The unspoken scenario

WTC lights sister72 flickrConsider for a moment what would happen if you lost everything you own and all your money. That awful scenario is, of course, possible in any of our lives. And no one wants to dwell on such a thought. It would be hideous.

But try out the scenario. What would you do that first morning? You and your family? What would you do first? What resources, deep down, would you still have to try to restart your life?

You would not have lost everything. You would have your knowledge, your skills, your intelligence, and you would have the love and regard of your friends and family. You would have your ambition and your drive to find a way to live. You would have positive thoughts amidst the negative, or you would have try to. You could find those positive thoughts and put them to work to build something new for yourself. This is what I see time and again when a natural disaster hits people, taking everything they own. 

This story of disaster is your unspoken scenario. And in working with clients, I can often detect that they have an unspoken scenario, and sometimes they can too.

It is, of course, far from their minds that they'd like to spend time exploring the unspoken scenario. They assume that if the disaster happens, nothing will be the same anyway. So why dwell  on it? Though they of course resist shining a light on the possibility, organizations can and do fail, and disappear forever. Or they get his with a massive shock that is a thoroughgoing disaster.

In the 9-11 attacks, the brokerage firm Cantor Fitzgerald lost over two-thirds of its workforce in the World Trade Center collapse. But the firm still exists, and it's perhaps stronger than ever. Cantor Fitzgerald faced a sort of unspoken scenario. The firm likely would never have sat down to explore the "what if" of such a disaster. But what if they had? They could have exercised their thinking on how the organization would reroute its massive load of brokerage transactions, using its other offices and infrastructure to reroute the load. They could have thought about and gotten stronger in building the resilience and durability of their mission and culture. CEO Howard Lutnick chanced to be out of the office on 9-11 and survived the attacks. The strength of his vision and determination was a difference maker in their recovery. Perhaps Cantor Fitzgerald had this sort of resilience anyway. The firm brought its trading back on line within a week of the attacks.

What is the unspoken scenario in your organization? It could be a lot of things. Is there an existential threat out there that no one want's to talk about? or at least, that they are reluctant to get into in detail? Often there is. It may be a scenario of doom or a big change that changes everything. But should you explore it? You should.

The unspoken scenario may be an easily-thought-of elephant in the room, or it may be an idea so "out there" that no one is talking about it, but they should. There is power even in an extreme bad news scenario. Why? Because you can look at potential futures where all bets are off, where everything changes, and sometimes, you can see a pathway forward. And the organizations that practice that thinking have a better chance of success.

What you can do. Get a small group of thoughtful colleagues together, and brainstorm your unspoken scenarios. Reflect on them and why they are 1). threats to your existence, and 2). not being discussed. Consider if there would be value in convening a larger conversation, or playing them out in more thorough story building and analysis. You may need and want to do these things quietly–even very quietly, to not alarm people, but involve your strategic leaders in frank discussion of true threats, and, quite likely you will discover more about your strengths and how you can find opportunities in what look like insurmountable challenges.

Image: sister72 via Flickr, Creative Commons attribution license.

How a futures scenario is like a Rube Goldberg contraption

One of the delightfully crazy makers who built a device for the Nabisco Cookie vs. Creme Challenge uses a hatchet and an electric router to get the creme, which he hates, off of Oreo cookies, which he loves. Here’s the Youtube video. It’s great fun to watch, but these Nabisco Challenge devices sure seem to be pointless stunts. This guy has built a classic Rube Goldberg contraption.

But crazy, single-minded, pointless stunts have something in common with some of the scenarios futurists build to help explore the future. They are a big “what if”. What if you used a hatchet to get the creme off an Oreo?

The Oreo-cleaning guy won’t make his fortune with this machine, and people don’t normally want or need a machine to get rid of the creme. His effort is an exploration of an intricate technical system, done for fun, but it’s fun with a payoff. He learned a lot about mechanical systems, and automation, and the need for a robust mechanical set up for the success of his machine.

In buidling scenarios, particularly the “ridiculous” what ifs we sometimes use to explore deeply into different possibilities, we’re building a contraption to show something that probably won’t ever come to pass.

If we pose a “what if” that says, “the end of paper,” and then explore thoroughly a world without paper, we don’t have to believe that in 20 or 30 years there will literally be no paper. No, we can believe, and learn more about a future, in which there is far less paper. But drawing the sharpest contrasts, and understanding the most about the potential, may lead us to set our scenario as an extreme, an absurd world that we don’t really believe in.

The key, of course, is to make sure people know the difference between an experiment and a forecast, that they know you’ve built a Rube Goldberg story to try some things out, and that no, you don’t think in the future it will altogether be like that. Some of the best scenarios are that kind of experiment, they aren’t forecasts, but we can learn a lot from creating them.

A 2021 shopper’s path to purchase

Technology and social changes are transFuture Pathway to Purchaseforming how we shop. The future path to purchase won’t look like the traditional one—in fact, our path to purchase has already changed strikingly as retailing and consumer life have changed. But we’ve only begun to see what will unfold.

Retailers, CPGs, packaging developers and others up and down the consumer value chain need to grapple with the changes and be ready to do new things in new ways. Fundamentals of the retailing business: store sizes, formats, technology, locations, distribution channels, and so on, will have to be reconsidered in the coming decade.

What might the future path to purchase look like? Here is a scenario for 2021:

Claire is 32 years old, and lives in Boston. Work keeps her busy and mobile—she puts in about 60 hours a week at two jobs—and she spends a lot of time in her car for work, in Boston traffic. She likes to shop, but doesn’t have time to spend going to stores as much as she likes. So Claire relies on shopping virtually. Hers is an app-driven life, and shopping is no different.

This week, Claire bought a new sweater and blouse. Here’s how she did it.

First, Claire noticed on SocialShare that sixteen of her friends had “Liked” a new young designer’s collection. She looked at pictures of Marteen’s designs and a video of the designer talking about his work, but then thought no more about it as work distractions took hold. [“Likes” and buzz]

Later, when she was out with her friends, Becca’s blouse caught her eye—she asked about it—it was that same designer, Marteen. She really liked the blouse, and Becca let her take a quick photo with her mobile. “Don’t get this same color!” said Becca. [see and image]

That Sunday, she used the ShopNow! app to find the blouse—it recognized the brand and model from her smartphone picture. Right away it showed five stores in the Boston area that had the designs, but Claire realized she wouldn’t get out to shop that weekend or the next. But she kept thinking about the blouse. [app finds it]

So Claire decided to send “Digital Claire” shopping. Digital Claire has all her sizes and preferences, and what she had bought in the past two years. It checked the fit, and narrowed her choices from the collection. But the app found that the blouse Becca had really would not fit Claire. And to make things worse, it also showed her a gorgeous sweater that didn’t fit either. [avatar match]

Disappointed, she checked whether she could order a custom blouse in the same style. Using Digital Claire, she priced a custom-fit version, and previewed colors. She had her avatar try on the blouse and a sweater from Marteen’s collection, and showed Becca the 3D views. The blouse and sweater could be made to her specs and delivered the next day, Monday. The chance to have it immediately was exciting—she could wear it Tuesday. SOLD! [auto order custom version/produced per order/delivered]

NOTE: I offer keynote talks and workshops on the future consumer and the future of retail, contact me at jbmahaffie@leadingfuturists.biz for more information

Follow by Email
Instagram