1. Identify a panel of experts or specialists by soliciting nominations from specialists or individuals appropriate to serve on the Delphi panel. Cooperation and participation is improved significantly when prospective panelists are told how they were nominated by their peers. The panelists' primary qualification should be their specialist knowledge. This knowledge can be gained through experience (for example, readers of a certain publication) or specialist knowledge (for example, safety engineers). Another key qualification is that panelists be willing to share their information (for example, non-competitors). The terms of reference of the study need to be described to the panelists at this time.
  2. Invite an appropriate number of panelists to participate. Thirty to fifty individuals should be members of the final panel. This is large enough to see patterns in responses, but not so large as to overwhelm the facilitator or researcher, who must sift through all of the responses individually. The invitation should explain what is expected from each panel member in terms of time and effort to complete each wave of the Delphi study.
  3. Prepare and distribute the initial survey instrument. The initial survey may contain open-ended probes or specific closed-ended questions, depending on the focus of the research.
  4. Receive and analyse the first responses. Compile the responses by question, with only minor editing as necessary for clarity and consistency. If open-ended questions were used extensively, then it may be necessary to analyse and present the first set of responses within an appropriate theoretical framework, typology, or outline.
  5. Prepare and distribute the second survey instrument. Most often panelists are asked, with this second wave enquiry, to clarify and rank order survey items suggested during the first wave. When the panelists receive the second survey instrument, it will be the first time they will have seen the responses of the other panel members. It is often appropriate at this time to ask for additional ideas, clarifications, and elaborations based on the initial survey responses
  6. Receive and analyze the second lot of responses (second wave of data). If the initial questions were open-ended and the second wave asked for clarifications and elaborations, the analysis of the second wave of data can be very challenging because it requires numerous subjective decisions about rewording and revising the initial responses. Care should be exerted to include all of the new ideas and suggestions, for the main purpose of the Delphi study is to generate new ideas.
  7. Prepare and distribute the third survey instrument. Most often, panelists are asked, with the third wave, to rank order and clarify the new set of revised survey items.
  8. Receive and analyze the third wave of data. Often by this stage, the analysis is less subjective and judgmental, and more quantitative and objective.
  9. Repeat the process with additional waves, if necessary. For example, sometimes certain priority items are selected for more in-depth treatment by the Delphi panelists, who may be asked to propose answers to questions or shortrange strategies for long-range goals, and so on.
  10. Prepare and distribute a final report to panel members. One of the motivations for participating in a Delphi panel, particularly for specialists, is to learn firsthand, before others, what the results of the Delphi study are.
  11. The final report is acted upon according to the initial terms of reference. (source: http://extmarket.ifas.ufl.edu/FOCUS.html)



  • You can open and close cards in place. Just click on ~1383/3259.png or the card name.
  • To get to the page (and web address) for a card, click on ~1709/3792.png.
  • When you're editing, to create links within the website (even to a card that doesn't yet exist), put double square brackets around some text, like this.

To learn more see the Wagn documentation.


If you have questions, contact the Process Arts wiki support team. We may also be online live, or you can just ask your question here and someone will answer it shortly:

see http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Facilitation where we are also listing similar practices

  --Michel Bauwens (Not signed in).....Sun Jan 31 00:53:33 -0800 2010

The Bohm Dialogue, especially Collective Reflection has significance for me in terms of artistic critique and dialogue.

If one wanted to connect this to Jungian thought I'd relate to that.

  --Srule Brachman (Not signed in).....Mon May 21 17:09:16 +0000 2012





Wheeled by Wagn v. 0.8.3