by 
There are many possible answers to this question, and I think in a healthy foresight ecosystem there can and should be many variations. We at Houston Foresight think of our niche in the foresight ecosystem broadly as “introducing people and organizations to the future.” We recently went through a 10-year program review, a global accreditation activity, and we’re doing a new strategic planning activity. So, we’ve been thinking a lot about what we are – and should be – doing!
A useful way to break that down is to clarify what our graduates should be able to do. You can see our curriculum here. Again, we do lots of things and our grads use what they learn in different ways. Nonetheless, we took aim at what we’d like to see. Here’s the statement:
One thing to keep in mind is we define client very broadly as whoever the audience for foresight work is. It’s not just paying clients, but it could be readers of a report, book, blog, etc. – whoever we are trying to reach with our work.
We imagine a case where a client asks for help regarding the future, and it’s up to you to design a way to help them. Think of it as “blank slate.” Many times a client isn’t even sure about what they want to do. They look to the futurist for help. Can we design a conversation/talk/workshop/project to help them?
In our view, there are no “magic” tools for this. We have to be able to think. To know what tools, processes, or frameworks are most helpful. To have a core understanding of how to design foresight projects. To know if and when variations are needed (almost always). And to do all this, we need a theoretical foundation. So, yes, we’re practical, but that practicality rests on a sold theoretical base.
– Andy Hines
agree. no tool solves the problems. tools just enable structured, repeatable methods.
idiots using the tools will get idiotic results.
fools using the tools will get foolish results.
Andy, i’m enjoying one of your books, “Thinking About the Future”. You use the word strategic occasionally, but i can’t find a definition of strategy in the book.
for example, on page 56, you write “Strategic objectives entail bringing a greater understanding of the future to bear on current decisions.”
How does the meaning change if you leave out the word “Strategic”?
or perhaps i should just ask, what is your definition of strategy?
for one thing, futurists should be able to define strategy