First, a bit of a turn from my comment on Part 1 — I admittedly got a little hyperfocused there on the how does this come to life question and the macro conditions for the BCG scenarios. Thank you for this piece as it's inspiring and pulls me back to the practice of futures thinking itself. The multiples piece really lands, and so does the order of operations underneath it (preferences first, feasibility second, which I clearly did in reverse in my comment to Part 1!)
What I'm wondering now, in my current seat, is what futures thinking looks like for leaders who AREN'T at the very top. If you're an executive (head of a department, a rung or two down from the C-suite, or a strategic consultant running point for a client), you have the judgment to do this work, and often the closest visibility into where the organization actually needs to head. But you may not have the authority to call when the slate gets wiped or which preferred future gets pursued. The actual adoption and implementation isn't yours. Two questions that leads me to that I'd love your take on, because I don't have the answers:
1) How do you get a seat at the table where the imagining is happening, as someone whose preferred futures count as inputs to the choice if you're not already there?
2) If you CAN'T get a seat at that table, how do you practice futures thinking for your part within the organization anyway, knowing the adoption decision will get made above you, often without you in the room, and often based on factors (board pressure, parent-company politics, quarterly numbers) that the imagining couldn't simulate?
I've attempted some of this type of work in roles like the ones I named above, where I (and/or folks like me) cared about futures thinking, could see what their organization needed, while operating inside large, matrixed, global structures where the call ultimately wasn't ours to make — with mixed results. Curious for your take of what the practice could/should look like in roles like that?
Well first off, thank you for going on the (two-parter) journey with us.
You're wonderings are real ones. The first suggestion I have is to consider the system(s) where you do have control. A system can be huge (a government, society, a fortune 100), but there are much smaller systems where impact still matters (a family, neighborhood, department of ten, micro organization like Mess Hill). Can you imagine multiple, preferred futures within a system where you have control? And can you do this in partnership with others in this system?
To your second wonder: Don't dismiss the impact your actions can have on others watching. What can you do within your department or team, but do it loudly and in the open, so others in power see your efforts and their influence?
First, a bit of a turn from my comment on Part 1 — I admittedly got a little hyperfocused there on the how does this come to life question and the macro conditions for the BCG scenarios. Thank you for this piece as it's inspiring and pulls me back to the practice of futures thinking itself. The multiples piece really lands, and so does the order of operations underneath it (preferences first, feasibility second, which I clearly did in reverse in my comment to Part 1!)
What I'm wondering now, in my current seat, is what futures thinking looks like for leaders who AREN'T at the very top. If you're an executive (head of a department, a rung or two down from the C-suite, or a strategic consultant running point for a client), you have the judgment to do this work, and often the closest visibility into where the organization actually needs to head. But you may not have the authority to call when the slate gets wiped or which preferred future gets pursued. The actual adoption and implementation isn't yours. Two questions that leads me to that I'd love your take on, because I don't have the answers:
1) How do you get a seat at the table where the imagining is happening, as someone whose preferred futures count as inputs to the choice if you're not already there?
2) If you CAN'T get a seat at that table, how do you practice futures thinking for your part within the organization anyway, knowing the adoption decision will get made above you, often without you in the room, and often based on factors (board pressure, parent-company politics, quarterly numbers) that the imagining couldn't simulate?
I've attempted some of this type of work in roles like the ones I named above, where I (and/or folks like me) cared about futures thinking, could see what their organization needed, while operating inside large, matrixed, global structures where the call ultimately wasn't ours to make — with mixed results. Curious for your take of what the practice could/should look like in roles like that?
Well first off, thank you for going on the (two-parter) journey with us.
You're wonderings are real ones. The first suggestion I have is to consider the system(s) where you do have control. A system can be huge (a government, society, a fortune 100), but there are much smaller systems where impact still matters (a family, neighborhood, department of ten, micro organization like Mess Hill). Can you imagine multiple, preferred futures within a system where you have control? And can you do this in partnership with others in this system?
To your second wonder: Don't dismiss the impact your actions can have on others watching. What can you do within your department or team, but do it loudly and in the open, so others in power see your efforts and their influence?
Thank you for the thoughtful reflections!