Introduction and Agenda

Understanding the future requires more than intuition, extrapolation or optimistic assumptions. This session provides an introductory overview of Future Sensemaking and Strategic Foresight, with a focus on practical approaches that help organisations examine possible developments in a structured way.

The aim is not to provide comprehensive training in every method. Instead, the session introduces ten approaches that can be used individually or in combination. Some methods overlap, but each offers a valuable perspective for analysing future developments.

The objective is to create a structured inventory of available approaches. Over time, organisations can select the methods that best fit their strategic context and build their own portfolio of foresight-related practices.

The session covers the foundations of Future Sensemaking, ten methods for understanding the future, resources for further exploration and a concluding discussion.

Why Future Sensemaking Matters

There are several popular but unsuitable approaches to predicting the future. One is the image of looking into a crystal ball. Another is relying on guru-like certainty and extrapolating the past without questioning whether existing structures and dynamics will remain unchanged. A third fictional option would be to use a time machine, travel to the future and return with certainty.

In practice, none of these options is available or reliable. No one can define the one future that will occur. However, organisations can move beyond guesswork, wishful thinking and groupthink.

Corporate teams can easily agree on a preferred future simply because they want it to happen. Such agreement may reflect cognitive biases rather than sound analysis. Future Sensemaking provides more systematic ways to examine potential developments, uncertainties and strategic implications.

The purpose is not to identify one supposedly certain future. It is to develop a better understanding of what could happen, to consider several possible outcomes and to prepare for the consequences.

Scenario Example: Online Retail

An example from 1982 illustrates the value of Scenario Techniques. A study on the future of retail from 1980 to 2000 anticipated a form of shopping that is now known as Internet shopping.

At that time, there was no widespread internet infrastructure, few households had personal computers, and the technological environment differed fundamentally from today. Nevertheless, the scenario combined several developments: central computing, distribution systems, telephone-based customer interaction and the possibility of people ordering from home through an available device, such as a television.

The forecast did not reproduce today's exact model of online retail. Instead, it brought together plausible technology and market developments to describe a possible future outcome. This illustrates how scenarios can create credible future images even when the final outcome cannot be predicted precisely.

Scenario Techniques may be quantitative and mathematically supported, or they may be more narrative and creative. In both cases, they combine relevant trends and develop plausible future developments from them.

The purpose is not to identify one certain future. Organisations should work with several competing future outcomes and assess whether their strategies, technologies and capabilities are sufficiently robust across them. The relevant question is what needs to be done today to leverage opportunities, compensate for risks or avoid undesirable developments.

The retail example shows that useful foresight does not depend on knowing the exact outcome. It depends on identifying trends, projecting their possible development and combining them into plausible future scenarios.

A Portfolio of Approaches

Many methodologies are available for Future Sensemaking. Some share common elements or use different names for similar processes. What matters is not the label, but whether an organisation develops a useful portfolio of approaches.

The methods introduced here can be used at different stages of foresight work. Some help identify early indications of change. Others analyse relationships among drivers, formulate alternative futures or translate insights into action.

The methods are not intended to replace one another. In many cases, they work best in combination. Weak signals can inform Environmental Scanning; Environmental Scanning can support Trend Analysis; Cross-Impact Analysis can identify important drivers; and these findings can become inputs for Scenario Planning and Backcasting.

The purpose of this overview is to make the available approaches visible. Each organisation can then select methods that are practical, relevant and appropriate for its own situation.

Weak Signals and Wild Cards

Weak signals are early, ambiguous and often noisy indications that something may be changing. They are not established trends. Their relevance may be uncertain, but they can indicate developments that deserve attention.

Weak signals are often found outside an organisation's immediate industry. Relevant sources may include adjacent industries, the customers of customers, suppliers of suppliers or other peripheral sectors. Changes in these areas may eventually affect the organisation's own environment.

The purpose of weak-signal monitoring is to establish a group that collects signals from relevant external sources. The group evaluates what individual signals may mean, combines related signals and discusses whether they justify greater attention or an early warning.

The goal is not to know everything. It is to know where to look and how to recognise potential change before it becomes obvious in industry news or conventional reporting. Signals may also become valuable input for scenario work, helping to identify developments emerging in the broader environment.

Wild cards complement this perspective. They represent unexpected, high-impact developments that may disrupt assumptions, industries or strategic plans. They cannot be predicted with certainty, but they should be considered when assessing the resilience of strategies.

Horizon and Environmental Scanning

Horizon Scanning, also referred to as Environmental Scanning, provides a systematic view of the organisation's environment. While weak-signal monitoring may identify emerging developments opportunistically, Environmental Scanning ensures that important areas are observed continuously.

The approach examines the main factors that can influence an organisation, including regulation, legislation, market access, taxation, competitor activities, technological developments and potential disruptions.

Environmental Scanning requires dedicated attention. It is not enough to wait for relevant information to emerge. Organisations need people who actively observe their environment, seek new developments and identify issues that may affect markets or strategies.

The findings can provide a basis for Trend Analysis. Organisations can identify opportunities and risks, consider how to leverage or mitigate them and create practical action lists.

A systematic scan helps ensure that relevant developments are not overlooked simply because they are not yet prominent or immediately visible within the organisation's established field of view.

Time-Series Analysis

Another approach for understanding change is statistical forecasting through Time-Series Analysis. Mathematical models use historical data to project possible future developments.

Organisations may include additional events, impacts or regression-based analysis to improve forecasts. This creates a broad range of forecasting approaches based on existing data points.

Forecasting can also reveal deviations from expected patterns. If increasing outliers appear in revenues, market shares, orders, competitor numbers or other relevant indicators, this may indicate that an underlying dynamic has changed.

Such deviations should trigger further investigation. They may point to new trends, changing conditions or altered future outcomes that require explanation.

Time-Series Analysis is particularly useful when historical data remains relevant. Its limits become apparent when changes are discontinuous, when new drivers emerge or when past patterns no longer provide a reliable basis for the future.

Cross-Impact Analysis

Cross-Impact Analysis examines how drivers, factors or events influence one another over time. It is useful because business environments operate as interconnected systems rather than as isolated variables.

The method commonly uses a matrix. Teams assess the extent to which one driver affects another. For example, they may consider how a change in one industry factor affects a second factor, whether the effect is strong or weak, and whether it is positive or negative.

The results help distinguish among driving factors, dependent factors and buffering factors. Some variables shape the system strongly, while others are primarily influenced by other variables. Some factors absorb changes without changing substantially themselves.

Cross-Impact Analysis can be supported by specialised software. Teams provide their assessments, and the tools help identify priorities among trends and factors. The results can then be used in Scenario Planning and other foresight activities.

The approach also supports what-if analysis. By changing assumptions about the impact of individual factors, teams can examine possible effects on system dynamics and industry outcomes.

Futures Wheel

The Futures Wheel is a visual method for exploring the direct and indirect consequences of a change or event. It can be compared to throwing a stone into a lake: the initial impact creates ripples that spread outward.

Teams begin with an event, trend or important driver at the centre. They then identify first-order consequences, followed by second-order and third-order consequences. This creates a layered view of potential effects.

A driver identified as particularly important through Cross-Impact Analysis can serve as the starting point. Teams then explore how it may affect customers, competitors, technologies, markets, regulations or other parts of the system.

The Futures Wheel is especially suitable for collaborative and creative work. Participants can contribute their knowledge, challenge assumptions and identify additional consequences that may not be obvious at first.

The method can also help identify which developments need to be monitored. By understanding how one change may create several further effects, organisations can improve the quality and breadth of their foresight work.

Delphi Methodology

The Delphi Methodology addresses some limitations of direct group work. In conventional workshops, participants may be influenced by dominant voices, personal relationships, immediate reactions or the desire to avoid disagreement.

The Delphi Methodology gathers expert assessments individually rather than in a shared discussion room. Experts receive the same questions, for example about the possible effects of a development on key drivers or trends. They provide their judgments along with reasoning, assumptions or explanations of constraints.

The inputs are collected and anonymised. The consolidated results are then shared with the expert group. Participants can see the range of views without knowing who made a specific contribution.

This process allows participants to revise their assessments without losing face or becoming attached to a publicly stated position. The process can be repeated across several rounds. Each round consolidates the results, invites further reflection and refines the collective understanding.

The objective is not necessarily consensus. The value lies in obtaining well-reasoned expert perspectives while reducing undesirable social influences on the assessment process. The results can serve as input for scenarios and other future-oriented analyses.

Three Horizons Framework

The Three Horizons Framework structures thinking about future development across three time-related horizons.

The first horizon represents the continuation of current conditions. It reflects the established business model, familiar assumptions and a comparatively conservative view of development.

The second horizon represents transition. It includes emerging changes, new causal relationships, changing rules of competition, new technologies and potential new market entrants. It begins from a commonly understood present but creates space for more diverse and challenging discussion.

The third horizon represents more far-reaching alternatives. It allows participants to explore more creative, transformative or discontinuous futures.

Using three horizons helps teams overcome cognitive biases and linear extrapolation. If an organisation considers only one future horizon, it may remain too close to existing assumptions and avoid recognising significant change. The framework creates intermediate steps while also enabling more ambitious thinking about alternative futures.

Causal Layered Analysis

Causal Layered Analysis examines future issues at different levels of depth. The approach can be illustrated through the image of an iceberg.

The visible layer represents observable issues: market dynamics, competitors, developments in the business environment and other tangible phenomena. This is often where organisational discussions begin.

A second layer examines structures and systems. It asks which forces, relationships, historical conditions or interacting trends create the visible developments. This level explores root causes, mechanisms and system dynamics. Cross-Impact Analysis can support the examination of these structures.

A third layer examines mental models and worldviews. This is particularly important because future-oriented discussions are often shaped by personal experiences, values, assumptions and cognitive biases. People may defend expected outcomes because those outcomes fit their established perspective, not because they are necessarily the most plausible.

Combining the three layers creates a more thorough and usable model. It helps organisations consider visible developments, underlying systems and the assumptions that influence how change is interpreted. Like an iceberg that can shift or turn, the method challenges existing beliefs and encourages teams to reassess their understanding.

Scenario Planning

Scenario Planning develops alternative, plausible and internally consistent images of the future. It does not aim to predict a single outcome. Instead, it explores several possible future end states based on relevant trends, uncertainties and driving forces.

Scenarios bring together relevant developments and consider how they could combine over time. They may be quantitative and data-driven, or they may use qualitative and narrative techniques. In either case, they create a structured basis for considering uncertainty.

Scenario Planning helps organisations test the robustness of strategies, capabilities and decisions across different future conditions. It encourages teams to prepare for uncertainty rather than commit to one preferred expectation.

The process begins by identifying the decisions that need to be made and the factors that may influence them. These factors can be examined through Trend Analysis, Causal Layered Analysis or Cross-Impact Analysis. Key factors are selected, projected and combined into plausible scenarios.

The resulting scenarios can then be used to explore implications for decisions, strategic options, risks and opportunities.

Backcasting

Backcasting translates future-oriented analysis into strategic action.

After developing one or more future outcomes, teams temporarily accept those outcomes as if they were real. Instead of continuing to debate whether they will happen, they work backwards from the future endpoint to the present.

The central question is: if this future exists ten years from now, what must have happened in the period between then and now?

Teams use insights from Environmental Scanning, Cross-Impact Analysis and other methods to create a credible pathway from the future back to the present. There may be several possible paths, but the process identifies the developments, decisions and actions required to make the future outcome plausible.

Backcasting also supports strategic prioritisation. Organisations can distinguish between factors they can influence and factors they can only monitor. They can identify the actions needed to shape developments, prepare for them or reduce their risks.

Different methods may be more suitable for different professional backgrounds and organisational contexts. Some approaches may appeal particularly to experts and scientists, while others may be more accessible for engineers, market researchers or business professionals. The important task is to select methods that enable meaningful participation and useful results.

Further Resources and Conclusion

A useful starting point for deeper exploration is the toolkit published by the Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies. It provides an overview of foresight approaches, examples and literature references for further study.

The methods presented in this webcast form a starting point for building a Future Sensemaking portfolio. The appropriate combination depends on the organisation, its industry, its strategic challenges and the people involved in the process.

The best way to predict the future is to invent it. Organisations that understand how to influence relevant actors and conditions in their environment can reduce uncertainty and improve their ability to shape future developments.