The Delphi Standard.
A scientific framework designed to ensure methodological quality, traceability and responsibility throughout the research process.
The Delphi Standard defines how data are collected, transformed into analysis, reviewed and ultimately validated before becoming an official scientific output of the Institute.
Scientific quality through explicit responsibility.
The Delphi Standard is the Institute's internal system of scientific qualification and review.
Its purpose is to guarantee methodological consistency, traceability of sources and epistemic responsibility across every stage of scientific production.
Each official publication results from a structured process that distinguishes between data collection, technical elaboration, analytical interpretation, scientific review and final validation.
Responsibility therefore increases together with the scientific qualification required at each stage of the process.
The Delphi Standard does not certify the “truth” of an analysis. It certifies that the analysis has been produced according to explicit scientific criteria and can therefore be criticised, verified and revised.
A progressive system of scientific responsibility.
Progression does not represent an associative or hierarchical advancement. It reflects increasing scientific competence, autonomy and responsibility.
Observer
Collects, monitors and organises data and sources that constitute the empirical basis of the Institute's scientific work.
- Source selection
- Traceability and attribution
- Chronological and thematic organisation
- Strict separation between data and interpretation
Research Assistant
Supports scientific analysis through technical elaboration, pre-analysis and methodological organisation of collected material.
- Comparative frameworks
- Matrices and conceptual maps
- Identification of patterns and anomalies
- Descriptive and methodological sections
Analyst
Produces autonomous scientific analyses, predictive scenarios and applied analytical models.
- Formulates argued theses
- Selects and hierarchises variables
- Builds scenarios and alternatives
- Assumes responsibility for analytical coherence
Senior Analyst / Reviewer
Performs qualified peer review and evaluates the methodological and scientific robustness of outputs produced by other researchers.
- Argumentative structure assessment
- Verification of sources and inferences
- Methodological review
- Motivated and traceable review decisions
Scientific Committee / Strategist
Exercises governance over scientific methods and standards and guarantees the final validation and strategic coherence of official Institute outputs.
- Defines and updates the Delphi Standard
- Validates official outputs
- Resolves internal scientific disputes
- Guarantees methodological continuity
From raw evidence to official knowledge.
Scientific production is organised as a sequence of distinct responsibilities. No official output is treated as the product of an isolated analytical act.
Data & Sources
Empirical material is collected, classified and made traceable.
Analysis
Variables, structures, assumptions and causal relationships are identified.
Peer Review
Sources, logic, inference and methodological coherence are critically examined.
Validation
The Scientific Committee guarantees compliance with the Institute's scientific standards.
Publication
The validated work becomes part of the Institute's official scientific production.
Every official output must withstand criticism.
Scientific review is an integral part of the Delphi Standard.
Reviewers evaluate sources, argumentative structure, declared assumptions, analytical methods, uncertainty and the distinction between facts, hypotheses and interpretations.
Review is not intended to eliminate legitimate interpretative disagreement. Its purpose is to identify methodological errors and ensure that conclusions remain logically and empirically defensible.
Data and sources are identifiable and traceable.
The thesis and its premises are explicitly stated.
Inferential steps are logically coherent.
Methods, assumptions and analytical limits are declared.
Facts are separated from hypotheses and interpretations.
Forecasting explicitly identifies uncertainty and relevant variables.
Models must adapt to reality.
Analytical models are treated as hypothetical and revisable instruments. Their validity depends on their continued coherence with empirical evidence.
Falsifiability
Analytical propositions must remain exposed to empirical evidence capable of challenging them.
Transparency
Assumptions, methods, variables and analytical limits must be made explicit.
Traceability
Sources and factual claims must remain identifiable and verifiable throughout the research process.
Conditional Forecasting
Forecasts delimit possible and probable outcomes under specific structural conditions rather than claiming deterministic prediction.
Revision
When evidence contradicts a model, the model must be revised rather than protected against empirical reality.
Cumulative Knowledge
Valid analytical elements are preserved while inconsistent assumptions are corrected or reformulated.
Responsibility must remain visible.
Every official scientific publication is linked to the people and processes responsible for its production and validation.
The Delphi Standard provides for the qualification level of authors and reviewers to accompany official outputs, making the process of scientific responsibility transparent.
Strategic Analysis
Research built to be questioned, tested and improved.
Explore the Institute's scientific production and the analytical work developed according to the Delphi framework.
Explore our Research ↗