The Geometry of Foresight: Are we Thinking Outside the Box?

As more and more people engage in generative AI on the job, it’s interesting to see a new generation of tools being adopted into workflows and working styles. Although there are still major discrepancies among users and consistency of use, it seems that going forward, Chat GPT will be a go-to for many professionals.

Within specific fields, there have always been specific tools to get the job done. The foresight field is no different. Futurists are keen on AI as much as any other profession these days but most still fall back on an array of established methods. This post seeks to unpack a quirky observation: many well-known futurist tools align to geometric shapes and concepts. This compelling fact beholds new insights as to what futurists think and may help better understand the role futurists play in business and society.

Foresight, or futures studies, is a multidisciplinary field that draws on numerous skills. It is fair to say mathematics is one of the many fields of study which has informed the futurist toolkit: probabilities, statistics, and data projections are distinguishing elements of original academic and applied foresight.

Over its decades-long evolution, foresight has embraced existing theories and approaches that help achieve the aims of studying the future. Rather than evaluate the pros and cons of various futurist tools, this discussion will focus on the notable fact that many of the methods draw on geometry in both nomenclature and design. This post assumes an anthropological perspective on the foresight field in terms of what this observation tells us about the beliefs and practices of those who study the future.


Futures Wheels

Futures Wheels are a go-to futurist tool. Invented by Jerome Glenn of the Millenium Project, Futures Wheels have been in use for decades as a structured brainstorming method suitable for any conceivable future topic. The process is highly visual: starting with a central idea at the middle of a diagram, the process is to populate many circles, representing various levels of future implications, with content based on creative brainstorming about the future of the central idea. The ideas are interconnected by spokes. Recently, a foresight scholar has developed a spin-off called Backcasting Wheels, which is a clever adaptation of Futures Wheels oriented toward strategic planning rather than future implication brainstorming.


Futures Cone

The Futures Cone encapsulates the basic premises of the study of the future: 1-There are multiple futures rather than a singular future; 2-The futures can typically be categorized among one of the P’s (preferable, probable, possible, preposterous, plausible); and 3-Prolonged time horizons have greater uncertainty than near-term futures. The cone is a strong choice for introducing the future, and many varied practitioners have had a hand in shaping its evolution. The cone brings the future into a three-dimensional view and conveys the most important tenets of foresight, so it is unsurprising to see it persist after decades of use in foresight studies.


Futures Triangle

The Futures Triangle is an analytical foresight method developed by Dr. Sohail Inayatullah. The triangle shape is used to frame a systematic unpacking of issues or decisions by designating each side (or angle, this seems to vary) with a different type of dynamic force: the push of the present, the pull of the future, and the weight of history. Futures Triangles are used in workshops to hold a discussion and analyze variables shaping the future of an organization or group, and it lends to forming future scenarios.



Conclusion: Incongruous Shapes

This is just a brief foray into the fascinating world of the geometry of foresight. Other techniques that may warrant further discussion could include the Futures Diamond, Horizon Scanning, and Three Horizons. (The horizon is a geometric concept that lends itself to foresight metaphorically: Futurists are always looking for what’s just coming over the horizon, using weak signals to pick up on it before it hits mainstream.) Trend lines and waves would also be fun to bring to the mix.

But why is there geometry in foresight? Do we wish to find formulas that will allow us to offer precise answers? Would we like to constrain the future into nice, neat shapes? Do we need the structure of geometric shapes to bound our wild thinking? Would we like the future to be solved by equation? Unlike most math problems, there is no clear answer or solution in foresight. There is no final calculation or predictable outcome. There is often no right or wrong answer. Perhaps gravitating toward something solid, like shapes, is stabilizing. The elementary nature of shapes and the fact that they tend to appear in nature might make them appealing on a subconscious level.

I remember a meaningful quote from college, but I’m not sure who said it: “Culture is most effective when it’s disguised as nature.” We spent hours of anthropology class time exploring all the ways that human groups have tried convincing themselves (and each other) to accept social norms as the natural order of things, or human nature, though norms are socially constructed. There may be a corresponding take for the shape of things in futures studies: “Foresight is most effective when it is disguised as shapes.”