Linear vs less linear futures narratives
Many trends reports are useless. The good ones distill without losing inherent dynamics
Following on from my last post, I came across an article by Matt Klein who criticises the proliferation of useless marketing trends reports (hat tip to Andrew Curry). Most are just self-serving ads
“… the vast majority of our trend fodder today does not help us in our pursuit of judiciously navigating change. Instead it pumps hype and entertains us, dialing up the existing, deafening noise which we’re tasked with listening to.”
You see the same in other trends reports too. The result Klein notes is “Information Junk-ification.” More information but less preparedness. They repackage what’s generally known, missing out on more emergent and disruptive signals.
I avoid such marketing, and many tech, trend reports for just that reason. With generative artificial intelligence I predict we’ll get much more of that normative packaging and faux insights over the short term.
It is also important to recognise that trend analyses and reports are a start not the ending of futures thinking.
Trend networks and narratives
What most interested me in Klein’s article was his point about considering trends as networks, and that lines connecting different observations and trends should be considered “stories of change.” He suggests that these are what trend reports need to put more emphasis on.
“A trend practice fails because one myopically focuses too much on the nodes [observations], and not enough on the coalescing narratives which connect them all. These edges [connections between nodes] embody perspective, nuance and historical context. Over-simplification occurs when there are too few edges.”
But I think he in turn over-simplifies a networked and narrative approach, creating a linear and static futures narrative. By this I mean narratives such as “Trends A & B will lead to a rise in X over the next decade.”
In the futures world there are multiple competing narratives, so dynamism not linearity needs to be emphasised. If you are picking one narrative, you need to explain why this is more important or likely than others.
The “Future Opportunities Report” approach
An example of this type of linear thinking is the Dubai Future Foundation Future Opportunities Report. It identifies 50 opportunities for “future growth, prosperity and well-being.” I like how it emphasises opportunities, a welcome change from many adverse risk-focussed reports. It contains useful links to many science and technological developments (or ideas), as well as brief discussions of uncertainties and some challenges with each opportunity.
But its focus is on technologies and how they can be used to improve societal wellbeing (economically, environmentally and socially). In my view it is largely glossy advocacy for the “technology will set us free” mindset, ignoring many political, economic, and societal settings and barriers that also hold back opportunities. A useful resource but not sufficient for well-informed futures discussions.
The “Building Performance Reimagined” approach
A more stimulating, to me, approach is the Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers report (developed by the consultancy firm Arup) “Building Performance Reimagined.” This is a much more tightly focused sector report. Rather than just proposing solutions or opportunities the report is
“… a conversation starter — a foresight aid to imagining what might happen at the edges of possibility for building ‘performance’ measurement and management. Ideas here shine a light on the potential evolution of a building services engineer in the coming decades.”
Surveying social, technological, economic, environmental, and political changes It poses four questions, based on the building performance metrics of “variety, readiness, connectedness, and emergence”
How might building services optimise space, promote adaptability and diversity of use and user?
How might building services reduce risk and harm, and build anticipatory capacity to respond to unseen threats?
How might building services better respond to the building context and its contents, and integrate with local and wider systems?
How might building services contribute more than they consume, and learn as structures age?
Showing vs Telling
So, where the Future Opportunities Report has a narrative “tell” approach, the Building Performance Reimagined adopts more of a “show” and approach that doesn’t define solutions. In today’s super turbulent environment, where long standing assumptions are being challenged and uncertainty is growing, the latter futures approach is the more productive.