What is and What if

In organizations, knowing what’s going on today across the business landscape (”what is”), is essential. Too often the press of daily work keeps an executive from knowing enough.

But understanding how things are changing and the emerging challenges and opportunities in front of you (”what if”) needs attention too. Nearly always, the press of business and immediate demands shut down attention to “what if”.

Here is what is involved:  

“What is” — the operating environment:

  • Due diligence — care and attention to the organization’s interests
  • Industry focus — sector and market knowlege
  • The state of the art — best practices and the latest technology, systems, processes
  • What’s going on — the competitive landscape

“What if” — the future:

  • Leading edge change — emerging change in the market, technology, society, that will impact the organization
  • Emerging and future possibilities — identification of specific opportunities and challenges and potential responses to them

For both, we can’t help but stand in today as we think and work to understand. But we must try to think forward to better anticipate the future.

“What is” functions poorly without “what if.” Taking action in response to conditions today, without thoughts toward the future, is risky. But the reverse is true too. You need to know enough about current conditions to fully explore potential change. 

What to do about it

Broaden your view of “what is” by exploring the environment more broadly, beyond the specific marketplace niche, or issue, or geography you focus on.

Deepen your view of “what if” into the future by: Explicitly testing out ideas about 5 or 10 or more years from now. Ask the “what ifs” questions. Build stories (scenarios) of future possibilities. Draw implications of those “what ifs”.  Attention to both questions will make you stronger and more limber as you face challenges and meet new opportunities.

For more insight on this and a related illustration, see: Management, strategy, and foresight, compared

Do you suffer from mill-mindedness?

The Mill astride the river was the town’s heart. Life blood pumped through it in surges of steam, blasts of the shift-change whistle, toings and froings of boxcars and hoppers on the rail spur, shift workers parading in and parading out. Tied up the traffic light? A mill shift was entering or leaving. A man asking credit at the grocery? The Mill cut back hours. New houses going up on the North side? Output and sales are up. Like peasant shacks against a castle wall, the whole town leaned on The Mill, and drew its sustenance from it. Imagine the town without The Mill? You cannot.

You must try to imagine the town without The Mill.

Small towns exist because of a mill or rail depot, a mine, a factory, a college, a hospital, something central that informs, shapes, sustains a community. But America’s ghost towns are often mill or mine towns that lost their mainstays. They didn’t think past The Mill.

Too many companies and sectors have something just like this: a mill, a production line, a critical machine, a cash cow, that is everything. It occupies the front and center of the minds of stakeholders: owners, investors, leaders, and workers. Wall Street sees the firm with mill eyes. Lenders see it with mill eyes. The community sees the firm and itself it with mill eyes.

All of them want The Mill to be The Mill, to churn along, to make money and jobs and community. And all of them define their truths in reference to it. This is mill-mindedness and it can constrain thought and change.

Using foresight to fight mill-mindedness

Foresight can make the difference. Images of different futures are powerful for fighting mill-mindedness.

What is the company (or the town), after The Mill?

Good futures thinking brings a focus beyond what exists now. It can break down rigid mental framing. Without images of something different, The Mill will define everything, past, present, and future.

How to work past mill-mindedness:

Ask these questions of yourself or better, discuss them with colleagues:

  1. What is our mill—that central thing or process that we allow to define us?
  2. Does that thing or process have a secure future?
  3. What would our organization become if we no longer had it?

Exploring the answers means confronting fundamental questions about how you frame and understand what your organization is all about. And answering them sets you up to consider “what’s next?”.

So build scenarios of your future without The Mill. Re-imagine the organization on a new basis. Those thought experiments allow you to see a future that doesn’t depend on this singular force or asset. It gets you past your mill-mindedness.

This blog has dozens of posts about “thinking differently” and on the power of foresight to work past stuck thinking. See: Thinking differently 

My practice as a futurist is centered on helping organizations break down barriers to thought and positive change. If your organization is so afflicted, maybe I can help. Let me know. Email me or call 202-271-0444.

Image: White Oak Cotton Mill, North Carolina, about 1914, with part of the mill village in the foreground. Public domain.

8 things leaders should know about strategic foresight

Today’s leaders are pressed to focus on strategic foresight and many are responding. But it’s not always clear what strategic foresight means. What do leaders need to know?

  1. It has to be long term. For true clarity on your future, you need a view that goes at least five or ten years out. You need to see past immediate concerns and explore and envision real change. See: The short-term view and the long-term view
  2. There are no “answers.” The future is uncertain, with a range of potential outcomes. So strategic foresight doesn’t mean prediction, it means clarifying patterns of change and modeling potential outcomes and choices. See: Foresight illustrated: The mother of all futures diagrams
  3. You have to look beyond your usual domain. New challenges and undiscovered opportunities will often come from outside your sector or market. See: All futures are global
  4. You need to reach beyond the low-hanging fruit. The actions you can take now to fix things and keep going are obvious, whether or not you are able to accomplish them. They are the low-hanging fruit. Addressing bigger challenges and opportunities, and forging a successful future, means reaching beyond the low-hanging fruit to bigger systems that will need to change. See: Making change beyond the low-hanging fruit
  5. The foresight process itself is valuable. Wider participation in the processes of strategic foresight strengthens organizational foresight, agility, and learning. You need others’ inputs, and you need others to be a part of innovation and decisionmaking. And everyone benefits from the time spent learning, exploring, and imagining. See: Noun=bad, verb=good and Planning, scanning, forecasting—it’s the verb not the noun
  6. You must confront unpleasant truths, not just hopes and dreams. That means “what ifs” that include catastrophic or transformational change. From those scenarios can come fresh thinking about a positive path forward. See: The unspoken scenario
  7. Success means forging a culture of foresight. Strategic foresight can’t be a once-in-a-while activity. Organizational habits of mind and action should stand on a base of clear and regular thinking about the future. See: What is a foresight culture? and The characteristics of a foresightful organization
  8. The future is yours to shape. Finally, the future is not inevitable. You can and must shape it yourself. Don’t wait for it to happen to you. See: Don’t be a victim of change

My work is all about helping leaders do these things. Let me know if I can shed more light on this, or help you kick your efforts up to a new level. Jbmahaffie@leadingfuturists.biz and 202-271-0444 More about my work is at www.leadingfuturists.biz.

5 foresight steps for dealing with community resistance to change

MainStreetNovelI recently met a couple who are leaders in their small Southern US town. They are not elected leaders. They are self-driven change makers. They are working hard and spending their own money to improve the town. They have planted thousands of flowers and created a festival to build town pride and draw visitors. They are planning new spaces for incubating creativity and businesses.

Their efforts reminded me of Carol Milford, the heroine in Sinclair Lewis' Main Street. She wanted to bring culture and sophistication to her adopted town. Like Carol Milford, my friends face tradition-minded, suspicious townspeople who don't understand their motives or vision for the community.

They are working for a better future for everyone, so why the pushback?

It's likely a combination of things. People are unsure or suspicious of the changes. Their instinct is it's better to have what you know than to chance it on unclear and outlandish new ideas. They don't know or share the vision of the couple who are leading change. So what do my friends need to do?

5 ways foresight can help

  1. Sell their vision better. This means bringing clarity to their ideas about change and their motivations for pressing for it. They do so while respecting and celebrating the town's legacies, and the people who are a part of those. Appreciative inquiry is a technique for working with groups that starts with acknowledging strengths and positive legacies. It offers a starting point for a community (or organization) seeking to move forward cooperatively.
  2. Join with stakeholders to explore a positive future. This means not claiming to have all the answers. Instead, invite community members to help forge plans. Community members with the strongest sense of "ownership" of the town should be allies, not opponents. Giving them participation in the process preserves their ownership. Some thoughts on dealing with people whose thinking is stuck in the present (or past) are here: "When only you see the future." Also, "difficult history" may be part of what my friends face in their town. See: "How to break free of difficult history."
  3. Start the conversation by sharing assumptions about the future. Have participants in visioning meetings share their thoughts on "In 2027, I believe that ______________" . That view is at least 10 years in the future. Why? because that will help people jump past their immediate concerns and "today" objections. Probing this question does two things. 1). It gets the juices flowing, getting everyone's head in the future. 2). It surfaces assumptions about the future that we all carry and operate on whether we've told each other them or not. Sometimes the inability to move forward will be rooted in unexamined assumptions about the future. See: "In 20xx I believe that ________"
  4. Do some unencumbered thinking. With stakeholders, explore the question: "What would we build today if none of this existed?" You don't do this because you plan to blot out everything and start over. This discussion allows people to imagine things not from the perspective of rigid, existing barriers that would make it hard to acheive them, but rather, from the point of view of what would be best. See also: "The clean slate scenario".  
  5. Build a clear vision of a desired future. Create 10- or 20-year views into the future. These scenarios could include stories about "what if we don't change" as well as views of positive futures. You can develop these scenarios with people from across the community. The scenarios will bring out clear and vivid images of the future. An artist's renderings of the future can further showcase the new ideas and enourage feedback. See also: "Why we need scenarios to be ready for the future".

Entering into processes like this is scary. But my new friends show only signs of excitement about it. They will make an even greater difference going forward, armed with some of the tools of foresight.

If you are working in a community or organization with these sorts of challenges, I can help you develop and lead a process to get further, more smoothly. Let me know if I can help: jbmahaffie@leadingfuturists.biz and 202-271-0444.

Pitfalls in governance: Views of a futurist/trustee

This post addresses the non-profit governance roles of Boards of Trustees. See related post: Governance and Foresight

320px-WolfsgrubeThose in governance have a distinct role that may be at odds with the organizational roles they are used to. In the governance role, you wear a different hat. I bring to this question my own experience in non-profit governance. I am a trustee for two educational institutions. I also have worked as a futurist serving organizational leaders and boards for three decades. My work is about helping them understand change and prepare for the future. I have seen the traps and failures they face.

Trustees have a responsibility for the big picture and the long term. Jeff De Cagna of Foresight First LLC has done seminal work on explaining how and why boards need foresight. He coined the phrase “Duty of Foresight” and is at work to make the recognition of that duty a reality. [LINK]

Here are some of the pitfalls: 

Misunderstanding the governance role. People who join boards don’t always know what governance is. They instinctively act like workers or day-to-day managers of the organization, and may  have a weak or missing eye to the bigger picture.

Only responding to what’s laid in front of you. The role of a Board member is to look beyond, ask questions, frame things in ways different from how those in executive roles do. Here’s a post I wrote on this: “Don’t just answer the question you are asked

(Only) chasing growth or dollars. A board can have “spreadsheet eyes” and fall into the habit of focusing tightly on financial matters, at the expense of the mission, sustainability, new roles, etc. Yes, the business model may be tracking well in terms of a budget and balance sheet. But is the organization on the right track?

Groupthink. The tendency for a governance group to go along so as to get along. Everyone should be coached to have a “yes, and” or “yes, but” frame of mind. A board’s leadership should model and validate this behavior.

Fix and stop. A temptation in a board role is to see that a problem in the organization is solved and then breathe a sigh of relief and fade back. Instead, the board needs to keep its eyes on the bigger picture, and turn to new issues and opportunities.

Falling out of the governance role. This happens when a Board member/trustee drops into the business of the day-to-day management, overriding decisions (as opposed to asking questions, framing long-term strategic goals, etc.) Some in governance are also in day-to-day roles. They have to be able to switch hats and maintain a mindfulness about which role they are in when.

Failing to exercise the duty of foresight. Last but not least, at the core of responsibility for the long-term success of an organization is anticipating the future. That means looking beyond the usual time horizon the organization considers, to take a view five, ten, or fifteen years out. Here Jeff De Cagna’s work (see above) is vital. I will address this more in a subsequent post. See: Governance and Foresight for more on his vital issue.

The solutions to these problems are in the hands of boards themselves. A board should give its new trustees a proper orientation. In it, they should talk through the role, learn from example cases of things that could come up in their board work. Since board members may also have “roll up your sleeves” duties, such as assisting with fundraising, it’s important to air out the question of which roles each plays, when.

Boards should refresh these lessons each year. People forget. One way to do that is to have existing trustees join new ones in their orientation. They can join in small group discussions of situations that come up for people in the role.

Trustees should get in the habit of saying, “why?” and “does this support our mission?” and “can this be sustainable or help the organization’s sustainability?” And they should call out pitfalls when they see them. "Watch out!" 

Image: pitfall trap for wolf hunting, Germany. Georg Waßmuth, via Wikimedia Commons.

Our Role in Shaping the Future

I am hoping you’ll take a moment to complete a quick SURVEY. It’s focused on how what people do shapes the future.

In late July my colleague Jennifer Jarratt and I will offer a conference session at the WorldFuture 2012 Conference called “Our Role in Shaping the Future“. We will explore the critical role of human agency: what you, and I, and anyone does to shape society, in shaping mankind’s future.

This is perhaps the seminal question for anyone engaged in foresight. We have to wonder: Does what we do matter? and, What human action makes a difference, even at the individual level?

Our session is on Saturday, July 27, 2012, at the conference in Toronto. Here is the session description:

Futures work depends on identifying patterns of change, understanding data and systems, determining forces, and drivers shaping an organization or a society. These are important. Less often explored is the idea of human agency. Human agency is our own ability to be actors and shapers of our own future and that of others. Our decisions and actions make a difference beyond ourselves.

Sometimes a decision is fateful because it opens a vision to the future far wider than the individual’s own path: Rachel Carson’s decision to write Silent Spring,for example. More often, it is an everyday act, such as taking a job, helping someone clarify a decision, or leading a group.

In this session we explore the idea of human agency and how to use it in shaping more positive futures in small and large ways. Attendees can participate in an online survey (at www.leadingfuturists.biz) of how and why people think about the future, their motivations, and, potentially, their changed behavior.

The SURVEY is our chance to gather your insights on how what people do matters to shaping the future. Please give us a few minutes of your time, if you can. There’s a link in the survey where you can ask for the results, too.

Noun = bad, verb = good

Consider the difference between a plan and planning. A plan is a thing—most often a document in some form. It’s a fixed set of ideas about what you are going to do next.

Just at the moment a plan is completed, it begins to age into irrelevance or incorrectness, possibly very quickly. Conditions and context are always changing. And because of the decisions and narrowing necessary to concoct a plan, the thing may never have been particular right in the first place.

Now consider planning. Planning is an ongoing process. It’s a process you work on, improve, and continue. Instead of a limited stepwise effort resulting in a literal or figurative 3-ring binder, you have an organizational process that has a life, sees growth and development, and can change as needed.

Among my clients are many who engage in a periodic strategic planning process. That’s the old-school thing you do—it’s text book management. But that doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

Organizations put their heart and soul into periodic strategic planning. They spend time and money. Usually, a special team or department takes the lead. Too often, the work is a task for experts, and doesn’t connect to the wider organization. The effort suffers because it is set up as a special activity.

So don’t put your energy into completing that three-ring binder, celebrating or breathing a sigh when you have punched and inserted the last pages. Put your energy into getting good at the verb*–planning, not the noun–plan. Focus on learning to be agile, strategic, and to plan, plan some more, and plan yet more. The payoff is in your ability to move and shift with changing conditions.

Don’t make planning only an episode or periodic activity. Make it continuous, and build it to be ready to move and shift as conditions do. Your plans will be relevant, workable, and easier to adjust when they are not.

Note: I’ve shared a closely similar view here: The Power of Words — but this is a topic worth revisiting!

*Please also note: I am aware that “planning” is a gerund, noun form of the verb to plan, but for a succinct title, I settled on noun vs. verb

Ask the hard questions

The thoughts here continue from my previous post, Question Continuity.

Your future in questionOnce you have recognized that you cannot assume continuity across the systems, technologies, relationships, etc. you depend on, you should recognize that you have to ask some tough questions: “Do we have a future?” “What makes us think so?” “What could disrupt the systems we rely on?” and “What do we have to do to ensure our future?” You have to ask these questions bravely and honestly, getting past assumptions of continuity.

The scanning that supports probing those questions has a different character than routine organizational scanning. It puts a focus on the fundamental and big systems in global society, on changes in technology, on changing in the global economy, and on threats from other areas of knowledge and professions. It lets in the more-speculative provocations and leading edge of change discoveries that are not normally on an organization’s radar screen, or that it may have difficulty conceptualizing and facing.

A valuable step in the process is to build positive and negative scenarios for the organization’s future, and use them to explore the potential for disruptive change. The scenarios don’t assume continuity. Some of them challenge it, and propose alternative futures in which there is sharp change or negative outcomes. Those possibilities need to be the focus of scanning and monitoring regarding the organization’s future.

If your “what if” scenarios don’t shake people up, they probably are not about the tough questions you need to ask.

Question continuity

Slide Rule
Did the makers of slide rules assume too much continuity?

An organization’s routine strategymaking has to include ongoing explorations of the forces, issues, and trends in its internal and external environment. That is environmental scanning, and the process is routine for any well-led organization. But too often our scanning focus is too narrow and is based on assumptions of continuity.

Here’s why that happens. When you look at your future from today, and explore the topics you already know are part of your business, you are focusing tightly on your existing systems, processes, relationships, technologies, and the trends and forces shaping them. In doing that, you can too easily assume your organization, or your profession, or your sector, or your product/technology will continue as it has. And unfortunately, that’s the kind of routine environmental scanning that organizations do.

Is this what the makers of “adding machines”—the mechanical calculators of three or four decades ago thought? The slide rule? Probably. They just kept working to get better at the same business, assuming continuity.

But your continuity is not assured—it is essential to question it. Bigger things—things you may not be looking at carefully—can disrupt or destroy the pathway you are on. You need to question that pathway, and explore what could change your game entirely. That means asking some tough questions and changing the way you explore your future. Those points are the subject of another post.

These thoughts continue in the post “Ask the Hard Questions

Image: Dominic’s Pics, cc attribution license, via Flickr

How to work your way past your thinking blockages

"The real barrier to strategic innovation is more than denial – it’s a matrix of deeply held beliefs about the inherent superiority of a business model, beliefs that have been validated by millions of customers; beliefs that have been enshrined in physical infrastructure and operating handbooks; beliefs that have been hardened into religious convictions; beliefs that are held so strongly, the non-conforming ideas seldom get considered, and when they do, rarely get more than grudging support." [Gary Hamel, The Future of Management]

In trying to improve an organization’s ability to think about the future, there are some big, built-in constraints. The critical elements that stand rigidly in the way of new thinking include: the corporate culture, established/legacy systems and programs (including business models), and language. 

The organization’s language may be ill-equipped to let it talk new talk, but scenarios create a new way of talking, with names for the scenarios and names for things in them having the power and potential to be part of how the organization’s people talk about the world and how it is changing. For example, a few years ago I worked with public library professionals on developing scenarios. One that we played out was called “Last Bastion of Books.” Another was “Barnes & Nobleization.” The scenarios gave them a clear view of possible futures, and a short-hand for talking about their future.

In my experience scenario building can help loosen up some of these constraints. Working with groups in the organization to build scenarios can jump them past the barriers of the current systems and business models, by creating new ones to think about, fully wrought. Because you can jump thinking out 10 or 15 years, it’s possible to set aside the immediate, too-tangible systems and practices the organization depends on, and consider things transformed.

Ultimately, but establishing a sort of future mythology in the scenario narratives, it’s possible to at least open up some new thinking that could enable the corporate culture to accommodate the new thinking. It’s this last payoff that I believe is most critical to most organizations. Give it a try, and call if you need help!
 
 
See also, posts under category "Thinking Differently"
 
 
Image: alykat, via Flickr, cc attribution license
Follow by Email
Instagram