Sign in or 
Share this
Future briefings
Future briefings are a key output of any Horizon Scanning project or program and summarize the research undertaken thus far. Their purpose is to describe the future of a wide range of trends, uncertainties, wildcards, and drivers of change and present possible and plausible outcomes.
Depending on desired outcomes, future briefings can be presented as pithy, reduced one pagers or be presented as full-blown major research reports covering all the topics in the list above.
Style
Excellent briefs:
Writing a briefing about the future can only provide a patchwork guide to tomorrow's world. But we can improve on this patchwork by ensuring we consider every key aspect of how the future may evolve. Improvement involves not just considering every aspect but also in removing undue bias perhaps seduced by expert credentials, or tricked by fanciful assumptions and using appropriate processes.
So, in writing a brief we need to ask tough questions of ourselves in how well it answers the key question(s) we are seeking to answer.
Brief aspects
Best practice, full Future briefings usually include commentary and analysis on the following aspects:
Abstract | Table of Contents | What is Changing? | Why is This Important? | Summary Findings | History | Current Conditions | Anticipated Capabilities | Geographies Affected | Market Response | Data Points | Forecasts | Assumptions | What to Watch | Who to Watch | Supporting Data | Early Indicators | Drivers & Inhibitors | Parallels & Precedents | Counter Trends | Spin-Offs | Shortcomings | Disruptions | Weak Signals | Wild Cards | Trigger Events | Methods Used | Next Steps | Sources
For full descriptions of the above commentary and analysis visit here.
Not all of these aspects may be required for a particular brief but their exclusion should be carefuly considered before rejection, for often as not the harder to answer aspects are where the rich sources of discovery and learning lie and where the future may not turn out quite as we imagined. For instance, considering "parallels and precedents" often helps us to see how history may repeat itself or "shortcomings" may provide a rich source for extended innovation and "wild cards" help us to see alternative futures from extreme perspectives. Use historic perspectives to touch on key event and causes that got the issue to where it is today but don't assume that history will repeat itself.
An excellent brief also quickly informs the reader of its purpose and what can be learned as part of the abstract. It will detail who produced it, what the intentions of the author are; for instance, if the brief is to concentrate on extremes or continuing trends, how widely it will be shared, and whether it specifies actions in the external world or organization for whom it is produced.
Referencing
Although "Sources" appears as the last topic in the list above this does not reflect its importance in providing an audit trail and link to more supporting background material. Quality assurance ensures that underlying analysis is open to challenge. A researcher's role here is to select high-quality references that support the future briefing in a fair, objective manner and that offer alternative and challenging views where appropriate. The researcher's role is to identify how the future is evolving and how it might be re-framed by events and colliding driving forces.
And, key to writing is the author putting themselves in their audience's shoes and ensuring that undue bias has been removed and appropriate processes engaged to produce a convincing end product as follows:
Undue bias
Specificity: does the brief explain its intent to spell out what will happen or to illuminate possible alternatives or both? Does it suggest too much or too litlle certainty? Is it clear about the pace of change, does it specify time frames or is this unclear?
Information quality: how extensive and corrobated is the data? Is it current? Does it use best available information from primary and secondary sources? is the data real or projected?
Interpretation: Is there a selective choice of facts? Is there prejudicial organization, people, or product emphasis? Is personal emotion expressed or a worst/best case assumed for the likely outcome? Is the brief sponsored; does it express self-interest? Are ideology and idealism prominent? Does it describe a single issue future? Has it been peer reviewed?
Assumptions: Has sufficient scanning been conducted and assumptions triangulated from different perspectives? Are the assumptions made explicit? Are the assumptions valid and reasonable?
Groupthink: Does the brief question prevailing wisdom and continuing paradigms? Does it anticipate shifts in societal, political, and economic behaviour or technological transformations, or accept the staus quo? Does the brief rely solely on expert opinion? Does it stretch thinking and suggest new paradigms?
Appropriate processes
Methods and models: Does the brief detail the methods used? Are these methods suficiently robust for the job in hand?
Quantitative limits: Are the use of quantitative methods appropriate? Does the quantification stand the tests of common sense and rule-of-thumb?
Managing complexity: Has the brief over-simplified or made the story too complex? Does the brief show the inter-connectedness of issues and their cause and effect on each other? Does the brief show how things could arrrive faster or slower than anticipated? Does the forecast suggest continuing "no," "business-as-usual," or "exponential" change?
Drivers and restrainers: Are the key driving and restraining forces defined? Is friction between these built-in? Are trends purely projected? Does the brief adequately state how usable a new innovation is likely to be and the expected take-up? Does it detail the opposing views of key stakeholders? Does the brief sufficiently challenge social, cultural or moral norms? Whose side of the law is it on? Does it suggest a love affair with technology? Does the brief over or under estimate the time to arrival or the pace at which people's habits change? Does the brief suggest what will change, not change? Is the brief too gung ho for suggesting fast, transformatory change?
Use this page as a checklist to check the quality of your work before copy-editing and peer review, and expect your reviewers to use similar checklists to give their feedback.
Further reference: Future Savvy, Adam Gordon
Next: Editorial Review Back: Action Planning To: Shaping Tomorrow
Copyright: Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Depending on desired outcomes, future briefings can be presented as pithy, reduced one pagers or be presented as full-blown major research reports covering all the topics in the list above.
Style
Excellent briefs:
- convey authority, originality, and energy
- inspire, engage, enable, and challenge thinking
- provide knowledge rather than information or data
- offer wisdom through strong evidence and powerful thinking
- create a working knowledge of previously little or unknown issues
- suggest new directions of thought
To be successful brief writing needs to be:
For inspiration on how others write short briefs visit here - relevant, topical, robust, meaningful, impactful
- written in a sharp, punchy style to attract potential readers
- on message and not stray off the point
- challenge readers assumptions about the future
- speak actively rather than passively in lively but not flowery language
- jargon-free and acronym friendly
- descriptive and analytical
Writing a briefing about the future can only provide a patchwork guide to tomorrow's world. But we can improve on this patchwork by ensuring we consider every key aspect of how the future may evolve. Improvement involves not just considering every aspect but also in removing undue bias perhaps seduced by expert credentials, or tricked by fanciful assumptions and using appropriate processes.
So, in writing a brief we need to ask tough questions of ourselves in how well it answers the key question(s) we are seeking to answer.
Brief aspects
Best practice, full Future briefings usually include commentary and analysis on the following aspects:
Abstract | Table of Contents | What is Changing? | Why is This Important? | Summary Findings | History | Current Conditions | Anticipated Capabilities | Geographies Affected | Market Response | Data Points | Forecasts | Assumptions | What to Watch | Who to Watch | Supporting Data | Early Indicators | Drivers & Inhibitors | Parallels & Precedents | Counter Trends | Spin-Offs | Shortcomings | Disruptions | Weak Signals | Wild Cards | Trigger Events | Methods Used | Next Steps | Sources
For full descriptions of the above commentary and analysis visit here.
Not all of these aspects may be required for a particular brief but their exclusion should be carefuly considered before rejection, for often as not the harder to answer aspects are where the rich sources of discovery and learning lie and where the future may not turn out quite as we imagined. For instance, considering "parallels and precedents" often helps us to see how history may repeat itself or "shortcomings" may provide a rich source for extended innovation and "wild cards" help us to see alternative futures from extreme perspectives. Use historic perspectives to touch on key event and causes that got the issue to where it is today but don't assume that history will repeat itself.
An excellent brief also quickly informs the reader of its purpose and what can be learned as part of the abstract. It will detail who produced it, what the intentions of the author are; for instance, if the brief is to concentrate on extremes or continuing trends, how widely it will be shared, and whether it specifies actions in the external world or organization for whom it is produced.
Referencing
Although "Sources" appears as the last topic in the list above this does not reflect its importance in providing an audit trail and link to more supporting background material. Quality assurance ensures that underlying analysis is open to challenge. A researcher's role here is to select high-quality references that support the future briefing in a fair, objective manner and that offer alternative and challenging views where appropriate. The researcher's role is to identify how the future is evolving and how it might be re-framed by events and colliding driving forces.
And, key to writing is the author putting themselves in their audience's shoes and ensuring that undue bias has been removed and appropriate processes engaged to produce a convincing end product as follows:
Undue bias
Specificity: does the brief explain its intent to spell out what will happen or to illuminate possible alternatives or both? Does it suggest too much or too litlle certainty? Is it clear about the pace of change, does it specify time frames or is this unclear?
Information quality: how extensive and corrobated is the data? Is it current? Does it use best available information from primary and secondary sources? is the data real or projected?
Interpretation: Is there a selective choice of facts? Is there prejudicial organization, people, or product emphasis? Is personal emotion expressed or a worst/best case assumed for the likely outcome? Is the brief sponsored; does it express self-interest? Are ideology and idealism prominent? Does it describe a single issue future? Has it been peer reviewed?
Assumptions: Has sufficient scanning been conducted and assumptions triangulated from different perspectives? Are the assumptions made explicit? Are the assumptions valid and reasonable?
Groupthink: Does the brief question prevailing wisdom and continuing paradigms? Does it anticipate shifts in societal, political, and economic behaviour or technological transformations, or accept the staus quo? Does the brief rely solely on expert opinion? Does it stretch thinking and suggest new paradigms?
Appropriate processes
Methods and models: Does the brief detail the methods used? Are these methods suficiently robust for the job in hand?
Quantitative limits: Are the use of quantitative methods appropriate? Does the quantification stand the tests of common sense and rule-of-thumb?
Managing complexity: Has the brief over-simplified or made the story too complex? Does the brief show the inter-connectedness of issues and their cause and effect on each other? Does the brief show how things could arrrive faster or slower than anticipated? Does the forecast suggest continuing "no," "business-as-usual," or "exponential" change?
Drivers and restrainers: Are the key driving and restraining forces defined? Is friction between these built-in? Are trends purely projected? Does the brief adequately state how usable a new innovation is likely to be and the expected take-up? Does it detail the opposing views of key stakeholders? Does the brief sufficiently challenge social, cultural or moral norms? Whose side of the law is it on? Does it suggest a love affair with technology? Does the brief over or under estimate the time to arrival or the pace at which people's habits change? Does the brief suggest what will change, not change? Is the brief too gung ho for suggesting fast, transformatory change?
Use this page as a checklist to check the quality of your work before copy-editing and peer review, and expect your reviewers to use similar checklists to give their feedback.
Further reference: Future Savvy, Adam Gordon
Next: Editorial Review Back: Action Planning To: Shaping Tomorrow
Copyright: Some rights reserved. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
sunfirejewels |
Latest page update: made by sunfirejewels
, Jul 13 2009, 1:17 PM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by sunfirejewels
62 words added 64 words deleted view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
None
More Info: links to this page
|
There are no threads for this page.
Be the first to start a new thread.
