Phase 2 of 4
Imagining
Constructing multiple alternative futures using proven scenario methodologies
The Imagining phase moves from sensing what is to constructing what could be. Using proven scenario methodologies, you will build multiple alternative futures - not to predict, but to expand the space of possibility and develop the cognitive flexibility that is the hallmark of futures literacy.
Key Principles
Core Frameworks
THE CONE OF FUTURES
The Futures Cone is the foundational map of possibility space. It classifies futures from the projected (business-as-usual) through the probable, plausible, possible, and all the way to the preposterous. The most transformative futures often begin in the "preposterous" zone before migrating inward.
Joseph Voros - Futures Cone
Inquiry Prompts
- What is the "projected" future - the default trajectory if nothing changes?
- What futures are "probable" - likely given current momentum?
- What futures are "plausible" - they could happen given what we know?
- What futures are "possible" - they could happen if we acquired new knowledge or capabilities?
- What futures seem "preposterous" today - but might not be in a decade?
- What is your "preferable" future - and where does it sit on the cone?
Practitioner Notes
- - The cone widens with time - the further out you look, the more possibilities exist
- - Your preferable future may currently sit in the "possible" or even "preposterous" zone - that's fine
- - The Apollo Moon landing was once preposterous; then possible; then it happened
Frameworks
FOUR FUTURES ARCHETYPES
Jim Dator's foundational insight: all images of the future fall into four archetypal patterns - Growth, Collapse, Discipline, and Transform. Using all four as lenses ensures you escape the trap of imagining only one type of future.
Jim Dator - Four Generic Images of the Future
Inquiry Prompts
- Growth: What does a future of continued expansion and progress look like in your domain?
- Collapse: What does a future of systemic breakdown or decline look like? What triggers it?
- Discipline: What does a future of deliberate constraint, conservation, and regulation look like?
- Transform: What does a radically different future look like - one that breaks all current assumptions?
- Which archetype do you instinctively resist? That is the one you most need to explore.
Practitioner Notes
- - Most organizations only plan for "Growth" - the other three archetypes reveal blind spots
- - The "Transform" archetype is where the most creative and disruptive thinking lives
- - Use all four archetypes as scenario scaffolds before adding detail
Frameworks
SCENARIO CONSTRUCTION
Scenario planning is the discipline of constructing internally consistent, challenging narratives about alternative futures. Developed at Royal Dutch Shell, it is the most widely practiced foresight methodology in the world - and the most powerful tool for challenging strategic assumptions.
Pierre Wack & Peter Schwartz - Scenario Planning
Inquiry Prompts
- What are the two most critical uncertainties facing your domain - the ones that could go either way?
- Using those two uncertainties as axes, what four distinct scenario worlds emerge?
- For each scenario: what is the narrative? What does daily life look like? Who wins and who loses?
- What early indicators would tell you which scenario is beginning to unfold?
- What decisions would you make differently in each scenario?
Practitioner Notes
- - The 2x2 matrix is a scaffold, not a prison - use it to generate scenarios, then enrich them with narrative
- - Good scenarios are memorable stories, not spreadsheets - give them evocative names
- - The goal is not to pick the "right" scenario but to prepare for all of them
Frameworks
THREE HORIZONS
The Three Horizons framework maps the dynamics of transition: the declining dominant system (H1), the emerging future system (H3), and the turbulent innovation space between them (H2). It reveals where the "pockets of the future" already exist in the present.
Bill Sharpe & Andrew Curry - Three Horizons
Inquiry Prompts
- What is the current dominant system (H1) in your domain - and why is it losing fitness?
- What is the emerging future system (H3) - what does it look like at its best?
- What "pockets of the future" (H3 seeds) already exist in the present?
- What innovations in H2 are genuinely disruptive (H2+) versus captured by the old system (H2−)?
- What role do you want to play in the transition from H1 to H3?
Practitioner Notes
- - H1 is not "bad" and H3 is not "good" - the framework maps dynamics, not morality
- - The most contested space is H2 - where innovation is either co-opted or transformative
- - Use Three Horizons as a dialogue tool with diverse stakeholders to surface different visions of H3
Frameworks
BACKCASTING
Backcasting starts with a vivid image of a desirable future and works backward to the present, identifying the milestones, decisions, and conditions that would need to be true for that future to emerge. It is the opposite of forecasting - and far more empowering.
John Robinson - Backcasting; The Natural Step Framework
Inquiry Prompts
- Describe your preferable future in vivid, concrete detail - what does it look, feel, and function like?
- Working backward: what conditions must be true 5 years before that future arrives?
- What decisions, policies, or innovations must occur 10 years before?
- What must change today - right now - to set that trajectory in motion?
- What are the critical path dependencies - the things that must happen in sequence?
Practitioner Notes
- - Backcasting is most powerful when the desired future is fundamentally different from the present
- - Be specific about milestones - vague visions produce vague pathways
- - Combine backcasting with scenario planning: backcast from your preferable future within each scenario
Frameworks
FUTURES ETHICS
Every imagined future carries embedded values and assumptions about what is desirable, for whom, and at whose expense. Futures ethics asks: whose future are we building? Who benefits? Who is harmed? Who is invisible? Without this lens, foresight becomes a tool of power rather than wisdom.
Gerd Leonhard - Technology vs. Humanity; Nick Bostrom - Existential Risk
Inquiry Prompts
- Whose interests are centered in the futures you are imagining - and whose are marginalized?
- What are the ethical red lines that no future should cross, regardless of efficiency or profit?
- How do your imagined futures distribute power, agency, and dignity?
- What would Leonhard's question reveal: are we building futures that serve humanity, or that humanity serves?
- What existential risks does each imagined future create, amplify, or mitigate?
Practitioner Notes
- - Leonhard's "androrithms" - uniquely human qualities like empathy, creativity, and consciousness - are the ethical compass
- - Apply Bostrom's existential risk lens: does this future increase or decrease civilizational fragility?
- - The most dangerous futures are those that seem desirable to the powerful and invisible to the vulnerable
Frameworks
SYSTEM TRANSITIONS
The Two Loop Model reveals how systems change: the old system declines while a new one emerges simultaneously. Pioneers "walk out" of the old system, connect with each other, and gradually build the new. Understanding this dynamic helps you locate yourself in the transition.
Margaret Wheatley & Deborah Frieze - Two Loop Model (Berkana Institute)
Inquiry Prompts
- Where is the dominant system in its lifecycle - still ascending, at peak, or in decline?
- Who are the pioneers already "walking out" to experiment with alternatives?
- How are these pioneers connecting with each other to form networks of the new?
- What role are "hospice workers" playing - helping the old system decline with dignity?
- What would it take for the emerging system to become the new dominant paradigm?
Practitioner Notes
- - Both loops coexist - the old system doesn't vanish overnight
- - The most critical role is "illumination" - making the new visible so others can join
- - Resistance from the old system is natural and expected; plan for it
Frameworks
SENSEMAKING
Sensemaking in the Imagining phase means stepping back from the futures you have constructed to reflect on what they reveal - about the world, about your assumptions, and about your own relationship to the future.
Inquiry Prompts
- Which of the futures you imagined feels most challenging to you personally? Why?
- What assumptions about "how things work" did the imagining process surface and challenge?
- Where do your different futures converge - what seems likely regardless of which path unfolds?
- Where do they diverge most dramatically - what are the true branching points?
- How has your relationship to uncertainty shifted through this process?
- What new questions are emerging that you didn't anticipate?
Practitioner Notes
- - The value of imagining is not the scenarios themselves but the expanded thinking they produce
- - Share your futures with people outside your group - their reactions will reveal your blind spots
- - Document the assumptions that were most difficult to challenge - they are your strategic vulnerabilities