Contemplating Future Scenarios
In the spring of 2020, shortly after it was clear that the COVID-19 pandemic was not just a passing cloud briefly darkening an otherwise sunny global landscape, I was invited to join a group of forward-looking thinkers on the Millennium Project. Over the next 9 months we produced three “stories” about what the near future might look like as the novel virus rampaged through the world’s populations. Our purpose was not to blame or take political action. Rather, we sought to help medical, social services, NGO, and government decision makers prepare for an unpredictable future. (You can see a video report on this work here.)
This last week, Knowledge Management World published a review of the Millennium Project’s report. It begins:
“The American Red Cross is no stranger to crises and disasters. When things go bad, it is often among the first organizations on the front lines lending assistance.
Yet, last year, during the height of the pandemic, Michael Kleeman of the American Red Cross kept thinking a different approach was needed. In a recent report, he is quoted as reflecting at the time, “We’re so focused on what we have to do today to respond to the COVID pandemic that we don’t have time to think twelve-to-eighteen months down the road. But someone has to.” That’s when he turned to The Millennium Project for help.
Jerome Glenn, CEO of The Millennium Project, and one of the world’s top strategists, had to step back for a moment, since the vast majority of his body of work focuses on the long term. In fact, Paul Saffo, his colleague at The Millennium Project, studies time horizons spanning tens of thousands to billions of years. Never ones to pass up an opportunity, especially given the turmoil the world was (and still is) going through, they accepted the challenge.” Click here to read the rest of the KM World article
I posted these notes in the comments section following the article:
“Nice review, thank you Art.
Several points you made are worth emphasizing. First, future scenarios are not predictions. They are intended to bracket possible outcomes so organizations can prepare for a wide spectrum of events.
Second, the “citation ring”, echo chamber, or confirmation bias effect makes ferreting out reliable data difficult for experts and even more challenging for ordinary news consumers. On one hand, receiving the same message from a variety of researchers may indicate that the community of practice has tested a concept thoroughly and reached a convergent conclusion we can rely. On the other hand, multiple secondary reports may result from many writers picking up on the same, possibly fake, extremely preliminary, or mistaken published research. It take considerable sophistication to discern the difference.
A third issue you highlighted is data that did not “distinguish between purely COVID related deaths and deaths involving comorbidities.” This is an example of the logical fallacy, “post hoc ergo propter hoc” that concludes that if B follows A then A caused B. Under the pressure of so many hospitalizations of elderly and frail people, it was impossible to take the time to sort out whether an individual patient with COVID actually died of COVID-induced respiratory failure or something else.
Finally, it’s worth noting that the Red Cross is not the only response agency that could benefit from scenario studies similar to the one we did for COVID-19. Any time there is a large-scale event that plays out over a multi-year period, agency staff tend to focus on methods drawn from their recent training and experience. And, they talk most often to their known partners and colleagues which can enhance the echo chamber effect. But whether the event is a wildfire, a war, slow but inexorable climate change, or the impact of a new, rapidly-adopted technology, the uniqueness of the event calls for more robust and innovative responses. Scenario studies can both drive innovation and confirm the effectiveness of well-known practices. The world would benefit from more Millennium Project style thinking.”
My contribution to the Millennium Projects COVID-19 report was minimal and I was honored to be able to participate. Public health is not my area of expertise although I have been active in disaster preparedness and recovery in my home county, Sonoma, California. But, by joining this working group, I learned a tremendous amount about how to conduct future studies. Learning and education are my wheelhouse and the view from here is dismal.
Over the next two years I would dearly love to stage a Millennium Project study of the future of formal, non-formal and informal education. It’s not too soon to start taking names of those of you who would be willing to participate in the Real-Time Delphi process.