Future Thinking

The scarce management skill

Anthon P Botha1,2 and Marthinus W Pretorius1

1
Graduate School of Technology Management, Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and IT, University of Pretoria,
Pretoria, South Africa
2
TechnoScene (Pty) Ltd, Pretoria, South Africa

Abstract - We are all expert strategists for the now. But what
about the future? Seeing that the future lies beyond strategy, it is B.   Foresight is not trusted
of great concern that so few leaders have the ability to do future A variety of foresight techniques have been used to demystify
thinking. Future thinking is the ability to mind-time travel into these longer range futures [2]. Although strategic foresight is
the future, experience that imagined future and back-cast to required by business practices, they are often considered with
develop strategies in the present to realise the preferred future. suspicion or avoided because they “naturally introduce
Several futurists have expressed concern about the lack of future
fuzziness and expose uncertainty” [1]. More than 40 years of
thinking skills and an interest in the future among business
leaders on a global scale. This applies to corporate boards, futures studies have brought the world a wide range of
executive management, policy makers and academics alike. This foresight specialties and a variety of academic activities in
research is based on interviews, supported by learnings from many different fields.
executive training and consulting in future thinking. We look at
future thinking in terms of recognising emerging and disruptive
technology in time, the ability to integrate the understanding of C.   Educating for future thinking
human behaviour inside the workspace and in the marketplace A universal failure [2] of future thinking is that future
and the ability to make sense of the impact of major events. This concepts, tools, appropriate models and methods have not
paper presents a thought model outlining critical reasons for lack been incorporated in educational systems, with the result that
of interest in the future and recommendations to instate future it is not a natural skill resident in professionals and executive
thinking among leadership.
management. This has led to a lack of ability to respond to or
I.   BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE pre-empt global problems or opportunities, and reduced
capacity for forward-looking leadership.
We are all expert strategists for the now. But what about the
future? Seeing that the future lies beyond strategy, it is of
great concern that so few leaders have the ability to do future D.   Tools to look at the future
thinking. Future thinking is the ability to mind-time travel into The extended spectrum of foresight tools has evolved into
the future, experience that imagined future and back-cast to very practical approaches where these tools are customized,
develop strategies in the present to realize the preferred future. integrated and modified to address specific future views.
Several tools are available to assist with future thinking. Yet, These tools have different horizons and assist in mind-time
the future remains a difficult subject - it is not predictable, travel [3], [4] where thinking takes place in a continuum from
neither is it predetermined. It can thus be shaped from the the past, through the present into the future. Six foundational
present. This shaping can take place through applying the right concepts proposed by Inayatullah, “The Six Pillars of Futures
way of thinking, amidst the political, environmental, social, Thinking” [5] provide an approach incorporating, integrating
technological and economic influences. and optimizing several foresight methods. Mapping the future;
anticipating emergent issues; considering the timing of the
A.   The future and change future; deepening the future through metaphorical
understanding; creating alternative futures; and transforming
When we talk about the future, we mean an era in time yet to through visioning and back-casting, provide a landscape on
come that lies outside of the everyday planning, strategic which to navigate towards the future.
management and intervention scope. It normally refers to
over-the-horizon landscapes that may be anticipated with
future thinking and long-range planning, but cannot be "seen" E.   Corporate foresight
directly in the present. The future approaches at different Corporate foresight is defined as the ability to enable an
speeds for different business environments. In the information organization to lay the foundation for future competitive
technology sphere change may be faster (years) than in the advantage [6]. It involves identifying, observing and
mining sphere (decades). Different changes occur at different interpreting factors that induce change leading to possible
rates and will have different impacts at different times [1]. organization-specific implications, and triggering appropriate
organizational responses. It should lead to critical resources or
actions ahead of the competition, and prepare the organization see the whole situation and its consequences; taking initiative;
for change. It further positions the organization towards a integrative thinking abilities, including thinking outside of
desired future. Rohrbeck et al. [6] suggest four development functional areas and visionary skills. All of these relate to
phases of corporate foresight: early phase initiation of strategic thinking and the ability to do future thinking.
concepts in the 1950s; the age of scenarios in the 1960s and
1970s; methods and processes in the 1980s and 1990s and
H.   Youth, culture and future thinking
organizational integration from 2000 until present. This has
led to the belief by many corporates that a foresight unit must It is not only at executive level and leadership level that future
be established [7]. This presupposes deep integration of thinking skills have become crucial. Psychological studies
foresight in the strategy, applying “method sophistication”, show that human beings have the ability to do mind-time
diversity and flexibility to adapt to change and adopting a new travel at a very young age [12]. Yet, this natural ability to do
culture. Combined with this, successful foresight depends on mind-time travel is not developed further in the education
the ability to cope with uncertainty and operating in increased systems of the world. School education systems are stuck in
complexity [8]. In scenario planning, key uncertainties, often an outdated industrial era world view [13]. An integrated
related to the impact of major events, form the one axis, forward looking view should be a crucial part of education, at
compared to key factors and forces over which control can be school level and at higher education level. Three traditions of
exercised, often over technology and the behavior of people. future studies prevail: the empirical tradition, practiced mainly
Uncertainty relates to operating in the complex domain where in the USA; the critical tradition, originated in Europe, much
information is not available beforehand and proper analysis in reaction to the empirical tradition and lastly; the cultural
cannot be done to reduce uncertainty, but where emergence of tradition, which has a strong non-Western cultural basis.
unpredictable effects is to be reacted to, based on decision These traditions have influenced the teaching of futures at
making in the absence of reductionism. schools and cause a non-uniformity, unlike the teaching of
mathematics and science which are globally taught in
universal ways. Young people are faced with three perceptions
F.   The evolution of future studies of the future: the feared future that is often illustrated as a
The evolution of future studies [9] has also impacted on how dystopian and post-apocalyptic world in science fiction;
future thinking is practiced. A new phase of modern futures preferred futures where technological enhancement of work
studies deals mainly with complexity and the integration of and life, as well as harmony with the earth dominate thoughts;
systems thinking. This era is characterized by almost a and proactive futures, where world views are linked with
complete end to the development of new foresight methods, action planning. When a future world based on future thinking
the stabilization of the academic activities in futures research, is presented to audiences, it is the young people that are in
discussions around an identity for future studies (e.g. is it a general encouraged and the older ones that primarily want to
discipline?), and overall fragmentation of the field. This avoid these changes at all cost.
fragmentation results from a lack of formal education in
futures studies and no defined qualifications of the futurist
I.   Integrating future thinking in organizations
profession; the explosion in knowledge and information, big
data and the fact that no single person can grasp the entire Although foresight is increasingly used by organizations, the
field; the nature of work by consultants who in confidential integration of foresight work is not readily integrated with
brief by their clients to provide strategic intelligence through corporate culture and work processes. Some organizations
futures studies do not contribute to the body of knowledge; have started to appoint “organizational futurists” with the clear
and the generic nature of future studies, not being owned by a role of doing foresight on a continuous basis. Hines and Gold
single group, such as futurists. With the world rapidly [14] explore whether this has a positive effect on futures
migrating from the knowledge era to the conceptual era, where alignment, in fact they extend this to investigate whether
the so-called algorithm economy will evolve from the foresight at all has an impact on organizations. They pose a
knowledge economy [10], studies of the future will be research question on why it is so difficult for organizations to
concerned with dialectic thinking, including the consideration use foresight work. One reason suggested is that “foresight
of paradoxes, options, linkages and mindsets, through delivers a type of knowledge that is difficult to apply in
cognitive arguments [9]. organizations, because there is a mismatch in timeframe such
that the organization and its members have difficulty in fitting
foresight findings into existing decision-making processes”. It
G.   Future skills for business leaders is recognized that many executives use foresight intuitively
In a study on the required future skills of business leaders, the and that professional foresight experts do not exist in many
following was identified as critical for the current organizations, often consulting futurists are used. It is also
management era [11]: the ability to empower others; the stated that the field is still emerging and terms are unclear,
ability to learn; commitment to lifelong learning; creativity grappling with what it is and what its boundaries are. Three
and the generation of ideas; flexibility and willingness to challenges are identified: (1) episodic use of foresight,
change; foresight which includes the ability to predict future consisting of intense activity for a while, followed by long
occurrences; holistic thinking abilities leading to the ability to periods of inactivity; (2) cultural resistance to foresight,
resulting from perceptions that foresight competes for crises (water, food security, climate, health, etc.) all current
attention of already busy people, foresight is threatening the generations will have to take futures seriously.
existing order, it is viewed as intangible and is more an
intellectual activity than one that is getting things done and
deep foresight capacity is lacking apart from the interest in II.   RESEARCH PROBLEM STATEMENT
superficial trends; (3) institutionalization of foresight is not a It is clear from the literature and general perception that there
priority and a clear view of the professional focus is not is a concern about the lack of future thinking skills and
evident, with organizations calling the organizational futurist interest in the future among business leaders on a global scale.
function anything from a trends manager to an ideation leader. This applies to corporate boards, executive management,
Organizations in general have people nominally responsible project managers, policy makers and academics alike. A
for foresight, but few have any formal training as futurists. distinction should be made between having the propensity to
look at the future and having the tools to do so. It is clear that
a large spectrum of tools is available that could assist in
J.   Time horizons - how far ahead do people think?
understanding the future. The problem, however, lies within
People rarely think of a distant future and when they do, they the following statement:
employ cognitive styles different from the ones commonly
used for planning and decision making [15]. Mind-time travel "Few business leaders have the ability to do future thinking."
is not spread uniformly in time. Different thinking processes
are used, depending on the time scale. The distant future
thinking is more concerned with high level goals and vision III.   RESEARCH QUESTIONS
than near future thinking which deals mostly with concrete In this paper we address the following research questions in an
plans for action. Boschettia, Walkera and Pricea [15] state that attempt to understand the validity of the research problem and
people normally think one day ahead, somewhat less its causes.
frequently one week to one year ahead; much less frequently
between one and five years and rarely beyond five years. 1.   Is there a problem with the ability to do future
People in general seem to have difficulty imagining the future thinking?
beyond 15 to 20 years. When people are asked what time 2.   Is the lack of future thinking skills leadership age
horizons they think about when they hear the word ‘future’, it related?
differs from one to two years to 10 to 15 years. 3.   At what management level does the problem lie?
4.   Is the problem more predominant in certain industry
K.   Do young and old people think differently about the sectors than others?
future? 5.   Does organization form and size have an influence on
the ability to do future thinking?
The generational shift depicted by baby boomers, generation
6.   What are the reasons for not being able to do future
X-ers, generation Y and the millennials is often quoted to
thinking?
provide a conflict in attitude towards the future and how work
7.   Are people that find it easier to do future thinking
will be done and markets will behave. This may be
more comfortable working in the complexity regime?
misleading, since this generational spread has been developed
8.   Are certain future techniques more effective to assist
more as a marketing issue and the behavior will be different in
with future thinking?
different parts of the world, especially away from accepted
9.   What is the relevance of different emergent issues
first world norms. Futures methods have evolved over time
that determine future thinking?
and it is assumed that younger people will be linked to new
10.   Do people that find it easier to do future thinking
generations of future methods. Knowledge transfer on futures
have different strategic planning styles?
methods from old to young and through formal academic
11.   How can future thinking skills be improved?
programs are fragmented and not available universally. Young
and old have to adopt complexity and uncertainty as intrinsic
to reality. Two aspects remain important in the skills toolkit IV.   RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
for the futurist. (1) Futures fluency, defined by Schultz [in 16],
An “electronic interview” was developed in the form of a web
involves identifying and monitoring change; critiquing the
based set of questions that was sent to a variety of people
impacts of change; imagining alternative futures; and planning
involved in senior management positions ranging from boards
and implementing. (2) Futures literacy, as defined by
to project managers. This survey was live for fifteen days and
Slaughter [16], involves the symbolic grounding of futures
guided respondents through a series of options where they
capability in futures concepts, and through in-depth
could provide information to structured and unstructured
knowledge and understanding of the futures domain. Futures
literacy is essentially the ability to maintain a futures research questions. The idea behind the “electronic interview”
discourse. It is also the basis for effective action, or strategy. was to do a quick survey of opinions related to a structured
investigation that would address the research problem and
Realization that the world is heading towards all kinds of
research questions. Respondents were assured of keeping their
information provided confidential and the “electronic
interview” was held blind so that their identity was not Future&thinking
revealed. The “electronic interview” was structured as
follows: the context in which participants took part in the
interviews - position in their own organizations, age of
Difficult-to-project-
respondents, gender of respondents, country in which the thoughts-into-the-
respondent works; the relationship with the future - interest 47%
future
the organization has in the future, how difficult it was to 53%
Easy-to-project-
project their thoughts into the future, foresight/future thinking
thoughts-into-the-
methods used, familiarity with working in the complex and
future
chaotic space, ranking of emergent issues according to their
relevance in determining the future, how their organizations
plan strategically, belief why it is difficult for leaders to
imagine the future, suggestions on improving future thinking Fig. 1. Responses on ability to do future thinking
capabilities of business leaders; and ideas on improving
leadership interest in the future. The sample was chosen from B.   Age and future thinking
a broad base of individuals known to the authors either
through teaching and post-graduate research supervision of Research question 2: Is the lack of future thinking skills
students in the work space, executive training specialized leadership age related?
courses, strategy consulting, foresight guidance and
consulting, roadmapping facilitation and academics and It is now investigated what the age distribution is of people
practitioners in technology, innovation and knowledge that find it difficult or not to do future thinking and this is
management as well as future studies. This sample selection illustrated in Fig. 2. Of people under the age of 60 which form
resulted in a predetermined spread of individuals and may not the majority of the working population, 50% or more find it
be representative of the larger community involved in future difficult to do future thinking. Seventy percent of people in the
thinking, but it provides a strong opinion poll from people that age bracket 41 to 50 years have problems with future thinking,
are known to be confronted with long range planning and as have two thirds of those between 31 and 40 years of age. It
strategic responsibilities in their organizations. is interesting that of the younger people, under the age of 30,
half find it difficult to do future thinking. The few older
people that responded have many years of experience in
V.   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION taking their organizations into the future and indicated that it
is not a problem to think ahead. The majority (85%) of
Analysis was done on 62 replies ranging mostly from business
respondents were male, and 15% were female. Only one third
leaders in South Africa, but including responses from
of the females found it difficult to do future thinking. Future
Namibia, the United States of America, Canada, The
thinking is thus not leadership age related and a large
Netherlands, Germany and Portugal.
percentage of young leaders and older people in senior
positions share the same problem that it is not easy for them to
A.   Difficulty of projecting thoughts into the future do future thinking.
Research question 1: Is there a problem with the ability to do
future thinking? Future&thinking&and&age

The question posed was “Do you find it difficult to project Older.than.70.years.
your thoughts into the future?” The answers of “yes” or “no” 61.to.70.years.
are interpreted as “Difficult to do future thinking” and “Easy 51.to.60.years.
to do future thinking”. Slightly more than half of the 41.to.50.years
respondents (53%) indicated that they indeed find it difficult 31.to.40.years
to do future thinking as indicated in Fig. 1. If more than half Younger.than.30.years.
of business leaders find it difficult to do future thinking,
0 10 20 30 40 50
deeper understanding of the problem is warranted. The
statement: “"Few business leaders have the ability to do future %.of.responses
thinking" thus represents a real problem which needs to be
Difficult.to.do.future.thinking Easy.to.do.future.thinking
addressed in management.
Fig. 2. Age distribution of respondents and their ability to do future thinking
C.   Position and future thinking Reasons'why'future'thinking'is'difficult
Research question 3: At what management level does the Short*term0 pressures0for0financial0
problem lie? performance
In0constant0fire*fighting0 mode
The outcome of the “electronic interview” showed that the
problem of not being able to project thinking into the future is Lack0of0holistic0thinking
quite evenly distributed over all levels of respondents. The
Lack0of0future0 thinking0 skills
majority of respondents were at levels such as executive and
general management and project management. However, Restrictively0structured0organisations
responses from the level of chairman of the board, board Left0brain0dominance0in technology*
members, company directors and CEOs indicated 50% or based0businesses
more find it difficult to do future thinking. Over*reliance0on0consultants

0 5 10 15 20 25 30
D.   Industry sector dependence of future thinking %00responses
Research question 4: Is the problem more predominant in Difficut0to0do0future0thinking Easy0to0do0future0thinking
certain industry sectors than others?
Fig. 3. Ranking of reasons why future thinking is difficult

The ability to do future thinking does not vary significantly business leaders are in constant fire-fighting mode. These
from industry sector to industry sector. Responses received influences are equally valid for those that find it easy and
indicate an almost equal division between difficulty and ease difficult to do future thinking. Further reasons include a lack
of doing future thinking for the majority of industries of holistic thinking, lack of future thinking skills and
representative of respondents. Respondents were associated restrictively structured organizations, with the latter having a
with manufacturing; information and communication; slight preference from those that find it easy to do future
electronics; defense; aerospace; science, engineering and thinking. Lastly, left brain dominance in technology-based
technology; education; services; mining and quarrying; business and over-reliance on consultants may be minor
finance, insurance and real estate; public administration; reasons why future thinking is difficult. Again the latter is
construction; agriculture, forestry and fishing; transportation stronger in the opinion of those that find it easy to do future
and storage; retail trade; and electricity, gas, steam and air thinking.
conditioning.

G.   Complexity and future thinking

E.   Future thinking and form and size of the organization
Research question 7: Are people that find it easier to do future
Research question 5: Does organization form and size have an thinking more comfortable working in the complexity regime?
influence on the ability to do future thinking?
There is a clear indication that people that find it easy to do
Form or size of the organization do not seem to influence future thinking are also more used to working in the
future thinking by leaders and the spread of those that find it complexity domain as pointed out by the results of the
difficult to think ahead and those that find it easy is almost interviews in Fig. 4. A very large percentage of the
equal. The respondent density per organizational grouping in respondents in total indicated that they are familiar with the
declining order were: SME (private); state-owned enterprise; complexity domain. Most of the respondents that are not
multinational (listed); government institution; multinational familiar with complexity also find it difficult to do future
(private); academic institution; large enterprise (private); large thinking.
enterprise (listed); government department; NGO; and
research funding foundation. Listed multinationals, and
private multinationals were outliers with respectively 85% and Future&thinking& and&complexity
83% of respondents in these sectors finding it difficult to do
future thinking. Non<familiarity2with2complexity

F.   Reasons for not being able to do future thinking Familiarity2with2complexity

Research question 6: “What are the reasons for not being able 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
to do future thinking? %2responses2

Respondents were asked to rank a set of reasons they believe Difficult2to2do2future2thinking Easy2to2do2future2thinking
make future thinking difficult. The outcome, as shown in Fig.
3 primarily lies in short-term pressure for financial Fig. 4. Future thinking capability and familiarity with the complexity domain
performance, and the fact that
 Popular(future(thinking/foresight(tools Future&thinking&and&strategic&planning&style

Technology*Assessment Doing,an,environmental,analysis,,SWOT,
Roadmaps analysis,,Vision,,Mission,,Objectives,,Strategic,
Interventions
Technology*foresight
Scenario*planning
Trendspotting Focus,on,business,model,innovation,rather,
than,strategy
Visioning
Anticipatory*Thinking
Ideation Use,future,thinking,to,mind9time,travel,to,the,
future,,select,a,preferred,future,,backcast,to,
Lateral*Thinking
the,present
Causal*Layered*Analysis
Multiple*Futures 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Narratives*about*the*Future %,responses

Social*Network*Analysis Difficut,to,do,future,thinking Easy,to,do,future, thinking

Backcasting Fig. 7. The relationship between future thinking capability and strategic
Emerging*Issue*Analysis planning
The*Futures*Triangle
Metaphors Narratives about the future and the Futures Wheel are not
The*Futures*Wheel used by many, but are equally used by the two groups.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 I.   Relevance of emergent issues
%*responses
Research question 9: What is the relevance of different
Difficult*to*do*future*thinking Easy*to*do*future*thinking
emergent issues that determine future thinking?
Fig. 5. Popular foresight/future thinking tools used by respondents
Several techniques for measuring emerging issues have been
H.   Future thinking/foresight tools used developed, one of these being the S-curve [5]. A new
approach suggested by one of the authors [17] is that of a
Research question 8: Are certain future techniques more
future thinking lens, where emerging and disruptive
effective to assist with future thinking?
technologies, the behavior of people in the marketplace and
inside the organization and major events are used to determine
Respondents were asked to indicate the typical foresight tools
future impacts. The relevance of these parameters in terms of
or methods for future thinking they have used in the past. The
influencing the future was tested in this research and are
results are shown in Fig. 5. The top seven futures methods
shown in Fig. 6. Most respondents felt that the behavior of
used evenly by those that find it difficult to future thinking
people inside the organization has the highest relevance,
and those that find it easy are in declining order of
followed by events which can be predicted or not, and avoided
importance: technology assessment; roadmaps; technology
or not. Then follows disruptive technology, behavior of people
foresight; scenario planning; trendspotting; visioning; and
in the marketplace and emerging technology. The opinion
anticipatory thinking. This is followed by a group of
expressed by those that find it easy to do future thinking and
methodologies, applied largely by those that find it easy to do
those that do not is very similar.
future thinking: ideation; lateral thinking; causal layered
analysis; multiple futures; social network analysis; back-
casting; and the Futures Triangle. Lesser used methodologies J.   Future thinking and strategic planning styles used
that are mostly applied by the group that find it difficult to do Research question 10: Do people that find it easier to do
future thinking are: emerging issue analysis and metaphors. future thinking have different strategic planning styles?

Relevance(of(emergent(issues Fig. 7 shows the results of responses to a question to indicate

how organizations plan strategically at present. Most people
Behaviour-of-people-inside-the-organisation
use the old, classical strategic planning style of doing an
Understanding-events-(geo@political,-
economic,-natural,-social,-demographic) environmental analysis (mostly in the present), doing SWOT
Disruptive-technology
analysis, defining a vision and mission and deciding on
objectives and strategic interventions. There are slightly more
Behaviour-of-people-in-the-marketplace people that find it difficult to do future thinking in this
Emerging-technology
category. An almost equal split in those that find it difficult to
do future thinking and those that do not is evident for those
0 1 2 3 4
Weighted-average
that focus on business model innovation, rather than strategy.
A minority, that is dominated by people that easily do future
Difficult-to-do-future-thinking Easy-to-do-future-thinking
thinking, select a preferred future and back-cast to the present.
Fig. 6. Relevance of emergent issues determining the future
 Actions(to(improve(future(thinking TABLE I. IDEAS ON IMPROVEMENT OF LEADERSHIP INTEREST IN
THE FUTURE
Demand.by.boards.and.executives.that.
future. readiness.is.a.performance. indicator Category Difficult to do future Easy to do future
thinking thinking
Academic.training.in.future. thinking. for.the.
Boards and •   Introduce future •   Remuneration must be based
young. minds.of.the.future
executives readiness in a disruptive on long-term outcomes, even
Belief.in.the.fact.that.the.future.is.not. world as an important exceeding the term of
predetermined key performance area employment of leaders
•   Develop long term
Acquiring. the.ability.to.communicate the.
strategies
future
Formal •   Basic introduction at •   Turn the discipline of future
Education university level - studies into a science
More.customised.executive.courses
develop leadership •   Supplement future thinking
qualities from an early with critical thinking
Transitioning. into.the.complexity.regime age
•   Exposure to the benefits
Development. of.mind2time.travel. and business relevance
capabilities.natural.to.human.beings of future thinking
Culture •   Create a future thinking •   Encourage experimentation
0 5 10 15 20 25
culture within and honest failure as part of
%.responses organisations learning
Difficut.to.do.future.thinking Easy.to.do.future.thinking Management •   Eradicate a mind-set of •   Exposure to tools that are
styles command-and-control less complex and demanding
Fig. 8. Suggested importance of actions to improve future thinking •   Establish unique roles •   Establish communities of
to develop future plans practice on future thinking
•   Leaders to be
K.   Improvement of future thinking skills concerned about
Research question 12: How can future thinking skills be organizational life
beyond their tenure
improved? •   Incorporate systems
thinking and trend
Suggested actions to improve future thinking have been rated analysis
•   Expand statements of
in the interviews. These are shown in Fig. 8. The most work to include future
important action suggested is that corporate boards and thinking aspects
executives should demand that future readiness is a •   Work collaboratively
with key stakeholders
performance indicator for organizations. This is followed by to project the future
academic training in future thinking to create the young minds Self-motivation •   Adopt a specific mind- •   Remove fears about the
of the future. Furthermore, adopting a belief in the fact that the set and brain profile future
dedicated to the art of
future is not predetermined and can be influenced may assist future thinking and
in improving future thinking skills. It is important to acquire guide others
an ability to communicate the future in an understandable, •   Promote the power of
simple way. This is normally done through visualization, being ahead of the
curve
modelling and simulation. A need has been confirmed for •   Think holistically
more customized executive courses in future thinking. Up to •   Move away from
this point almost equal importance was given to the focusing on operational
issues
suggestions by those that find it difficult to do future thinking Leadership •   Cross-industry •   Seminars or workshops held
and those that do not. The fact that a large number of development workshops on future by successful leaders who
respondents have indicated that they work in the complexity thinking practice future thinking
regime leads to a suggestion that future thinking can be •   Educate senior •   Change short term incentives
members of the to long term incentives
improved by transitioning into the complexity regime. Lastly, company as well as the •   Develop executive thinking
the development of the natural mind-time travel capabilities board on gains to be skills
that all people have should be encouraged. The latter two achieved •   Cultivate adaptable leaders
•   Make future thinking a •   Involve popular speakers,
actions are predominantly suggested by people that find it key performance area of produce media articles
easy to do future thinking. leaders •   Greater collaboration and
sharing in futures thinking
Respondents were asked to suggest additional ideas for
improvement of leadership interest in the future. These are
shown in Table I.
 VI.   CONCLUSIONS skills and to solicit ideas on how to improve the future
Future thinking is indeed a scarce management skill. This thinking skills of leaders.
research has confirmed the problem to be rooted in the fact
that few business leaders have the ability to do future thinking. The following conclusions are drawn from the research
Not enough importance is given to the fact that the future and supporting the proposition that few business leaders have the
change happens at different speeds and that different impacts ability to do future thinking.
will take place at different times. The literature suggests that
foresight is not trusted. Future thinking is also not taught in •   The lack of future thinking skills is not age related and
global educational systems and academic activities are young leaders and older people in senior positions share
fragmented and present several gaps in a body of knowledge the same problem that it is not easy for them to do future
about the future. A large variety of tools are available to look thinking.
at the future, but these are often applied in isolation and no •   Position in an organization does not influence the ability
holistic view of the future is achieved. Corporate foresight has to do future thinking. The problem to project thinking into
been institutionalized by some organizations, to the extent that the future occurs at all levels of management, from
the position of a “corporate futurist” has been created - this boards, through executive management to project
primarily in larger organizations. Future thinking is often management.
facilitated by consultants, with the result that the knowledge is •   The inability to do future thinking is primarily due to
not transferred into the organization. Future thinking in short term pressures for financial performance and leaders
organizations are primarily episodic, receive cultural being in a constant fire-fighting mode. People that find it
resistance and is not given priority in terms of importance and easy to do future thinking believe that organizational
role it could play. Future studies have evolved and are now structures are often restrictive.
more focused on complexity and systems thinking. It is along •   A very clear indication exists that people that find it easy
the lines of systems thinking that future thinking is emerging to do future thinking are mostly familiar with working in
as a holistic way of getting involved with the future. It is the complexity regime.
globally accepted that business leaders must improve on their •   Foresight tools such as technology assessment,
future skills and become more visionary. Young people have a roadmapping, technology foresight, scenario planning,
natural ability to do mind-time travel that assists them in trendspotting, visioning and anticipatory thinking are
future thinking. This natural ability is, however, not cultivated employed by a large number of leaders. Both those that
further by educational systems. Future thinking also varies find it difficult to do future thinking and those that do not,
with culture, complicating global mobility of knowledge. use these tools. People that find it easy to do future
Business leaders do not think long term, most are concerned thinking, albeit a smaller number, use more modern and
with the immediate future and making a success of current advanced tools such as lateral thinking, causal layered
activities. In general, the longest time horizon people think analysis, creating multiple futures, doing social network
ahead in is too limited to warrant a proper understanding of analysis, do back-casting and using the Futures Triangle
future impact. and Futures Wheel
•   Emergent issues that determine the future as described by
This research sought confirmation of some of these the future thinking lens [17] include technology, the
perceptions about future thinking. It posed eleven research behavior of people and events. These were confirmed by
questions related to: confirming the problem; the influence of this research as relevant to the development of future
age on future thinking; identifying whether different thinking skills and were rated in declining order of
management levels experience different future thinking importance as: behavior of people inside the organization,
problems; investigating whether certain industry sectors have understanding large events, disruptive technology,
an exacerbated problem; see whether organizational form and behavior of people in the marketplace and emerging
size influence future thinking; assess whether it is easier to do technology.
future thinking when working in the complexity regime; •   Most people use the classical way of strategic planning,
investigate typical future techniques that assist with future starting with an environmental analysis, SWOT analysis,
thinking; rank the emergent issues that determine the need for determining a vision and mission, followed by strategic
future thinking; establish whether proficiency with future objectives and interventions. Fewer people are using
thinking leads to advanced and modern strategic planning; and business model innovation in stead of strategy. Those that
collecting ideas on how to improve future thinking skills. find it easy to do future thinking are more inclined to
apply modern strategic planning processes where they
The research methodology of an “electronic interview” mind-time travel to the future through future thinking and
allowed the investigators to get a quick response from a large then return to a present time strategy through back-
variety of targeted individuals known to work in areas where casting.
future thinking is very important. The research was aimed at •   Future thinking skills can be improved by boards and
both confirming pre-identified issues related to future thinking executives demanding future readiness to become a
performance indicator. Likewise, academic training in
 future thinking to create the young minds of the future REFERENCES
will make a major impact on the ability to future-enable
organizations. Additional aids to improving future [1]   A. Hines and P. Bishop, “Thinking about the future: Guidelines for
thinking include the belief that the future is not strategic foresight”, Second Edition, 2015, Hinesight Edition, available
predetermined and can be shaped, an ability to from https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-about-Future-Guidelines-
Strategic-ebook/dp/B018IFNHWG
communicate the future, and customized executive
[2]   R. Slaughter, “Reflections on 40 years of futures studies and Futures”,
courses. Achieving a familiarity with complexity, and the Symposium/Futures vol. 40, pp. 893–926 , 2008
development of mind-time travel capabilities. [3]   V.J. Fortunato and J.T. Furey, “The theory of mindtime: The
•   The research points out a wealth of ideas on improving relationships between thinking perspective and time perspective”,
leadership interest in the future, classified in actions the Personality and Individual Differences vol. 48, pp. 436–441, 2010
board and executive management can take, the role of [4]   J.T. Furey and V.J. Fortunato, “The theory of mindtime”, Cosmology,
vol. 18, pp. 119-130, 2014
formal education, creating a culture for future thinking,
[5]   S. Inayatullah, “Six pillars: futures thinking for transforming”,
self-motivation aspects and leadership development. Foresight, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 4-21, 2008
[6]   R. Rohrbeck, C. Battistella and E. Huizingh, “Corporate foresight: An
emerging field with a rich tradition”, Technological Forecasting &
VII.  RECOMMENDATIONS Social Change vol. 101, pp. 1–9, 2015
The scarce management skill of future thinking must be [7]   F. Ruff, “The advanced role of corporate foresight in innovation and
recognized as important for sustainability, survival and strategic management - Reflections on practical experiences from the
automotive industry”, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol.
competitiveness. Business leaders should equip themselves to 101, pp. 37–48, 2015
acquire these skills and apply them in a holistic way. To assist [8]   R. Vecchiato, “Environmental uncertainty, foresight and strategic
them in doing it, universities around the world that have decision making: An integrated study”, Technological Forecasting &
programs in futures research should agree on a standard of Social Change, vol. 79, pp 436–447, 2012
education and training that will enable future thinking and [9]   T. Kuosa , “Evolution of futures studies”, Futures vol. 43, pp 327–336,
2011
identify the knowledge gaps and fill them. This includes the
[10]   A.P. Botha, “Economic waves driving national prosperity”, unpublished
recognition of weak signals, the ability to seamlessly think
[11]   E. Blass and J. Hackston, “Future skills and current realities - How the
forward and backward and to link patterns that emerge from a psychological (Jungian) type of European business leaders relates to the
complex world, systems approaches, holistic mindsets and the needs of the future”, Futures vol. 40, pp 822–833, 2008
ability to drive ideas. Research is required to define and [12]   A. Kretschmer-Trendowicz, J.A. Ellis and M. Altgassen, “Effects of
develop an integrated set of tools and techniques that can episodic future thinking and self-projection on children’s prospective
characterize the “far future” and then create an ability to back- memory performance”, PLoS ONE vol. 11, no. 6, e0158366.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158366
cast to the near future and present. To do this, the field of
[13]   J.M. Gidleya and G.P. Hampsona, “The evolution of futures in school
future thinking should be given status as a discipline, building education”, Futures vol. 37, pp. 255–271, 2005
on a strong multi-disciplinary body of knowledge. A holistic, [14]   A. Hines and J. Gold, “An organizational futurist role for integrating
systems level approach is required. Instead of only foresight into corporations”, Technological Forecasting & Social
institutionalizing a corporate futurist position, organizations Change, vol. 101, pp 99–111, 2015
should rather focus on embedding future thinking abilities in [15]   F. Boschettia, I. Walkera and J. Pricea, “Modelling and attitudes
towards the future”, Ecological Modelling, vol. 322, pp. 71–81, 2016
all their leading staff. In a globalized world different cultures
[16]   E. Krawczyk and R. Slaughter, “New generations of futures methods”,
of doing business and looking at the future should be Futures, vol. 42, pp. 75–82, 2010
recognized and aligned to achieve a common view of desired [17]   A.P. Botha, “Developing executive future thinking skills”, International
futures. Complexity must be embraced and a new regime of Association for Management of Technology, IAMOT 2016 Conference
decision making based on volatile and uncertain environments Proceedings, pp. 951-972, 2016
should become the norm. Tomorrow’s leaders cannot think in
today’s ways. They must approach the future by knowing that
they have already arrived.