Suchergebnisse

This article presents a genealogy of the Futures Triangle. The method's evolution is explained. Problems, iteration and benefits are presented. The Futures Triangle is a simple method to map three competing factors: the pull of the future, the push of the present, and the weight of history. It can be used as a stand-alone futures method or in conjunction with other methods such as Emerging Issues Analysis, Causal Layered Analysis, or Scenarios.

A chat with ChatGPT about the Futures Triangle led by Sohail Inayatullah, who created the method.

Drawing on hundreds of case studies and decades of using the future in professional settings, this article moves toward a stage theory—to begin with, a conceptual framework—to using the future. This extends the Six Pillars framework and accompanying tools (scenarios, causal layered analysis, visioning) by inquiring which methods and tools are appropriate for which national, institutional, organizational, and personal contexts. Seven stages (nonlinear, spiral) are suggested. The first is perceived injustice—"it is not fair." The second is risk mitigation. The third is creating alternative futures. The fourth is directionality, the vision. The fifth is "making the vision real." The sixth is metaphor. The final state is personal and focused on using the mantra technique to transform the narrative. This approach intends to assist change agents in understanding the worldview context they are working—co-creating—with.

This essay is a personal narrative of meetings with Graham Molitor, both as person and as text. His contribution is not just his invention of emerging issues analysis but his graciousness as a scholar and practitioner.

This article is written in four parts. First, macrohistory as it relates to the study of the future is defined. Second, the role of macrohistory, or the timing of the future, is located in the "six pillars" approach to futures studies. Third, case studies of macrohistory as practice are presented. Finally, the article concludes with insights from the practice of using timing.

For foresight to be useful to organizations, it must have seven dimensions. The first is that the journey is learning focused and not about particular forecasts or strategic targets. The journey is continuous, adaptive, and narrative-based. Second, for organizations to transform, they must challenge their used future: practices they continue that do not match their desired vision. Third, as the rate of technological change is dramatic, often exponential, it is necessary for organizations to search for emerging issues—novel disruptors that can challenge standard operating procedures. Fourth, they need alternative futures or scenarios, as they best capture uncertainty and allow for novel possibilities. The fifth is inclusion, or the question of "who is not in the room?" Sixth, for a new future to successfully emerge, it must have a supportive worldview and underlying narrative or metaphor. And, seventh, they need a vision, neither too far nor too near, one that enables and ennobles.

PurposeBased on a report to the non‐profit organization, The Foundation for the Future, this article aims to review methodological approaches to forecasting the long‐term future.Design/methodology/approachThis is not an analysis of the particular content of the next 500 or 1,000 years but a comparative analysis of methodologies and epistemological approaches best utilized in long‐range foresight work. It involves an analysis of multiple methods to understand long‐range foresight; literature review; and critical theory.FindingsMethodologies that forecast the long‐term future are likely to be more rewarding – in terms of quality, insight, and validity – if they are eclectic and layered, go back in time as far as they go in the future, that contextualize critical factors and long‐term projections through a nuanced reading of macrohistory, and focus on epistemic change, the ruptures that reorder how we know the world.Research limitations/implicationsThe article provides frameworks to study the long‐range future. It gives advice on how best to design research projects that are focused on the long‐term. Limitations include: no quantitative studies were used and the approach while epistemologically sensitive remains bounded by Western frameworks of knowledge.Practical implicationsThe article provides methodological and epistemological guidance as to the best methods for long range foresight. It overviews strengths and weaknesses of various approaches.Originality/valueThis is the only research project to analyze methodological aspects of 500‐1,000 year forecasting. It includes conventional technocratic views of the future as well as Indic and feminist perspectives. It is among the few studies to link macrohistory and epistemic analysis to study the long‐term.