women’s rights

Future Forecast: Ignoring Half the Picture Yields Surprisingly Poor Results

[adapted: Magic 8-Ball by Andres Rueda via Flickr]

[Adapted: Magic 8-Ball by Andres Rueda via Flickr]

It’s that time of year when we not only take a look backward, but a look forward to the future. Unfortunately in doing so, we rely heavily on so-called experts, whose vision suffers from two fundamental limitations:

  • They’re overwhelmingly male; their viewpoints are published more frequently than those of women;
  • They depend frequently on male-dominated science and technology in constructing their forecasts, rather than looking at shifts in human conditions.

Once a upon a time in my career, I rubbed shoulders with futurists, both in corporate visioning and in business intelligence. They made a few eye-opening predictions that I pooh-poohed at the time. In 1999 one futurist told me that fuel cell technology wouldn’t be commercialized for more than 10 or 15 years. Another report circa 2000 predicted the U.S. would become a rogue nation because of its hegemonic power.

I laughed off both of those forecasts at the time. You’ll note, however, none of our government’s unilaterally killing drones use fuel cells as power sources.

In spite of the occasional spot-on prediction, many of the forecasts I’ve read or seen made as part of scenario planning have not come to pass. They remain years and decades away if they haven’t already become impossible or irrelevant. Why are future outcomes so notoriously nebulous?

During the dozen-plus years since I first worked with futurists and participated in scenario planning sessions, I’ve wised up and learned a few things, key to understanding the lameness of most futurists’ forecasts.

1) It’s really difficult for most organizations to see outside their own self-constructed silos built on the expertise of their products and services. They hire and promote subject-matter experts and look to them for forecasts. Because of internal feedback loops, organizations become blind to barriers so that their members really can’t see with specificity beyond 2-5 years. Asking folks in formal organizations to make forecasts about their own work, even with well-trained facilitators, is extremely difficult. Barriers within their own organizations may be invisible to them as well, ex. internal politics, or other activities deliberately hidden from view.

2) Organizations are often blind to their own social capital. If members within groups are uniformly unchallenged by barriers within and without their business lives, they may not see bumps in the road that thwart everybody else outside their group.

3) Outsiders who speculate on future activities of organizations while relying on publicly available information from within these groups may suffer from the same siloed and blinkered vision.

4) Predictions tend to follow the quantifiable, where the money as well as expectation exist—in science and technology. Unfortunately, scientists are loathe to make guarantees; they give percentages and odds, but not absolute assurances. Forecasts are only as good as the current understanding of science and technology, within some margin of error. Futurists often round up, encouraging excessive optimism.

These factors may explain why futurists’ predictions may ignore realities that grip nearly half of the humans on earth, while rendering so many of their forecasts inert.

Even factoring in the biases that shape forecasts, the future imagined can be far too tidy, . The gritty truths of the human condition and all its volatility are too neatly removed, parceled off outside the field of speculation. Continue reading

Emptywheel Twitterverse
bmaz RT @normative: Well, I guess there are SOME fluids Michigan cares about policing. https://t.co/VsmuNSJhyP
emptywheel Mike Bloomberg leaking his presidential run to a British outlet, not, say, the US one that bears his name. https://t.co/PFKky5axxR
bmaz Subpoena his ass. https://t.co/9eHX9KXoZ9
bmaz @ryanlcooper @pareene Yeah, shocker. Between Bill going rogue asshole again, and now Penn, little wonder the campaign is going off the rails
emptywheel @joesbooksthings It's your opinion that GOP should get no Qs after GOP Gov's handpicked EM poisoned a city of children? @NormOrnstein
emptywheel RT @NormOrnstein: Last GOP debate, foci on meaning of pro-life and 10th Amendment. No. Of Qs on Flint: zero. Political malpractice by ABC m…
emptywheel RT @ZoeTillman: 6th Circuit okays warrantless use of camera attached to a public utitliy pole to monitor man's activity for 10 weeks https:…
emptywheel RT @LynnRWebsterMD: Senator scrutinizes pharma links on government pain panel https://t.co/J4k8zU9mHN via @usnews Please also ensure payers…
emptywheel Uber Is Not the Future of Work https://t.co/fkq4FG4pkP
February 2016
« Jan