A foresight framework and algorithm: Future is…

How to think about the future?

A foresight expert uses many tools to help understand what the future holds.

Predicting the exact future is not the point for a foresighteer, except that people want to hear predictions – trend this and that – those are easy to deliver and easy to consume but often very limited in foresight value for various reasons… but that's for another day.

'Predictions' will not be exact unless one 'predicts' (enumerates) the aspects of the future that are 'inevitable' and then – well – what was all the foresight work for?

The reality is that we could not even 'predict' (postdict/revisit) our past (ok some factoids and so on we can revisit). New evidence (new 'facts') comes to light, changing our understanding of the past. Things that were not recorded at the time are not within our reach.

What is useful is to understand the future better, to guide our agency and to provide freedom from perceived hurdles that, in fact, often are not.

'Future is…' 

This 'Future is…' is a quick framework. The idea is that your foresight thinking algorithm cover these five dimensions:

• What should be
• What will be
• What was
• What can be
• What could be

This algorithm is not scientifically proven (the scientific proof tends to come later in the future – after the experiences and application – sorry could not resist) nor academically referenced (the past/parallel thinking has not caught up with me yet – would not know whom to refer to 'exactly').

This is just meant to be a thinking tool – straight out of my head to yours.

Future is… x% should

When things are not as they should be – something is wrong.

• Relationships are not functional let alone fulfilling
• Profitability has gone south and the market love is gone
• Procrastination (or other similar) has taken its toll on achievements

Future is a 'should' in order to…

• Improve life from what it is now
• Take the world to a better place
• Have a perspective and work it forward

The 'shoulds' tend to annoy the establishment, partly because they sound like righting the wrongs. The push back is why we hold onto industries that are dying and political ideologies whose due date was many years ago. The knowledge was there but nothing happened… Why? Because we humans got in the way.

So we, yet again, locked ourselves out of future success. One way to approach the mindset is to ask questions about the personal goals of those involved: "What will those history books say about you? …That you got on the front page of Time or that you frivolously brought a company to its knees." There are plenty of examples along these lines.

Future is… x% will

All things considered some things are inevitable in a short time frame – like what you can change in a manufactured product once the production line has started. Some eventualities are inevitable in the very long run – like for example depletion of resources if used faster than replenished.

However, a firm 'we will' can take you a long way.

The future will  ___________ (insert your view) if…

• You and your forces are determined and organized
• You know what the determination is all about – what is it that you are trying to achieve
• Others sign-in to these views and are geared to make things happen – becoming agents for that future – with its positive and negative consequences (BTW canvass both)

Future is a 'will' in order to…

• Drive an entity's future somewhere meaningful: we will take man to the moon, we will cure cancer
• Communicate that 'goal' to those willing to listen: this is about rallying mood of the nation, organization or group
• Harness the ecosystem to make that future happen: anything bigger than what you can go ahead and do yourself needs this

The stronger your 'will' (pardon pun) the more you have a chance of pulling it off. But seriously it has nothing much to do with your own will except in entrepreneurial circumstances where your will or persistence will at times be all you have to 'will' with, until you get that exciting $1million.

The larger the group willing together the better the chances that the meaningful goal is going to take a good slice of the future %. The more and meaningfully your agenda gives to others, the easier it will be. But, you still need to do lots of leg-work to make it happen. Your competitors will not know what hit them, right, when the force is so powerful and in particular when it is multipronged.

Future is… x% 'was'

Future is not disassociated from the past. Without sufficient recognition for the influence of the past a decision will go only so far. An organization often gives this 'what was' a bit too much credence (the % is too high) – often without realizing – due to a narrative that does not ring true. This is a bit like stating organizational values that the employees do not recognize.

Future is guided by 'what was'

• Planet Earth is a mighty force but limited
• Humanity has evolved over millions of years and our modern life is a minuscule drop in that ocean
• Cultures, ideologies and deeply held beliefs provide a human being the backbone for their lives – describes who they are – beyond the 'given by nature'
• Education systems (schools, home and the village) twenty years ago give us workers today – we will not quickly close that gap 
• Technology introductions have created a legacy of how the world works
• Organizations have a culture, an approach to things, strongly held beliefs and a determination of an ox to drive that strategy forward – into a future that perhaps no longer exists.

Future is a 'what was' to…

• Build stability to human life – a massively fluctuating set of agendas where all individual wants and impositions are to be accepted by others would create a world of stagnation and fear (more than we already have)
• Create a sense of achievement and build on what was – at times it does feel like progress is just empty words in terms of improving our everyday lives but that is a too easy a blow. We need to recognize that to organize a world of seven billion people is very different to the pre-industrial era
• Give our imagination a double check on what might work in the future and why it might work – not exactly the same but a novel twist on what was
• Act as a reminder of the foolishness humanity has engaged in and the consequences of that foolishness – good to remember that as our lives on Earth are puny little specs of dust, it is the 'history' books (for as along as they exist) that will reflect the better educated judgment on what was done (as those facts emerge from the files that were kept secret). You do know that your tweets will go the US Library of Congress, don't you? So behave.

'What was' provides some situations a major % of the future. A war ravaged country can expect to take years to recover a sense of normalcy. The longer it takes to stop the war the longer it takes to recover from it as generations grow expecting the revenge and danger.

Future is… x% 'can be'

Future is part sweat (putting some effort into something) and part potential. Future is limited by our abilities, capabilities and our 'command' in the world.

Future is guided by 'can be'

• Realizing that the bigger the influence footprint the greater the 'can be' impact on the future. Dreaming big is not outside of anyone's reach.
• Embracing the 'can be' attitude and persistence of the people who have the gusto to work hard and often risk a lot in their lives to make a difference.
• Giving up on some of the 'what was' love to things that no longer have validity – the world changes around us. Holding onto that past can just waste a lot of brain power and potential.
• Understanding that things can be different, can be done differently…
• Recognizing the potential in our capability to make things happen – in contexts large and small – and having the wisdom to be patient.

Future is a 'can be' to…

• Have hope that things can be different. That we are not bound by the frustrations in our lives.
• Welcome models that work from elsewhere, adapting them to suit. Sometimes a model cannot be applied directly due to major contextual differences. However, it is the recognition that things can be done differently that matters then even more.
• Keep going. When the going gets tough the tough remember 'can be'.

Future is… x% 'could be'

Future is part magic (creativity, ideas, innovation, left field surprises).

Future is guided by 'could be'

Future is shaped by dreamers and agency. Without 'could be' future would look like more of the same – not much wonder and ingenuity. If you accepted all advice you have been given, would you ever have achieved the difference you've made in the world. Of course not. It is one of those by definition issues.

Future is a 'could be' to…

• Go beyond the obvious next steps
• Ignore advice (I say this with tongue in cheek in all earnestness…)
• Let the current entrenched executives talk to your hand (so to speak).
• Acknowledge that it 'could be' different. Those worn-out ideologies have created a lot of homeless people looking for new friends and family. 
• Play a little with all the toys – not just the ones handed to you directly.

Future is a dynamic algorithm of all this.

Now you just need to know how much to put into each bucket to solve the future conundrum that you face right now. What matters and how much? How big is the risk if the percentages are skewed the wrong way?

Emerging cityscapes in the next ten years

Hunome has kept me very busy. When Frank at KedgeForward asked me to contribute an article it was a neat little break from the 'on the business' and 'in the business' and have a moment to think about one major aspect of our human condition. I wrote a think piece on the emerging cityscape. My article is the second one on the page. The great thing about KedgeForward's approach is that they take in all the articles at once and release them in pairs that look at the topic from different angles or even have a totally opposite view. You judge how me and my pair Chris Barnatt are positioned.

Here is the full text for convenience:

“Economy and politics have been the emphasis in shaping our cities over the last century. Economy was in focus to spin the wheels of the industrial revolution and a necessity for the speedy rebuild after the wars. Politics was in focus as ‘social capitalism’ to deliver otherwise unattainable services, a modern version of the utilitarian statement “greatest good for the greatest number of people”, with some vacillation in that intent in both directions, extreme capital and extreme social, somewhere along the century. This has created megacities in the service of finance, industry and government. The focus lifted many from poverty to middle class and beyond. That was then. Now I see us moving on.

I think during this century and decade we will add to the mix more of the social (meaning pleasing to human life and interaction), technological and environmental aspects for a better cityscape. Cost, pollution, traffic, stress (raging people) and perhaps a lack of sense of a community and even partly our obesity and diabetes issues are some of the downsides of living in big cities and the structures that go with it.

Cities still provide services, which would be hard or impossible to distribute to many locations due to expensive equipment or rare talent. So what difference does this emphasis shift make to the, mainly developed area, cities?

Some responses to these issues that I have experienced around the globe are: developing smaller city centers within the large cities, making way for green public areas, constructing with more space and aesthetic value, increasing small mass transport solutions and human powered means to get around as well as increasing the services that allow people to meaningfully get together.

One expressed wish is to bring the country closer to the cities for better access to fresh and quality food. Today our food does acrobatics around the globe to get to the mouths of the people. We are living in a phase of centralization of distribution gone mad. What would those aliens say about us if they were observing how our stuff is moved around?

Some of the essential elements for shaping our cityscape is that people can establish relatively small scale businesses and activities with the help of funding, if necessary, and with politics supporting or at least not getting in the way, e.g., car spaces for renting a local car or pick-up space for motorized rickshaws and so on. These novel cottage industries are required for moving cities nimbly in the direction of what people want more of in their lives.

I also think that honoring what went before is an important aspect of our emerging cityscape and our sense of belonging to it. We cherish heritage, well perhaps not some of the 70s developments. There is a lot that can be done with heritage, the worn out or some quirky ideas; an example of this are boutique hotels like Dasparkhotel in Linz, Austria. The ‘hotel’ offers three rooms in three drainpipes in a public park. You name the price.

One could go as far back as asking the question, why are we in cities? Some of the fundamental reasons involve security, services, marketplaces and social constructs for varying pursuits beyond our daily existence. It is not hard to see that there is a change trajectory happening in most of the key benefits to living in a city.

Security has shifted from large cities to smaller cities and communities, for many reasons. Many services can now be delivered anywhere. Some difficult exceptions are for example infrastructures for remote areas and quick access to leading health care. Fresh and local goods are best delivered in smaller communities. The tricky thing about social activities in smaller communities is that they may not cater for the needs of the variety of humanity. This is better in larger cities. Of course there is always the Internet.

An Internet oriented existence is lifting the need to work or be educated in a city. There is less need for major investments, many people to form a meaningful company or overheads. Those involved in this shift can find the community that best suits them as people and live happily ever after. However, we are still not convinced that key meetings can be held at a distance.

I don’t think we need to be fooled by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to understand that it does not matter how poor a person is or how little food one has we want a range of these elements in our lives.

We must recognize that ten years is not a long time. We struggle with our busipolitico models for large-scale change. Actions that agile and purposeful decision-makers take highlight aspects of those models as irrelevant or even hostile to humanity.

Individual ingenuity can win over these issues. Individuals, small businesses and agile organizations shape emergent cities for the benefit of the shifting acceptance and mood of people. This caters for the short and long-term motivations of those who do; for the benefit of humanity and the pocket book of those who act for the newly hatched human 2.0. I think that while there are difficulties in this journey we are going in a good direction.”

Transhumanism – Where does it stand? Where will it go?

You can find my point-of-view on transhumanism. It is part of a series of articles on the topic on KedgeForward.

Here is the full text for convenience:

“My view is that humanity is already moving towards a transhuman, beyond biology, species. We have taken little steps. This will be a gradual shift in what we are made of, as well as for our mindsets, unless some dramatic events precipitate humanity’s steps towards it. The forces pushing us are a combination of technology and the essence of humanity, which feed each other. As an example over the next few decades we will discuss the potential impact of a demographic peak, which is the turning point for the population increase, in which case we end up seeking to sustain the human resource balance by extending life. The other scenario is that we could actually grow well beyond the forecast nine billion. In that case we would need to seek new ways of inhabiting either the Earth or some other currently inhabitable place. In either case we will need to look into enhancing our abilities to sustain life. In a similar manner we may need to seek to become a more resistant species in the extreme case of climate change, cooling to ice-age in the Northern parts of Europe and extreme droughts and other patterns in southern Europe, Africa and Asia.

Human search for longevity, wellness and performance is age-old, even to the point of seeking eternal life. As the potential for augmentation increases, in a similar manner to plastic surgery, little by little we enhance our make-up, no pun intended, through technology, as it becomes more acceptable societally and psychologically. The decisions we face can be very profound. Do I decide to live with a biology, accident or calamity based issue or do I seek to improve my functioning? How about living a good life? A lifetime as it stands today seems not to be long enough for wisdom and leaving a legacy. Some wake up very late to their ‘calling’, this may push them to seek assistance for their longevity. Humanity as a whole may need this in order to progress. In reality human augmentation is already happening. Just like a toaster, which we no longer consider to be technology, our pace-makers, implants, meshed bones and so on do not seem like technology. These technologies have become transparent and hence acceptable and yet in the direction of transhuman existence. Technologies like nanotechnology and biotechnology make it very difficult to even decipher anymore where the line between physics or biology and technology is.

Many technologies, including those related to transhuman species, carry within them some ethical and moral dilemmas, and most of them also present dangers of misuse. If I augment myself because I might have the means to do it, what about others? What about the younger generations? Are we in danger of killing humanity by augmenting those already on the planet? Who decides who gets to be augmented and who not? Do we check the biology potential first and then make that even better or do we leave the biology as is and then add to it through technology, or improve both? These discussions will lead humanity to hot water and are a reason why this transition will not be a fast one but rather by circumstance. The development for technologies allowing for a super human to exist necessarily needs to happen before we need it on a large scale, which in turn leads to the need for management, open discussion and humanity beneficial frameworks.”

Pastist – Presentist – Futurist

Are you a pastist, presentist or futurist?

How would you know? Are these terms related to a particular personality profile, are they something in your upbringing, in your experiences or your firm beliefs. Does your orientation depend on what happened in the past, how your present satisfies you or what is in store for you, that you know of, in the future?

Disclosure #1

I like creating new words when what’s available does not help. My spell checker has trouble with pastist and presentist. However it has no trouble what so ever with futurist. How interesting and yet it is often the ‘futurist’ time dimension that people, not familiar with the tools and applications of it, have most difficulty with.

I guess one could argue that there is already a great word for pastist = historian. However, I believe what I am talking about here is a little [or a lot, you choose] different. I see a historian as a recorder of the past. Often also a communicator of it. Previously this was mostly done by professional drafters of the official past. Today this includes the every day stream on the net on what makes up humanity’s experience of the events. Love it! (more…)

Emotional and rational future maze

We must remember that the future is neither wholly ours nor wholly not ours, so that neither must we count upon it as quite certain to come, nor despair of it as quite certain not to come.

Epicurus, 341-270 b.C., Greek philosopher, Letter to Menouceus, The Essential Epicurus: Letters, Principal Doctrines, Vatican Sayings, and Fragments (Great Books in Philosophy)

This quote probably hit you as ‘so true’ for your personal life. Perhaps a personal goal, which you have trouble getting to or an emotional impasse you do not quite know how to deal with.

Here I’d like to expand on it a little from the perspective of ‘strategic foresight’, which is a systematic approach to deal with the future.

The quote is well worth unraveling a little.

It has in essence four parts, which all play into the way to think about the future systematically:

1. Future is not fully ours
2. Future is not fully not ours
3. We should not count on it as certain
4. We should not despair of it as wholly uncertain

Future is not fully ours

We cannot dictate the future in our private or professional lives. No matter who we are and what we do there are always elements, which are not under our control.

We can amass all details about trends, drivers and influencers and work them into very clear strategies, making those strategies a win-win for all stakeholders and engaging a passionate group of people behind them. It still does not guarantee that things will just roll as planned. People are fickle and what was a win-win one day no longer is necessarily that later. Sometimes it is not possible to keep the decision elements jelly enough to shape things according to all change. This means that sometimes we have to stay the course on things, which were set in motion before and turn our backs on the new, perhaps clearly better, possibilities. This particular aspect has changed a lot in business over the last twenty years. Things have become super liquid. (more…)