Scan & Sense method guide
Intelligence Needs Register
The register turns strategic uncertainty into owned, decision-critical questions for technology and market intelligence.
Beginner-friendly guide · 4 min read
What Intelligence Needs Register does
The register turns strategic uncertainty into owned, decision-critical questions for technology and market intelligence.
An intelligence needs register converts uncertainty into a managed set of questions. It stops market and technology intelligence from becoming a collection of interesting articles with no clear decision user.
Each entry should state the decision, what is not known, when an answer is needed, what evidence already exists and who will act on the result.
Technology-intelligence research separates the questions decision-makers need answered from the scanning and sourcing activities used to answer them. This prevents scouting from becoming undirected browsing.[1][2]
A need begins with a decision, becomes a bounded question, attracts evidence and ends in an explicit response.
- 1Decision→
- 2Question→
- 3Search→
- 4Evidence→
- 5Action
Original InnovationFlow illustration. Example values and software behaviour are explained in this guide; method sources are listed below.
Understand the method
The parts in plain language
Decision-critical question
Frame the need as an answerable question connected to a real choice, not as a broad subject.
Illustrative example
Which three machine-data standards are required by our target customers for 2028 deployments?
Evidence threshold
Define what would count as a sufficient answer. Some decisions need directional expert evidence, while others need verified technical or commercial proof.
Illustrative example
Five customer interviews plus two live integration tests before platform selection.
Owner and deadline
Assign both the person gathering evidence and the decision owner who will use it. Add a date linked to the decision window.
Illustrative example
Technology scouting lead reports by March, before the architecture gate in April.
When to use it
- When roadmap or leadership discussions repeatedly encounter missing information.
- Before launching a technology-scouting programme.
A practical workflow
- 1
State the decision and the specific question blocking it.
- 2
Record urgency, horizon, owner, current evidence and the knowledge gap.
- 3
Choose an appropriate intelligence mode and assign follow-up.
- 4
Review the backlog and close, revise or promote needs as evidence arrives.
Fictional worked example
Example: selecting a battery technology
This example is illustrative rather than a reported case. A roadmap choice depends on future cost, safety and supply conditions.
Observation:The team does not know which chemistry can meet the 2030 duty cycle.
Implication:Specify performance, cost and geography rather than asking broadly about batteries.
Observation:Published data and supplier claims disagree.
Implication:Combine literature, supplier interviews and independent testing.
Observation:Evidence supports two candidates for different conditions.
Implication:Record a conditional choice instead of forcing one universal answer.
From analysis to decision
How to interpret the result
- 1Prioritise needs by decision value and deadline, not curiosity.
- 2Close or reframe questions when the decision changes.
- 3Preserve sources and confidence so later users can understand why the answer was accepted.
Practical interpretation guidance from InnovationFlow. Refer to the method sources below for the underlying approach.
What a useful output looks like
Common pitfalls
- Avoid vague topics such as “AI” that are not framed as answerable questions.
- Close stale needs so the register remains decision-led.
References and method basis
- [1]Kerr, C., Mortara, L., Phaal, R. and Probert, D. (2006). A conceptual model for technology intelligence. International Journal of Technology Intelligence and Planning, 2(1), 73-93. Source ↗Peer-reviewed research
- [2]Mortara, L., Kerr, C., Phaal, R. and Probert, D. (2009). A toolbox of elements to build Technology Intelligence systems. International Journal of Technology Management, 47(4), 322-345. Source ↗Peer-reviewed research
This guide synthesises the named sources into practical questions for strategy and innovation work. It does not claim that using a tool by itself produces a successful decision.