Last month I had an opportunity to listen to Paul Saffo of the Institute for the Future speak at the CIO Magazine CIO|06 The Year Ahead conference in Phoenix. I was there as part of CIO's Enterprise Value Award Process Review Board and as a facilitator for several of the breakout sessions. Paul was the MC for the 3-day event and his opening talk offered his rules for forecasting. They're worth having handy if you find yourself in a position to have to make some bets on what might happen next.

Before sharing his rules, Saffo made the point that he thinks of himself as a forecaster not a futurist. In his categories, a futurist is an advocate for a particular future, while a forecaster is an observer trying to understand and bound the uncertainties generated by events and trying to frame the choices that might influence the outcomes. Saffo used the following image (actually his image was much nicer - this is from my notes, but you get the idea).

Rule 1. Know when not to make a forecast.  Saffo made pointed reference here to Apple's famous Knowledge Navigator concept video in contrast with Doug Engelbart's Demo Video from 1967. I think what Saffo was driving at was the distinction between setting out a vision that will drive inventors and innovators on the one hand and recognizing that a salient event has occurred that opens up uncertainties that you ought to factor in to your planning.

Rule 2. Overnight successes come out of twenty years of failure. If you're not paying attention, you're going to be surprised a lot. This is where Saffo began to offer his take on the role of S-curve kinds of phenomena and how to account for them in your planning processes. Two points that I took away here. One is that there early stages of these curves is when you typically have the most leverage, if you can find a curve that will make it to the knee. Nothing terribly new there. The second, which I hadn't thought about as much, was the difference in planning errors depending on where you were in the curve. I'm used to thinking only in terms of the tendency to overestimate how fast things will happen in the early stages of development. I've been less tuned in to the equally likely tendency to underestimate speed and demand changes past the tipping point. BTW, one of Saffo's specific observations relative to this rule was that he's paying more attention to Robotics as potentially the next big thing.

Rule 3. Look back twice as far as forward. Another quick bit of capsule advice about how to think smarter when you are dealing with exponential/logistics curve phenomena. This is a rule of thumb that captures the essential error in our tendency to think in linear terms about power laws. The change you've lived through in the last 10 years is a predictor of what you are likely to experience in the next 5. Douglas Adams captured this most memorably in his 1999 essay "How to stop worrying and love the internet."

Alan Kay has talked about this in the context of why we've had more success at dealing with smallpox than with AIDS. If you are dealing with something that is operating on exponential terms, then the rate of growth matters as much or more than the slope at any instant in time. Given our tendency to project on a linear basis our tendency to over or under predict actually depends greatly on when/where you make that projection. With smallpox, the growth rate/infection rate is so fast that by the time you make any projection you are likely to be over predicting. With a slow growing epidemic such as AIDS, early stage linear projections will under predict. The corollary, of course, is that the surprise factor in slow-growing exponential phenomena is much higher.

Rule 4. Hunt for prodromes. Learned a new word. For you non-medical types, a prodrome or prodroma is an early symptom or leading indicator. This is William Gibson's observation that the "future is already here, it's just unevenly distributed."

Rule 5. Be indifferent. Don't confuse your desire for a particular outcome with its likelihood.

Rule 6. Tell a story or, better, draw a map. Trying to package your insights into a story (or scenario if you need to justify your consulting rates) helps reveal gaps, risks, and opportunities present in the events you are trying to understand. It can also help you get a better grasp on the potential wild cards. Saffo was more keen on the value of trying to find a way to capture your insights into something more graphical/visual. The value there is that those representations can help you highlight important relationships more easily and they raise the possibility of revealing 'whitespace' where you might find important opportunities to exploit or risks to minimize.

Rule 7. Prove yourself wrong. The essential wisdom of the scientific method. Understand and resist the natural human tendencies to believe. Be careful not to rely on a single element of strong information. Look for lots of pieces of weak information that collectively reinforce your insights. Your search for strong information should be for that one piece of evidence that proves you wrong. Look for the one thing that will make you look stupid if someone else brings it up after you've gone public.

It was a well spent morning listening to Paul, as was the opportunity to interact during the breaks.

Technorati Tags : paul+saffo, forecasting, s-curve, predictions2006

I am very pleased that several of the Future of Work corporate members (Forest City Covington, Agilent, Boeing, and IBM) and the Business Community Center^tm concept that Charlie Grantham and I are promoting are mentioned in the December 12 issue of Business Week ("The Easiest Commute of All" - paid subscription required to access), now available online and scheduled to be in print on newsstands everywhere on Monday, December 5.

Now, clearly, in the case of distributed work for an organization, the people involved by definition need to produce something in the real world. But are they truly efficient in doing so? In the case of communities of practice (or the perhaps not-so-aptly-designated activist communities), how many of them have really made something happen? A change in behavior, a change in legislation, a person elected, a product designed and delivered, and so on. How many times have we seen a failure of expected result (ineffectiveness or impact failure) despite all of the buzz? Are interest-communities actually convincing people to do something? Do they need to?

I have observed and participated in online communities of practice, for example, where members spent a lot of time happily, kindly, politely debating ideas, but stumbled when it came time to step forward to take action. The activity of getting to action kept running up against strong roadblocks in the form of differing philosophies, reluctance or fear of leadership, the lack of time or commitment to take action, and so forth. Getting to action was (and is) often hideously painful.

I think one key is the design of a community. When action (and the rules that need to be put in place to facilitate this) is an afterthought, you can't hammer it onto a community that has only vaguely addressed it. When action has to happen, all of the hidden biases, struggles, vanities, egos, weaknesses etc. that have been glossed over during the listening/conversing phase jump into heavy relief. And the result can be disheartening and discouraging.

I am going to be digging into this subject over the coming months. If you have comments, examples, sources, and/or ideas please let me know. If you want to write about it in this space, please propose that to me as a guest author. I think it is a truly important subject that needs more attention as ever more of us work, collaborate and communicate online.

In fact, we really do believe that nothing short of a reformation in management practice is required to cope with the changes that face virtually every organization and the entire economy these days.

Specifically, our experience suggests that your future business success depends directly on your ability to understand the shifts that are occurring and to redefine your workforce, workplace, technology, and business strategies accordingly.

Having examined the demographic trends, the labor force stats, the health and longevity data, the projected costs of Social Security, Medicare and other government programs, the experts have come to a strikingly widespread consensus: Never mind that golden-years stuff. Keep working.

Of course, the government is thinking up ways to "encourage" us to keep working. And given the benefits, there may be a moral imperative to keep working as well, for the good of others.

So one prescription is obvious. Whatever else lawmakers do or don't do -- if they raise the age of Social Security or Medicare eligibility, if they establish private retirement accounts, if they index benefits for longevity -- it would be a fine thing, the wonks agree, if we'd keep working.

It's practically the public-spirited thing to do. If we remained in the workforce longer -- and labor force participation among older workers does appear to be inching upward -- we could postpone the age at which we receive Social Security checks, thus easing the drain. The higher taxes we would keep paying (including continued Social Security contributions) would help fill the federal coffers. And we could ward off a labor shortage that might threaten the whole economy.

The article offers three "serious changes" delaying retirement requires. Do you think these are the most important three? Do you have other ideas? Please share!

(a) Modifying traditional pension practices and regulations that discourage people from working longer.

(b) Persuading employers to get as excited about retaining or hiring older workers as labor analysts are.

And (c) subjecting the societal expectations and sense of entitlement built up over 70 years to a fast U-turn.

[Technorati Tags: workplace public policy]

Rags writes "Regarding Blogging at work Miller of The Seventh Suite wrote to me saying "yes I believe lots of people are blogging at work - all the more reason to give employees the chance to blog like Sun, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, etc...".

Rags goes on to say "I think blogging at work and employers allowing blogging is not an easy black and white decision. I think I am somewhat cynical about people blogging at work. A disclaimer, " No I am not part of the management, I am just another peon". According to Technorati's numbers the first thing people seem to be doing at work is to post a blog article. This probably is on top of the usual surfing activities like reading personal mails and news. Now one should also assume that the blog posters spend time reading other blogs as well."

Kerabu points to a cool blog called The Play Ethic by Pat Kane who has written a book called The Play Ethic. It will be published in the UK at the end of September. "Kane expresses the hope throughout the book that the play ethic can be a bridge between results driven management and meaning driven employees in the emerging style of modern organisations."

In particular, "... Generation Xers and Yers who make up increasing percentages of today’s workforce have been brought up in a culture of play – gaming, play-stations and interactive technology – and we need to adopt different patterns of employment to accommodate their needs. New workers are looking for something more fulfilling and enriching – something that matches their experience. Perhaps, therefore, instead of looking for a work-life or work-play balance, we need to seek more ways to integrate the two."

DK sounds like a really neat guy with a very big mission. "Everyone is always wondering what kids are thinking. DK gives you a view into the complicated and sometimes contradictory world of today's teens." His organization, Phatgnat, us-them-you together "operates between the commercial and public sectors. Phatgnat creates opportunities for companies and brands to engage and communicate with young people whilst supporting local and central government’s youth-oriented initiatives through specific, high profile projects."

And now, for the final installment:

15. We must master Ambiguity

We no longer live in a world of certainty—if we ever did. The illusion that Homo Sapiens controlled their fate has crumbled with the evolution of the industrial, mechanical age. This, coupled with the increasing velocity of nearly all human activity, has generated an era of constant and continual change.

Work projects will begin with some goals and vision, but will continuously morph as the projects rolls on, being responsive to external influences. This new reality means that project budgets will be moving targets, deadlines somewhat arbitrary, and final design impossible to predict. Managers who thrive on certainty must evolve into leaders of ambiguity – or be left behind.

Here's the next seven (big caveat: I know these are broad generalizations, and subject to plenty of qualifiers. But that's okay, since I'm not trying to predict an actual future, but rather stimulate conversation and thinking about what the world would be like if these conditions actually become reality):

8. Work will be more collaborative, less individualistic

People will shift their work activities to their core competencies for approximately 80% of their time. Everything else will be handed off to someone with complementary competencies. Individuals themselves will become less ‘vertically integrated’ and grow loosely coupled collaborative networks to meet their needs outside their core competencies. No more "jack of all trades.’" The remaining time will be devoted to learning new skills and competencies.

9. Corporations will morph into confederations with shared liability

Modern corporations are an artificial legal structure created within the past one hundred years to minimize the risk associated with control of large asset bases. As Peter Drucker so aptly notes, they have out lived their usefulness. The assumptions that have underlain their need are not longer valid.

Primary among those assumptions is that large organizations were required to capitalize the investments required in the ownership of the means of production, such as factories. With a shift to more knowledge work this isn’t necessary for a much larger portion of the working population. Confederations of business clusters will instead move to the forefront. They will be held together by strategy, rather than by ownership of assets.

Here's a teaser ("The PC and open source will outlive Windows"):

"The PC platform is going to outlive the Windows platform. In other words, because the PC platform is essentially open, it can run other operating systems, and it's open to people modifying it. So it will have a longer life span than Microsoft Windows, which is maintained, operated, and completely controlled by a single corporation. I don't think Microsoft is going to maintain its ascendancy forever. In fact, I would be surprised it it's anywhere near as dominant 10 years from now as it is now."

The whole thing is worth your time if you care at all about the future of technology.

Tag: technology

]]> 6786@http://futuretense.corante.com/ Trends 2005-07-28T17:31:02-05:00 http://futuretense.corante.com/archives/2005/07/27/the_reformation_of_work.php In an attempt to return this blog to a more serious tone (just kidding Elizabeth), I want to offer up some thoughts on the future of work. I promised a couple of weeks ago to share some of the ideas that Charlie Grantham and I have been nurturing for some time.

So, what follows is a sampling of some trends that we believe are becoming more real every day (these are the first 7 of a total of 23 "Theses" that we've framed about the changing nature of work. We're trying to find a corporate door somewhere to nail them to).

1. Social bonds between worker and firm will decrease

Historically workers have been subservient to corporations because companies owned the means of production, such as factories. Individuals’ livelihoods depended on companies and they formed close connections with employers, often for life. These dependencies will decrease because large organizations are not needed to create value in a knowledge-driven economy.

]]> 6784@http://futuretense.corante.com/ Trends 2005-07-27T13:27:01-05:00 http://futuretense.corante.com/archives/2005/07/18/welcome_guest_author_jory_des_jardins.php I'd like to extend a warm welcome to Future Tense's first guest author, Jory Des Jardins. Jory is the author of Pause, where she chronicles her life as an independent in a series of posts entitled, "Living Without a Net," an often hilarious look at the trials and tribulations of working for oneself. Jory is also one of the organizers of the upcoming BlogHer Conference, which will take place in Santa Clara, Calif. on July 30, and will focus on the role of women in the blogosphere. She’s written for USA Today Magazine, The New York Times, and most recently for Fast Company.

This week Jory is going to share her thoughts with us on women and leadership, drawing on her own experiences, as well as research and other leaders' (both male and female) opinions. I am looking forward to the conversation!

]]> 6765@http://futuretense.corante.com/ Trends 2005-07-18T08:24:51-05:00 http://futuretense.corante.com/archives/2005/07/12/the_state_of_the_global_labor_pool.php Brainbench recently analyzed global technical certifications, and came to a variety of conclusions about the global labor pool, including:

* While the U.S. still led the world in skill certifications, India showed an increase of more than 300% in just two years.
* Eastern Europe, specifically the Russian Federation, has a significant and growing body of IT competence, while Western Europe and Southeast Asia are also on the rise.
* Canada is a powerful player in certifications, especially in customer support.
* The Southern U.S. led the nation in certifications, reflecting population shifts and the growth of “insourcing” business processes to lower-cost areas of the country.
* India led in Java programming, while the U.S. led in security-based certifications.
* While Microsoft products dominate skills tests for applications, both Linux and Unix administration outpaced Microsoft Windows Server certifications worldwide.

Study co-author Mark Healy, an independent consultant specializing in organizational assessment, hiring, and leadership, is quoted in the press release:

“In their efforts to join the global workforce, these people are shaping the very nature of work, changing the society and the world in which we live. It's important to realize that 'globalization' is not merely a corporate strategy or an economic policy: It's fundamentally a human phenomenon, a new chapter in the evolving story of the planet and its people.”

]]> 6758@http://futuretense.corante.com/ Trends 2005-07-12T07:28:22-05:00 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/