Mapping strategic futures analysis David J Holland Smith

1
Mapping strategic futures analysisDavid J
Holland Smith
2
Original tube map requirement

• The Map should
• show similarity/dissimilarity between different
  departments/agencies (cluster map)
• show changing futures practices
• provide a compact, intuitive, browsable overview
• be aesthetically pleasing, inviting inspection
• indicate where exchange might be of value, and
• facilitate the finding of further information.

3
Technique portfolios
roadmapping
Simulation and gaming
Horizon Scanning
Driver analysis
Trend analysis
Technology
Backcasting
Scenarios
Visioning
Modelling
Delphi
Dept for Transport
Dept of Health
Environment Agency
FCO
DCSF
HM Treasury
Food Standards Agency
HSE
DfID
Defra
Home Office
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of Defence
HSE Health Safety Executive DfID Dept for
International Development
Key FCO Foreign Commonwealth Office DCSF
Dept for Children, Schools Families
4
DfT
DH
EA
HO
FCO
DCSF
HMT
FSA
MoJ
MOD
Defra
DfID
HSE
Pie charts for technique portfolio mix
5
Tube map process

• Collect technique profiles for each
  organisation
• Calculate similarities between all profiles
• Graph organisations such that similar ones lie
  close to one another
• With a rail for each technique, derive an
  efficient network to join organisations.

6
Map 2008
HMT
DCSF
Regular use
Emphasised
go to 2005 map
FSA
DH
MoJ
HO
HSE
Defra
click onFCO for a demonstration how the map
works
DfID
DfT
MOD
FCO
EA
7
Map 2005
HMT
DCSF
Regular use
Emphasised
return to 2008 map
FSA
DH
MoJ
HO
HSE
Defra
click onDepartmentfor info
DfID
DfT
MOD
FCO
EA
8
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
In recent years, futures thinking has been
systematically introduced into FCOs policy
development processes. From senior management to
policy leads, futures thinking is an increasingly
integral part of strategic thinking on countries.
FCO Policy Planners are trained in the use of
futures techniques and are now sharing these
skills and promoting their use across the wider
FCO. Decision trees and axes of uncertainty are
two regularly used methodologies in FCO strategy
work.

• Futures techniques have been used in FCO for less
  than five years
• This work looks at all time frames out to ten
  years and beyond

Contact Chris Bradley chris.x.bradley_at_fco.gov.uk
continued
Further details can be found at
returnto map
9
Foreign and Commonwealth Office (supplemental)
Externally, Planners are engaging with
cross-Whitehall futures groups (such as the
Stabilisation Unit-led co-ordination effort on
country level futures thinking in main foreign
policy departments) and have begun to engage with
wider futures networks such as the FAN and FUSION
groups. FCO Planners are also taking an active
role in organising joint futures events with
other government departments (e.g. the
FCO-MoD-DfID Africa Futures workshop at Wilton
Park in January 2008) and established bilateral
and trilateral futures work streams with DfID and
MoD in areas of common interest. Scenario
planning. In contrast to most of the other
techniques, this has been sporadically used by
individual FCO departments and posts as part of
self-initiated exercises for some years.
Pre-2007, its often unclear if and how this fed
into policy but scenario planning is now a
systematic part of strategy development with
policy leads involved in the whole process from a
very early stage. Horizon Scanning the FCO has
tended to engage with and use MoD and DfID
Horizon Scanning rather than conducting its own
scans. This is currently under review to see
whether there are gaps in foreign policy horizon
scanning which could be filled internally or
whether MoD/DfID work alone is sufficient to
inform strategy development and policy thinking.
No one standard time horizon applies to all FCO
work. This ranges from planning post-election
scenarios for the following year, to exploring
possible geopolitical trends in a specific region
in 30 years time.
10
About the tube map

• Background. This file is based on the findings of
  a short, questionnaire based study of strategic
  futures practice across UK Government.
• Creating the maps. The analysis has been
  conducted by first ascertaining which, if any, of
  ten futures techniques are in practical operation
  within each of the Government Departments.
  Departments are then positioned on the map
  according to the similarity in the type of
  futures methods they use. Two departments, for
  example, that use driver analysis and scenarios
  are considered to be more similar than two that
  share only visioning. The tube map effect is
  simply created by running rails between
  adjacent stations, much as physical rails are
  constructed in practice. The end result bears
  some visual similarity with the real tube map but
  is quite different in many respects.
• By drawing two maps, one showing technique usage
  at the current time and one for circa 2005, it is
  hoped to create an accessible view of changing
  practices.
• How to read the tube-map diagrams. The tube-map
  format is designed to be intuitive and engaging
  but is not intended to provide detailed insights.
  Three general levels of analysis seem
  appropriate.
• Level 1 overview. Before reading the map in any
  detail, some information can be gained from the
  general layout, the density of lines, number of
  line crossings, and so on. In particular, the
  differences between organisations and the
  strength of the clustering should be evident.
• Level 2 cluster membership. Having identified a
  potentially interesting cluster at level 1, the
  map then facilitates closer inspection to
  identify the constituent organisations.
• Level 3 individual techniques. Using the colour
  coding, it is straightforward to follow the
  line for a particular technique, both within a
  cluster and potentially running between clusters.
  Very little special significance can be read into
  the position of organisations that sit at the end
  of a line or lines.
• Navigation
• hyperlinked buttons allow general movement
  between slides,
• supplementary information can be reached from
  either of the two maps by clicking on the
  department of interest.

11
About the futures techniques(Jackson, A. (2005)
Strategic futures planning suggestions for
success. Office of Science and Technology Guide.
www.foresight.gov.uk.)

• Horizon scanning
• Looks across an area to identify future
  challenges and opportunities. Ranges from
  systematic to more open exploration. Can also be
  near-term or at the limits of current thinking.
• Very useful for spotting key issues before
  undertaking an in-depth analysis of interaction
  and social context, for example in scenarios or
  technology roadmaps.
• Delphi
• A type of consultation, starting with a
  questionnaire to seek initial views from a wide
  range of experts. Experts assess their relative
  level of competence in answering the questions.
  Responses are collated and sent out again to the
  contributors for comment.
• Good for gaining an overview of an area of
  science. Does not encourage interaction and is
  very dependent upon experts finding time to
  engage.
• Trend analysis
• The extrapolation of historical data forward
  (assuming that the future is an extrapolation of
  the past).
• Good for testing policy robustness and spotting
  developing problems. More suited to issues that
  take time to change (e.g. demographics), rather
  than issues that respond to immediate pressure
  (e.g. price of oil).
• Driver analysis
• Spots the factors that are driving and shaping
  trends and considers possible future
  interactions. Appropriate for detailed
  investigation of critical factors that are likely
  to shape the future, or as the basis for
  developing scenarios, roadmaps or visions.
• Good for testing policy robustness and spotting
  developing problems.
• Scenarios
• Internally consistent pictures of what the future
  might look like built by assessing how trends
  and drivers might influence the present to create
  the future. Usually three or four scenarios are
  produced.
• Creates a possibility space of what the future
  might look like as a context to test the
  robustness of policies against a range of future
  challenges. Can also help in spotting the
  unexpected.

Visioning Creates rich pictures of what the
future might look like, based on relatively less
rigour and more imagination. These represent a
jump forward that may not be clearly linked to
present trends. May be relatively difficult to
persuade stakeholders to take action on the basis
of a vision. Should have a ring of truth, and
ideally reflect emerging patterns that will
strike a chord with those hearing it. Technology
roadmapping Sets out the steps to achieve a
desired goal and assists the exploration of
possible future products and the key elements of
science and technology that need to be integrated
to deliver those products. Good for gaining
consensus within a diverse community and for
agreeing specific actions. Backcasting Starts by
producing an ideal future, then considers
actions to increase the chances of achieving
it. Requires clear unambiguous aims, otherwise
may be better to use scenarios. Modelling Can be
used to examine the future of a system, provided
there is a formal understanding of the factors
that will affect the way that system changes over
time. Can provide objective metrics for complex
issues and help assess the relative impact of
different options. Highly reliant on good data
for calibration great care needed in
interpreting the output. Simulation, gaming
synthetic environments In gaming scenarios,
stakeholders are asked how they would respond to
a given scenario. Good for owners of policies to
explore their influence on the future. In
simulations, a computer model plays the parts of
a system and the effects of particular
decisions can be explored. Good for communicating
complex decisions or for broadening peoples
perspectives.