Monthly Archives: July 2014

Do you think, or do you just do?

Planning, business planning, strategic planning. Whatever term you put on it, it requires thought.

And thinking implies effort.

Most times, its just easier to do. Its just easier to repeat how you have been successful in the past. Assuming that the future will be no different.

But unlike that financial planning adage “past performance is no guarantee of future performance” we assume that how we have operated in the past will hold us in good stead into the times ahead.

But will it?

Think of what the internet has done to retail.

What about low-cost imports from China?

And, what about the changes in people’s spending behavior?

Will there be changes that affect you? Reflect on this anecdote: as much as we have learnt & discovered over the last 75 years, we will repeat over the next 25.

Consider the following and the impacts that they have had:

  • Amazon.com
  • cordless tools
  • GPS
  • internet
  • just-in-time manufacturing
  • low-cost air travel
  • Microwave oven
  • MP3 player
  • MRI
  • to name but a few ….

So, what are the inventions, innovations, new things and processes that will impact upon your business? Upon how your organization operates and succeeds?

For more, visit Dellium Advisory, follow on Twitter, connect using LinkedIn, or review my IT-centric blog.

A different perspective of your organisation

What is the perspective that you have of the organisation you are part of, that business you run, that not-for-profit you give yourself to?

Could you change your view to seeing it as either:

  • an information processing system, or
  • a decision making system, or
  • an interpretation system

If so, what tools will you need to get the best out of the system? What leadership will you need? What strategies will you need to take you into the future?

For see, you take inputs and transform them using the, if you will, intelligence, of the organization.

You take the materials, the information and energy and produce something different.

So, if you are an information processing system:

  • how well are you processing the information?
  • how well have you defined the information?
  • what other information do you need?

And, if you are a decision making system:

  • what decisions are you making, or not making?
  • are the decisions made in a timely manner?
  • what decisions can be outsourced?

Finally, seeing the organisation as an interpretation system implies that:

  • you need to have the correct perspective
  • that the rules of interpretation need to be consistent
  • that the language has to be understandable

What is the perspective that you have of your organization?

For more, visit Dellium Advisory, follow on Twitter, connect using LinkedIn, or review my IT-centric blog.

The 3 P’s of Your Future

I want to place the question of life’s probabilities before you. I want to draw your attention to a set of plausible paths that the business or organisation you are part of can pursue. I want to pique your interest in the possibilities of the future.

For to the uninitiated perhaps these three words: probable, plausible and possible mean the same thing. That probable is just another word for possible, and that plausible is really that same as saying probable or possible.

But I put it to you that they are not.

Even though you could imagine Sherlock Holmes saying, “yes Watson, that is entirely probable”. Or an Agatha Christie detective stating equivocally, “mmm… plausible”. And I dare say that Patrick Jane, of “The Mentalist” fame would use the words “Its possible” when he reflects on a case with Lisbon.

In these three contexts, however, we are using these three words to look backwards. To look at a past action. To reflect on what has gone before. To look at a current situation to find clues for uncovering decisions that have been made.

But I’m more interested tonight in providing a reference point for decisions yet to be made. I’m interested in framing these three words probable, plausible and possible in terms of future actions. In terms of potential. In terms of what could be.

For example. Just imagine you have driven to the base of that mountain you are going to climb. As you are making your way from this starting point, you are faced with a set of choices for the length and difficulty of your work. Will you choose what is probable, plausible or possible?

Or here you are around the board table discussing business case options. Profiles of the various options are laid out, trends are discussed, and the future is mulled. The appetite toward risk is weighed, whilst the advantages and disadvantages of each of the outcomes are reflected upon. What is the final choice? Will what is probable, plausible or possible be selected?

What of the student part way through that undergraduate degree. Sitting at their desk in a moment of day-dream. Reclining with eyes closed, contemplating what could be. The choices before them, and the seemingly myriad consequences that are there for the grasping, even pursuing. Is this the probable, the plausible, or the possible?

You see, in the world of the futurist, of which I am a small part of. From the perspective of one who deals with strategic foresight, strategic thinking if you will, there is a difference between these three. There is a significant divergence between the probable, the plausible and the possible.

For these three are the major elements of the futures cone. The range of potential outcomes when looking at what could be. Handy descriptors of alternatives. This futures cone? It’s a cone on its side, with an apex on the left and its base to the right. It’s apex is at a point of time called now. Today if you will. And the base grows larger as the timeline moves further out ahead.

Through the centre of that cone, is a small diameter cone marked probable. The extent of the range of future states within this smaller cone are described as current trends. As those things that are likely to happen.

The mountain car park scenario describes this first cone. For it is probable that the group will take the easy path, rather than the difficult. Based on the group’s level of fitness, they are more than likely to choose the path of least resistance. Their range of potential experiences up that mountain are bounded by what is probable.

The second cone has a diameter which is broader than the first. This is cone is marked plausible. The extent of the range of future states with this larger cone are based on current knowledge. Those things which could happen.

The business case decision describes this cone marked plausible. For based on its current knowledge the board tries to see what could happen, and then make their decision accordingly.

But the final cone is the most exciting. It has the widest diameter. It is the one where perhaps dreams belong, visions if you will. It’s the breadth of potential that is not marked “likely to happen” in the case of the probable cone. Or “could happen” with the plausible spread of future states. Rather it’s the “might happen” cone. It’s the possible cone. Its what could be possible based on some future knowledge.

This range of futures, this breadth of possibilities. Well yes, it does apply to that day-dreaming undergraduate. But it also applies to those mountain climbers as they ask themselves – let’s take a different path, we’ll look forward to what might happen. And it applies to those decision makers. They can step back from their options analysis, and look deeper. They too can move from plausible to possible.

And so can you.

Three ranges of potential. Three breadths of scope for consideration. Three fields of view. Probable, plausible and possible. What is likely to happen, what could happen and what might happen.

Probable, plausible and possible. Oh reader, how do you view what lies ahead?
For more, visit Dellium Advisory, follow on Twitter, connect using LinkedIn, or review my IT-centric blog.