by 
Not new, but updated … as promised in a previous post. To recap, for several years we and our audiences at the Houston Foresight program thought we saw likely patterns in how domains evolve over time using archetypes and the Three Horizons. We use a customized version of Jim Dator’s Archetype technique (see Evolution of Framework Foresight).
We (finally) did the research by gathering and analyzing historical scenario sets. We identified those using or aligning with the archetypes and observing, with the benefit of hindsight, whether the domains did in fact follow a pattern along the three horizons. The paper has been through revisions and is still in the pipeline. (It is taking such a long time – peer review is broken, but that’s for another post.)
The most significant change to the original graphic is that the super-talented Denise Worrell re-designed it (Denise is part of the research team along with myself, Heather Benoit, Lavonne Leong, Laura Schlehuber, and Adam Cowart.) On the graphic, we explicitly added the three horizons label. We already had put forth the idea of two versions of transformation in the early version. Now that we have used it in practice a few times, we like it and it’s here to stay. We should be able to share an example publicly soon (another piece stuck in a review process). We also added some design polish, i.e., shading and a redesigned logo.
Now, for a little sneak preview of the research findings. The key purpose of the research is to see if there is a pattern in the flow of a domain through the archetypes and across the three horizons. There are two obvious candidates.
- Baseline > New Equilibrium > Transformation
- Baseline > Collapse> Transformation
Of these two, we thought the answer was obvious. We appear to be wrong. Care to guess? – Andy Hines
Leave a Reply