by It’s been great to see a surge of interest in the topic of professionalizing foresight. To be clear, it is still in what we might call the exploratory phase. But the issue is being raised and discussed in a variety of forums, papers, and groups.
I’m happy to note that the Journal of Futures Studies has published my contribution to the professionalization discussion, Professionalizing foresight: Why do it, where it stands, and what needs to be done — a collaborative effort with my dissertation advisor Jeff Gold of Leeds Metropolitan University.
This article advocates for the professionalization of foresight as beneficial to development of the field. It offers three reasons why:
- providing a focus for field-building,
- for aiding credibility,
- for attracting talent.
The piece then explores the current state of professionalization by assessing where foresight stands against the standard criteria of a profession. It concludes that there is still work to be done and suggests five potential projects or initiatives to guide the process.
I’ve long been interested in the topic of professionalizing because I think it helps advance the overall cause of spreading the use of foresight. It was part of my motivation in helping form the Assn of Professional Futurists more than a decade ago, and it’s really great to see APF tackling the issue in its upcoming Pro Development Seminar. Andy Hines
Hi Andy,
Personally, I’m extremely pessimistic about efforts to “professionalize foresight”. As I discuss in a recent blog post, if people in a field cannot agree on the meaning, appropriate use, and value of key methodologies (e.g. scenario-exercises, scenario planning, etc) it seems there is little hope for the wider standardisation that professionalisation requires. Similarly, the lack of theoretical and philosophical underpinning significantly holds the field back.
Professionalization tends to require a certain level of standardised practice routines. Otherwise, how can you (and others external to the field) judge what is good, poor and indifferent practice?
My blog post: http://www.facilitatingsustainability.net/?p=1798
Nonetheless, I shall read your JFS paper with interest.
Warm regards,
Stephen McGrail
Hi Stephen, thanks for your comments. And I really liked your blog post — left a comment!
I agree that professionalization won’t be easy! Lots of work to be done and it will likely take a while, but I think we can do it. The APF just had a great day-long meeting on the topic alongside the WFS meeting.
Hi Andy, thanks for reading my blog and leaving a comment! I really appreciate your feedback and hearing your “take” on the use of scenarios (e.g. differentiated between big ‘S’ and little ‘s’ scenarios).
You might be interested in my latest commentary on professionalising foresight and associated discussions of industry building, entitled ‘Foresight “industry” building and professionalisation – distraction or necessary processes?’, available here: http://www.facilitatingsustainability.net/?p=1988
Sorry to say this but I’m increasingly leaning towards viewing it as a distraction, and in the blog post I try to explain why I see it this way.
Cheers,
Stephen