6/25/2023 0 Comments Strategic foresight![]() I asked what would happen as mobile device components dropped in price - wouldn’t there be an explosion in mobile content, digital advertising, and revenue-sharing business models? Anyone would soon be able to post photos and videos to the web, and there was an entire mobile gaming ecosystem on the verge of being born. The proto-smartphone was connected to the internet, allowed me to make purchases, and, importantly, had a camera. To illustrate this, I pointed the executives to a new Japanese i-Mode phone I’d been using while living in Tokyo. Tactical actions without a vision of the longer-term future would result in less control over how the whole media ecosystem evolved. I was concerned that any strategies we developed to confront future risk and find new opportunities would be only tactical in nature. ![]() But I didn’t anticipate the reluctance to plan beyond four years, which to the executives felt like the far future. I already knew the cognitive bias in play (their desired year ended in a five). This was an industry with visible disruption looming from the tech sector, where the pace of change was staggeringly fast. They, too, had already settled on a target year: 2005. newspaper executives to forecast the future of the news business. Over time, those tactical responses - which take significant internal alignment and effort - drain the organization’s resources and make them vulnerable to disruption.įor example, in 2001 I led a meeting with some U.S. ![]() Teams that rely on traditional linear timelines get caught in a cycle of tactical responses to what feels like constant change being foisted upon them from outside forces. My observation is that leadership teams get caught in a cycle of addressing long-term risk with rigid, short-term solutions, and in the process they invite entropy. Why We Avoid Long-Term TimelinesĪs a quantitative futurist, my job is to investigate the future using data-driven models. Where do you want to have impact? What it will take to achieve success? How will the organization evolve to meet challenges on the horizon? These are the kinds of deep, foundational questions that are best addressed with long-term planning. Deep uncertainty merits deep questions, and the answers aren’t necessarily tied to a fixed date in the future. Neither are the one-, three-, or five-year strategic plans that have become a staple within most organizations, though they are useful for addressing short-term operational goals. This helps teams brainstorm ideas, but it isn’t a substitute for critical thinking about the future. As all those variables collide, they shape the horizon.Ĭhief strategy officers and those responsible for choosing the direction of their organizations are often asked to facilitate “visioning” meetings. Regulatory actions or natural disasters are wholly outside of your control, while other factors - workforce development, operations, new product ideas - are subject to layers of decisions made throughout your organization. Of course, the real world we all inhabit is a lot messier. Nice, linear timelines offer a certain amount of assurance: that events can be preordained, chaos can be contained, and success can be plotted and guaranteed. Your brain can easily count in fives, while it takes a little extra work to count in 4s or 6s. Plus, when companies go through their longer-term planning processes, they often create linear timelines marked by years ending in either 0s or 5s. “Strategy 2030” could be easily understood by employees, customers, and competitors, and it would align with the company’s messaging about their hopes for the future. They’d arbitrarily picked the year 2030, a nice round number, because it gave them a sense of control over an uncertain future. Had the executives chosen the year 2030 because of something unique to the company happening 11 years from today? After all, the forces affecting the company were all on different timelines: Changes in global trade were immediate concerns, while the field of robotics will have incremental advancements, disappointments, and huge breakthroughs - sometimes years apart. I was curious to know why they chose that specific year - 2030 - to benchmark the work. Before our work began in earnest, executives had already decided on a title for the initiative: Strategy 2030. With so much uncertainty surrounding autonomous vehicles, 5G, robotics, global trade, and the oil markets, the company’s senior leaders needed a set of guiding objectives and strategies linking the company’s future to the present day. I recently helped a large industrial manufacturing company with its strategic planning process.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |