John Mahaffie

Foresight illustrated: Choosing how broad a view to take when exploring the future

February 18, 2025February 15, 2011 by John B. Mahaffie

One of the core questions to ask when you are going to explore the future is: How broad a look do we need to take?

Much of the power of foresight is in looking beyond what we routinely pay attention to–we are experts at that–to see what forces and changes are not yet obvious to us, but will be. That is the reason to look a few years out, at least, but it's also the reason to broaden thinking beyond the organization, or community, or system we are part of.

I developed this diagram to help show people how to think about this. The lowest tiers are what responsible people in a company or other organization pay attention to. Those leaders usually have a pretty good grip on what's happening at those levels, though that is not always true.

But change also comes from beyond the system we are part of. The diagram uses as an example, a US-based organization. For that organization, change will come from beyond the region, and beyond the business sector, from elsewhere in the country, and from other parts of the world.

The answer to "how high should we fly?" in exploring the future, is, higher than you think. I've written previously that All Futures are Global. That holds true for anyone, and using the diagram, you should consider raising some of your focus, and spending some of your time, exploring what's happening at the top, even if you settle for your main focus lower down. The less clear changes, and often the biggest ones, will come from beyond your usual field of view.

For another "Foresight Illustrated" post, see: https://foresightculture.com/2008/04/22/the-mother-of-all-futures-diagrams

The short-term view and the long-term view

February 18, 2025February 8, 2011 by John B. Mahaffie

In working to get people to look out further into the future, we have to understand and work with people’s immediate concerns. Those concerns are an obstacle to long-term thinking until they get acknowledged, discussed, and put in a longer-term context. Most often, people have at least some fear about change and uncertainty, even if they don’t realize that motivation, and cannot express it.

But they can reflect on what’s on their minds, what they are unsure about, and what they think could be bad, versus good, as the future unfolds. What’s on most people’s minds includes global, national, and regional events and problems, and the big, immediate things facing their family or business.

For business people, with quarterly revenue targets, this year’s performance review, a new technology roll-out, on their minds, the long-view has trouble getting a purchase on their thinking. With a war, an election, a looming recession, and a lending crisis on their minds, the long-view fades from view too easily. But truly being prepared for the future means we have to look past the immediate situation.

When I present to groups on the future, I choose a set of broad forces of change to explore with them. Each of those forces is part of a long-term future—10 or 15 years into the future, at least. But each has to also be clearly understood from a perspective of today. Ultimately, my futures work is about the present and the future. The future starts momentarily and everything about it is built from what we have now. There is no disconnect between the future and the present.

For example, futurists generally agree that we will see rising prosperity in much of the world, over the next few decades (though most also explore potential discontinuities that could derail that growth). But facing a group of businesspeople and telling them that prosperity is rising is harder with a US recession and larger economic crises unfolding.

It’s essential to not allow an immediate situation drown out important messages about the future. We have to acknowledge what’s on people’s minds right now, and show them how it fits into a longer-term context. That means using ideas about the future to, for a time, set our thinking beyond the present situation, focusing on what could be true, in 10 or 20 years.

What football can teach us about foresight

February 18, 2025January 7, 2010 by John B. Mahaffie

On December 27, 2009, during a pro football game between the until-then undefeated Indianapolis Colts and the New York Jets, Colts Head Coach Jim Caldwell pulled his starters, including the veteran quarterback Peyton Manning—a football megastar, from the game. The Colts were ahead, but barely. There was a lot of game left to play. The move drove fans nuts, creating a sports-blog furor and lots of Monday morning quarterbacking.

It was clear to me, as I watched the game with several strong-opinioned sports fans, that there were multiple, distinct points of view about this. And everyone, to a point, was right, and perhaps everyone was also wrong. It depended on your point of view and assumptions about what was at stake.

Some of the points of view:

Fans in the stadium—Short-term view. Paid a lot of money, and suffered cold weather and snow to go see the game, some surely in the main to see the star quarterback play.

Fantasy football fans and bettors—Short-term view. Surely counted utterly on the Peyton Manning and his team to win, and lost money because of the loss.

Second-strong players—Short-term view. may have been pleased at the chance to play and develop their skills, but suffered at the humiliation of poor results and a loss, all attributable the quarter and a half in which they played.

Head coach Caldwell and quarterback Manning—Long-term view. Focused on the playoffs and keeping Manning healthy for the only part of the season that truly matters.

New York Jets players and fans—Short-term view. Sure, they got a win, but they didn’t beat the best of the Indianapolis Colts.

And so on.

What does this tell us that is at all useful to foresight? First, it highlights a complex situation of conflicting near and long-term perspectives, and varying stakeholder points of view. That, in fact, is common across society and across the questions that matter to us most. It’s also at the root of many organizational decisions. Nevertheless, the fans in this case, and stakeholders in most cases, often forget that things are not black and white, and that there are long-term and short-term ways to weigh things.

And too often, those of opposing views think others are either stupid, or evil in their actions. I worked hard to try (I failed) to convince some I was with that Coach Caldwell was not making a “mistake,” just taking an action they didn’t agree with, or wished he wouldn’t. It was not a blunder. He did it on purpose, with forethought, and with the knowledge of quarterback Manning and agreement of the team owner.

Looking at sports can help us think about big questions and can improve our foresight. Perhaps most usefully, there are regularly situations in popular sports like this, and lots of people will know about and understand the situations. You can use them to illustrate points you may need to make about different points of view in your work and decisionmaking. This is especially true of weighing near and long-term goals, and also valuable in contrasting different stakeholder perspectives. Sports are also a safer topic (usually) than some of the most pressing and distressing organizational or societal questions. You can use a good story from the sports world to highlight differences of stakeholders, differing assumptions, and the short-term versus the long-term.

Image: www.usmc.mil