lev-os Generic Foresight Process
Overview
The Generic Foresight Process Framework, developed by Australian futurist Joseph Voros in 2000 and published in Foresight journal (2003), provides a reference model for integrating futures thinking into strategic planning. It won a Highly Commended Award in the Emerald Literati Club Awards for Excellence 2004.
Voros synthesized earlier work by Slaughter (1999), Horton (1999), and Mintzberg to create a process applicable at scales from individual to organizational. The framework was developed during implementation of foresight into formal strategic planning at Swinburne University of Technology in Australia.
The key insight: foresight is not a single activity but a system with distinct phases, each requiring different methods. The framework operates as a closed loop, enabling continuous course correction rather than one-time planning exercises.
When to Use
- Introducing foresight capability into an organization
- Structuring strategic planning with futures orientation
- Teaching foresight methodology to practitioners
- Auditing existing foresight processes for gaps
- Designing foresight programs or departments
- Academic research on futures methods
- Individual long-term planning and career strategy
- Evaluating where organizational foresight breaks down
The Process
Element 1: Inputs (Strategic Intelligence Gathering)
Systematic collection of information about environment, trends, and emerging changes.
Methods: Environmental scanning, horizon scanning for weak signals, competitive intelligence, stakeholder intelligence, expert consultation.
Output: Raw strategic intelligence - signals, trends, data, expert perspectives.
Quality criteria: Breadth, depth, diversity (contradictory sources), timeliness.
Element 2: Foresight Work (Three Sequential Steps)
The core analytical work of foresight occurs in three distinct phases:
Step 2a: Analysis
Establish baseline understanding through examination of what inputs reveal.
Methods: Trend analysis, forecasting, driver analysis, cross-impact analysis.
Output: Identified trends, drivers, baseline forecasts, pattern maps.
Step 2b: Interpretation
Probe beneath surface of analytical findings to uncover deeper structures and meaning.
Methods: Systems thinking, causal layered analysis, archetypal analysis, stakeholder analysis.
Output: Deeper understanding of causal structures, mental models, worldviews.
Critical transition: Moving from "what" to "why" - understanding forces producing trends.
Step 2c: Prospection
Create forward-looking views of alternative futures using outputs from analysis and interpretation.
Methods: Scenario planning, visioning, normative futures, backcasting, wild cards.
Output: Range of alternative futures - scenarios, visions, possibilities.
Quality criteria: Plurality (not prediction), plausibility, provocativeness.
Element 3: Outputs
Tangible: Strategic options, scenarios/visions, opportunity maps, risk assessments, capability requirements.
Intangible: Changed thinking, reframed mental models, strategic conversation, reduced certainty.
Critical insight: Intangible outputs often exceed tangible in long-term value. Changed thinking persists beyond specific documents.
Element 4: Strategy
Decision-makers evaluate outputs to develop strategies and implementation plans.
Activities: Option evaluation, strategy formulation, implementation planning, monitoring design.
Output: Strategic decisions, implementation plans, monitoring frameworks.
The Closed Loop
Strategy implementation generates new information feeding back into Inputs. The framework is explicitly iterative - each cycle refines understanding and improves decisions.
Example Application
Situation: University strategic planning for 2040.
Inputs: Enrollment trends, technology signals (AI tutoring, micro-credentials), policy environment, expert interviews.
Foresight Work:
- Analysis: Declining 18-year-old population; employer skepticism of degree ROI; unbundling of education
- Interpretation: Credentialing monopoly eroding; "4-year campus" mental model challenged
- Prospection: Four scenarios - Resilient Campus, Distributed Learning, Credential Collapse, Lifelong Learning
Outputs: Four scenarios, 12 strategic options; leadership shifted from "protect status quo" to "reinvent value"
Strategy: Pursue robust options (digital infrastructure), create hedging investments (campus flexibility), establish sensing mechanisms (monthly signal reviews)
Scoring Rubric
- Practitioner Weight: 8/10 - Developed in organizational practice; widely adopted in foresight profession
- Clarity/Executability: 9/10 - Clear phases with specific methods; highly structured
- ROI: 7/10 - Academic validation; difficult to quantify foresight ROI directly
- Novelty: 6/10 - Synthesis of prior work; value is in integration and clarity
- Cross-domain: 9/10 - Generic by design; applicable to any planning context
Total: 39/50
Anti-Patterns
- Skipping Interpretation (going straight from Analysis to Prospection loses depth)
- Treating phases as linear rather than iterative
- Ignoring intangible outputs (changed thinking matters)
- No feedback loop (one-time exercise, no learning)
- Inputs only from familiar sources (missing weak signals)
- Scenarios without strategic response (entertainment without action)
- Over-reliance on Analysis (avoiding the ambiguity of Prospection)
- Conflating forecasting with foresight (prediction vs. preparation)
Related
- iftf-foresight-insight-action (complementary IFTF methodology)
- scenario-planning (deep dive on prospection methods)
- causal-layered-analysis (interpretation technique)
- systems-thinking (analysis and interpretation foundation)
- horizon-scanning (inputs method)
- three-horizons (complementary framing for time)