“Memories, misty water colored memories..” reinterpreted

Today's democratic court systems draw on ancient wisdom when they emphasize an eye witness as the best sort of evidence of guilt or innocence that can be given. Television and movie scripts validate this in many of their scripts. Yet, like the famous song "The way we were", time has “rewritten every line”. Evidence from current brain research says that our memories are based upon a better or worse ability to recall details. Some sing, ski, build electronic gadgets, sew, we all have a range of abilities in relation to others. We all know that we are better at some things and have a harder time with others. Why should memory be different?

Studies have shown that the way in which questions are asked influences the perception of the memory under inquiry. Memories change over time; they are not objective and are always reconstructed. We can even remember incidents that did not occur if others we trust validate that the incident occurred.

Other research suggests that we create the future based upon the memories we have from the past (the more detailed the better). Our present is colored by the interpretation we place upon the past and how we use that as a component of future scenarios.

Florence Kluckhohn, a famous anthropologist, determined that people could look at the past on a spectrum running from a people positive perspective to a people negative perspective, in more dynamic language people are basically good to people are basically evil. By evil we mean that they have no conscious, act only in their own self-interest, have no remorse or compassion, in other words psychopathic. About 1% of the population fit that diagnosis and the cause is complex and based more upon physiological and social conditions than it is values and beliefs.

Complicated? Yes, because the brain is complicated. One complex concept that has occurred recently is that of plasticity. Our brains build new neuron connections all the time and we have the capacity to revisit old memories and reinterpret them by sliding more toward the people positive perspective or more toward the people negative perspective. We can re-interpret them with new insight, maturity and understanding of the world and how it functions. Once again, it is not our memories that are important, but our interpretation of them.

What we are able to create for the future is largely based on the quality of our interpreted past. To have high quality memories, we have to be able to recall, not what was done to us, but what we derived from the situation that matters most.

Look Back to See the Future

In a recent 60 Minutes news forecast (American TV News Magazine, there was an interview with President Obama. The major focus of the interview was the battle to initiate health insurance into the American system.

In a revealing article in the Fall 2009 issue of Yes! Magazine, author Brooke Jarvis reveals all the mistakes Barak Obama is making, despite his background as a community developer and his successes in poor communities with an example from the past. She tells the story of academics and analysts who came together over the issue of health care as they saw workers, elderly and poor people who were in desperate need. However, they din't go to the people who need the care and help them to organize, they made their appeal to those they saw as having the direct power to make the necessary changes. Those in power were, in this particular case, the medical profession, the insurance industry and conservative politicians who got defensive and killed the initiative.

This sounds very much like what happened in the last struggle for a comprehensive health coverage intended to bring services to the masses of un- and under-served under President Clinton. Ms. Jarvis surprises us by saying that this particular incident describes a health care initiative from 1915!

She points out the same pattern in the 1920's, as a part of the New Deal, "the Wagner-Murray-Dingall bill of the Truman era." They ignored grass roots movements and succeeded in sucking the fight out of what those movements felt was their initiative.

Jarvis quotes historian Beatrix Hoffman, who states the real problem to be faced is that the proposals came from elites who sought to compromise with interest groups, where they believed real power lay, rather than to ally with grassroots movements and their supporters among everyday Americans. Those trying to make the reforms gave in to the powerful stakeholders, ignoring the strength of people in need. Even existing social movements for "civil and women's rights, organized labor", and those from the grassroots fighting for attention for specific diseases like AIDS, cancer, heart disease, obesity and diabetes could have contributed to the fight.

This article highlights the need for looking back and finding patterns. Isn't that what good psychiatry is about- helping people to understand that there is a pattern to all the mistakes they make and then encouraging them do something different? Why is that different when talking about large populations of individuals? The message for President Obama is clear. Go back and encourage those who propose a single-payer solutions encourage them to be heard, to demonstrate and fight for what they want. Look back and you will see the future!

Your inate ability to create the future

The current financial crisis of 2008-9 has hit all over the world. Many people find themselves out of work and in far too many cases out of a place to live. For many this will be a time for rethinking what truly brings meaning to our lives. However you see it, nature, evolution or the higher being of your choice has given us a variety of coping mechanisms for just such occasions. One of these is the capability of our minds to form our behavior in anticipation of future consequences. We can now see these capacities at work with the help of MRI and fMRI. We can anticipate future consequences, plan and monitor the direction of events in relation to how we see ourselves partaking in future activities. While these three are considered executive skills (used by leaders), everyone has the capacity to use them more or less. Everyone can be their own leader. Some need to learn and practice them and others perform them naturally.

The best way to practice is to create a specific event in which we have the roll we desire. It should to be an event that has meaning for our lives. For example, we are receiving acclaim for work we have done that has contributed something of value to others and has had meaning for ourselves. An event in which we are being handed a lot of money for winning a lottery, for which we did nothing may be exciting and come in very handy, but has no meaning unless we use the money for a cause we think contributes to the greater good. Try to picture that situation in as much detail as possible by using all your sense organs. See place, the colors and sounds, smell the smells and the feel the feeling you and others around you have. This is called an episodic future thought.

What does one gain from such an exercise? In the first place, it puts us in a position of thinking about the future, which is one of the first abilities to go when we are depressed. It means you are not deeply depressed or you are able to shake yourself out of depression. That is fantastic news. In the second place, the process of formulating an event in detail strengthens our ability to do that in the future. It is like working out at the gym.

The next step is to think about what consequences might arise from this event, both positive and negative. From there, we can begin to form our current behavior in the direction of strengthening the development of the positive consequences and giving as little energy as possible to consequences that may have negative outcomes. All the way, you can monitor if a given behavior contributes to your episodic future thought. Science tells us that that we have the capability. Wouldn’t now be a good time to nurture it?

Is this a description of you?

Do you tend to have people around you who are different from you and each other? Do you interact with them as individuals? Do you look for patterns in the world around you? Do you tend to do several things at once? Do you partner with others in order to accomplish tasks? Is it easy for you to see how you and the people around you make a difference together? Do you see the events around you as unfolding based upon what came before? Do you see them as a kind of evolution? Do you sense that there are many truths, which grow from varying circumstances?

This is an interpretation of one of four strongest mindscapes found in research by Professor Emeritus Magoroh Maruyma in some very interesting work he has done in the field of psychology and sociology. He argues that his methodology works over cultural borders as there are many more similarities between people of like mindscapes than there are between people from the same country. His work has an esthetic aspect as well. Professor Maruyma has found that individuals have an audio/visual preference related to redundancy (repetition) and symmetry or harmonic interactivity among dissimilar elements. He calls this entire spectrum the degree of nonredundant complexity. Examples of this for the mindscape above are: some traditional Japanese gardens and floral art, Picasso’s Guernica, Stravinsky’s Rite of the Spring, Richard Strauss’ Ein Heldenleben and Pergamon in Greece.

The more we understand about the possible preferences of the brain and the senses in making decisions, the better we can understand the individuals and the society around us. This is complicated business as Professor Maruyma has shown. Even though he was able to identify the four strongest mindscapes there were others, not as strong, but still relevant for individuals that exist. Putting people into categories is something that our brains tend to do, some more or less than others. For every stereotype you can identify, there will be some exception. This body of research has much to offer Foresight Styles. You may not feel at home with the above description; remember that there are others and that life is diverse and everyone is needed. As we look at such complex research we begin to understand just how that complexity is reflected in us.

On that rather complex note, have a relaxing and healthy summer. You can look forward to more insightful articles from The Foresight Files in the fall.

What is your action style?

Propensity to Action




Being/becoming/doing is an orientation, a range of human propensities to action or “the nature of man’s mode of self-expression in activity” report anthropologists Florence Kluckhohn and Fred Strodtbeck.

We all have the whole spectrum in us, but we have natural preferences as well. Our preferences are guided by our beliefs in how the world is structured and also our own image in that world. For example, because I came from a highly individualized culture, where action is prized over whom you know and what you can do, my self-image is based very much upon what I have accomplished through doing. When I am not "doing", I criticize myself for laziness and lack of initiative.

"Being" is related to the spontaneous way human beings satisfy their impulses which has nothing to do with passivity or development. It lies nearer instinctual behavior. If my lips are dry, my concentration is totally on how I can get to lip balm. If I am thirsty, a drink is upmost in my thoughts and motivates my actions. Being occurs when we accept our environment, living instinctually with a certain amount of “flow” made famous by Csikszentmihalyi.

“Becoming” is a creative activity, motivated by one's will, which is triggered by our emotional, intellectual and sensuous experiences. If one believes strongly that wife battering is the root of many of society’s problems and possibly have some more personal experiences, then your activity level might drive you to volunteer at a shelter for battered spouses. It is in becoming that we can understand the workings, patterns and systemic connections in our environment.

“Doing “ is dominant in Western society and is characterized by “…the kind of activity which results in accomplishments that are measurable by standards conceived to be external to the acting individual” (Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck,1961, p.17), like succeeding in being responsible for large profits in your working situation. It is often that monetary gains are the standards conceived to be external to the acting individual". Whether our reward is monetary, status or fame depends upon what we need most. Our actions are directed to changing something, making something, as we see it, better.

The being, becoming and doing continuum influences our foresight ability. The individual focused upon “being”, is totally involved in his or her work, enjoys the work, doesn’t make a conscious effort to develop, and is not as motivated to wander into thinking about what might be.

However, an individual focused upon "becoming" might be studying what is going on around him or her and seeing links, consequences and systems. They might begin to see what future activities or trends might result from such systems. It requires a certain amount of distance and the ability to see the whole picture rather than focus upon details. Generalists, who know a little about a lot, can often see the connections between divergent situations and activities.

When the situation under our inspection becomes personally connected to our emotions or grows out of an unfulfilled need is when we move toward action and "doing". In positive situations, the activist within steps forward and tries to make a change not only for him or herself, but for others with similar problems. Watch the TV program Dr. Phil to see examples of both. Some people are just caught up in their tragedy and can only tell how they feel. Others have the ability to realize that the situation, in which they find themselves, happens to others as well.

Which propensity to action do you find yourself using at this moment? Are you able to identify personal examples of when you are “being, becoming, or doing”. One of the biggest lifestyle complaints has been that we are so wrapped up in doing that we have no time for being (playing with the kids) or becoming (watching the interaction between the people around us, or observing world patterns and systems).

Do rules reign?

How much structure do you require to feel save and happy in your life? The theory of foresight styles postulates that one’s personal need for structure partially affects where on the foresight style continuum one sits. Naturally, there are other personal characteristics that affect it as well. Earlier I have written about the temporal factor.

You can test your personal need for structure on a Scale.

Personal Need Structure or (PNS) is one of those few academic descriptions that don’t need interpretation. Think about the structure that you have in your life. Do you always put your keys in the same place? Do you want a written job description or just verbal instructions in the beginning?

I first became aware of the concept when I worked with thirty-five women in learning/executing a study of the future of the public sector in Sweden. Every time we had a participants meeting, there were some that asked question after question and others who understood directly and wanted to leave and start working. Those in the middle needed a little clarity, but pretty much understood and were greatly irritated by those who wanted more information and those who had one foot out the door. When I thought about it, I realized that every meeting I had ever been a part of had the same dynamic which illustrated individual differences of the participants. Obviously, others had made the same observation and have done some very detailed research on it. PNS is conceptually similar to how tolerant or intolerant we are of ambiguity, or as Geert Hofstede called it, Uncertainty Avoidance. These concepts, when applied to foresight have to look at what a high need for structure might mean to someone who is asked to thinking about the future. A logical extrapolation from the current situation could make the future a better or worse version of how it is today. Someone who has a low need for structure, and can handle more ambiguity and not shy away from uncertainty, might feel freer to create visionary or dystopic images of the future. Those in the middle of that spectrum might be inclined to put together current and past ideas, creating something new and yet not totally unfamiliar. It is clear that both positive or negative or mixed futures can come from individuals on the personal need for security spectrum. This is the starting point for many scenarios. However, when looking at why people choose one or the other or both, might lie in their orientation on what anthropologist Florence Kluckhohn used, scale of good to evil. In other words, we all sit somewhere on a belief spectrum from: people are basically good to people are basically evil. You are possibly starting to get the idea that there are a lot of factors that influence foresight. Research continues to flush them out. Keep reading here, we have and will discuss others.

Theoretical entree, practical dessert

Recent interest in the theoretical background of Foresight Styles Assessment has lead to a paper soon to be published by the Journal of Futures Studies titled Foresight Styles Assessment: A theory based study in foresight competency and change.

For Certified Consultants who use FSA in their consulting or coaching, insight into our "entree" (some light theory) might be useful in working with clients. For "dessert" practical suggestions are offered.

The intentions of FSA are the same as for most assessments, allow for wide divergence in clients' views, attitudes, values, and behaviors, recognize the diversity with which they and their colleagues face change and aid clients in choosing approaches to change that consider both short and long term aspects.

Background

FS has its background in Innovation Diffusion research or how new ideas become integrated into a wider population. It is a scale from non-acceptance to quick adaption of the new. It is not just how we accept what's new, but has to do with the origin of the new idea and how each different adaption style affects long and short range results. When economic, climate, ecologic and energy questions fight for our attention and energy, the long-range and the short range come into perspective in a new light.

A number of assumptions that influenced the foresight theory are:

individuals have a greater affinity for and can be placed upon a temporal spectrum of past - present - future,

individuals think from analytic or holistic paradigms,

individuals have a greater or lesser affinity for activity as described by the continuum for instinctual behavior, development directed behavior or action oriented behavior,

individuals have a greater or lesser need for structure.

Evolutionary development has endowed Homo sapiens with genetic and physiological capabilities that allow them to do what no other animals can; form their future.

Holistic thinking is summarized as a spectrum, from the ability to see the larger picture with all its messy detail: holistic causality, everything-is-connected and a an attitude of contradictions that can see some validity in both sides. The locus of holistic thinking is the whole. Analytic thinking is described as slow, deliberative and conscious, rational analysis and discussion with locus of attention on the parts. Researchers from Eastern cultures refer to their research as holistic and Western researchers tend to use Duel Process and their term of choice.

The temporal aspect of FSA has to do with ones orientation or alignment to the past, the present or the future. It does not mean that the individual lives totally in one of these time zones, but find one or the other a comfort zone.

Under propensity to action there are two concepts. Being, becoming and doing describe the activity relationship we have to our total environment. We can be accepting within our environment, living instinctually with a certain amount of “flow” as Csikszentmihalyi describes it. We can understand the workings, patterns and systemic connections in our environment, or we can take action in order to bring about change. The being, becoming and doing continuum influences how each of the styles individualize themselves.

The other individualization influence is in the varying degree of personal need for structure which enables us to make sense of the world, to form and maintain a clear perception of our personal and work lives. A high personal need for structure implies a need for information and rules about the topic at hand and appears to correlate with a fear of lack of validity, cogency or acceptance by the larger group. In addition, when confronted with a proposed change, a personal need for structure can include a need to know what to expect, the need to maintain a daily routine, the fear of unpredictable situations and people, unclear and new rules, activities and expectations.

Paractical Tips

When using FSA with client groups or individuals, one can discuss need for or lack of need of structure, propensity to action, holistic or analytic thinking and temporal orientation. First, talk to yourself about your stance on these four orientations. Consider that your orientation will draw you to clients that have similar orientations and initiate a certain amount of judgment against those who do not. Bon appitit!

The telling of your time

As those of you who have used Foresight Styles Assessment with your clients know, there is a temporal perspective attached to each of the six styles.

Foresight Styles Assessment and Temporal Orientation

Futurist - Future
Activist - Present/Future
Opportunist - Present
Flexist (Leading group) -Present/Future
Flexist (Later group) - Present/Past
Equilibrist - Present
Reactionist - Past

From resent research we are just beginning to understand just how important temporal perspectives are in the way we respond to life's various changes. Each of us put a lot of time into thinking about the past, the present or the future. You can check your own time orientation by drawing three circles representing past, present and future on a piece of paper in relation to one another as you see them in your life. They can be different sizes, near, far or overlapping where you find it appropriate. Label the circles past, present and future in the way that you feel is the best representation of your life. Do not read further until you have completed the task. Look to the bottom of this blog. Thanks to Peg Thoms' Driven by Time for the exercize.

If your clients are managers or CEO's they will want to know "is better for the boss to be future oriented?" Each of the time orientations have their positive and negative sides. Naturally, a CEO who is out to change their organization has an advantage with a future orientation. If getting the organization in order after crisis, it is good to have someone who is oriented to the present. What ever your orientation, one should have compliment orientations in their near circle to add balance. After consulting with them you get valuable information that reflects how others might respond. Use that information to help you in making the kind of changes you feel are important to your business.


Analyzing your drawing:

There are two points of interpretation in this task. One has to do with impact and the other has to do with size. The larger circle is that upon which you focus the dominate amount of energy. The nearness, touching or overlapping indicate the amount of influence one time orientation has upon another.

Our thoughts tend to dwell in one temporal orientation or another. Of course, our temporal orientation isn't simply that, it is colored by negative, positive, hedonistic, fatalistic or transcendental impulses say researchers Boyd and Zimbaro.

Request to Read about FSA

I have been asked recently if there is something written on Foresight Styles Assessment. There is a lot of information on the website and monthly entries at Foresight Files and Consulting Change. A manual is available on the website which is tailored to those who wish to become certified. A theoretical paper is currently being written, and a statistical paper will follow. Here is an excerpt from the opening of the theoritical paper:


The Foresight Styles Theory defines and measures a range of thinking that distinctly influences responses to change and the future. In this particular juncture in time, change is increasing in speed and intensity. The human organism struggles to respond to this change. Within the broad range of both capacities and needs there are four, values related orientations: temporal (time orientation), structural (stronger or lesser need), doing/being (acting/observing), systemic/linear which assist us in our response to change. Each individual contributes their own unique combination of each orientation to every external change they meet during their lifespan. Foresight Styles Assessment is a tool designed for the purpose of drawing focus to just those qualities in each individual and group which are used to survive in this ever changing world.

A Place of Creativity and of Holistic Foresight

Recently, in writing about Foresight Styles Assessment, I have spent a lot of time explaining why the "Futurist" style differs quantitatively from most of the other five styles which have their own personalities, but are relatable to the massive and statistically validated body of research known as Innovation Diffusion. I am convinced that there is a place of creativity and of holistic foresight that comes together within us that is a part of a genetic gift that we all have to varying degrees. I am convinced that how we relate to the future is highly influenced by that genetic gift.

Evolutionary scientists are learning more every day about the development of our brains. The order of the brains development has been established for decades now. We are just beginning to learn about things like plasticity, the way culture and behavior shape the brain, the way past memories influence what we can imagine the future to be. We are also learning how genetics influences what our brains can be and what they can and cannot do.

Another of the styles that doesn't fit into the innovation diffusion scheme is the "Opportunist". It may feel as if the parts of us that live in the present, that look for what will enhance our lives here and now, the parts that, in our materialistic, achieving society tempt our values towards gain for fame's sake are totally negative. Yet, we see many examples of opportunistic behavior every day and we act on opportunities that we would regret if we didn't take them. Opportunism represents more than just the speed with which we accept an innovation. It goes to the motivation behind our need to live in the present, to use whatever comes along to enhance our survival now without regard to a future time. This is also a part of our brain's architecture. It speaks to survival, at the reptilian brain level, but also in other parts of our brain. If lying will get a hug, praise, acceptance or acknowledgement and those qualities are missing from our lives; naturally we will take the opportunistic road and leave thoughts of the future for others.

That opportunistic behavior can also be of value in a change process was something I came to slowly. As Maslow put it, there is a certain hierarchy of needs and survival is the bottom line. An organization, in which I am a member, recently was on the brink of extinction. It was very hard for the membership (largely academic and all working with some aspect of the future) to keep straight what were the "Opportunist" actions and "Futurist" actions. Fortunately, the group had one person who understood the difference and was willing to take charge.

It feels presumptuous to offer a model of change that is tangent to such a well developed concept as Innovation Diffusion. I still feel strongly that FSA is a more holistic view of change. It can be used to fulfill our need for understanding and learning. FSA can be used as a way to grow ourselves, our communities and our organizations. It is integral to understanding the present and creating the future.

The Answer is in the Questions

A group who recently took Foresight Styles Assessments made an oft repeated comment, "What interesting questions, they really made me think". Often Consultants and even individuals who are interested in FSA for personal or group development ask me, "What should I do with my results"? Naturally the results are interesting, and I will speak to that in the near future, but the questions can be just as useful. Take, for example, the question about being willing to give up benefits in the present to assure even better rewards in the future.

It is easy to come up with daily personal examples - give up this desert now for less weight gain in the future, pay bills now for lowering stress and feeling good about one’s self.

In business situations there are also many examples such as, address possible customer illness or injury caused by our product now instead of dealing with bad publicity, lowered product sales and legal costs in the future, - spend now on research for non-polluting materials for later rewards in the form of positive publicity, good will, saving on future fines or pollution clean-up costs.

How can giving up success now for even better rewards in the future help your team, your leadership group or your department? Are you, as Consultant, CEO, or leader willing to take such questions up in your organization? What better way to get more people involved in the decision making?

When it has to do with changes in process, work load, new assignments, new bosses or new mechanization, some employees, when questioned, perceive decision makers as a threat to them and their world. These individuals fight the changes recommended by others no matter who they are. When asked why they resist they reply with a series of responses you have heard before, "they don't know our organization", "they are too young (or old) and haven't thought things through," they don't have any experience in this specific situation", we've been through these changes before and it only makes things worse. These individual are those who can make life difficult in an organization change. Are they just difficult people who we can dismiss? Do they have any points to make? An open discussion of this question, handled respectfully, could open a few new doors.

Take Foresight Styles Assessment and think through the questions in relation to a current assignment or change situation. Use the questions and your own creativity to open difficult subjects and get people to articulate their feelings and attitudes.

Working with individuals

I recently had the pleasure of working with a college student who had taken Foresight Styles Assessment and wanted to discuss her results. She was curious what the answers would reveal about her. She thought that it was hard to choose which response was most descriptive of how she felt about each question. This is not unusual as many times those who take FSA are not used to thinking of themselves in terms of foresight. We are rarely called upon to define our own behaviors in terms of how we respond to change.

She had her highest points on Futurist and Activist. This happens very often that Futurist and Activist styles are linked. "But", responded the assessment taker, "I don't see myself as much of an activist, I don't go out and demonstrate or plan actions against anything".

"Do you try to convince others to accept your view of things?" I countered. Well, it turned out that she did, all the time in fact! Activism is about convincing others to think and behave differently. Some of us try to change the minds of many at once and others of us try to change one mind at a time. They are just different activist strategies.

Another person I worked with, this time a man with a lot of business success behind him, said that he thought he was more of a Futurist than his scores showed. He was disappointed because he thought of himself as being ahead of his peers. He had a great score in opportunism which shortened the time frame in which he worked. He was, however, always ahead of his contemporaries even if it was just one or two jumps ahead. The fact is that many people would have loved his profile and would have liked to be less of a Futurist and more of an Opportunist in order to be a little more successful in the monetary sense. A Futurist with very high scores is often so far into the future than they are not able to be productive in everyday activities. They are interrupted by the big picture, linkages of one activity to another and possible consequences.

One of the interesting parts of working with individuals are the "aha" experiences they get. A well known futurist/consultant, with many years of experience and education in the field had the same experience. She felt that her Futurist style was lower than she had wished or expected. She realized that working with the business world as much as she had, her futurist inclinations had taken a back seat to the shorter term outlooks most companies have today. She had unconsciously prioritized one part of herself over another. That was her “aha” experience.

When starting out with Foresight Styles Assessments you might be unsure about how to help your clients with their understanding of the material. The good thing is that help is not far away. For ideas and inspiration contact Natalie Dian at the numbers and address listed in contact information at http://www.foresightstyles.com/. I will be happy to work with you.

Organization Profiles - getting the arrows alligned

Which description best fits your company?
Cutting-Edge - State of the art firm, leading in it's field

New Thinking - Changing the way business is done or changing the world

High Profit - Looking for lucrative opportunities

Quality Lift - Uses best practices and implements new innovations successfully tried by others

Corrective - Looking to perpetuate their success

Structural - Pillars in their "community" with many achievements

Each of these descriptions is instrumental in stimulating new directions, strategic actions or visions for the company. In their true form, organization profiles do not exist. To achieve a “perfect” profile, a company or organization would have to be made up of people; all having the same dominate foresight profile. Recruiting for such an organization would be a nightmare, and it is uncertain just how long such a grouping would be able to continue to exist. Just like individuals, organizations have different styles that impact the companies’ policy and behavior. We also know that a combination of age and success can change a company’s profile. A life insurance company that started prior to a depression with the goal of relieving the effects of economic disaster could be categorized as Cutting Edge. They perceived a future event and met the need. However, insurance is a long-range business with a time margin: the length of the longest life and the last signed policy. All things having gone well, the life insurance company matures and needs people who can maintain and develop the company. A Quality Lift profile takes over. The company grows and due to its increased size becomes more complex and centralized showing signs of Corrective profile, that is they look to perpetuate their success. As pillars in their “community” with a proud history and achievements behind them, our model company begins to slip into a Structural profile, where innovation is not advancement, but is seen as a threat to traditions and time-tested methods learned the hard way. Change threatens basic company values and jobs. Which profiles do you have pushing and pulling within your organization?

What is your companies story?

Below are six descriptions of company profiles related to Foresight Styles Assessment research. Which ones tell the story of your company or organization?

Cutting Edge: is state-of-the-art and lead in their field.
New Thinking: changing the way business is done or change the world!
High Profit: looks for lucrative opportunities.
Quality Lift: uses best practices and implements new innovations successfully tried by others.
Corrective: looks to perpetuate their success.
Structural: are pillars in their community with many achievements.

Knowing which company profile fits is a boon to strategic planning. It can help you in hiring (which doesn't mean hiring only leaders with a similar style), in decision making, in visioning and mission development and in managing.

It may be that your organization has been around so long that it has had all of the above stories at one time or another. Something or someone comes along and renewes it and it takes on a different profile and starts not only a new story, but a new book! If you feel FSA's company styles can help you to work more effectively with your clients you can write for more information to info@foresightstyles.com. Why not tip a colleague to www.foresightstyles.com?

More on Change

Take the Foresight Styles Assessment and take us up on our introductory offer.
at:http://www.foresightstyles.com/assessment.html

Find more material on change on my Squidoo lens: Consulting Change
at:http://www.squidoo.com/lensmaster/first_publish/consultingchange

Introductory price for Foresight Styles Assessment

Thanks to those of you who have ventured into Foresight Styles Assessment before we lifted our "almost ready" sign! You have helped us identify our weak spots and fix them. If you have never taken the assessment Foresight Styles we welcome you to take it for the introductory price of $12.75 (normal price 15.00). We hope you will learn more about yourself and how you handle change. If you would like to use it as a tool for personal growth, please feel free to contact us and we will give you a free 15 min. consultation via Skype. Make an appointment at info@foresightstyles.com and we will set it up!

This blog "The Foresight Files" is for those of you who work with people who are struggling with change. You will find insights, tips on how to get started and information on how to work with groups. We hope you will contribute with your experiences as you begin to work with the material. It is our goal to offer as much coaching as possible. We want you to be the Foresight Styles experts!

Positive group pressure as a way to change

If you want a way to show people how new ideas spread take a tip from Molly Melching, who works in Senegal. She has an interesting exercise that change consultants might find useful. She has everyone sit (someone could make sure that all participants are sitting before you enter the room). She introduces herself and explains that in her land (or in Cutting Edge companies, successful politicians or productive NGO's etc.) everyone stands when someone speaks before them (choose another behavior that fits your situation) and that it is normal to stand, people stand and listen when someone speaks. She goes around the room and spreads the message to a number of people that it is more comfortable to stand. One at a time people begin to test standing and they are encouraged to tell someone else nearby or a friend across the room. After a few have started to stand, Molly needs to speak to fewer and fewer participants. The new advocates for standing spread the word. Soon there are only a few left sitting. After a while all are standing.
This is an exercise that illustrates how an innovation (in this case a new behavior) becomes diffused throughout the group. Spend time with those who are most receptive to the innovation. Encourage them to speak to others. In this way, Molly Melching is raising the human rights of the women of Senegal beginning with those most interested and they pass it on. Her education program is presented only to volunteers. The concepts are broken into three levels with increasing sophistication and the innovating group stays in each village (department) for three years.

Opportunists Conquer Climate Change

Here we have a perfect example of opportunistic behavior. In the Swedish press, Aftonbladet, reporter Joachim Kerpner writes the story behind ethanol production. European providers of ethanol are blooming like cauliflower. Sweden, an example of counties who have put much of their environmental energy into ethanol and bio-fuels, encourage companies as part of their strategy to fight global warming. Competition is created so that the companies are looking for the cheapest prices for their customers. Governments desperate to decrease their carbon emissions (and looking for new ways of employing citizens) create markets and encourage companies. The expression “Make hay while the sun shines” apply describes this situation.
What are the consequences? Kerpner reports that Brazilian sugar cane workers work fifteen hour days chopping the cane by hand. Competition comes from Tanzania where sugar cane is also grown. By keeping salaries low, their employers ensure a cheap raw product for ethanol production in India, England and Holland. Buyers think that they are providing jobs that will lift the poor of Tanzania. The consequences are that any monetary gains will be pressed by competition from some other poor, tropical nation and what’s left lost to health issues. Another consequence is that land owned by small farmers growing a diversity of crops will be turned into industrial farming. Ownership moves from the local grower to the “industrial” grower; crops that once nourished local families are gone. A leading Swedish company calculates that 3 million Tanzanians will be lifted out of poverty and assert their desire to avoid physical burnout. Huge tracts of land, the size of the Swedish Provence of Skåne will be involved and the social structure related to small farms and communities will be broken forever. As we know from Foresight Styles, consequences are not a big part of opportunist thinking. A generalized wish not to overwork cane cutters and give them jobs satisfies the opportunists need for meaning.
Technology that will allow production of ethanol from cellulous fibers found in all plants is still under development. Between now and then companies wish to earn as much as they can from sugarcane and assure high market share for 2010 when Swedish use of ethanol is scheduled to play its role in slowing climate change. We are going to see more of this opportunism because the systemic change to renewable fuels will go in phases rather than an overnight flip flop. The trick is for companies to realize the transitional nature of their enterprise and be willing to employ foresight skills in order to maintain flexebilty and survive or move from one short term project to another. Source: http://www.aftonbladet.se/klimathotet/joachimkerpner/

Change - innovation: what is the difference?

As a consultant working with companies or as a coach working with individuals it is important to help clients understand how they move forward. Let us begin with an individual. One of today’s most discussed personal problems is obesity or overweight. There are many products on the market that promise you will loose weight before swim suit season, in two weeks or in a month. Most of these work on a few, but fail for the greater majority. Another group of weight loss writers speak about a lifestyle change. What they mean, but don't say because it is too loaded is that a lifestyle change means a change in how one uses his or her brain. The brain must be taught to think long-term instead of giving in to instant gratification. It means taking responsibility for ones self and making decisions about products. It means learning more about how the world works, spending more money on food and taking responsibility for ones self.

This is a huge "change". After commitment to the new direction there are many “innovations” that will help the individual. Information from informed people who talk about more than food, they also speak about exercise, good mental health, understanding ones own body and its peculiarities will suggest innovations in each area that can enforce the new lifestyle.

In many companies and organizations a commitment to providing customers with products and services that are sustainable and provide ones workers with fair salaries and working conditions represents a huge “change”. It is not a change because they think these goals are inherently wrong, but that they appear go against the maximization of profit. If one is mandated by law to earn a profit for the sake of shareholders, it is much harder to make the change. The two seem incompatible.

However, a number of companies are slowly trying. Of course, none of them will truly make the change until they are released from the need to maximize profit in order to pay stockholders or if they remain small and or private. The idea of local and small companies is taking hold in some areas. The large Wal-Mart’s have been denied building permits in some towns. The trend of the dying mom and pop businesses is slowly reversing itself. One of Sweden’s largest and most successful business is IKEA. It has gone international but is not listed on the stock exchange because it’s owner and founder has refused to go public.

Remaining small and private are “innovations” that will lead us to a very different business paradigm. For a long time big business (that is stockholder held international conglomerates) will continue to make profit, but in the long-run, they will fail. They already have divested themselves of large numbers of employees, an innovation that serves the dying paradigm. This is an interesting point. One can innovate within the existing world view with the idea of extending its past glories longer into the future or one can adapt the new worldview and innovate to give life to and assure success in the new one.

If you are consultant to a company do they want help extending the old world view, or do they want help with actualizing a new one? Which type of work do you prefer to do? Are they up for a large change to a new paradigm, or are they just interested in innovations which lengthen the status quo?

Why Strengthen Your Organizations Change Muscles?

Naturally you will have heard the following phrases in the news and read them in newspapers; climate change, energy crisis, peak oil, hybrid cars, sustainability and many more. These are signs of the beginnings of a huge paradigm shift. A paradigm is a world view, and our view of our relationship to nature is changing. You in companies and organizations will be affected in ways that were unthinkable only five years ago. We are in the beginning of a new S-curve or paradigm. The lowest point of the S-Curve marks the beginning of a new world view. The growth of the curve means that more individuals have begun to change and innovate.

Companies and organizations are adapting new ideas that will help us live more healthfully and prosperously on the planet earth. These changes are going to clash often with existing policy and systems and create new challenges. It is not just a matter of a little innovation; it is a matter of a myriad of innovations which must hang together if your organization wants to survive the shift. Your clients or colleagues will be continually asked to readjust, innovate and integrate new behaviors and new ways of thinking in order to keep up.

Technology is already spinning. Cheaper photovoltaics are being developed, advances in wind power equipment, hybrid cars and biofuels. Hydroelectric production and equipment is the next layer of change in the energy field. What might this mean to your organization? It means careful with investments because, just like computer’s, energy sources will both improve and change, making your expensive investments out of date. More local power stations to prevent brown and blackouts will be adapted by companies. Unlike computers, where basic knowledge can be used even though the programs and machines are upgraded, changing energy sources or equipment could involve totally different technologies and high costs.

Technology is not the only area impacted by the changing world view. Mass production and the idea of “Bigger is best” is being replaced by local and transparent. Individuals want to know that their food is fresh; grown without chemicals, pesticides and that the money they pay for it stays in the local community. People want to know that the companies they buy products from have control over every stage of product development. They want to know that no pollution occurred as a result of obtaining the raw materials, that the workforce was paid and treated properly and that their health and working conditions were satisfactory. Now many can get away with saying that they will try. As the S-Curve grows trying will not be good enough, it must happen. As a company, you will be increasingly expected to open your books and processes to consumers.

The building industry is awash with new, renewable products that do not pollute, are strong, cheaper to produce and use less wood. Window glass that reflects or draws in warmth, while not effecting light transfer, is now available. Wind and solar power solutions to home energy make homes increasingly less dependent on the mass energy networks of the “mass production” era.

The changes in values and thinking, plus new duties, routines and responsibilities increase in intensity until the S-Curve reaches the top. Climbing the S-Curve requires mussel. Companies are going to have to train their ability change and then stretch to meet new ways of doing things. Just like athletes, train and stretch and compete. Then it will be time for more new changes!