The value add of foresight in understanding mapping and influencing the future

As promised in a recent post, some thoughts on the value-add of understanding, mapping, and influencing the future. I think it’s fair to assert that foresight  provide value in terms of understanding the future. We help our clients think about the future with concepts such as alternative futures, the cone of plausibility, and the framework activities of framing, scanning, forecasting, visioning, planning, and acting – among others. We also bring in systems thinking, theories of social change, and other conceptual systems. The understanding work provides a theoretical underpinning to the more practical areas of mapping and influencing the future.

In the Houston Foresight program, mapping involves the three activities of framing, scanning, and forecasting. Here, too, I think it is fair to say that futurists provide clear value here to clients. One could argue that these activities are at the core of futurists’ expertise. We might be so bold as to say they are part of our core competence.

Matters get a little trickier in the influencing realm of visioning, planning, and acting. Sure, we are “good” at these activities, and we teach them in our Master’s and certificate programs. But are we clearly better at these than, if you will, non-futurists. I think it’s fair to say that this one is a matter of debate. (and part of that debate, which we won’t go into here, is how one defines “futurist”). Others teach and practice visioning, planning, and acting, and teach it well. It’s less clear, at least to me, that futurists are distinctly different here. One strategy might be to say, well, let’s just focus on where we are clear distinct: understanding and mapping, and leave influencing to others. But I, and I suspect many other futurists, would find that somehow not satisfying. Another strategy might be to rethink our value proposition in regard to these activities. So here goes…

First, I must give credit to fellow futurist Cecily Somers for this idea. She graciously volunteered to work with me over the course of a weekend in doing some visioning and planning work for the Houston Foresight program (and I must add that it was an amazing session!) She helped me see that perhaps the value-add isn’t necessarily in the influencing category per se, but in tying together the entire spectrum of understanding, mapping, and influencing. The value-add is our integrated approach to the three areas of understanding, mapping, and influencing. In other words, we are distinct in tying influencing to mapping and in turn to understanding. I hope that makes sense to y’all – it sure makes sense to me. That’s the bare bones – I suspect a more in-depth treatment is called for! Andy Hnes