Competency | Hinesight....for Foresight

by Andy Hines on July 18, 2017 2 Comments

Foresight Competency Model published in WFR

What do futurists need to know how to do? The APF’s Foresight Competency answers that in a new article: Building Foresight Capacity: Toward a Foresight Competency Model in World Futures Review. The development of a competency model is a nice milestone in the evolution of foresight – we’re growing up!

The purpose of the multi-cluster model is to clarify how futurists collectively view their knowledge, skills and abilities. The central cluster of the model is a circle of 6 foresight competencies: framing, scanning, futuring, designing, visioning and adapting (explained below). This central node is undergirded by a base of 3 clusters: personal, academic and workplace competencies. In turn, two competency clusters: sector and occupational roles are above the center foresight competencies.

Framing Scoping the project, defining the focal issue and current conditions

Scanning Exploring signals of change or indicators of the futures

Futuring Identifying a baseline and alternative futures

Visioning Developing and committing to a preferred future

Designing Developing prototypes, offerings and artifacts to achieve vision and goals

Adapting Enabling organizations to generate options to alternative futures

The model drew upon the framework that APF members helped develop for “Thinking about the Future” and “Framework Foresight.” One update was replacing the term “forecasting” with “futuring” to avoid confusion with non-futurist forecasting. Another was the addition of “designing,” with planning moved as a sub-competency. Finally, acting was renamed as adapting.

The model was a product of a task force of 23 futurists from 4 continents working on issues in professionalizing foresight. It was driven by a core team: Cornelia Daheim (Germany), me and Jay Gary (US), and Luke van der Laan (Australia) — I really enjoyed working with these folks. A great spirit of listening, understanding, sharing, and working toward solutions!

We followed the steps outlined in “A Guide for Developing Competency Models,” and accompanying tutorials from the Competency Model Clearinghouse website, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration. The model is intended to demonstrate the recommended competencies that individuals preparing for or considering a futurist career ought to possess. They wrote up and posted a nice piece on our work.

We will, of course, revisit and update the competency model in the years ahead as needed. — Andy Hines

Save

by Andy Hines on September 28, 2016 Leave a Comment

A Foresight Competency Model

It was great to be able to brief the new Foresight Competency Model at the recent APF Global Futures Festival. To listen to my 30-minute talk, please click this link, and go to minute 13:30.

This purpose of this multi-cluster model is to clarify how futurists view their knowledge, skills and abilities. The central cluster of the model is circle of 6 foresight competencies: framing, scanning, futuring, designing, visioning and adapting. This central node is undergirded by a base of 3 clusters: personal, academic and workplace competencies. In turn, two competency clusters: sector and occupational roles are above the center foresight competencies.

Framing Scoping the project, defining the focal issue and current conditions

Scanning Exploring signals of change or indicators of the futures

Futuring Identifying a baseline and alternative futures

Visioning Developing and committing to a preferred future

Designing Developing prototypes, offerings and artifacts to achieve vision and goals

Adapting Enabling organizations to generate options to alternative futures

The Foresight Competency Model (FCM) addresses the basic question of what one ought to capable of doing as a professional futurist. We will, of course, revisit and update the competency model in the years ahead as needed.

There is more to come from the Professionalization Task Force (and more on it from this blog) but for sure, this is an important milestone in our work. — Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on December 6, 2023 5 Comments

Building Foresight Credibility

It doesn’t take long into a session of what foresight needs before we get to awareness and credibility. It’s been the case as long as I remember in my direct experience going back to 1988 and I read about it being the case before then. So, we’re still at it.

Are we making any progress? I think absolutely yes.

Could it go faster? Also yes.

Will it go faster? Maybe.

We could perhaps be smarter about how we approach it. But a problem with any new capability, field, or discipline is that awareness and credibility take a while.

Where we might be better is telling the story of what we do. There is a tendency for some to believe they have the magic beans and if only we … then… You know what I mean here (I’m not naming names, ha). The advocate of the new, new thing promotes it as THE answer, and even worse is the mass of futurists flock to it as if it is THE answer. Eventually if fades, but years are wasted. I love the idea of new ideas. If we could just find a way to integrate and build instead of critique and tear down.

We have the unfortunate use of foresight and futures studies. I wish we would pick one – I prefer foresight. The “studies” of futures studies is too academic. I think futures would be great, but it has the unfortunate association with pork bellies and commodities markets in the US. I recognize the challenges – I suppose I am wishing for some magic here.

What we can do is keep promoting the work we are doing. A massive drivers study Houston Foresight did with SAP for Open Foresight reinforced for me just how much of our work is behind a secrecy wall. A lot of that could be retrievable and maybe we could build in years of secrecy and then a public release as a standard feature. We have done some field building! In the last two decades we have:

developed a professional association
developed a foresight competency model
put out two updates to our knowledge base
completed a task force on evaluation
accredited the first graduate programs in foresight.

These are all very sensible and useful things to do! Of course there is more. What would you add to this list? – Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on November 1, 2023 1 Comment

Houston Foresight at the WFSF 50th Anniversary

I was fortunate to spend last week with my University of Houston Foresight friends in Paris at the World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF) 50th anniversary conference. The main event for us was being awarded the world’s first accreditation of a Foresight graduate program. This is a very important milestone for the development of our field. We are slowly but surely doing what we can to build awareness and our credibility. The WFSF has been a mainstay on the academic side of foresight and was the ideal candidate to offer the accreditation service (NOTE: they were founded a year before us; we will celebrate our 50th in 2025 … ya, don’t check the math). The professional association, the APF, was founded 20 years ago, and about 7 years ago the Foresight Competency Model was developed. We’ve also had three editions of the Knowledge Base of Futures Studies published, in the 1990s, 200os and most recently in 2020. These are examples of important developments in the building of our field.

In terms of field-building, what was really exciting to me was the spirit of the Houston community. Eighteen students and alums self-organized and made the trip to Paris to support the program. A cadre — Juli Rush, Heather Benoit, Sarah Wheeler, and Jeremy Wilken — stepped in to volunteer and help manage the conference, which really reflected well on our program — thank you! Perhaps the most fun of all was the late night talks about the future in the group AirBNB flat organized by Juli.

I have to admit I was a little weepy when I accepted the award and got a raucous ovation. The spirit was just amazing. It’s that spirit, more than anything else, that will build our field and bring more high-quality foresight to the world. We are building a community of talented individuals who believe in academic rigor and producing high-quality futures work, and who also believe in sharing deep intimacy and community-building with one another. In closing. I would like to acknowledge the yeoman’s work of my predecessor and long-time Program Coordinator Peter Bishop — we would not be here without you!! — Andy Hines

For more LinkedIn posts from the UH Foresight Community attending the 2023 WFSF Conference:

Andy Hines, Mina McBride, Abdulrahman Alsulaimi, Heba Alhadyian, Mushfiqa Monica Jamaluddin, Rich Erwin, Hauson Le, Heather D. Benoit Kampa, Ingrid Furtado, Jeremy Wilken, Emily Mudge, JT Mudge, David Geye, Nicci Obert, Sarah Wheeler, Timothée CHANUSSOT, Adam Cowart, John Sweeney, Dr. Derek Woodgate.

by Andy Hines on October 11, 2023 Leave a Comment

A Technique for Guiding Images of the Future

I’m pleased that “A Technique for Guiding Images: Imagining the Future After Capitalism” has been accepted for publication in the conference volume from the 2022 Knowledge and Space Symposium on “Placing the Future” in Heidelberg, Germany. In particular I focused on the methodological aspects of creating the After Capitalism guiding images.

When I took up Polak’s challenge to develop these guiding images of the future several years ago, a most obvious question was how to do it. Polak provided some general principles, but not a specific method for doing so. Futurist colleague and U of Houston Adjunct Faculty Wendy Schultz has provided many useful ideas on the topic over the years. Nonetheless it was time to build.

I always start with the Framework Foresight method, as its modular design enables a great deal of flexibility and customization. I’ll note that it aligns with the Association of Professional Futurists (APF) six foresight competencies. The table summarizes the key steps of the FF method, and highlights in bold the modifications made for the development of guiding images. The steps and modifications will be described in more detail after the table.

Framework Foresight observes that there are two major phases in project work: mapping and influencing the futures. Put simply, to explore the future, one first draws a map, and then decides which direction to take.

The most significant modification in the mapping phase of creating the futures was focusing on “projections” as the key research input. There had been a significant number of books directly or indirectly related to the After Capitalism topic – a book about the future of a topic fits as a “projection.” Since a key objective of this work was to synthesize already existing ideas about the topic, this became the key input. More than a hundred books were reviewed, with 52 analyzed in detail, and 28 reviewed with the image analysis template (see appendix) that was developed for this project.

The influencing phase was in general treated much more lightly than in a typical project since the key purpose of the work to identify the guiding images themselves. Practically speaking, if the guiding images prove useful, then a follow-on work on “how to” will be worth the effort. Frankly, first things first – let’s see how our guiding images do. – Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on September 13, 2023 1 Comment

Foresight’s Last Mile Challenge

One of the biggest changes I’ve seen in foresight practice in more than three decades of work is the shift to more emphasis on implementation. At Houston Foresight, we call this the influencing phase, which follows the first phase of mapping the potentials. In short, once you’ve mapped the futures, how do you influence them – what might you do?

We’ve based our process on the six competencies of the APF Foresight Competency Model. Other futurists might call it something different, but most of us do some version of this. In my client work, we keep being asked to go deeper in terms of more specific and detailed recommendations on what to do. At first, and even today to some extent, it feels like we are encroaching on the client’s territory – we’re in the space where you might think they would be “taking it from here.” Nonetheless, since our goal is to make foresight more useful, we take the journey.

The very last step of adapting is where the final “translation” happens. We’re practically inside the organization now, metaphorically speaking. As external consultants, it’s difficult to sufficiently grasp the culture and politics. [An organizational futurist partner is ideal here.] Futurists typically have not built a deep tool kit here. The change managers are here. The Organizational Development (OD) people are here. But why not us? I’m doing research with colleague Mina McBride on this last mile challenge. How can we futurists help bridge this important gap? – Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on December 28, 2022 2 Comments

Understanding, Mapping, and Influencing the Future

What do we teach about the future? What does one need to know to be an effective futurist? The six steps of our basic Framework Foresight methodology, based on the APF Foresight Competency model competencies, divide a project into two phases, mapping and influencing.

The mapping phase, including framing, scanning, and futuring, is about crafting a map of the future of the domain you are exploring. The simple logic is that if you were going to explore any new territory, you would want a map (whether physical or GPS). If there isn’t a map, as is the case with the future, you need to draw one.

The map is a tool for helping you to influence your future. Where do you want to go? Why? When? How? The map doesn’t tell you which way to go – even a GPS needs to be told what the destination is. What’s our vision, our strategy for getting there, and what do we actually want to do in the future?

Finally, understanding relates to the why? Why explore this space and why do want a particular preferred future? We need a theoretical grounding that guides the mapping and influencing. This includes, among other things, our view of social change, an understanding of systems thinking, and ability to think creatively, critically, and integrally.

If you want some more on methodology, the video explores some tips for exploring the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUsqAlzTtks — Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on November 29, 2022 Leave a Comment

Introducing the Future locally

The headline “University of Houston one of twelve places in the world that offers degree in Foresight …” recently appeared in a local Community Impact newspaper. This story resulted from a recent feature of our Foresight program in the UH magazine.

Introducing people to the formal study of the future is a key part of what we do at the University of Houston Foresight program. We know from direct experience that our students “stumble upon” foresight one day and realize “that’s it!” So we need to be out there as much as we can providing the opportunities for people to stumble upon us.

But that is the long way. Picking up a few people here and there is nice, but we need to do better — the world needs more high-quality foresight! It is a hope of mine that as a field we will decide to mobilize around getting the word out about foresight in a big way. There have been some steps in this direction. The development of a Foresight Competency Model by APF, for instance, helps us share with new folks what the basics of foresight work are. The World Futures Studies Federation recently launched an Accreditation Council for academic programs. Peter Bishop has been beating down the doors across the country and the world to introduce futures thinking with his Teach the Future Foundation. Jerry Glenn has built an amazing global network with his Millennium Project. The recent Dubai Future Forum talked about starting a new global organization to fill the void left by the old World Future Society.

So, things are happening, but slowly. Perhaps we will see the day when people don’t have to stumble into the future, because futures thinking is embedded everywhere. — Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on December 15, 2021 Leave a Comment

Futurists, get in the box!

For a lifetime we have heard, and likely been advising, that we and our clients should “get out of the box.” In most cases this is sound advice. But may I offer a case where it might be helpful for us to “get in the box?” Methods. For my professional lifetime I have mostly heard that we futurists have a hard time agreeing on anything and how we do our work might be at the top of that list. Many celebrate and promote their unique approach to the future. Try it out. Ask 10 futurists how to do a project, and you will likely get back 10 different answers. On the one hand, having a wide variety of methods is surely a good thing, right? Lots of tools in the tool kit. I agree. On the other hand, it may suggest that we futurists don’t agree on how to do our work, particularly to those new to the field.

Getting in the box suggests that in addition to celebrating our differences (which we are good at), we also celebrate our commonalities (which we are not good at). It makes sense that we prefer differences. It’s a reason one is drawn to the field – to explore alternatives, to question the present, to imagine preferred futures. But this is a “public relations” challenge. For people new to the field, it may appear that we agree on very little. In the methods arena, for example, a few years back the APF produced a Foresight Competency Model (framing, scanning, futuring, visioning, designing, and adapting). It sought to identify a common core. Indeed, if you list the steps of many foresight methods, you’ll see that they typically incorporate many, most, or all of the foresight competencies. The differences are in how they steps are arranged, what is emphasized, and the particular special sauce that is used to carry out that step. In other words, there is still diversity, but it builds off a common core. We do agree … on more than we think, so let’s let the public know! – — Andy Hines

by Andy Hines on October 7, 2020 7 Comments

Sexy Foresight

I am pleased to see a collaboration with former guest student Alex Ferganani and friends captured in a new article in the Europan Business Review: Corporate Foresight In An Ever-Turbulent Era. Alex visited with us last fall as part of his PhD work. The topic was the State of Foresight and in particular we wanted to craft an article that would help introduce foresight in a simple, compelling, and sexy way. Beyond doing a very nice article (primarily by Alex), I thought it would helpful to highlight a few things we did to increase its appeal:

First, we broke the basic six-step process of Framework Foresight (based on the APF competency model) into three steps. This pained me a bit — the first bow to sexy. So

Scanning including Framing and Scanning
Futuring stayed Futuring
Reconfiguring included visioning, designing, and adapting.

There were a couple of other places where I felt it made sense to be a little sexy (this one has more to do with me personally):

“Corporate foresight.” I know there fans of this out there, but I am not one of them. It implies a distinction from governmental foresight that I don’t see as worth marking. The process is basically the same. There are differences in the goals or output, but the ability to accommodate these differences is built into our basic Framework Foresight process. For that matter, any foresight process can just be tweaked a bit to deliver business concepts or policy options. I suppose there is some branding value in “corporate foresight,” along the lines of “strategic foresight.” We add the word strategic to make it sound more serious, but there is no separate process for strategic and I guess non-strategic foresight. Again, the larger principle in play here is introducing the future as widely as possible. If corporate foresight is a sexy concept, there is no real harm in using it.
Reconfiguring. My sense was that reconfiguring was a bit too strong to capture the influencing the future steps (visioning/designing/adapting). In my experience with foresight projects, we don’t always reconfigure what the clients are doing. Sometimes we do not change the client at all – if they are happy with process and results, why change it. I suppose there is a mindset in foresight work that clients always need to be changed (ha ha). Challenged, yes, but changed, maybe not. Maybe they are doing good foresight and just need to keep doing it. The larger principle that prevailed here was that reconfiguring was more appealing. I recognize that my own tendency to be nuanced, balanced, and fair is not all that sexy, thus we went with reconfiguring.

I think we need as much sexy as possible — and no more. Quite simply we need to bring more people into the fold and we could use use a little sex appeal – we can “coach ‘em up” later. Nonetheless, I recognize this is dangerous territory. What do you think? What’s your policy on sexy foresight? — Andy Hines

Search Results for: Competency