Description Long

Future Backwards is a visualisation method that helps groups combine reflections on the past with visions for the future. Its goal is to bring together different perspectives within an organisation, in order to identify commonalities and differences and to generate learning from them.

Process:

1. Current State (CS): The group begins by describing the current state of the organisation, for example using key words or short anecdotes. These are placed in the centre of the working space.
2. Impossible Positive Future (Heaven): Participants describe a hypothetically ideal future scenario. These ideas are visualised in the upper section.
3. Impossible Negative Future (Hell): In contrast, a strongly negative future scenario is developed and placed in the lower section.
4. Turning Points: For both scenarios, the group identifies turning points that play a key role in the past or the future. These are highlighted with colour.
5. Discussion and Reflection: The group discusses the outcomes, explores differences in perspective, and derives possible courses of action.

This method serves as an alternative to traditional strategy or scenario planning, which often overemphasises ideal future states. The Future Backwards approach reveals the insights and decisions rooted in an organisation’s past. It can be especially helpful in supporting conflict resolution between groups with opposing views.

Preparation

• If possible, use hexagonal cards (e.g. in different colours for Heaven, Hell, and Turning Points), as well as markers, a flipchart or a whiteboard.
• There should be enough space for the visualisation (e.g. a large pinboard).
• Optionally, a legend can be placed near the working area to explain the colours and categories: Current State (CS), Turning Points of the CS, Heaven (positive future), Hell (negative future), Turning Points of Heaven, Turning Points of Hell

Execution

1. The facilitator explains the method and the purpose of the workshop.
2. Each group jointly describes the current state of affairs (CS). This brings to light events from different staff perspectives. Key words or short anecdotes are written on cards and placed in the centre of the working space.
3. The group first develops an ideal – yet impossible – future scenario (“Heaven”), followed by an equally impossible negative scenario (“Hell”). These terms are placed in the upper and lower sections, respectively.
4. Participants then identify turning points in the past or future that could lead to each scenario and mark these using a different colour.
5. The results are compared, commonalities and differences are analysed, and possible strategic actions are developed.

Hints from experience

• Clear facilitation is important to ensure that all perspectives are taken into account.
• Sufficient time should be set aside for reflection and discussion, as this often leads to valuable insights.
• Use clear colour-coding and a well-structured workspace to present the results in an organised way.
• For larger groups, several teams can work in parallel, and the results can then be brought together.

Tools list

• Big and small paper circles
• Flipchart or Whiteboard
• Pencils, board markers

References

https://cognitive-edge.com/methods/the-future-backwards/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233344139_Narration_as_a_human_communication_paradigm_The_case_of_public_moral_argument Fisher, W. R. (1984). Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument. Communication Monographs, 51(1), 1-22. Routledge.

https://epistemh.pbworks.com/f/4.+Macintyre.pdf MacIntyre, A. C. (1981). 15. After virtue: a study in moral theory (p. 216). Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.

http://www.upenn.edu/pennpress/book/13339.html Niles, J. D. (2010). Homo Narrans: The Poetics and Anthropology of Oral Literature. Philadelphia, USA: University of Pennsylvania Press.