How Can We Anticipate Plausible Futures?
The three power vectors of the Futures Triangle explained
FUTURE PROOF-BLOG BY FUTURES PLATFORM
The Futures Triangle is a foresight method that is used to identify plausible futures that emerge in riptide between three pushing and pulling corners, each with its own set of drivers and inhibitors. The math between the power vectors of each corner defines the plausible future. Essentially, any change in one corner will impact the dynamics of the entire triangle, altering its angles and potentially leading to a shift in the probable direction of the plausible future. The original method was developed by Professor Sohail Inayatullah with the end goal of mapping the overall game situation before a transformative foresight process may begin.
The competing dynamics of the Futures Triangle are the past, present and future contexts. Each of these three corners of the triangle has its own set of trends, drivers and inhibitors, which are listed and ranked when using the method. The Futures Triangle method can be used in both individual or collaborative foresight work to map the current landscape where plausible futures take shape. It’s particularly well-suited as a structured brainstorming tool in participatory foresight workshops.
Futures Triangle, originally developed by Sohail Inayatullah
Moreover, Futures Table is a simple and quick-to-use tool that can be utilized anywhere. All you need is a whiteboard or a large sheet of paper to draw the triangle and write up different ideas, drivers, inhibitors, etc. You can use sticky notes for these, map them into the corners of the triangle, and then move on to a more interactive process.
So what do the three corners of the triangle consist of?
1. Pull of the future
The process begins with naming the pull of the future, which is a dominant visual image or vision. This chosen image sets the focal point that will be examined in the subsequent steps. There are naturally multiple competing images for the future, but only one shall be put here, together with all beliefs and ideas that are associated with the image.
There is a group of nine archetypal logics describing how people tend to believe the future gets formed and what they wish for. This framework can be used as a starting point for preparing the image, but the image can be much more specific and visual too. The group should also identify factors that contribute to the pull of this future image. Here are some guiding questions to uncover the future image and its associated pulls:
What would be the ideal future for this topic?
Do we have a shared vision of the preferred future and the futures we want to avoid?
Do we have a shared image of the logic behind how the future gets formed in this specific case, or are there conflicting logical beliefs?
If we were adrift in a river, where would we end up in the issue?
What tools and resources do we have that can affect the direction and steer us towards that future?
What do we lack to influence change? What are our limits?
Is it possible to impact this future image? Or is it needed at all?
2. Push of the present
The present encompasses many forces actively pushing change forward. These pushes are trends, drivers, technologies, and influential actors that make new things happen. It is essential to consider quantitative aspects when identifying the pushes of the present. This implies that these influences should, at least in theory, be demonstrably measurable in their impact on the direction of change. For instance, a prominent example of such a driving force is John F. Kennedy's decision in the early 1960s to embark on a mission to send a person to the moon.
Useful questions to identify pushes of the present are:
What trends and technologies are shaping the future right now?
What things are pushing change forward?
What already known new policies, procedures, laws, budgets, decisions and technologies will start to push change forward in the near future (like in the Kennedy case)?
3. Weight of the past
The past embodies weights, such as the structural barriers that inhibit change and hinder us from attaining a particular pull or push towards the future. These historical weights can manifest as organisational structures, policies, laws, regulations, procedures, knowledge structures, or historical narratives that restrict progress. They can also include existing investments in infrastructure, technology, education, and all societal agreements, accrued benefits, debts, and demographic structures.
Several influential societal organisations are committed to upholding the status quo, including labour unions, religious institutions, the military, and more. Useful questions to identify such weights of past are:
Who benefits from the status quo or loses if changes?
What are the barriers to change?
What is holding us back, or getting in our way?
What are the deep structures that resist change?
SHAPE PLAUSIBLE FUTURES FOR YOUR ORGANISATION
The Futures Triangle offers a powerful framework for examining the interplay between various factors that shape plausible futures, which is an essential component of foresight work.
Prior to using the Futures Triangle, it may be beneficial to employ the Future Signals Sense-Making Framework. This approach incorporates similar elements as the Futures Triangle, such as drivers of change and historical weights. However, instead of assessing the power vectors of change to determine plausible futures, it is designed to map and distinguish various types of futures into six distinct categories. This allows for a better identification of genuine anomalies among all potential futures.
Together, these methods offer a robust toolkit for identifying the current setting or “game situation” from which the plausible future can start to emerge. In the next step, horizon scanning can then be carried out to prioritize and assess the most significant phenomena related to the issue or topic at hand.
Shape plausible futures with Futures Platform. Our digital foresight database is packed with insights on emerging trends and future scenarios across industries to help you identify change signals early on.
These two disciplines play distinct yet complementary roles in strategic decision-making, both essential for success in today's volatile environment.