, including decisions
about research work to be carried out and investments
in human resources. This process can be seen in
Figure 1.
Figure 1 shows a competency-based management
process. It has an initial moment when the organiza-
tion strategy is designed. This would consist of the
definition of the overall vision of the company, its
business focus and model of management. Following,
the organization would diagnose its core competencies
and define its objectives and performance indicators at
the macro level. Identifying an organization's core
competencies would allow for another diagnosis: that
of human competency. This would subsidise decisions
on the development of internal or the hiring and
Identification and Formulation and
Development of Management
Internal of Work Plans
Competencies
Definition of
Hiring and
Performance
Development
Indicators,
of External
Team and Individual
Competencies
Payment
Systems
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001

development of external competencies. These steps
would lead to the formulation of operational and
management plans and the respective performance
indicators and the remuneration of the teams and
individuals. Follow-up and evaluation would supply
the necessary feedback for the whole process.
The level of strength of a R&D organization's core
competencies may be identified by their capability to
generate technological innovations that have a sys-
temic character. The innovative character of compe-
tency consists of a set of methodologies, knowledge
and methods of work used by the organization to
generate products or services that meet the needs of its
users. This creates some competitive advantage over
the organization's competitors that could result in
products or services of better quality or cheaper prices.
The systemic character of competency is associated to
its capability to influence the highest possible number
of organizational processes. The concept of core
competency for a R&D organization like Embrapa,
consists of skills, knowledge, methodologies and work
processes able to strongly influence the portfolio of
research projects, aimed to produce technological
innovations to solve environmental or agribusiness
problems, or to increase knowledge in the area of
agriculture.
Whereas an industrial organization can present its
innovations in the form of a brand new product or
process or having incremental modifications ± on the
label or in the aesthetic format of the product, for
example ± innovation in a R&D organization gen-
erally means more radical changes in products or
processes which already exist, or in the development of
something completely new. In this sense, the produc-
tive process in the research environment totally
depends on intellectual capital or on the existing
knowledge of the organization. These issues need to
be constantly updated and perfected by continuous
training and education programs.
Human core competency is highly important within
R&D organizations and it can be defined as a group of
skills, knowledge, cognitive strategy, meta-cognitions,
beliefs, values and attitudes belonging to people that
command and perform the processes of R&D, usually
researchers. They are able to determine which knowl-
edge and technology are generated by these organiza-
tions. This paper focuses on this group, but at the same
time realises that there might be other essential
competencies in the organizations, like physical systems,
existing technology, specific structures and ways to
influence, to their own benefit, the external environment.
The prognosis of core competencies in R&D
organizations
Prospective technology analysis is a set of procedures
used to forecast the long-term future of science and
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001
Forecasting core competencies
technology, economy and society. This is done by
identifying growing new technologies which have the
capacity to provoke economic impacts and social
benefits (OECD, 1996). This approach, generally used
to formulate science and technology (S&T) public
policy, has also proven useful in the planning process
of R&D organizations.
Embrapa has used prospective technology analysis
as a support for its decision-making process of what to
research. Examples are the identification of productive
chains and environmental systems and the forecasting
of technological demands (Castro et al., 1998). At this
level, the method uses information in the fields of
science, technology, sociology and culture. Its objective
is to obtain a map of the present and future situation of
S&T, so that decisions may be based on priorities
identified. On the organizational level, similar infor-
mation is also used, but with more attention paid to
planning organizational structure and deciding what to
research.
Quirino et al. (1999), based in an Embrapa Research
Centre, used the Delphi technique to carry out empirical
studies on the quality of the environment, its impact on
agriculture and livestock production, and to create a
research programme necessary for this activity. One of
the most important results was the production of a list
of fields of knowledge and appropriate high-priority
technology to monitor and evaluate the environmental
impact on agriculture and the forecast of the scenario of
Brazilian agriculture in 2005.
The technique aims to identify future events by way
of a consensus of opinions of a group of experts. The
usual steps are as follows: a) definition of the main
concepts and references necessary to carry out the
research; b) identification and selection of the indivi-
duals who will constitute the panel of judges to be
consulted; c) designing the questionnaire containing
the main concepts, reference terms and orientation for
the participation of the judges; d) application of the
questionnaires, data treatment and analysis of the
answers; e) verification of the need to introduce new
questions and the repetition of stages b, c, and d, if
necessary; f) analysis to obtain convergent answers; g)
general conclusions.
The strong point of the Delphi technique is the
structuring of a form of group communication that
allows the participants, as a whole, to deal with a
complex problem. During the process the participants
can express their opinions to evaluate and re-evaluate
the vision or the judgement of the group, within a
certain amount of anonymity (FrancËa 1983). Through-
out this exchange of information, the participants are
informed about the opinions of the others, re-doing or
deepening their own opinions and, as a result,
adjusting their own probabilistic judgement about
future occurrences.
The technique is especially recommended for
exploring ideas in a creative way, and gathering
R&D Management 31, 3, 2001 251
T.A. Guimaraes, J.E. Borges-Andrade, M. dos S. Machado and M.R.M. Vargas
information and judgements which could lead to the
creation of a new invention or the discovery of a line of
action suitable for a specific situation (Quirino et al.,
1999). These authors recall that although reaching a
consensus might be generally the most emphasised
aspect in the Delphi technique framework, the
identification and exploration of divergences could be
a very fruitful approach for constructing scenarios,
making decisions and adopting alternative strategies.
The method employed by Embrapa to diagnose its
future human core competencies is described below
and some examples of results are provided.
Methodology
Embrapa is an organization that aims to produce
knowledge and technology and, consequently, to
modify existing productive systems. For this reason,
it is of fundamental importance that Embrapa
consider, when identifying its core competencies, not
only the existing competencies in the established
reality, but also those likely to change this reality.
Thus, besides the technological demands identified in
agro-industry and in the environmental systems, one
must consider where scientific knowledge is headed
and the diverse core competencies necessary for the
firm to reach its objectives and accomplish its mission.
This was the path chosen by the team responsible for
this research.
The initial work plan was to develop a methodology
to identify the strategic (and future) personnel training
needs of Embrapa for the 5-year period of 1999± 2003.
During the course of the research, the team responsible
for its execution realised that the methodology being
used would permit the diagnosis of future core
competencies for the firm. From that point on,
considering the results that were obtained, the afore-
mentioned organization could make decisions not only
regarding training, but also on human resource
management in general. This would include human
resource planning, job description, selection and
evaluation. The validity period of the results was
reduced from 5 to 3 years, because the fast rate of
change in Embrapa's environment did not allow for a
longer period for a prognostic analysis of this nature.
Concerning the specific field of personnel training,
the methodology of identifying priorities that Embrapa
used until 1998 was the same one used during the 70s
and 80s (Borges-Andrade and Lima, 1983; Borges-
Andrade et al., 1989). In essence, it was based on the
judgement of directors and managers of the research
and management units of the firm, referring to what
knowledge fields and skills were priorities for the
organization to invest in training. Besides the inbreed-
ing that is common in such a practice, it favours the
vertical dimension of the organizational structure,
ignoring the horizontal dimension of its research
252 R&D Management 31, 3, 2001
projects. In other words, the demands and technolo-
gical problems of the agents who constitute agro-
business and the environmental systems are systemic,
in the sense that they are not restricted to any one
subject or field, while the training priorities of
Embrapa have been defined according to the specific
fields of knowledge that exist within the firm.
Furthermore, the methodology of diagnosis lacked
an instrument that could help the nature of evaluation
that it produced to become prospective.
There was a demand to find a way to match the
systemic focus of the R&D process of Embrapa and the
identification of the strategic needs of personnel
training. The way to reach this goal chosen by this
project team was to use the concept of core competency
instead of field of knowledge. Core competency is not
necessarily limited to one specific field of knowledge.
Another requirement of Embrapa, that should have
been considered while developing the methodology, was
the direction of the identification of scientific knowledge
in diverse research projects the firm was working with.
Actually, technology forecasting in a highly changeable
environment was the big bottleneck of a process of
organizational analysis whose task was to direct
investments towards human resources development.
Although the Delphi technique was not developed for
this reason, it has helped to solve this problem, as
Burton and Merrill (1977) and Campbell (1988) have
earlier mentioned. Using the Delphi technique as a
basis, with necessary adjustments, made it possible to
develop a methodology of core competency diagnosis at
Embrapa, as described below.
First, an initial list of 17 organizational core
competencies, that were considered essential to the
firm, was internally formulated. The list was based on
the reading of corporate documents concerning Em-
brapa's planning and research projects. In the first
semester of 1998 this list was presented personally to a
group of 17 top experts of the firm. These experts were
from different fields of knowledge, and all were
renowned for being highly competent in their fields.
They were asked to analyse the above-mentioned list,
to add other competencies, to gather or dismember
them, to define them operationally and to indicate
their respective components (human competencies).
The experts were also asked to recommend other
internal or external colleagues to be consulted.
After receiving the results of the first phase, a
questionnaire was designed containing nine organiza-
tional core competencies including their respective
operational definitions. The questionnaire was sent out
to 151 experts, 115 internal and 36 external. The group
of internal experts consisted of researchers from
Embrapa. They were heads of projects or research
groups, directors of research centres, and directors of
administrative units at Embrapa. They were respon-
sible for the creation and monitoring of the manage-
ment policies of the firm. The group of external experts
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001

was made up of Brazilian University lecturers,
researchers, technicians and managers of funding
R&D agencies and union representatives of the
agricultural sector.
Every organizational core competency indicated on
the questionnaire contained from five to 19 future
human competencies. Each expert was asked to make
the following contributions: a) to review the opera-
tional definitions of the organizational competency
associated to his or her expertise; b) to verify the list of
human competencies of that competency, recommend-
ing new ones, or suggesting the elimination of those
judged inadequate; c) to evaluate each human compe-
tency in terms of its future importance and current
installed capacity at Embrapa, utilizing a Likert scale
of six points.
The scale varied from zero to five, for future
importance and current installed human capacity. On
the first scale, the initial point meant that the human
competency was of no importance and the last point
represented high importance to carry out research
projects at Embrapa. On the second scale, the zero
meant non-existence at Embrapa of any capacity of
human competency, while five meant the existence in
the firm of full human capacity to carry out research
projects. The experts were also asked to evaluate, using
the same Likert scale, the other human competencies
related to other fields of expertise and to recommend
other experts who could contribute to latter phases of
the study.
Of the 151 questionnaires distributed, 77 were
returned (65 internal, 12 external). That represented
51% of the total, which is satisfactory for this kind
of study. A calculation of the average amount of
judgements of future importance and installed capacity
of each human competency was made based on the
answers received.
A new questionnaire was designed and sent out to a
larger group of 202 experts, consisting of 142 internal
and 60 external. This group was composed of those of
the first phase and the new ones whom they
recommended. The same nine existing organizational
core competencies appeared on the second question-
naire, but this time with the number of human
competencies varying from five to 24. The collabora-
tion requested, in this phase, was basically to verify
and correct (or confirm) the evaluations of importance
and capacity which were identified before.
In this phase of the study each respondent was asked
to evaluate all nine organizational competencies. The
respondent was requested to express his or her opinion
beside the averages of importance and installed
capacity for each human competency, using the
following possible responses: UN (undecided), A
(agree with the average) or writing a number using
the `0' to `5' scale used before. In the cases of new
human competencies that were not judged before,
because experts who participated in the first phase
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001
Forecasting core competencies
included them, the individuals were asked to indicate
their evaluation, of importance and the existing
capacity. There were competencies with no averages
because of the low number of experts evaluating in the
first phase. In this phase, these cases also had to be
evaluated by all respondents and a very good return of
forms was registered: 137 questionnaires (94 internal,
43 external), 68% of the total sent.
Selected results and discussion
Following the return of the second questionnaire, a
calculation of the priorities of the human competencies
included in all organizational competencies was carried
out. This was done following the method proposed by
Borges-Andrade and Lima (1983), that was already
being used in the evaluation of training necessities at
Embrapa. In the first place, the scores on the scale of
current capacity were inverted, so `0' became `5', `1'
became `4', `2' became `3' etc. Secondly, the calculation
consisted of multiplying the scores of future impor-
tance and the inverted scores of current capacity. The
resultant product could vary from zero to 25. In this
way, the greater the future importance and the lesser
the existing capacity, the greater the priority would be.
In order to carry out this study, all the human
competencies that had values superior to 9.3 were
considered priorities, following the logic of `cutting
points' proposed by Borges-Andrade and Lima (1983).
It is important to stress that to reach a priority score
equal to or higher than 9, it must have judgements of
importance and lack of capacity equal to or higher than
3, the number immediately superior to the middle point
of each scale utilized. The human competencies were
classified in order of falling priority using a scale of up
to five levels, after examining the statistical distributions
of scores in each organizational competency and the
differences between the scores. Given that the distribu-
tion of scores is organized by decreasing numbers, the
existence of abrupt drops, when compared to the next
closest numbers, suggests that the former and latter
scores must be grouped in the same level of priority. As
an example, the priorities obtained for a given Embrapa
core competency, geoprocessing and its human compe-
tencies are shown in Table 1.
As the example of Table 1 shows, the human
competencies' priority scores ranged from around 7.4
to 12.5 and these scores indicated the order of priority
of each human competency, from `1'or high to `5'or
less priority. In this sense the study obtained a list of
priorities of the human competencies and not necessa-
rily a proportion of them that were considered
priorities. Due to lack of space it is not possible to
show in this article the priorities of all the human
competencies listed in the second questionnaire.
After the priority scores for human competencies
were computed, they were submitted to a factor
R&D Management 31, 3, 2001 253
T.A. Guimaraes, J.E. Borges-Andrade, M. dos S. Machado and M.R.M. Vargas

Table 1. Priorities obtained for an organisational core competency (geoprocessing) *

Priority Standard Order of

Human competencies n score deviation Priority

1. Space data model 44 12.5455 3.8847 1

2. Geographic information system 89 12.5416 3.8320 1
3. Remote sensing 91 11.9077 3.6525 2
4. Space analysis 43 11.7674 4.5452 2
5. Computerised cartography 70 10.7971 3.2196 3
6. Geostatistics 75 9.3512 4.7545 4
7. Mapping algebra 58 7.4034 3.6745 5

*A set of processes, methodologies, knowledge and techniques that allow the analysis and inter-relationship of spatial information and space-
time data of biotic, abiotic and socio-economic origin.
Source: Data from questionnaires.

analysis (principal components) with oblique rotation.
This analysis revealed that each organizational com-
petency was basically formed by a single factor or that
the priority scores had been internally consistent.
Therefore, each one of them would be fundamentally
composed of one priority dimension integrated by its
operational definition and by its human competencies.
The rates of Cronbach alphas were between 0.79 and
0.90, suggesting reliability scores ranging from good to
excellent among the obtained factors (or organization
core competencies). These results indicated the feasi-
bility of calculating organizational competency prio-
rities, aggregating their scores from the human
competency scores. The results of these calculations
are presented in Table 2.
As can be seen in Table 2, not surprisingly all nine
organizational competencies obtained priority values
greater than 10, since they had been previously
identified as corporate core competencies. Therefore,
the study did not throw new light on these compe-
tencies, but it has validated them. However, for
appropriate human resources planning, this general
finding of information is not sufficient. It must be
complemented by the results of the priorities of each
human competency. In other words, in spite of any
organizational competency being considered as a
priority, the same may not occur to all its human
competencies. Actually, this could be observed a
number of times in the present study. At this level,
therefore, it has been instructive.
The consistencies and reliability scores demon-
strated suggested that the results could be safely used
for the Embrapa's nation-wide decision-making pro-
cesses concerning its human resources, in the period
from 1999 to 2001. The priorities obtained, for each
specific human competency within each corporate
core competency became one of the bases for selecting
new researchers. They were also incorporated into
Embrapa's annual processes of choosing which
researchers who should receive financial support for
engaging in postgraduate training, in the Brazilian
and international university systems. This is certainly
evidence that the corporate managers valued the
study results.
Some methodological issues, however, require con-
sideration. Gathering answers from the experts who
were consulted in each phase of the investigation was
not an easy task, although this difficulty tended to
lessen between the first and last phase. This kind of
problem seems to be inherent in the group of
individuals that were consulted: renowned experts in
their fields, extremely busy and always on the move. It
was difficult to track them down and to invite them to
participate in the study.

Table 2. Organisational core competencies of Embrapa, in order of priority

Priority Standard
Organizational core competency n score deviation

1. Technological innovation management 115 11.72 2.84

2. Geoprocessing 92 11.24 2.76
3. Agribusiness and technological economics 112 11.13 3.15
4. Environmental resources economics 114 10.96 3.43
5. Animal pathology 82 10.85 1.97
6. Family-based agriculture 113 10.62 2.87
7. Environmental resources 117 10.55 2.53
8. Molecular and cellular biology 103 10.45 2.83
9. Plant pathology 108 10.05 2.44

Source: Data from questionnaires.

254 R&D Management 31, 3, 2001 # Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001


Another problem, also related to the question of
sample representation, refers to the participation of
external experts, or those who were specialists from
the `outside world'. Their participation was crucial to
reduce the effects of inbreeding problems in the
process of investigation, although their answers did
not differ significantly from their internal counter-
parts. However, as a percentage the return of their
questionnaires was much less than that of the internal
experts. Concerning the Delphi technique, this meth-
od seemed to be expensive depending on the size of
the sample.
Conclusions
This investigation used the Delphi technique as a tool
to forecast core competencies in a specific R&D
organization. Organizational and human core com-
petencies were identified. The latter was used as high
priority for investment in human resource pro-
grammes by the organization for the next few years.
The results have been used as subsidies for several
decisions concerning management of human re-
sources; especially those connected with selection
and graduate training of researchers. The investments
and actions of the organization were guided by the
high priority competencies. Therefore, obsolescence
may have been avoided using strategic placement in
the firm.
The main results of this study indicate that the core
competency approach and the Delphi technique are
suitable for an R&D organization, in order to lead the
processes of hiring, training, and placement of
researchers. Thus, the present report has been a case
study with its focus on those three central boxes of
Figure 1. At least in Embrapa, the study fitted well
with the culture of the organization. This should be
expected, since the concepts of core competency and of
the future (instead of current) importance of human
competencies were embedded in a method for training
needs assessment which had been previously developed
for and used in this same organization. Research
studies need to be done, in order to generalize that
suitability to other organization environments.
# Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001
Forecasting core competencies
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Levon Yeganiantz, of
the Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research,
for his helpful comments on the draft of this paper,
and to Ronaldo Pilati, of the University of Brasilia, for
his help during data collection and analysis.
References
Borges-Andrade, J.E. and Lima, S.M.V. (1983) AvaliacËaÄo de
Necessidades de Treinamento: um meÂtodo de anaÂlise de
papel ocupacional. Tecnologia Educacional, 12, 54, 5 ± 14.
Borges-Andrade, J.E., Lima, S.M.V., Soares, C.R.V. and de
Paula, S.M.A. (1989) Treinamento de Gerentes de
Pesquisa: necessidades e impacto. Cadernos de DifusaÄo de
Tecnologia, 6, 1, pp. 117± 139.
Burton, J.K. and Merrill, P.F. (1977) Needs assessment:
goals, needs and priorities. In L.J. Briggs (ed.), Instruc-
tional Design: principles and applications. Englewood Cliffs
NJ: Educational Technology Publications, pp. 21 ±45.
Campbell, J.P. (1988) Training design for performance
improvement. In Campbell and Campbell, Productivity in
organizations. San Francisco CA: Jossey Bass, 177± 215.
Castro, A.M.G., Lima, S.M.V., Goedert, W.J.; Freitas Filho.
A. and Vasconcelos, J.R.P. (ed) (1988) Cadeias produtivas e
sistemas naturais. ProspeccËaÄo tecnoloÂgica. BrasÿÂ lia: Em-
brapa=SPI=DPD.
Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L. and Pettigrew, A.
(1996) The new public administration in action. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
FrancËa, Z.M.P.S. (1983) Predeparture orientation program to
prepare Brazilian agricultural professionals to study in
American universities. University of Maryland. Unpub-
lished MA Dissertation.
Hamel, G. and Prahalad, C.K. (1995) Competindo pelo
futuro: EstrateÂgias inovadoras para obter o controle do seu
setor e criar os mercados de amanhaÄ. Rio de Janeiro:
Campus.
OECD (1996) Review: special issues on government technology
foresight exercises. Paris: OECD Publication no. 17.
Prahalad, C.K. and Hamel, G. (1990). The core competency
of the corporation. Harvard Business Review, May ± June
79 ± 91.
Quirino, T.R., Irias, L.J.M. and Wright, J.T.C. (1999)
Impacto Agroambiental: perspectivas, problemas e prior-
idades. SaÄo Paulo: Editora Edgard BluÈcher.
R&D Management 31, 3, 2001 255