One ecosystem · three phases
From research question to foresight
A modular ecosystem of methods and AI agents that carries a Delphi study from the first framing decision to validated scenarios and stakeholder reports — with humans in the loop at every interpretive turn.
Delphi Planning Ecosystem (DPE)
Design the study as research: orientation, phenomenon, panel and question architecture.
Pronoia — facilitation
Argue, don't just vote: iterative, anonymous expert panels. Numbers and reasons.
Delphi Analysis Ecosystem (DAE)
A 21-checkpoint pipeline interprets the material under quality gates.
Phase 1 · planning core (M1a) + satellites
Planning — research design as research
The planning core walks from orientation to a quality gate in staged steps, each ending in a STOP point for the researcher. The result is a Planning Handoff Package the analysis pipeline (DAE CP-0) ingests directly.
Six research orientations
“Should it happen?” — desirable futures, value-laden theses tested dialectically. Leans to consensus.
“How do we make it happen?” — means, actions and pathways toward a chosen goal.
Provocative framings that break the regime's assumptions and protect deviance — no forced convergence.
“What is already emerging?” — abductive theses built from weak signals rather than fixed claims.
A blended design mixing dialectical orientations within one study. Default for multifaceted studies.
Extended combination running intentional and emergent framing paths in parallel.
The core sequence — orientation → phenomenon → panel → questions
After the orientation is locked, three staged steps build the study and end at a quality gate. Click each:
B3 Phenomenon — what is actually being studied
B4 Panel — a designed epistemic space
B5 Question architecture — the theses
Satellite modules around the core
M1b Pre-analysis — Futures Wheel & Relevance Tree
- Futures Wheel — 1st/2nd/3rd-order consequences, STEEP+ classified impact network.
- Relevance Tree — goal–means hierarchy with priority weights and success criteria.
M1c Simulation — the Argument Simulator (Route B)
M5 Perspective — MaxPerspective (Hautamäki)
M6 Learning — the planning learning loop
Phase 2 · panels & rounds
Data Collection — argued expert judgment
Delphi collects two kinds of evidence at once: positions (probability & desirability) and arguments (the reasons behind them). The panel works anonymously and iteratively on Pronoia — the AI-native data-collection platform built by the Metodix community as the successor to eDelphi.org.
What makes Pronoia different
Before Round 1, an AI chat orients and prepares each panelist in a personal dialogue — clarifying concepts, surfacing their perspective and warming up the argumentation.
The facilitator gets AI support between rounds: argument summaries, feedback synthesis and suggested probing questions. Suggestions are drafts the facilitator owns and audits.
Pulse, group comparison and per-thesis traffic lights detect differences between subgroups and support targeted panelist prompts.
Panel data flows into the analysis pipeline (CP-0) with no export/import friction — first analyses can begin while the panel still runs.
The phases inside a round
Every numbered round runs the same four phases — deliberately separating “form your own view” from “engage with others”.
Answer each thesis independently. Others' answers stay hidden until you commit — capturing genuine, un-anchored judgement.
Read the panel, comment and reply with the result graph visible — exchanging reasoning, not just numbers.
Update your position in light of the dialogue. The change is tracked as a revision, so movement can be measured.
The round is locked (read-only) — freezing a comparable snapshot before the next round opens.
Four iteration modes (delphi_mode)
The visibility ladder — blind · after-submit · open
privacy Per-study AI mode — privacy by design
The iteration
Three routes into analysis
A real expert panel. The gold standard: genuine stakes, perspectives and surprises.
The Argument Simulator generates synthetic, orientation-aware argumentation — always with GenAI disclosure downstream.
Real panel data complemented by simulation — to pre-test theses or fill perspective gaps.
Phase 3 · DAE — Delphi Analysis Ecosystem
Analysis & Reporting — the 21-checkpoint pipeline
An orchestrated pipeline of 8 phases and 21 checkpoints (CP-0…CP-20). AI agents do the heavy analytical lifting; quality gates route every interpretive step to human validation. Red-zone phases require a fresh session and human sign-off. Click a phase:
CP-0–2 Foundation — validate & quantify
CP-3–5 Content trilogy — what the panel argued
- MaxDA (CP-3) — dialogue analysis: the moves peers make on each other's comments (adopt · qualify · extend · challenge · reframe).
- MaxAA (CP-4) — argument analysis: Toulmin structure + the epistemic 7×3 coding (knowledge base × function).
- MaxDiscourse (CP-5) — critical discourse analysis: power, frames and what stays unsaid.
CP-7–10 System trilogy — depth · dynamics · purpose
- MaxCLA (CP-7) — Causal Layered Analysis, the depth dimension: litany → systemic → worldview → myth.
- MaxMLP (CP-8) — Multi-Level Perspective, the dynamics dimension: landscape / regime / niche and transition paths.
- MaxCATWOE (CP-9) — Soft Systems, the purpose dimension: who transforms what, for whom, under which worldview.
- System synthesis (CP-10) integrates the three; adaptive panel supplementation (CP-7b) fills thin coverage.
CP-11–13 Futures trilogy — signals & tensions
- MaxWS (CP-11) — weak signals: early/marginal change cues, PESTLE-classified.
- Signal validation (CP-12) — which signals hold up under scrutiny.
- MaxTension (CP-13) — tension map: structural, well-understood dissensus that feeds scenario axes.
CP-14 Grand synthesis — integrate every lens
CP-15–18 Report — scenarios & stakeholder reports
CP-19–20 Continuity — case library & learning
⚙ DA-Quality — the engine running underneath
Each analysis is challenged before acceptance.
When AI validity is insufficient, the work is routed to human coding.
Human–AI coding agreement measured and staged (lock vs candidate codes).
Every claim tagged to its source: panel / analysis / researcher / hypothesis.
Popper-style attempts to break the synthesis before publishing it.
Gate validator between phases; high-interpretation zones force session splits and human sign-off.
Why it is built this way
Foundations & the learning loop
The ecosystem is not a bag of techniques — each layer operationalises a distinct epistemic tradition.
Knowledge emerges through structured questioning — the Delphi conversation itself.
Claims, grounds, warrants and backings — the skeleton of argument analysis (MaxAA).
Many voices kept distinct in synthesis — no premature merging into one “average”.
Fair, domination-free discourse as the panel ideal — and a lens for discourse analysis.
Findings must survive attempts to break them — built into the Grand Synthesis gates.
Every panel sees from somewhere — perspective health is measured, not assumed (M5, CP-14c).
Method lineage inside the System Trilogy
Causal Layered Analysis: litany → systems → worldview → myth. The depth dimension (CP-7).
Multi-Level Perspective: landscape, regime, niche and transition pathways. The dynamics dimension (CP-8).
Soft Systems Methodology: who transforms what, for whom, under which worldview. The purpose dimension (CP-9).