Recently in Futurism Category

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Consult unusual sources, people, and places -- including outliers, complainers, and troublemakers.

Here's Why: One important function of strategic foresight is the opening of the future. The inclusion of different perspectives is one way to assure this opening. Analysts should look for competent people inside and outside who bring a different way of thinking to the table.

Key steps: The selection of these participants should be done with care. Not every unusual or non-obvious individual qualifies. In the first place, they should be selected based on their authority in a particular domain. They should not bring "just another perspective," but a well-studied and well-articulated different view. The other participants should feel challenged by the ideas they bring in. This sense of challenge can result either from a deeper view of closely related subjects or from a subject that functions by analogy.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Consult "remarkable people."

Here's Why: The term "remarkable people" was coined by philosopher G.I. Gurdjieff (1960) to describe "someone who stands out from those around him by the resourcefulness of his mind." An ongoing part of strategic foresight is to build and maintain a network of remarkable people who can be consulted during an activity across a wide range of topics.

The timing behind using remarkable people depends upon the needs of the activity. It is best to target their entry into the process at the point where the greatest challenge or bottleneck exists, or where the infusion of alternative ideas is at a premium. For instance, remarkable people are particularly well-suited to questioning assumptions during the Framing of an issue, brainstorming creative ideas and alternatives during forecasting, and identifying and expanding the range of options during Visioning. They are typically good at generating unexpected, fresh thinking when it is needed.

Key steps: Building a network of remarkable people is an ongoing task. The characteristics one looks for are experts who have different perspectives, are skilled at challenging prevailing views, and are able to bring alternative interpretations to situations. Kees van der Heijden (2002) describes them as "intensely curious but sharp observers, who understand the way the world works and have their finger on the pulse of change."

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Don't try to win with research -- not all the data exists.

Here's Why: Foresight involves exploring the future, which is challenging from a research perspective. There is plenty of data one would like to have, but a lot of it just does not exist. The analyst must learn to depend on whatever clues are available and be ready to grab information whenever and wherever it can be found.

It is important to recognize when beating the bushes for a certain piece of data becomes a waste of valuable time. On the other hand, if instinct says a certain piece of information ought to exist, it may be worth the effort to try to find it. A balance needs to be struck between these two objectives--finding valuable nuggets, yet using one's time cost-effectively--but this guideline emphasizes the former. One is more likely to waste time looking for the hidden gem, and such excursions should be taken with caution. Many times, the data simply does not exist.

Key steps: When exploring the future of a topic in a foresight activity, keep the reading and research open to serendipitous discoveries. Limit the time spent trying to find certain data to support trends that may be early in their formation. With research staff, set a time limit. Ask them to report early in the process how the hunt is going. That way they can be called off the hunt and redirected to other tasks if necessary.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Explore Unfamiliar and "Uninteresting" Areas.

Here's Why: Read a golf magazine despite having no interest in golf, or the Journal of American Medical Association despite having no background in medicine. The ads alone will introduce you to new ideas and potential applications that may benefit a strategic foresight activity. Stepping outside the box is not as time-consuming as organizations tend to believe: it consumes only a tiny percentage of resources--one unusual magazine here, a unique conference there--and can yield benefits far beyond the cost, by creating a flow of new information.

The most difficult aspect of this guideline is convincing the organization that exploring unfamiliar or uninteresting areas is a productive use of time. It is difficult enough to stay current with the existing deluge of industry-related material. It can be a challenge to justify devoting scarce resources to something that seems unlikely to have an immediate or even a foreseeable impact.

Key steps: The best approach is to start slowly. Suggest that participants in a foresight activity pick out a magazine at random--simply pick the one three rows over and two shelves down. Have them read it from cover to cover and see what happens. Did it spark any ideas? Did anything interesting emerge of relevance to the activity? If the answer is no, at worst a few dollars and an hour or so were wasted. But it is a safe wager is that a dedicated professional cannot help but find a useful idea in any magazine. An unfamiliar field is filled with ideas not previously encountered. This tactic is a gentle way to generate new ideas.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Scan the Environment for Awareness of How the Context is Changing.

Here's Why: Strategic foresight explores and makes sense of the organization's external world through environmental scanning. At the same time, a foresight activity needs to be aware of developments within the organization. The analyst thus needs to integrate external and internal scanning for a successful activity. 

Gathering external intelligence, as Guideline 2.3.1 Scan the environment for awareness of how the context is changing suggests, is both a continuous (scanning) and a dedicated activity (the scan). The analysis team should always be looking for interesting weak signals that may be indicators of trends, and developing a framework to organize and maintain this information. 

Gathering internal intelligence has the same dual role. The team should be keeping up with internal developments, but it will also undertake more focused activities, working with specific functions and people relevant to each activity. The internal work will often involve some kind of visioning activity, in which the analysis team seeks to uncover the aspirations and goals of the organizations (see 4.0 Visioning for specifics). 

Key steps: Scanning and Visioning may proceed simultaneously, or one may precede the other. Start with the organization's vision, if one is available. Look for visionary material during scanning if one is not. The scan may be a key input to the visioning. Similarly, the visioning may inform what the scan should look for. Whatever the chronology, the important task is to integrate the two.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Scan the Environment for Awareness of How the Context is Changing. 

Here's Why: A key skill for analysts is scanning the external environment for information useful to the organization. The analyst typically has an important role as the external eyes and ears of an organization, providing an awareness of how the context is changing.

There are two principal forms of environmental scanning, which can be referred to as "scanning" and "the scan." Scanning is the ongoing, year-round process of looking for trends and events in the external environment that may have implications for the organization. It is independent of any other activity. It may lead to discovery of issues that the analyst can proactively bring to the attention of the organization, or it may provide information that will later prove useful to a particular foresight activity.

The scan refers to the same process of looking for trends and events in the external environment, but is focused on a particular activity. This process is emphasized early on, when the team is gathering data around the focal issue, but will continue to a lesser extent throughout the activity.

Key steps: There are many different methods for environmental scanning. The four steps below cover the essential elements, which may be combined, re-ordered, or called something else. The key point is to cover these four activities - in whatever way works best for the analyst.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Be Wary of Past Success that Leads to Thinking in a Rut.

Here's why: Past success can be difficult for strategic foresight. The effort put into that success and the benefits gained from it provide a compelling rationale to use the success model over and over again. While "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" is sound advice, when it becomes dogma, it is an obstacle to effective strategic foresight. The analyst needs to remind the organization that all performance follows an "S-curve": first, slow progress; then rapid improvement, and finally diminishing returns. When improvements slow down, it's time to seek new methods, better processes, and greater challenges.

Going beyond past successes requires a shift in mindset. The goal should never be just one success, but rather a never-ending staircase of goals, each one leading to a higher level of performance. When the slope of one goal levels off, it's time to set a new, higher one.

Key steps: Avoiding rut-thinking depends on influencing two aspects of organizational culture: "How do we handle risk?" and more importantly, "How do we handle failure?" One reason organizations find themselves thinking in a rut is that it's safe there. In pop psychology terms, the organization can find itself in a "well-furnished rut."

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Don't reinvent the wheel.

Here's why: The analyst doesn't need to start from scratch when undertaking a strategic foresight activity. During the last fifty years or so, a range of methodological approaches and a considerable number of scenarios and other substantive assessments of the future have been produced. A strategic foresight activity should start with a collection of the existing substantive material. Right at the beginning, take advantage of any good studies or scenarios already published that are relevant to the issue at hand.

Avoiding reinventing the wheel means doing the homework: search for links and material, read, talk to experts in the field and ask them to help identify the best resources and most competent people to be interviewed. A lot of time and money can be saved when this is done as thoroughly as possible in the beginning.

Key steps: Clarifying the goals of the activity, resources available, and deadlines will help focus the search for existing relevant methodological and substantive futures material. It helps if expertise in futures research is available inside the company, but it can be brought in from outside. Myriad public sources of futures material and links exist. International futures organizations and projects, such as the Association of Professional Futurists (APF), the Millennium Project, the World Future Society (WFS), and the World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF), are well-regarded neutral sources. Many of the futures consulting companies offer public material on their web pages. There are also many good literary sources. (see Bell 1997, Glenn 2004.)

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Start by looking backwards.

Here's why: All the data an analyst has to work with lies in either the past or the present. Bertrand de Jouvenel (1967) was the first to say, "There are no future facts," meaning there is no data from the future. Similarly, former World Future Society President Ed Cornish (2001) observed, "It is important to recognize very clearly that our ideas about the future cannot come from the future itself because the future, by definition, is not a physical reality. The future exists only in the ideas we have about it." Before launching into the future, therefore, recognize that the facts are uniformly from the past and the present.

Key steps: Given that facts are always present- or past-based, it makes sense that strategic foresight entails good use of historical data. A reasonable early-stage assumption is that the patterns of the past will continue into the future, at least within the timeframe of the analysis. As the activity proceeds, this assumption will be challenged and often revised, but it can be a useful starting point.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Conduct a Stakeholder Analysis.

Here's why: Stakeholder analysis identifies individuals or groups that may influence or be influenced by the foresight activity, and explores the implications of their involvement. Stakeholder analysis may be undertaken individually or with a team. It is best performed after the issue is clearly defined, and should be updated as the understanding of the issue and the system in which it is embedded evolves. It is preferable to convene a diverse group with different perspectives on the issue to ensure all relevant stakeholders are identified.
Stakeholder analysis entails various approaches and formats, but all of these follow the basic steps described below.

Key steps: The first step is to identify the stakeholders: the people, groups, and institutions that currently or potentially influence the issue, either positively or negatively. Second, identify the specific interests these stakeholders have in the issue being analyzed. Will they be positively or adversely affected? Will it require them to take action or make changes? Kees van der Heijden (2002) suggests the following useful interview questions to help elicit the needed information:

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this advice: Take an integral view of the issue.

Here's why: An integral view enables the analyst to identify and explore the broader context and connections in which the issue is embedded. It involves coming to the activity from different perspectives and exploring the issue from different angles.

Integral philosopher Ken Wilber (2000) has proposed a scheme for an integral view, which has been adapted to foresight by futurist Richard Slaughter and colleagues. Wilber suggests that many issues or problems are not properly analyzed because they are considered from a single perspective that neglects others. He has constructed a four-quadrant matrix that provides a framework for bringing multiple perspectives to bear. The ends of the horizontal axis are the "inner" and "outer" perspectives, and the ends of the vertical axis are the "individual" and "social" perspectives. Therefore, the four perspectives of an integral analysis are:

• The Intentional, or individual-interior "inner world of identity and meaning" (focus on psychology)
• The Cultural, or social-interior "world of cultures and shared meaning" (focus on culture)
• The Behavioral, or individual-exterior "world of individual capability and behavior" (focus on behavior)
• The Social, or social-exterior "physical world" (focus on systems)

Key steps: Wilber's four-quadrant matrix provides a useful check or reference throughout a strategic foresight activity. While it has the greatest utility within Scanning, it can be used in any of the six major steps outlined in this book. For example, during Framing, it is useful to adopt the integral perspective to consider aspects of the issue involving individual psychology or motivation, cultural trends, and supporting systems or infrastructure.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: Map the system under consideration.

Here's why: Effective problem-solving requires understanding the context of the issue at hand. The best way to do this is to map the issue in a simple systems map--identifying the key stakeholders and driving forces influencing the issue, then exploring the relationships among them.

Mapping an issue in its systemic context is done at the very beginning of a strategic activity. The systems map lays out a framework for the activity. It points to important stakeholders to interview, trend areas to investigate, and assumptions that need to be checked. The map will evolve as the study proceeds and more is learned about the system. Also, new issues and stakeholders will likely emerge as the activity proceeds.

Key steps: Creating a systems map is straightforward, involving several steps. First, define the issue crisply. Studying the future of communications, for example, is likely to be overbroad. Studying the future of keypad size on mobile phones might be overly narrow. An appropriate scope might be the future of mobile-phone handsets.

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: ADOPT A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Here's why: Strategic foresight needs to consider what is happening in other parts of the world. No situation or system is immune to events and forces elsewhere. Consider changes around the world and how they relate to the client’s overall business as well as to the issue under study. Thinking about the rest of the world should be prominent in research, analysis, or discussion--literally in all aspects of an activity. Modeling this thinking approach will influence colleagues and collaborators to think this way as well.

Key steps: There is no single way to embrace a global perspective. But it is critical to build one into processes specific both to the work and to the larger organizational culture. Ways to do this include:

Click to Read More ...

From the second chapter of "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop, comes this entry: ADOPT A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Here's why: Strategic foresight needs to consider what is happening in other parts of the world. No situation or system is immune to events and forces elsewhere. Consider changes around the world and how they relate to the client’s overall business as well as to the issue under study. Thinking about the rest of the world should be prominent in research, analysis, or discussion--literally in all aspects of an activity. Modeling this thinking approach will influence colleagues and collaborators to think this way as well.

Key steps: There is no single way to embrace a global perspective. But it is critical to build one into processes specific both to the work and to the larger organizational culture. Ways to do this include:

Click to Read More ...

Since 2007, we've been publishing segments from the first chapter on FRAMING from "Thinking about the Future," a book co-edited by Social Technologies' Andy Hines and futurist Peter Bishop.

May 6 marked the final entry from that chapter, and today begins the next section of the book on SCANNING, which Hines defines as “Breadth + Depth = Foresight with Insight.” 

Hines explains the concept ike this:

Once the team is clear about the boundaries and scope of an activity, it begins to scan the internal and external environments for information and trends relating to the issue at hand. Internally, the team wants to learn the organization’s experience with the issue. Externally, the team immerses itself in what’s going on regarding the issue. The goal is to come up with a mix of basic driving forces that suggest the most likely future, and some insight into potential change-drivers that may lead to alternative future outcomes. In scanning parlance, this involves identifying the macro-trends that will form the basis of the baseline forecast (or “most likely future”) and the weak signals that may portend discontinuities that drive alternative futures.

Recent advances in the art of environmental scanning have emphasized the need to go beyond the strictly empirical and incorporate more intuitive sources of information. Related to this is an emphasis on expanding the breadth and depth of the scanning activity to include a wider range of sources and to probe more deeply into their potential implications for the activity. It’s less about finding a piece of information that no one else can find--since information is so freely available--and more about understanding and acting upon that information more quickly and creatively than competitors.

Click to Read More ...

From Andy Hines and Peter Bishop's book, Thinking About the Future, comes this advice: focus on outcomes, not outputs.

Every organization has a mission to reach certain outcomes--for which society, through its external stakeholders, provides resources and holds it accountable. In fulfilling its mission, the organization engages in activities that produce outputs or results.

Outcomes can be clearly and obviously good in themselves. In the case of schools, this would be student learning. With such outcomes, no one has to ask, “What is that good for?” These are the ultimate purpose of the organization.

Outputs, on the other hand, are the tangible results of the organization’s activities, but they require justification in terms of a higher purpose (the outcomes). They are not intrinsically understood as goals in themselves. An output for schools would be the number of students graduated. While graduation is clearly good, it is a result of the students having learned enough to earn the graduation and be prepared for the next step in their lives.

Analysts need to keep the higher purpose--the outcomes--firmly in mind throughout the activity, to ensure relevant and actionable outputs that truly benefit the client.

Key steps: One approach to focusing on outcomes is to take a step back and question the very existence of the organization. Most people take the value of their organization for granted; for them, it is such an obviously good thing that no one can question it. But question it they should: “Just why are we here?”

Click to Read More ...

From Andy Hines and Peter Bishop's book, Thinking About the Future, comes this advice: focus on outcomes, not outputs.

Every organization has a mission to reach certain outcomes--for which society, through its external stakeholders, provides resources and holds it accountable. In fulfilling its mission, the organization engages in activities that produce outputs or results.

Outcomes can be clearly and obviously good in themselves. In the case of schools, this would be student learning. With such outcomes, no one has to ask, “What is that good for?” These are the ultimate purpose of the organization.

Outputs, on the other hand, are the tangible results of the organization’s activities, but they require justification in terms of a higher purpose (the outcomes). They are not intrinsically understood as goals in themselves. An output for schools would be the number of students graduated. While graduation is clearly good, it is a result of the students having learned enough to earn the graduation and be prepared for the next step in their lives.

Analysts need to keep the higher purpose--the outcomes--firmly in mind throughout the activity, to ensure relevant and actionable outputs that truly benefit the client.

Key steps: One approach to focusing on outcomes is to take a step back and question the very existence of the organization. Most people take the value of their organization for granted; for them, it is such an obviously good thing that no one can question it. But question it they should: “Just why are we here?”

Click to Read More ...

On his blog yesterday, marketing guru Seth Godin raised the generalists-vs.-specialists debate and asked what benefit generalists bring. Before I had time to dash off a response, Godin himself defended the need for generalists, writing,

"It's okay to specialize in being a generalist, of course. By that, I mean that there are many problems ... where someone who can see wide and doesn't have an allegiance to a particular solution is exactly the right person to call. I rely on generalists all the time, and so do you."

To be fair to Godin's argument, he adds, "My point is that you never call on these people when there's a better specialist available."

We at S)T pride ourselves on being generalists--our staff of futurists is composed of Ph.D. chemists, historians, English majors, MBAs, and--yes--the occasional trained futurist. Collectively we thrive because we bring a divergent set of training, backgrounds and worldviews to our clients. We are generalists because, as foresight professionals, our job is to look at the big picture and to make the connections that experts often miss. Experts, while knowledgeable, often see trees, rather than the forest, mountain, river etc. We don't lack for expertise, for in many cases our clients have all the expert knowledge we need and our job is to tease it out of them in order to help them see the larger picture of the future or futures.

My answer to Godin would be that all of my non-futures-trained colleagues combine to create a specialized knowledge base, and that it does our clients no good for us to know everything they do. That is a pointless duplication of resources. The benefit to hiring a firm of dedicated generalists is that collectively we create/own a specialized knowledge. This is reinforced as we bounce from project to project, so that one of our futurists may be writing on mobile telecommunications on Monday and infant formula on Friday. The generalist mindset allows our team to see the connections that exist between disparate businesses, consumers, and technologies. As a result, the sum of the whole is greater than its attendant parts.

That is why we are generalists.

Image: Angelrays (Flickr)<