12.3.3.2 Impression of the workshop process

The atmosphere during the workshop was good, the participants engaged actively. There was a clear interest in an exchange of views and experience, and the participants engaged in dialogue, both during the official programme and during the breaks.

After two introductory presentations, respectively to present the research results and the current developments in the field, the participants responded immediately. They nuanced the research findings, and suggestions were made for solutions and steps to be taken. However, keeping the U-theory in mind, these first remarks were ' parked by the facilitator. He introduced the next part of the programme which was aimed at discussing 'the system as a whole' with the expectation of coming to more fundamental insights and steps afterwards The creation of a shared understanding of the concept of the BES information market was considered to be one of the key conditions for defining and engaging in collaborative action (U-process level 3). In sub-groups, foreseeable developments regarding the role of BES in three sectors of industry were discussed. The outcome was interesting and the participants were actively exchanging views. When they were subsequently challenged to look at BES information products for the financial sector from the perspective of stakeholders other than their own organisation, it became apparent that this was more difficult than expected. The response to this assignment was limited.

During the brainstorming session on possible forms of collaborative action the suggestions presented in section 12.2.4 were provided as examples to start the discussion process within the subgroups. The participants actively reflected on these proposals, but only a few new suggestions were formulated. Even though the participants recognised the potential advantage of collaborative action, they mainly expressed an interest in using and, where readily achievable, contributing to the efforts of others.

Although the atmosphere was good and the participants expressed satisfaction about the day, concrete suggestions for a follow-up were not yet confirmed. A real sense of ownership of the issue seemed to be lacking. At the end of the day, the research group was uncertain whether it had succeeded in establishing a ' system-level perspective which could serve as a basis for collaborative action in this field. However, realistically speaking fundamental changes do need time to take effect.