The Delphi technique

As indicated above, this article is based on the first qualitative results of a Delphi study. Delphi studies are traditionally used in adult education research (e.g. Rossman and Bunning 1978). The core idea of a Delphi study is to explore future themes – in our context, issues at stake in adult education – in a collaborative way. The goal and procedures of a well-known earlier comparative Delphi study on the future of adult education (conducted in 14 countries between 1993 and 1995) were described as follows:

The Euro-Delphi project is attractive and promising because of the fact that it draws practitioners and policy actors from the outset into a process of reflexive discussion and common decision. Therefore, the term “respondent” does not adequately describe this type of involvement (Leirman 1996, p. 137).

In general, a Delphi study approach (Carr-Chellmann and Kroth 2018, Crawford and Wright 2016, Steinmüller 1997) is a research method that involves asking experts for their views on a particular aspect of their field of expertise. In a systematic, multi-stage progression, this method is repeated over several rounds. The purpose is sometimes to arrive at a kind of distilled experts’ consensus which can be used for predicting trends, probable developments and likely innovations. This aspect of forecasting led to this method being named after the ancient Greek Oracle of Delphi.

Nonetheless, there is no clear definition of the Delphi method. Rather, multiple variants and adaptations exist. For example (quotes are all cited by Häder 2002, p. 20):

The Delphi technique is a questionnaire method for organizing and sharing opinion through feedback (Bardecki 1984, p. 281).

An alternative means of accessing expert opinion and evaluating incomplete information is the Delphi technique, a systematic procedure for soliciting the advice of a number of experts, and forging a consensus from that advice (Richey et al. 1985, p. 136).

[The Delphi technique is] an accepted method of achieving consensus among experts (Duffield 1993, p. 227).

The method we apply in our own Delphi study is similar to that described by Bardecki, while Duffield’s approach of striving for consensus was not our goal in this international and multicultural study.