Seminar on Futures Techniques
-- a university of arizona course on methods and approaches for studying the future

You can select each entry individually for a particular technique, or you can scroll down the full listing. You can also print this page and get all 15 techniques on a single printing.

  Backcasting
  Looking from the Bottom up
  Delphi Analysis or Questionnaire
  Focus Groups
  Technological Forecasting
  Personal Interviews
  Models or Simulations
  Scenarios
  Search Conference
  Science Fiction
  Surveys
  Modified Trend Analysis
  Concept Mapping
  Cross Impact Analysis
  Futuring Wheel
  Separating Foresight from Data Collection

Backcasting

It is important to "ask the right question" when dealing with any futures analysis. We are often comfortable in current ways, or unable to ask relevant questions in a comfortable setting. Backcasting allows this to be done by "leaping" to the future through a vision or scenario, without regard to the method of getting there. This way, preferred futures can be identified and evaluated independently of the constraints of how to achieve the future situation. Then, after sufficient discussion to determine where we would like to be, we can look at where we are and determine the various methods/means of getting to the preferred future.
Top


Looking from the Bottom up

There are methods to just look around and see what people are doing, as an indicator of change. The most visible product is John Naisbitt and his book titled "Megatrends".

He looks at trends starting at the "grassroots" level by following newspaper stories in a variety of papers. He then compares the number of column inches on various topics in multiple locations, and spots trends early.

Similar studies have been done by looking at the frequency of appearance in the literature of certain events, in combination with qualifying words. With rapid and inexpensive searching on CD-ROM units, this is practical for anyone.

Other examples are books or journals that publish "current issues in management or environment", to see what leaders in the field are saying. One example from business might be "what management styles will be necessary for the 1990's? (where the underlying causes of their recommended management style suggest future trends - less administrative overhead, more baby boomers).

One caution on all these relates to the possibly temporal nature of the data.
Top


Delphi Analysis or Questionnaire

You normally use this for "experts" rather than for the general population. If you don't know something about the subject, the results are not worth much. You can make these very quantitative, so you get ranges and averages. You can also use a special technique, where you assign more "value" to someone else on a particular question IF you know they are more expert than you are on that question. The Delphi is useful to get things focused and on the table for discussion; it may also dilute all views to the lowest common denominator - so the blind will follow the blind, rather than develop new insights. It is good in its place, probably overrated, more historic than current.
Top


Focus Groups

This is frequently used technique, and can be used in many situations. You get a small group of people together (7-9) and FOCUS on one general question for about 1.5 or so hours. There is no structured agenda or set of specific questions. The facilitator presents the topic (normally the group has been told of the topic in advance). The group is normally diverse: selected from a variety of experiences and expertise or training. Then the group discusses this general subject, with each person learning a little from what the others say, and maybe making new comments they have not previously thought of.

The advantage of this technique is that you keep digging at the issue until the group is satisfied you have really addressed it. Normally the 1.5 or so hours is sufficient, and if you use more than about 9 not everyone can talk (and if less than about 5 you get too little diverse opinion). These are used often by prime time television news - for example: How should we reduce services if we don't have enough revenue.

If you do 2-3 focus groups, with different groups of people on the same general topic, you will cover many views, gain from the "knowledgeable" people in different disciplines, and find a much improved understanding of the subject. It is a good technique. It was used in older days without a formal name - could be a group of folks going out for a beer one evening.
Top


Technological Forecasting

This technique is more focused, and is generally done only by a narrow group of experts. Examples would be to identify ranges of operational speed for commercial aircrafts in the next 20 years. In this example, it might involve looking at new engines, new metals (or non-metallic composite materials because of strength and light weight), or relatively minor changes to existing aircraft (e.g., more powerful engine of same type).

In general, a new technology replaces an old one about the time the old one runs out of steam. Again the aircraft example, jet aircraft replaced the piston engine at the beginning of WWII. Supersonic aircraft replace some jets for long distance travel. This is an area where science fiction discussions can really help identify options for consideration. It is also a place where big errors can be made (because a narrow group - like social, political, economic). The SST (supersonic transport) in this country is a casualty of this lack of understanding. So, the technique is good for the area it is intended, but needs to have "additional" considerations to be a valid forecasting tool. The more broadly applied analysis is "technology assessment", which takes into consideration other factors).
Top


Personal Interviews

This is where one person interviews one person. It might last an hour or two, and requires GREAT skill. The interviewer should be able to gain insights from a "casual" conversation so the person being interviewed does not get too narrow in addressing a single point (unless you want a lot of info about a specific thing). This is a bit like the focus group, because you can keep asking questions until you get a satisfactory response. These are expensive and hard to do well, so there are not a lot of them. But, they are very good sources of information. and are especially useful when certain you must understand the views of certain people (because of their position or their expertise).
Top


Models or Simulations

This method uses mathematical relationships to explain a system, and then when it is understood, extrapolations into the future can be made. The overriding consideration is that you "know and understand" the system you are trying to model. In relatively simple systems, or those that have been used a long time and have many revisions from experience (like current economic forecasting), the relationships can be modeled fairly accurately.

Two major components are 1) knowing the relationships relative to what event is connected to what other event(s); and 2) the relative magnitude of that relationship. In anything but a very simple model, the interactions and feedback loops (results of one step affect an earlier step) are VERY difficult to determine. This is especially true for models that predict more than a few years. For complex situations, it is nearly impossible to model accurately both the relationships and their magnitude when appropriate feedback loops are considered.

Models are useful for two reasons: 1) when you cannot make simple extrapolations or modify trends, you get better results with models even with their limitations; and 2) you can change the conditions and see what would happen under a variety of assumptions. The latter are "what if" options, and you learn a great deal about the subject and its future possibilities by determining which changes cause what type (and how big) of an effect. However, the model results are only as good as the model. Those that are used a lot on actual conditions so they can be tested with real data, and used for short term (few years) extrapolation are the best.
Top


Scenarios

Scenario building is a relatively recent technique, but widely used. A common technique is to 1) identify general, broad, driving forces, which are applicable to essentially all scenarios, 2) identify a variety of PLAUSIBLE trends within each driving force topic (trends that vary depending on your assumptions so you get positive and negative perspectives), and 3) combine the trends so you get a series of scenarios (for example, mostly positive trends from all driving force topics would give a positive scenario). The number of scenarios should be around 3-5, too fewer and you don't have a range, and too many more and there are too many to understand. Generally, you would find a positive (or optimistic), negative (or pessimistic), and neutral (or middle of the road). Additional choices might be something involving an unlikely event but one that would have a large impact.

Scenarios are good because you don't have to model complex situations, you can alter the combinations, and play "what if" games (e.g., change the assumption and see what happens). The major use is UNDERSTANDING the situation rather than trying to predict the future. As you work through various scenarios, you get an understanding of events and possible combinations. The disadvantage of scenarios is that it is hard to get agreement (if the questions are controversial) on what is the "right" scenario to include, and the problems of making it clear the scenarios are not firm predictions.
Top


Search Conference

There are many ways to have group involvement in making change or developing goals or other targeted activities. The search conference approach began in the 1960s and improves on these techniques but many of the features are found in other approaches. Two primary ways this process differs from other group efforts is 1) rationalization and understanding of conflicts, and 2) democratic process where the group is self directing. The basic goal of a search conference is for a "community" of people to plan their own future AND to generate a strategy and take the responsibility for achieving it. The basic elements include 1) asking the right questions, 2) having the right mix of participants in the room at the same time, 3) building implementation plans with consideration for barriers and driving forces of change. Generally involves 20-35 people over a 2-3 day process. More details are available.
Top


Science Fiction

This is not really a standard futures technique. It is used more for "mind expanding" and allowing you to get out of rigid patterns of thought, so you can look at the situation from a fresh angle. Obviously it is mostly directed at "science" but other behavioral patterns and non-science issues can be found in most science fiction. By using imagination cleverly, through new terms to describe familiar events or old terms to discuss new events (or new terms for new events), you change you perspective. That is very valuable in looking at futures issues. The single largest problem in futures understanding (my bias here) is to get out of your old mindset and go "meta" to the issue (going meta allows you to go beyond your normal self and take a look from entirely new perspectives). Thus, this technique is good for developing ideas for some of the other more specific techniques (especially something like scenario building).
Top


Surveys

This is good for "snapshots" of what people's "perceptions" are at a given time. They are very useful to get a feeling of what people think about issues. This indicates to you if you should use an educational program of a certain type to change attitudes, market your services to how people are already ready to receive them, or if you should give up on what you were planning to do because the group you surveyed is not ready for that.

If you want responses of this type, it is a very good technique. It is highly refined and can be done a number of ways. We have a group at the university that does telephone surveys, upon hearing the response immediately types the key answer into the computer, and the results are easily and rapidly summarized or cross tabulated with other answers to give more information. But, for serious ideas about future trends, new techniques, or other more detailed understandings of a subject, this is not the appropriate technique.
Top


Modified Trend Analysis

Trends can be easily extrapolated into the future, or the basic trend modified (slightly) to reflect current and anticipated changes. Any large system generally changes slowly due to simple inertia, and thus on a short term basis this is a relatively non-risky procedure. Where changes are relatively small, the variables known and generally unchanging, and there is a long history, this is not a bad method.

It is especially weak when unanticipated events occur. The best recent example the energy industry and the initial oil embargo of 1973-74; this caused a perturbation in the forecasting (from straight line extrapolations) to something that is still hard to forecast today.
Top


Concept Mapping

This is good for brainstorming as a group or individually. A concept or word is put on a large paper (or via several types of software - search Internet for "concept mapping" for software sources). Then you think of related words or concepts and link them to the initial word. Then you repeat this for each of the new words or concepts, until you have a large listing of ideas/concepts that all grew from asking questions about the central word (e.g., what does it mean, what does it impact, what impacts it, and so on). You will likely find a lot of duplication of ideas as this "interlinked web of words" gets large. You can then make a more concise map or summary of the key elements and how they are related. If you do this by software, the summarizing and especially the different ways to format output adds a new dimension to your understanding of the original concept.

Further information is available from the Mind Mapping FAQ and the Concept Mapping home page.
Top


Cross Impact Analysis

This is a technique that summarizes the effects across several activities. Its primary value is that it allows for interaction across trends/events rather than treating them individually. Lets use 3 trends: 1) cost of electricity will increase substantially in next 10 years, 2) family income will remain constant in real dollars, and 3) nuclear waste from power plants will accumulate to a level where we need to dispose of it in new ways. The cross impact might look like:

Temporarily Wrong

-----  Effect on These Trends  --------

Effect of     Trend 1     Trend 2      Trend 3

Trend 1       x                 --                 +                (x indicates no match

Trend 2       -                  x                  -                 (effect as matches)

Trend 3       +                 --                  x                (self trend)
---------------------------------------------------------

+ is slightly big effect, ++ is really big effect, - and -- are similar.



This is frequently qualitative but can be made quantitative and becomes complex. It is good for early analysis when you are better understanding the impacts of assumptions and interactions. It would then likely cause further analysis and study to better understand the implications. So, it is more of an internal technique to make a better product for presentation to others.
Top


Futuring Wheel

This technique is not well known or widely used. It is mostly incorporated into brainstorming techniques. However, it has been used in the educational area and was developed at the University of Massachusetts. Basically, a small group of people produce an imaginative list of future possibilities, then the group eliminates those that are highly unlikely or too much like the present. Each remaining issue is developed in detail (by other techniques) or group discussion). The initial item is then developed into 3-6 subtopics, and then each subtopic is further divided into 3-6 more topics, until you are to a third of forth level. This technique is finding use in the continuous improvement literature (i.e., Total Quality Management) relating to methods of identifying problems and related events.
Top


Separating Foresight from Data Collection

It is important to understand the purpose for your evaluation of future conditions. Developing foresight capability is not intended to create large employment opportunities for database developers. To know what approach you want, answer the following questions: What will the information be used for? Who will use the information and in what form? What type of data will be collected and how will it be converted to useful information. What alternatives exist to getting the same information (as opposed to specific collection of data)?

Some examples of use for foresight studies: As input to developing alternative scenarios As background position papers or introductory sections in a variety of reports. As radar to indicate where the future might be heading. As a database to determine rapid "semi answers" to currently unknown questions (where data do not exist).
Top


Return to "Anticipating the Future" course home page
Prepared by Roger L. Caldwell