Futures methodological process

“Methodology is taken to be the overall activity or discipline, with an associated intellectual domain, by which to approach a subject or problem.”

(Ratcliffe 2002:11)

Foresight and Prospective can be both considered as futures methodologies. They are built around the assumption that participation is one of the main benefits of conducting the process (Horton 1999). People play a considerable role in the design and implementation of long-term strategies, their involvement in this type of processes can provide them with the knowledge about possible futures and help to take actions in their specific organisations in order to prepare for the future (Ibid.)

62 3.4.1 Foresight methodological process

Foresight process requires a combination of creative thinking about the future, eliciting expert views on the future and constructing alternative futures to inform policy making (Andriopoulos and Gotsi 2006; Fuller and Warren 2006). Horton (1999) describes Foresight as a process in which multiple visions regarding the future are developed and actions are taken to achieve the best one possible. Specific procedure used in the process depends mainly on its purpose, aim and subject. Taking into consideration various types of Foresight such as national, regional or corporate (see Appendix 4 for types of Foresight), one should understand that it is impossible to distinguish a single universal process which could be used in all types of projects. Here, the main ones are being discussed. Researchers like Martin and Irvine (1989) distinguished three phases of the process Pre-Foresight; Foresight; Post-Foresight. Each of these phases consists of a number of steps. The Pre-Foresight phase includes search for partners, funding, project managers and participants. Foresight phase, which lies in the centre of the process, involves contacting and consultations with experts and stakeholders, gathering and verifying the information. Post-Foresight phase is focused on communicating the results to all parties concerned with the specific topic.

Horton (1999) also divides the process into three phases (see Figure 3.1 Foresight Process):

1. Phase One: Inputs - collection, analysis and summarisation of data and knowledge regarding trends, ideas, issues, warning signs and wild cards from various sources such as experts groups, academia, business networks, share- and stakeholders.

2. Phase Two: Foresight - conversion and interpretation of gathered data and knowledge into future visions and implications of specific future for a particular

63

organisation. In other words it is a ‘translation’ of the knowledge gathered in the first phase into terminology and procedures used in the organisation conducting the process. According to Horton (1999) the gathered material should be interpreted in the context of the specific organisation and it could be useful to ask the following questions:

• What does it all mean for the organisation?

• What are the implications for the organisation?

• What can be done today?

3. Phase Three: Output and Action - assimilation and evaluation of future visions to create understanding and commitment to action plans based on the possible futures.

Results of Foresight are communicated openly to all stakeholders and preferably used in planning processes by decision-makers.

Figure 3.1 Foresight process Source: Horton (1999:6)

Foresight processes can vary depending on the subject, investigated area, approach, budget or techniques applied in the specific project. For business entities, which are a

64

subject of this study, Erdmann and Behrendt (2006) propose the following four-step approach:

1. Conduct a scoping study to determine goal and system boundaries, such as time, and scale.

2. Gather and systematise information regarding organisation’s environment- internal strengths and weaknesses, external threats and opportunities.

3. Develop alternative visions - scenarios to present possibilities and enable understanding of factors that influence organisation and its operations.

4. Communicate visions concerning the long-term perspectives to staff and transfer them into business tactics.

Specific Foresight projects and their results may differ significantly but the majority of them are based on the structured anticipation and projections of long-term trends.

Another feature of many Foresight initiatives is interactive and participative character of the process, which is often perceived as important as the more formal products such as reports and lists of action points. To sum up, crucial aspects and characteristics of the Foresight process can be described as (Martin and Irvine 1989; FOREN 2001):

! concentration on the medium- and long-term view;

! anticipation and examination of long-term trends;

! use of interactive and participative methods, involving a wide variety of stakeholders;

! stakeholders networking, which is often equally important as the final product, such as reports; and,

! development of strategic vision based on scenarios, trends and issues identified in the process.

65 3.4.2 Prospective methodological process

Similarly to Foresight, there are numerous types of Prospective methodological processes. This section is focused on the methodology applied in the BEF 2030 case study investigated in this thesis as a main source of primary data. Inspired by the work of futurists like Berger (1957), de Jouvenal (1967) and Godet (2001) ‘Prospective through Scenarios’ methodology was developed by The Futures Academy almost a decade ago. Since then, it was applied by the Academy in numerous projects examining the future of cities and spatial planning, for example, “Twice the Size? Imagineering the Future of Irish Gateways” (2008), “Global Real Estate Scenarios” (2001), also

“European Real Estate Scenarios: Nirvana or Nemesis” (2005). The first one was undertaken to investigate and promote public discussion about the long-term future of eight Irish gateways designated in the National Spatial Strategy. Two others were undertaken in collaboration with King Sturge. They were focused on driving forces of change and produced scenarios for global and European property industry. Their results became the basis for the BEF 2030 project examined as a case study in this thesis.

‘Prospective through Scenarios’ is:

“(…) the capability of organisations to perceive creatively what is going on in their environments, to think imaginatively through what this means for them, and then demonstrate the readiness to act decisively upon this new knowledge.” The Futures Academy (2004:11)

This methodology consists of ten consecutive steps and employees numerous futures methods. Each step with adequate methods assigned to it is discussed below and presented in graphic form in Figure 3.5:

66 1. Set the Strategic Question

At first the research question is defined. Depending on the individual area and setting it can concern a specific organisation, group, policy, nation or country or even a global problem. Critical to this stage is the correct identification and definition of the issue under investigation, for which a future perspective will be explored in the study.

2. Identify Driving Forces of Change

Driving forces of change can be identified on the basis of monitoring developments and trends in sectors like demography, economy, government, environment, society and technology (DEGEST) (David 2001):

1. Demography - migration, births to deaths ratio, average age of population.

2. Economy - trade volumes, currency exchange rates, return on investment, production and consumption of goods and services, infrastructure and transportation.

3. Government - law regulations, taxes, political stability, political conflicts, elections.

4. Environment - climate change, natural disasters, pollution, renewable energy sources.

5. Society - cultural clashes, crime, gender discrimination, education, homelessness and poverty.

6. Technology - information technology, communication and mobility, physical and virtual security.

Other sector approaches (Henry 2009) used to identify the driving forces of change are PEST (Policy, Economy, Society, and Technology) and PESTEL (political, economic, social, technological, environmental and legal issues). Common methods used in this part of the Prospective process) are also interviews with experts, workshops and targeted questionnaire surveys.

67 3. Determine the Main Issues and Trends

Issues and trends are factors which can have a significant influence on the future. Wack (1985) distinguishes two major types of events shaping the ‘future world’. First, predetermined events including issues and trends already evident and influencing all possible futures. Second, critical events concerning issues and trends likely to define or alter the possible futures/scenarios.

As in the case of the driving forces of change, main issues and trends can be identified using environmental scanning, futures workshops, strategic interviews and survey questionnaires. Crucial at this stage of the process is the focus on the most significant critical uncertainties, to avoid information overload hindering the process of data clustering into themes and groups.

4. Clarify the Level of Impact and Degree of Uncertainty

At this stage issues and trends are evaluated through the prism of the degree of uncertainty and their possible impact on the strategic question. Figure 3.2 presents a quadrant matrix often used to clarify and simplify this part of the process. Two areas, uncertainty and impact are used as axes creating dimensions for building scenarios.

Methods used to clarify the level of impact and degree of uncertainty, are research tools like futures workshops, strategic conversations and survey questionnaires.

68

Higher Uncertainty

Lower Uncertainty

Figure 3.2 Positioning issues and trends

Source: The Futures Academy Compendium (2004)

Four areas within the matrix created by impact and uncertainty axes define the following factors (The Futures Academy 2004):

• Potential jokers – issues and trends uncertain to occur and with low impact on the investigated issue, but important to monitor in case of gaining importance and transforming into pivotal uncertainties. In the scenario building process they can be used as factors bringing unexpected elements, which will distinguish a scenario from other stories.

• Pivotal uncertainties – factors likely to have a strong direct impact on the researched area but with an uncertain outcome, which could be positive as well as negative.

They are classified as key issues and trends constructing and determining the plots of alternative scenarios.

• Context shapers – relatively certain to occur with a comparatively low impact on the future developments in the investigated area, usually included in the storylines of all alternative scenarios in the same context.