The Use of Delphi Method

Delphi methods is performed as a survey of experts’ opinion in two or more 'rounds', where after each round a feedback is given about the results of previous rounds. Thus the same experts in the next round will judge the same subject once again influenced by the opinions and knowledge of the other experts. Delphi is usually used to assess long-term issues and topics that are related to the future by reducing the complexity of knowledge required to simple statements which can be easily judge upon. Eto (2003) argued that Delphi method is the relevant research technique especially when there is politically strong desire to involve many people in the process of decision-making. And in the case of low budget, many business and policy makers believe that it is difficult to achieve every piece of information related to the research but it is more relevant to concern about the long term orientation in which they invest their money. This is exactly what Japanese experience done by using Delphi method for the long-term application-oriented researches (Cuhls & Kuwahara, 1994).

Delphi survey can be organized in different ways depending on the objective of the research and the human, financial and other resources available. It is in general starts by setting the objective followed by formulating the statements and then defining the main questions.

The process of Delphi is, in theory, an iterated operation until a consensus has been achieved. However, many researchers argued that two to three rounds would be enough to collect the required information and to attain a consensus in most cases (Cyphert & Gant, 1971). Custer, Scarcella & Stewart (1999) stressed that the first round questionnaire starts usually with open-ended questions playing the basis role of getting specific information about the subject of the Delphi survey. By receiving the respondents’ answers of the first round questions researchers can use the gathered information in order to formulate well-structured questionnaire for the second round. In the second round the participants receive the second questionnaire

48

and asked to evaluate the information summarized by the researcher based on the results of the first round. During this round, in fact, the panelists are required to rank or order items aiming at establishing priorities among them and as a result of the second round an agreement or disagreement about the main research areas should be recognized (Ludwig, 1994). Generally, in this round a consensus among participants can be formed and the actual outcome is achieved (Jacobs, 1996). In the third round the participants receive a questionnaire contains the items and the ratings summarized by the researcher during the previous round and asked to revise their judgment and specify the reasons of being out of the consensus in the case of disagreement. This round gives the panelists more opportunity to make further reviewing and classifications for their judgment of the studied matters (Weaver, 1971; Dalkey & Rourke, 1972). After that a final opportunity for participants to revise their judgment is offered in a fourth round by sending them the list of remaining items, their ratings, and the items achieving a consensus among them. Practically, the process of conducting a Delphi survey should be carefully organized and implemented according to the following sequence:

The first step is to found a steering committee or management team who is capable of leading the process starting from determining the subject, nominating the panelists, designing the questionnaire, considering the communication means and offering the required human and financial resources.

Then the field of the Delphi should be decided: there could be more than one field and where there is always the flexibility of adding or changing the field of the survey. For example information and communication, services and consumption, management and production, chemistry and materials, health and life processes, agriculture and nutrition, environment and nature, energy and resources, construction and dwelling, mobility and transport, space and big science experiments were the fields for Delphi 89 (Cuhls et all, 2002).

After that, the topics should be formulated depending on literature review and previous surveys and researches available or by founding a working group who is responsible to structure the field work and formulate the topics according to the research specific objectives. The questions to be asked should be consistent to the topics, open ended in general and not time consuming questions. The open questions are particularly useful in order to have experts’ comments or to ask new questions, topics and alternatives to the statement given to them (Cuhls et all, 1995).

The resources to be used should be carefully considered and studied e.g. are there enough persons, money and time to perform the survey. Other practical processes should also be studied like the method of

49

distributing the questionnaires to respondents and the cost of printing them and the cost of holding a workshop if the survey designed to have workshop in one round.

Determining the experts is very important and difficult task, in fact, due careful should be given to the selection of the right persons who have the right experience, given the fact that in some field experts could be very rare. The number of experts belonging to each field of Delphi study should be correctly weighted so that no bias of expert numbers is resulting from the expert selection process.

Like other surveys, the Delphi sample needs to be large enough to draw conclusions at the end of the survey, however, no definite number is recommended but it is flexible and has a wide range from few to 100. The sample should also be diversified enough to combine persons of different ages, group sectors, gender, social and ethnic origin and so on depending on the topic studied.

After that the process of Delphi could be started by identifying the experts’ addresses and asking them for their availability and willingness to participate in the study before starting the first round by sending the questionnaires by the proper way (hard copies, electronic copies, etc.).