For hundreds of years printed books were the only source of reading. However today we are in the midst of a mixed format transition where consumers enjoy both print and digital books. The baseline future for reading sees authors, publishers, booksellers, and readers continuing to thrive. Technological development, social interaction, and educational [...]]]> by: Mark Warner

For hundreds of years printed books were the only source of reading. However today we are in the midst of a mixed format transition where consumers enjoy both print and digital books. The baseline future for reading sees authors, publishers, booksellers, and readers continuing to thrive. Technological development, social interaction, and educational evolution will all play a role to shape the reading experience of tomorrow. But a leveling off of the growth curve of readers who switch to digital from print could disrupt the baseline future, as would an emergence of new reading technology that would eclipse today’s ebooks. This paper offers four scenarios, or possible futures shaped by two questions: “how do we read?” and “what do we read?”.

Introduction

“…while lecturing to a large audience in a modern hotel in Chicago, a distinguished professor is bitten in the leg by a cobra. The whole experience takes three seconds. He is affected through the touch of the reptile, the gasp of the crowd, the swimming sights before his eyes. His memory, imagination, and emotions come into emergency action. A lot of things happen in three seconds. Two weeks later he is fully recovered and wants to write up the experience in a letter to a colleague. To communicate this experience through print means that it must first be broken down into parts and then mediated, eyedropper fashion, one thing at a time, in an abstract, linear, fragmented, sequential way. That is the essential structure of print.

And once a culture uses such a medium for a few centuries, it begins to perceive the world in a one-thing-at-a-time, abstract, linear, fragmented, sequential way. And it shapes its organizations and schools according to the same premises. The form of print has become the form of thought. The medium has become the message.”

– Father John Culkin, SJ, 1967 (emphasis added) ¹

The way the English language is structured directly affects how writing, reading, and ultimately thought occurs. The blue ovals on the chart to the left show graphically what Fr. Culkin was describing in his 1967 Saturday Review article, “A Schoolman’s Guide to Marshall McLuhan.” The formation of language led to writing. Over time, and especially post-Guttenberg, writing led to widespread reading. The action of reading, led by the structure of writing as illustrated by Fr. Culkin’s example, affected human thought; hence the McLuhanesque sentence in bold above, “The form of print has become the form of thought.”

But one area that Fr. Culkin did not mention, nor would one expect him to, was how form not only affects print but also affects reading itself. This is illustrated by the red oval in the chart. The form of writing (linear, sequential, etc.) affects reading and thought; the form of reading (book, tablet, computer, etc) also affects reading and thought. How something is communicated conveys meaning, just as the actual content of the communication itself also conveys meaning. This article will dig deeper into that structure to look at the future of reading.

Any discussion about the future of reading must include some aspect of the future of education or the future or learning. The conveyance of information through words strung together into sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and books has been the foundation of education and learning for hundreds of years. So when examining what the future holds for reading, attention must be paid to the future of education and learning. For example, an iterative process that over time shifts the learning experience away from the traditional classroom and into the world will have a resulting shift away from formalized textbook learning and toward more decentralized learning tools. This would affect books, reading, learning, and education.

When this article discusses reading, it is primarily within the context of published books. Today a tremendous amount of reading takes place in non-book forms: blogs, newspapers, magazines, and the like. While these formats for reading are important and merit further study, the space allotted here will be focused on what is traditionally thought of as a book: ink printed on paper and bound into a volume – and the modern-day digital equivalent.

The time horizon for this examination of the future is ten years, peering into the year 2023. This could be considered a relatively short horizon. After all, reading has thousands of years of history and printed books have hundreds of years of history. However given the state of transition that reading is in and given the current evolutionary state of reading-related technologies, 10 years is sufficiently long enough to draw out implications for the future based on the current trends and leading edge thoughts.

To assess the current and expected future conditions in this domain, it will be helpful to view the evolution of reading through three distinct eras: the Printed Page Era (past), The Hybrid Era (present), and the Digital Era (future). This admittedly is a simplified classification of eras; a more thorough treatment would certainly lead to bifurcation or trifurcation of each era to provide additional detail.

Current assessment: the Printed Page Era

Although it started earlier (see the chart to the right), Gutenberg poured gas on the small flame of the printed page era with his invention of the printing press in the late 15^th century. Before the time of Gutenberg, reading was not always seen as a private or silent act. In the 5^th century book Confessions, St. Augustine comments on the uncommon nature of Ambrose’s reading habits:

“…we saw him thus reading to himself, and never otherwise; and having long sat silent (for who durst intrude on one so intent?) we were fain to depart, conjecturing that in the small interval which he obtained, free from the din of others’ business, for the recruiting of his mind, he was loth to be taken off…” ²

Prior to Gutenberg, books were duplicated by hand transcription which limited the ability of the masses to have any role in reading, other than listen to the spoken word. Post-Gutenberg, literacy increased as more people gained access to printed books. Aside from improvements in reading education, printing technology, and book distribution, very little about the essential act of reading changed from the sixteenth century until the late twentieth century. Primary stakeholders in the Printed Page Era include authors, publishers, printers, distributors (both booksellers and book shippers), and readers.
Current assessment: the Hybrid Era
Today we are witnessing a shift from the traditional ink on paper printed books of the last half-millennium to digital pixels on screen books. Beginning around the turn of the twenty-first century, the Hybrid Era is characterized by the availability of both print books and digital books ebooks.

Today readers interact with text predominantly via printed books, although there is an increasing share of digital readers. In April 2012 21% of Americans reported that they had read an ebook in the last year, up from 17% in December 2011.³ This shift in consumer reading habits is also causing a shift in consumer expectations for what books can provide. For example, Gutenberg’s most notable printed book was the Holy Bible. This lengthy religious text saw a major transformation in 2008 with the release of the free YouVersion Bible App from LifeChurch.tv.⁴ Starting with just a few thousand subscribers in the 2008, YouVersion has seen strong growth. As of April 1, 2013, YouVersion had 87 million user installations⁵, with a rate of adoption of around 1 million per week⁶.

Another characteristic of the Hybrid Era centers around the social aspect of reading that technology provides. Early in the Printed Page Era, readers gathered together for corporate reading of book content (e.g. in public religious services). Early in the Hybrid Era, readers are gathering together on the internet via social networks to discuss their books. Social reading sites like goodreads.com provide a place for readers to interact with one another and with authors. Twitter and Facebook have allowed authors to interact with their readers much more frequently than a few decades ago. Primary stakeholders in the Hybrid Era include readers, authors, publishers, retailers (especially Amazon and Barnes and Noble, higher education (both universities and publishers).

Baseline future assessment: Constants

In the illustration below, the Communications Circuit shows the basic structure that supports reading in the Western World. This framework has been in place for hundreds of years. Books will continue to be written; stories will continue to be told. Reading will remain an active experience that is distinct from other forms of media like gaming, video, etc. These points will remain constant:

• Authors will continue to write and seek publication, whether through the traditional publishing structure, the self-publishing structure, or other means.
• Publishers will continue to connect authors with consumers via the sales pipeline. The definition of a publisher will continue to evolve as the form of books evolves, but the place of the publisher in the communications circuit will remain.
• Booksellers will continue to sell books. The form of those books will continue to shift from print to digital, and it is likely that a third form of books that can be sold at retail will emerge. But the place of the bookseller will remain.
• Readers will continue to purchase, borrow, and read books.

 The Communications Circuit⁷

Baseline future assessment: Disruption points

In the illustration above it is expected that disruptive change will occur for printers, suppliers, and shippers. As reading preferences gravitate toward digital, printers will see a decline in business as publishers face increasing economies of scale challenges where printed books are concerned. Initial print runs for new titles will become smaller and smaller, forcing printers to cut cost as much as possible and seek to scale up printing alternatives like Ingram Content Group’s Lightning Source on Demand. An additional future strain for printers and suppliers will come in the form of digital first publishing initiatives which often leave printed books out of the supply chain. Today larger publishers are beginning to experiment with digital first and smaller publishers have adopted this strategy out of necessity with varying levels of success.

Shippers who deal primarily with books will also feel a slight disruption, but most shippers are diversified in their product delivery options so the impact that declining print book production will have on shippers like UPS or Fed Ex will be far less than the impact that will be felt by printers and suppliers.

Baseline future assessment: Driving forces

Three driving forces work together to shape the reading experience of 2023. First, technology will continue to create opportunities for reading to become a more digital experience. Second, the social aspect of reading will continue to evolve. Interactive forms of book media will bring readers and authors together like never before. Third, the educational system will see movement away from traditional printed textbooks. Innovative solutions like customizable digital textbooks⁸ and real-world socialized learning structures⁹ will continue to be developed.

Baseline Future: the Digital Era

In 2013, despite living during a time in which many would be comfortable in characterizing it as a “digital age,” the Digital Era of reading is not yet upon us. Certainly we see some of the beginning stages of the Digital Era as we witness readers become more comfortable with reading via screens. But despite all of the press surrounding current trends like the exponential growth of ebooks, the majority of people (78%) still buy and read books printed on paper.¹⁰

The beginning of the Digital Era will be marked not by the elimination of the print book business, but by the shift in consumers reading habits toward primarily digital means. Vinyl records remain a small but viable format – even after the birth of the compact disk and the digital mp3. In the same way, print books will continue to be printed, bought, and sold long after the Digital Era begins.

The next iteration of the social reading experience will arrive in the Digital Era. Immersive reading as a social experience will combine the best aspects of the previous two eras, reading together in groups and internet interaction. Research into massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG) shows a strong correlation between real world social structures and online social structures.¹¹ New forms of massively multiplayer online role-playing experiences will emerge centered on book content, providing immersive reading experiences that allow for readers to interact with the text in a uniquely tailored manner, layered against constant interaction with other readers via wearable computers or neural networks. Primary stakeholders in the Digital Era will be authors, publishers, booksellers, readers, and hardware/device manufacturers.

Baseline future: Discontinuities and uncertainties

A leveling off of the adoption of digital methods for reading would disrupt the baseline future. Also, the emergence of an eclipsing technology that would render the need to read in the traditional sense obsolete (e.g. uploading a book directly into the brain).

Alternate Futures: Scenarios

Below, four scenarios for the future are briefly examined based on two primary questions related to the future of reading:

• How do we read? In 2023, are readers splitting their time between print and digital, or are readers primarily reading digitally via ebooks or other more advanced methods?
• What do we read? In 2023, is our reading fueled by the need to satisfy an urge for a quick hit of information, or are we seeking deeper, lasting content? To refer back to the opening illustration from Fr. Culkin, is our reading focused on deeper things which lead to an ocean’s depth of knowledge or is our reading focused on items and topics that are a mile wide and an inch deep?

The iTunes Scenario

Human reading habits are shaped by a more transactional relationship with content. In the same way that iTunes can be used to bring one’s collection of physical music CDs together with their digital music collection of mp3s, people will continue to seek a mix of physical books and digital ebooks. This scenario represents an arrested development: remaining in the Hybrid Era of reading without progression into the Digital Era. Book reading habits, under the influence of an always connected environment, tend to skew more toward the shallow side. Search and index become more prominent due to demands of society in an information age. Premiums are placed on knowing “in the now,” whatever the cost. Newspapers and blogs become preferred by many over books.

The Spotify Scenario

We see the death of the printed book. Because of the convenience and value of digital books, plus the environmental concerns about print books, readers discard the notion that printed and bound books are of any intrinsic or aesthetic value. The bookshelves in many homes are emptied as people realize they can digitally search and read any book at any time. Search is a major factor for readers; the ability to find something quick without flipping through pages is one of the catalysts that bring about this scenario. Reading in this scenario becomes quite business-like: it is all about the results. Few will read books like War and Peace cover to cover; instead they will utilize integrated reader’s guides and multi-media presentations via hardware like wearable computers. Reading a single book for hours at a time is seen as a waste of time. Much effort will be made by publishers to “chunk” content so that readers can read/consume books faster, thereby increasing publisher revenue.

The Netflix Scenario

We will see a mixture of print books and digital books continuing to provide readers young and old with the opportunity to read content in the way they prefer. Print books are seen as retro-cool. Due to increasing costs associated with printing books, digital reading becomes the preferred method for less affluent consumers while print books become a status symbol for wealthier book connoisseurs. Social/collaborative reading takes place somewhat, although it is difficult because many readers continue to read using unconnected print books. Publishers have stopped chasing after the next “big thing” in book formatting, opting instead to focus their efforts on producing exceptional book content in both print and digital formats. Recognizing the need to stay within core competencies, most publishers choose to license their book content to their party developers for the creation or multi-media rich ancillary book content.

The Kindle Scenario

Digital has almost completely replaced print for the book publishing industry. Once the ratio of digital to print sales passes the three to one threshold, publishers no longer can afford to print physical copies of all but a very small percentage of books. Publishers issue print runs for only the top 1%-2% of books. Print on demand becomes more common for distributing printed books, but it too is fading. All books become customized for each user based on historical reading and learning styles. New ways of reading socially become more common, similar to massively multiplayer online role-playing games, but with immersive book content as the thread. Readers don’t just read the new book Harry Potter vol. 12; they actually step into the plot via wearable computers and augmented reality.

Conclusion

Marshall McLuhan’s oft quoted axiom, “the medium is the message”¹² bears witness to the evolution of reading through the past, present, and into the future. How one reads a book will continue to be as consequential as which book they chose to read. Today’s reader has tremendous flexibility in both content and format, and tomorrow’s reader will have even more options. The expected future of reading will be shaped by technological development, social interaction, and educational evolution. The future of reading could arrive more slowly if the trend of digital adoption slows. Any new reading technology that arrives will have the potential to reshape the future of reading completely.

Information sources

1. Culkin, J.M. (1967, March 18). A schoolman’s guide to Marshall McLuhan. Saturday Review, pp. 51-53, 71-72. Retrieved from http://www.unz.org/Pub/SaturdayRev-1967mar18-00051.

2. Augustine, S. (2002). The Confessions of Saint Augustine. Oxford, MS: Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Digital file.

3. Rainie, L., Zickuhr, K., Purcell, K., Madden, M., Brenner, J. (2012). The Rise of e-reading. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved from: http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/04/04/the-rise-of-e-reading/

4. YouVersion Blog (2008). YouVersion now available for your Mobile Device! Edmond, OK: Lifechurch.tv. Retrieved from http://blog.youversion.com/2008/04/youversion-now-available-for-your-mobile-device/

5. youversion.com (2013). YouVersion. Edmond, OK: Lifechurch.tv. Retrieved from https://www.youversion.com/

6. youversion.com (2013). YouVersion. Edmond, OK: Lifechurch.tv. Retrieved from https://www.youversion.com/

7. Darnton, R. (1982) What is the history of books? Daedalus 111(3):

65-83. Boston, MA: Harvard. Retrieved from: http://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/3403038/darnton_historybooks.pdf?sequence=2

8. Santos, A. (2013). McGraw-Hill reveals the SmartBook: an ‘adaptive’ e-book for students. Engadet. Retrieved from: http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/08/mcgraw-hill-smartbook/

9. Gorbis, M. (2013). The Future Of Education Eliminates The Classroom, Because The World Is Your Class. Fastcoexist. Retrieved from: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1681507/the-future-of-education-eliminates-the-classroom-because-the-world-is-your-class

10. Owen, L. H. (2013). Ebooks made up 23 percent of US publisher sales in 2012, says the AAP. PaidContent. Retrieved from: http://paidcontent.org/2013/04/11/ebooks-made-up-23-percent-of-us-publisher-sales-in-2012-says-the-aap/

11. Szell, M., Thurner, S. (2009). Measuring Social Dynamics in a Massive Multiplayer Online Game. University of Santa Fe. Santa Fe, NM: Santa Fe Institute. Retrieved from: http://www.santafe.edu/media/workingpapers/09-11-042.pdf

12. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media. Berkeley, CA: Gingko Press.

Mark Warner is completing a Master of Arts in Strategic Foresight degree at Regent University and has worked in the publishing industry since 2005 in the areas of sales, business development, strategy, research/analysis, and project management. He is employed by HarperCollins Christian Publishing and lives with his family in Nashville, TN. You can find him on Twitter: @markawarner

Author Diana Butler Bass describes two significant cultural forces reshaping the religious future: 1) the rise of the “unaffiliateds,” including atheists, agnostics, humanists, “spiritual but not religious” and post-theists; and 2) the rise of religious pluralism and immigrant faith in everyday life throughout the West.

Read more here.

Recently the president of a Christian university was asked, “Where is Christian Higher Education going over the next 15 years?” Without skipping a beat, he replied, “I don’t know — but that’s what keeps me up at night!” The president then added, “I know one thing. It will [...]]]> by Jay Gary, PhD, June 15, 2010

Recently the president of a Christian university was asked, “Where is Christian Higher Education going over the next 15 years?” Without skipping a beat, he replied, “I don’t know — but that’s what keeps me up at night!” The president then added, “I know one thing. It will not look like what we have now. We just can’t afford to continue to do what we are doing!”

“All of us in ministry now are asking the financial questions,” admits Steve Doggett, director of international ministries with Converge Worldwide, “yet what we are really are trying to figure out is ‘Where is God is going?’” To answer this question for your own organization will require you to move from strategic planning to strategic foresight, and then back again.

Strategic foresight is a new name for a core practice that leadership teams use to learn about the shifting forces shaping their ministry landscape 3 to 10 years out. It engages them in critical thinking and ‘what if’ debates. It takes a team beyond budget or policy assessment to allow open learning and strategic conversations to craft a long-term adaptive strategy.

Australian educator Richard Slaughter defines foresight as “the ability to create and maintain a high-quality, coherent and functional forward view and to use the insights arising in organizationally useful ways.”

Useful ways in a faith context might mean to leverage outreach through strategic alliances, act proactively in light of demographic changes, reach new generations through a diverse team, reinvent aging institutions with new stakeholders, or engage the community through private-public partnerships.

To put it another way, strategic planning projects your past programs into the future. By contrast, strategic foresight allows you to stand in the future, and then look back at your present with new eyes. You end up with a more adaptable strategy, matched to a longer, deeper and broader view of your organization’s future. Here are two ways to cultivate long-term foresight to strengthen your strategic plans.

Let Horizon Scanning Undergird your SWOT Analysis

A great way to test your strategy over time is to create a formal horizon scanning program with both senior and middle managers in your organization. Most leaders are familiar with formal SWOT analysis, where an organization’s internal strengths and weaknesses are weighed against possible future conditions, framed as opportunities or threats. A SWOT analysis let’s you assess where you presently are as an organization. But a SWOT analysis is only as good as your strategic assumptions.

James Dewar, author of Assumption-Based Planning notes that unwelcome surprises in the life of any organization can often be traced to the failure of an assumption that had been forgotten or wasn’t anticipated. Every ministry plan is undergird by a dozen or more unnamed strategic assumptions. A strategic assumption is like a leg on your kitchen table. If that leg wobbles or collapses your plan is compromised.

Horizon scanning can test your strategic assumptions. It is an early warning system. Scanning generates a strategic conversation comprised of data, trends and ideas that could potentially impact your ministry’s viability. Managers document an “insight” in a standard template, and then comment on how it either confirms or disconfirms the shelf-life of your present strategic assumptions.

In noting how each new event or insight can shed light, Adam Gordon, author of Future Savvy instructs scanners to ask, “Does this fit a pattern? Is this suggestive of a trend? Is this part of a bigger phenomenon, a growth or decline of significance that will change…what is required of organizations in order to be successful?”

As president of One Mission Society, USA, David Long sets his mission’s long-term direction. When asked what strategic decisions are shaping One Mission’s new decade, he first mentioned internationalization, or how the various OMS sending countries related to each other, and second, globalization, or the rise of the church in the global south.

A horizon scanning program in Long’s context would gather insights from cross-cultural research, technology, communications, social entrepreneurship and NGO alliances, and consider whether new models of partnership would be viable at the global, regional and local level. When a robust strategic conversation is built through continuous scanning, decision makers have a solid basis to insure that their structure is serving strategy, rather than the other way around.

Create an Issues Management Program

In addition to horizon scanning, another way to cultivate strategic foresight is to start an issues management program. We live in a day of 24-hour news cycles, fed by scandals, product recalls, natural disasters, and legislative reversals. In this hyper modern context, a nonprofit’s stability landscape can change overnight. Unless your organization is future-ready your brand equity can plummet.
Strategic issues management is a pro-active process that builds on horizon scanning.

Rather than weigh trends against strategic assumptions, an issues management program monitors and manages a set of issues that will likely surface over the next 10 years to challenge or constrain the organization. Emerging issues are often more in flux, due to fluid levels of subjective uncertainty, while established trends normally have some degree of objective certainty.

The recent story of American missionaries in Haiti, arrested on charges of kidnapping, became an issue for both their home church in Idaho as well as the U.S. State Department. Whether the legal grounds for arrest were solid or not, this incident called into question whether missionaries were protecting or plundering the Haitian people. What started out as a local incident became an international debate on adoption, child smuggling and organized crime. This demanded an immediate response from other relief and development agencies. Non-profits who dealt with international child services had to reassure their stakeholders of their ethical policies.

Rather than be subject to winds of change, Christian organizations can get ahead of these likely changes, and handle them pro-actively. An issues management program allows an organization to sort anywhere from 30 to 60 issues into three categories: category 1 issues to manage, category 2 issues to maintain, and category 3 issues to monitor. Category 1 issues demand the most attention, as they have not been adequately addressed through policy or training. As sticky wickets, they must be framed, assessed and evaluated in terms of strategic options. Category 2 issues are maintained through new policy and risk mitigation strategies. Category 3 issues are monitored to see if their perceptual, legal, or liability parameters have changed, elevating them to policy action.

Recently I worked with three doctoral students of mine to conduct an Emerging Issues Audit among the top leadership at Regent University. Together with the director of Institutional Research, we identified 75 scanning categories relevant to the future of higher education. Out of those categories we pinpointed 15 issues that might disrupt the educational landscape by 2020. These included: mobile technology, artificial intelligence tutors, genetic enhancements of students, for-profit Christian university competitors, Hispanics demographic growth, global youth/student bulge, or changing workforce competencies in a molecular economy, to name a few.

The initial Issues Audit helped Regent University: (a) benchmark their leadership’s starting perception of these issues, (b) gauge where they felt existing policies and strategies could adapt to address them, and (c) inquire into the degree to which they should and could address each issue from now until 2020.

Leading from the Future

Our world is rapidly changing to the point where traditional planning based on budgets and program review is no longer sufficient in itself to propel your organization into the future. Scanning the horizon and reframing issues are but two ways to turn from static strategic planning to dynamic strategic foresight. Some non-profits are turning to scenario planning to further stress test their plans.

The important thing is to begin the journey upstream to spawn long-term creativity and innovation, rather than just target near-term downstream results. This may not cure you losing sleep over whether your business model is future ready, but at least you will generate a way for your strategic team to make the journey with you.

Dr. Jay Gary is president of PeakFutures.com, a foresight consulting group. Over the past twenty years Jay has helped non-profits, foundations, civic leaders, and strategic alliances to create more promise filled futures. He also teaches strategic foresight, innovation and leadership at the graduate level and through professional development courses.

This article first appeared in: Gary, J. E. (2010, Summer). Strategic foresight: Looking to the future to plan today. Outcomes Magazine, 34(2), 26-27.

For 2,000 years faith has been built on constants, can it now be built on change?

Christian Futures Network Version 1.8 – 26 April 2013

Keywords: future of faith, research, creativity, change, forecasting, spirituality, creativity, millennialism, theology, culture, leadership, strategic foresight, development, emergent leaders, science and theology

1. What is [...]]]> by Jay Gary, PhD

For 2,000 years faith has been built on constants, can it now be built on change?

Christian Futures Network
Version 1.8 – 26 April 2013

Keywords: future of faith, research, creativity, change, forecasting, spirituality, creativity, millennialism, theology, culture, leadership, strategic foresight, development, emergent leaders, science and theology

1. What is the Christian Futures Network?

We are a leadership ministry that exists to empower you to create the future. Through our consultations, webinars and coaching we can help you think creatively and critically about the future of society and help you reinvent your ministry in light of those new contexts. Most Christians realize that change in the culture often outpaces our ability to model that in our frameworks. We need something new from the “mind of Christ” that might release us from our collective blindspots (Col 3:16).

2. Why does faith need foresight?

Faith needs foresight in order to give birth to new creative possibilities for life and society. Faith operates in three dimensions. The backward look trusts God for what he has done. We call that hindsight. The upward look, or insight, looks to God for what he does in us each day. The forward view, or foresight, trusts God for what he will yet do through us from next week through the next two decades, in the church, through organizations, and through society.

3. How does faith cultivate foresight beyond just impressions?

A famous French mathematician once wrote, “It is by logic that we prove, but by intuition that we discover.” In her writings on Defining Future Fluencies, Wendy Schultz shares five ways in which we intuitively and critically focus on the future. First we aspire to see what is happening. Second we fear, who is this happening to? Third we wonder, how might things work out differently? Fourth we desire: what do we want to happen? Fifth, we do, we act and inquire how we can make things happen.

The study of the future of faith is therefore the pursuit of the ideal, the search for God’s highest and best will. It is the quest, by God’s grace, to improve all things, including faith. What dream of a better church and society has God placed in your heart?

4. How did Jesus see the future?

Jesus did not endorse the “official future” before him, that which Herod or Caesar offered. Neither did he accept the “alternative futures” that others were promoting by inspiring flights into the desert or by armed fights against Roman occupation. Jesus intutively saw these two futures clashing, leading to the collapse of Israeli society and the Jewish Temple state in his generation. To save Israel from the coming Great War (A.D. 66-74), Jesus enacted a third way. That path was the way of faith, believing that God would raise the dead nation. Jesus claimed he would take upon himself Israel’s rage and defeat the violence, saving her from the judgment to come. After his death, Jesus resurrection became the sign that God was raising up a New House, in view of impending collapse of the Old (Heb. 10:9). Those gathered would guarantee that a full harvest, a full restoration of Israel and humanity would follow. So in the short-run, Jesus saw a catastrophic future for his generation, filled with tribulation, but in the long-run, Jesus foresaw a constructive future, where humans could fulfill their potential because they were restored to God’s covenant. For more, see the article, “The Future According to Jesus.”

5. What distinguishes Christian futures from other mindsets?

Christian educators today often emphasize the importance of developing a biblical worldview. Yet few worldview books emphasize how Jesus engaged his society as a leader. Therefore, the field of Christian Futures emphasizes that the creation of a Christian worldview must start with Jesus, and explore his approach to personal, community and societal change.

As a way of living and leading, this field rejects a naive Bible prophecy on the one hand and a Christian triumphalism on the other. It sees the future as both the product of both human initiative and divine grace. Rather than focus on the study of last things, Christian futurists focus on the study of first things, and ask how both individuals and societies can “put off the old and put on the new.”

6. Aren’t you really talking about leadership?

Exactly. But not generic leadership, but generative leadership. This includes servant leadership, but encompasses transformational leadership. It is spiritual leadership at the highest level. Managers focus on the present, leaders focus on the future. Leadership focuses on how to take one’s organization, community or discipline from Model 1 to Model 2. So the purpose of leadership, according to Joel Barker is “leadershift” or transforming followers and organizations into greater wholes. In contrast to more tactical-based professional associations, like the Christian Leadership Alliance, Christian Futures deals with the big picture of God’s work in the world, and our practice of mind-set management. Rather than just think about restructuring or reengineering your organization, we can help you discover how to reinvent your organization within your sector. So as a professional association, Christian Futures will help you recognize your blindspots, learn from previous breakdowns, pinpoint your group’s present breakpoints, and take action to create team breakthroughs.

7. Doesn’t the use of futures thinking as a Christian conflict with God’s sovereignty?

We don’t think so. Theologians, philosophers and historians have pondered this question for centuries. Through the Rennaisance, the Reformation and into the Enlightenment, religionists and scientists have debated Providence versus progress, determinism vs. volunteerism, or agency vs. structure. At times, the conversation between faith and science has seemed to be at conflict’s end, at other times, the discussions have approached convergence. Some secular futurists maintain that futures studies is inconsistent with religion, especially if faith is defined primarily by determinism, fatalism, apocalypticism or after-life beliefs. On the other hand, many religionists consider empirical planning and rationalism as deficient to capture the beauty, wonder and mystery of God’s world. The most important thing about reality and the future is that it must continue to be a conversation that everyone might join. Whether we see the future as predetermined by God, or open-ended, we are called to be servants of the generations to come.

8. What training can I get in this field?

We offer a variety of training options, both custom and scheduled.

Seminars: We launched our “Future Proof Your Ministry” workshop series in 2002. This popular workshop, led by Dr. Jay Gary, explores the biblical basis of futures thinking, its five critical fluencies, and tools for mapping change in your ministry and community. It also shows you how to lead your team in a foresight process. In addition to a one-day 6-hour live format, we also offer this workshop in a two morning or a two evening format via webinars. If you have a training need for strategic foresight in your organization, contact us and we can schedule a workshop.

Courses: We also teach “organizational leadership” and “strategic foresight” at the graduate level for mid-career professionals. We recommend online courses, offered through the School of Business & Leadership at Regent University, an accredited graduate institution. Begin a masters in Strategic Foresight with a concentration in leadership, or pursue your Doctor of Strategic Leadership with a foresight concentration.
Through our sister organization, PeakFutures, we also offer short 6-week online courses. You can earn a “Certificate of Strategic Foresight” in as little as 3 courses, or an “Advanced Certificate” through 6 courses.

Conferences: Over the past ten years we have hosted numerous regional consultations on foresight, leadership or organizational development, including consultations on “the Future of Christianity,” that focus on both global and American scenarios. We have also conducted annual Foresight conferences for Christian leaders. In addition we also gather annually in July at the World Future Society.

Custom: Contact us if you would like to host a custom training session for your team. We offer both on-location and on-line training programs, that fit any budget or organizational culture.

Sign up for our “email” updates and get on our list.

This speech, “Framing Christian Futuring,” was given to Bacone College at their 2007 Presidential Leadership Summit.

I would like to spin a story for you about scandal, corruption, crime, and perjury–of wickedness in high places. No, I am not thinking about Bernie Madoff, Ken Lay, Bernard Ebbers, Scooter [...]]]> by Jay Gary, PhD Sep 26, 2007

This speech, “Framing Christian Futuring,” was given to Bacone College at their 2007 Presidential Leadership Summit.

I would like to spin a story for you about scandal, corruption, crime, and perjury–of wickedness in high places. No, I am not thinking about Bernie Madoff, Ken Lay, Bernard Ebbers, Scooter Libby, Alberto Gonzalez, or Congressman William Jefferson, the guy who was found with $10,000 in his freezer. I am referring to Jesus’ shocking parable of the Dishonest Manager, the Devious Employee, or traditionally what the church has called the Unjust Steward. We find this story in Luke 16:1-8.

A wealthy Galilean landowner discovers that the manager of his agricultural estate has squandered thousands of denarius. Stunned by this loss, the landowner charges his steward with corruption and asks for the books to be reconciled. The manager, fearing the loss of his job and the prospects that he may soon become a street beggar, comes up with a plan. He summons his master’s debtors one by one and reduces their bills.

When the master hears this, he laughs and praises “the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly.” Then Jesus drives the point home:

For the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light. And I tell you, make friends for yourself by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes (Luke 16:8-9).

The working poor who first heard this yarn by Jesus must have bent over with laughter. Here was a story of one of Herod’s wealthy friends, who had grown rich through confiscating peasant lands. He was as well connected to the White House as any Halliburton board member might be today. In one swell swoop, this landowner is taken to the cleaners, not once–but twice by the devious manager. Then when it dawns on the Landowner that the joke is on him, that he has lost not only the proceeds from his harvest, but the bulk of his accounts payable–he praises the dishonest manager for the shrewd way in which he makes provisions for the future from other people’s money!

Our Call to Action

Dr. Robert Duncan and the dedicated staff of Bacone College have called us to consider how our colleges, congregations and communities might make provisions for the uncertain years ahead in the early 21st century. Like Jesus’ admonition to his contemporaries, we have been charged to think God’s thoughts, to consider new trajectories, and to explore what church means in an age of ethnic polarization, rural blight, community disintegration, crumbling infrastructure and economic hardship. If there ever was a time to make provisions for the future, to turn leadership failure to community foresight, this is it.

So often when we hear this parable we miss the point. We scratch our heads, and wonder why Jesus would praise a scoundrel who pilfered someone’s finances. Jesus did not praise the scoundrel for his ethics, but rather for his ability to bounce back, to think outside the box, to develop a shared solution that empowered his social network.

An Anti-Hero for Our Time

Maybe in all our praise for the Good Samaritan, we have overlooked the cleverness of the Dishonest Manager! We dare not cast authenticity, integrity, or ethics to the wind, but in terms of anticipatory leadership, Jesus’ wily anti-hero may be the most biblical archetype for our time. One could easily re-title this talk, “In Praise of Scoundrels!”

Note that the Devious Manager did not arrive at his future through forecasting the harvest, nor through team visioning, nor through Estate planning. Instead the Manager won the lottery equivalent of his day through shrewdness–through “just in time” learning, which led to social networking and wealth of relationships.

In thinking about models of Christian futuring, there may be no better exemplar of forward vision or foresight than the Dishonest Manager. Another way to say this in today’s vernacular is this: if life gives you lemons, make lemonade!

Three Frames for Christian Futuring

With this story as backdrop, I would like to suggest three frames for Christian futuring. I define Christian futuring as leadership that encompasses the act of hindsight, insight and foresight. The backward look trusts God for what he has done. That’s called hindsight. The upward look, or insight, looks to God for what he does in us each day. The forward view, or foresight, trusts God for what he will yet do through us from next week through the next two decades, in the church, through organizations, and through society.

Much of what I share you may already know. Yet when we restore an old masterpiece and put it within a new frame, this can bring fresh insight. Here are three ways in which Christian leadership today can reframe how it sees itself and its mission to heal the church and society. I trust these will help you as you practice Christian futures in your own sphere of influence.

I share these three frames based on three decades of ministry, as a college pastor, a magazine editor, a world mission leader, an Evangelical author, a strategy consultant, and now an academic, in the field of global leadership with Regent University. So how can we move from failure to foresight? How can we emulate the Dishonest Manager, not in his ethics, but in how he made provisions for an uncertain tomorrow?

1. We must focus on “The Future According to Jesus.”

I know for pastors, this first frame must send chills down your spine! Millennialism has caused more harm and divided more churches in the past 164 years, than practically any other aspect of theology. When I refer to the future according to Jesus, I am not talking about contemporary millennialism, Bible prophecy, Christian Zionism, or the feeding frenzy surrounding the Second Coming.

If we are to see farther ahead, we must reach farther back. We must dig deeper in the wells of own tradition. We must look beneath the stones, and peer behind the text. In short, we must excavate Jesus (Crossan & Reed, 2001) and ask how he saw the future.

The Elephant in the Living Room

When we think about “The Future According to Jesus,” we need to acknowledge what most overlook, the elephant in the living-room of the First-Century. This was the Roman-Jewish War, 66 to 73 C.E. (Brandon, 1968). While Jesus prophetically saw crucifixion in his own future, he also saw crucifixion, famine and captivity in his nation’s future.

Looking back from the vantage of history, up to a third of the Jewish people were enslaved or crucified during the Roman-Jewish War. It was a first century holocaust, as decisive in world history as the Bubonic plague in the 1300s, or World War I to the 20th century. It marked the end of the ancient Jewish Temple state. Jews today still remember it as a catastrophe, on the Ninth of Av, usually in late Summer, as a day of mourning, to mark the destruction of the First (Babylonians, 586 B.C.E) and Second Temple (Romans, 70 C.E.).

Military historians refer to this as the First Great Revolt against Rome (Faulkner, 2002). The revolt was preceded by a bloody civil war or class war among Jews. This tore their society apart and left them landless. By 135 C.E., after the Second Revolt, Jews were forbidden from residing in Jerusalem and the city was renamed. If we take the Gospels at face value, Jesus was acutely aware of this looming crisis, and counseled his generation to survive it (Luke 19:41-44; 23:27-31), as we have seen in the Parable of the Dishonest Manager.

The Future that Jesus Saw

Figure 1 represents my model of Jesus’ future vision. It is really a model of how to fly when the elephant you are riding on goes underwater. I do not claim it is inspired. Nor do I suggest Jesus drew this in the sand (John 8:6)! Perhaps some of the students here, if they give themselves to historical Jesus studies, could provide a better model.

In short, I propose Jesus saw the mid-range future of the First-Century leading up the Great War as a dynamic of three paths: Conventional, Counter and Creative. The Conventional future was the mainstream future. It represented 1,500 years of Moses, or ancestral law, behind it. It had 250 years of Alexander the Great, or Greek culture, defining it. It had 100 years of Caesar, or Roman rule, enforcing it. This was the official world of “Second Temple Judaism,” ruled by the Herodians and Sadducees. In other words, the Conventional future for Jesus from the year 30 onward was the present state of Roman occupation projected into the future.

The Counter future opposed this official future. This future was largely defined by the Pharisees, the loyal opposition to Jewish collaboration with the Roman Empire. The Essenes, and later the Zealots, also shaped this popular resistance to occupation. The Counter future claimed that it, rather than Herod, represented Moses. This future rallied people behind 200 years of Jewish nationalism, represented in the Maccabean revolution of 167 B.C.E.

Jesus saw these two futures, Roman imperialism and Jewish nationalism, on a collision course in his generation. Left to its own, society was facing an impending collapse. Jesus weighed these two lower-line futures and found them wanting. In view of the “clash of civilizations,” of economic secularization and religious fundamentalism in his day, Jesus began to develop a third way, a Creative future that could make all things new.

In contrast with a mainstream or side stream future, this Creative path was an upstream future. Jesus saw this high road transcending the lower lines. It would lead to the ideal, the kingdom of God. It would include the ancient covenant made to Israel, but raise it from a one-nation to a many-nation covenant.

Jesus’ Creative future called for faith. He and his contemporaries would have to die to the old order before its external collapse. If they did, they would survive the “end of the age.” Even those who didn’t follow his lead from the outset would be given a second chance.

The World that Passed Away

Seen in this context, Jesus’ praise of a scoundrel makes sense. The Dishonest Manager’s world was falling out from beneath him. The same could be said for Jesus’ contemporaries. Their world was passing away, as much as Scarlet O’Hara’s ante-Bellum South was about to become history in “Gone with the Wind.” Jesus called people away from a false confidence in patronage, extreme nationalism and violence against Rome. He counseled them to make friends with their extended family by means of Mammon, so when that was gone, they might have a social network to rely upon. These were emergency ethics, as Albert Schweitzer frames it (1929).

In reference to the Great War of his century, Jesus’ ministry was clearly ante-Bellum, before the catastrophe. The apostolic age led by James, Peter and Paul was Bellum, leading up and during the war. The emergence of Christianity from Judaism after the fall of Jerusalem was part of the post-Bellum reconstruction period, about which we know very little.

The Limits of a Galilean Model

For the past four years I have developed this model in my writing (Gary, 2004, 2006) and “Future Proof Your Ministry“workshops. Recently, I addressed the World Future Society on this subject, and have published an award winning paper on this sub-titled, “A Galilean Model of Foresight.” Note this is a Galilean model of foresight, not a model of western history, the whole of church history, nor of modern history. It helps us understand eschatology in its First-Century context.

This model is contingent on its First Century context. As much as today’s end-time Christians might wish, Jesus’ prophetic awareness of the collapse of Herod’s temple cannot be transposed with certainty on any future generation. Our knowledge of the future is much more tentative. Jesus operated on the basis of divine foreknowledge. We operate with human foresight.

The “Future According to Jesus” is an area for greater scholarly focus in biblical theology, contextual eschatology, and historical Jesus studies. Anglican Bishop N.T. Wright (1999) has set the agenda for research in these fields this past decade, but so much more can be done. If Jesus was a futurist, in addition to being prophet; we must ground Christian futuring in its founding events. If Jesus operated in a 200-year present, so should we.

Second, to move from failure to foresight, and to frame the practice of Christian futuring:

2. We must focus on First Things, not just Last Things

Why did Jesus praise the Dishonest Manager in the midst of his scandal? Could it be Jesus’ protagonist didn’t let his pending termination paralyze him? Instead, he saw his Last Things as a transition to First Things. That is something that Jesus could admire. When everyone around the Manager saw his world as ending, the scoundrel had faith to believe his social fortunes would rise again. We need this quality in our day, to see beyond the end, to see every ending as a new beginning in God. If Christian futuring is to recover this original sense of the Gospel, it will need to draw not only from Last Things, but also from First Things.

Last Things - First Things

Figure 2 is a depiction of how these two curves worked in the apostolic age. The gospel explained that the Cross was a sign that Herod’s Temple would fall, while the resurrection was a sign that Jesus’ new house, built without hands, was rising. Both those who believed and those who didn’t would know that God had instituted a New Covenant when the Old was taken away (Hebrews 10:9).

Last Things, or Eschatology, is derived from the Greek word eschaton, meaning the study of the End or last days. Eschatology is that branch of systematic theology that focuses on last things, such as heaven, hell, immortality, resurrection, the last judgment, and the coming of Christ. Fundamentalists commonly think this field is referring to the end of the world, the end of space time history.

Twentieth century scholarship (Hoekema, 1979, McKnight, 1999), however, has amply shown that Jesus was more likely talking about the end of an age, or “aeon“–or the end of the Second Temple period (Fletcher-Louis, 1997). Paul likewise felt the present age of Law was passing away (Pate, 1995), to be subsumed by an age of Grace.

Keeping First Things First

If the Last Things or Eschatology refers primarily to the climax of the Old Covenant, what is that branch of theology that refers to first things, or new creation? Christianity has yet to fully name one. In my own thinking with colleagues, the word I’ve used to define this branch of theology is Archonology. The corresponding Greek word to eschaton is archon. Archon means “origin,” “beginning” or “first” chronologically. In Colossians 1:16-17, Paul says of Christ, “all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” In Revelation 3:14 Christ uses archon to refer to himself as “the Origin of God’s Creation” or “God’s Creative Original.”

Instead of just building on Eschatology as the end of the Old Covenant, Archonology could focus on the beginning of the New Covenant and its developmental dynamics in history. Archonics could be considered the architecture of the possible. God calls us by faith to give ourselves to new possibilities and to be social and spiritual architects - to shape our community’s future through originality, creativity, vision and leadership.

The apostle Paul writes, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come” (2 Corinthians 5:17). Early believers were called to exercise faith in the Cross, which broke their yoke to the old order, and exercise hope in the coming future, which bound them to a new order.

A Last Things perspective counts down to the end of the Law. A First Things perspective counts up from the beginning of Grace. Eschatology deals with the end of ancient Israel’s national story; Archonology deals with the beginning of the human story, as redeemed in Christ.

Why Our Calendar Counts Up

This realization that we should count up from Christ–rather than count down from the Creation of the world, was slow for church history to grasp. Figure 3 shows how the church fathers ran through two Anno Mundi calendars before they stumbled upon our present Anno Domini calendar. The first 1,000 years of church history are marked in centuries across the top. The left column is marked from 5500 low to 6000 high. This shows the growing perception that the world would soon end, as each calendar progressed on its trajectory, whether from A.D. 100 to 400, or from A.D. 300 to 700.

Dr. Richard Landes (1988) shows how the two Anno Mundi calendars fell into disuse once they entered the “danger” zone of 100 years in the countdown to 6000. It was not until Bede, the English historian, adopted Dionysus Exiguus’ Anno Domini calendar, that society could put the non-canonical World Sabbath Week legend to rest.

The Present-Future Church

Christian futuring, as a practice among church leadership, could bring real balance to the people of God with a focus on First Things. I like how Reggie McNeal (2003) captures this sense of possibility when he calls us to be a Present-Future church, rather than a Present-Past church. We need to view our loved ones, our co-workers and our congregations in this same sense–that their future is open-ended. Short of the return of Christ, it is not a stretch to envision that people of faith living 10,000 years from now will see us as the early church. We need to embrace the First Things of the New Covenant, rather than just languish until the End of Days.

Third, to move from leadership failure to foresight, and frame the practice of Christian futuring:

3. We must focus on Missional, not just Church futures

Note that in Luke 16:8 Jesus claims “the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.” Apparently, then, like now, the merchants of Jesus’ day were cannier to seize opportunity than the people of God. It is no accident that the social entrepreneurs of our age are not asking for advice from the church on how to build the cities of tomorrow. This is not the first time that the church found itself as “yesterday’s children”? What can we do, as Donovan (2004) asks, to re-found the church at the dawn of the Third Millennium? I suggest as we turn to Christian futuring for help, to frame our quest broader than just Church futures to encompass missional futures.

The Business of the Future

Sherden (1998) describes how the business of the future today is a multi-billion dollar industry, governing finance, economics, technology, business, weather, population and futurists. Back in 1989, I was involved in the creation of what became the “AD 2000 & Beyond Movement,” a global evangelical effort to reach the world for Christ. I remember distinctly in the early days of that effort, Dr. David Barrett, editor of the World Christian Encyclopedia (2001), telling me, “Jay, there is no future to ministry studies, unless we combine them with the breadth and depth of futures studies.”

I was slow to heed Dr. Barrett’s counsel, but finally when I realized that Evangelicals were so focused on 2000 as a managerial target, to the neglect of preparing churches for a new century, I began to immerse myself in the world of professional futures. Each July since 1996 I have spoken to the annual conference of the World Future Society, usually attended by a mix of some 1,000 leaders, whether business people, consultants, educators or non-profit executives.

In 2002, I became a founding member of a smaller society, the Association of Professional Futurists. While there are some exceptions, I found that most futurists are not opposed to values and faith perspectives. They are not exclusively secularists. They care deeply for the future of religion and society. But their vocations seldom intersect with the church.

Why the Church is not Ready

While keeping a foot in both worlds of marketplace and ministry, I have not been able to dismiss the statement of Charles Templeton (1996), the famous 1950s evangelist turned agnostic: “The church stands in danger that the time will come when it can pick up a microphone and address the entire world–only to find out it has nothing to say.”

Why has the church become so irrelevant to the world? One reason is that over the centuries, two words in Latin developed for time. One phrase governed the human realm, futurum; the other governed the divine sphere;adventus (Peters, 2005). Futurum refers to the natural future that arises from the present. The futurum of an acorn is an oak tree. The futurum of a child is an adult. Adventus refers to the divine future that is ahead of us, that breaks into the present. Adventus broke into the present when 70 years of Soviet militarism collapsed and ended the Cold War. Normally, however, Adventus is confined to the liturgical calendar, with the feast of Christmas drawing our attention to the first and second coming of Christ.

Although there are exceptions (Moltmann, 1963), sacred theology did not grow in imagination, investigation, and forward engagement, nearly as much as the natural and human sciences which studied God’s creation (Kung, 1988). This is despite that fact that in the 20th century, the kingdom of God came to be recognized as both present and future, as “already, but not yet” (Schwarz, 2000), or encompassing both futurum and adventus. These twolanguages of futures studies and theological studies may first appear to be at odds, but they can grow together. The practice of Christian futuring could be that touchstone between these two disciplines if it focuses on missional, not just church futures.

Christian Futuring is more than Church Futures

I would like to challenge you to make Christian futuring an all encompassing practice for both clergy and lay. While it should focus on church futures through methods such as Natural Church Development (Schwarz, 1996) or Percept surveys, it should focus on much more. Christian futuring should become an applied theology of hope (Gary, 2004). It should be practiced on Sunday through worship, but also from Monday to Saturday through faith, hope and love. It must become missional. Or as Kester Brewin (2007) says, we must have a vision for a church that is organic/networked/decentralized/bottom- up/communal/flexible/always evolving. This will involve an upgrade, both internally in how we think, and externally in how we interface with life (Vincent, 2007), to Christianity 2.0.

Christian futuring should not become just another version of planning-directed church growth (Easum & Cornelius, 2006; Malphurs, 2005), as helpful as that may be. Instead, it should become a personal and group practice of double-loop learning (Argyris & Schon, 1977), encompassing hindsight, foresight and insight.

We Must Cultivate Foresight

Another way to talk about missional futures, rather than just church futures, is to help people cultivate foresight. We live in a day when the church must help people develop vocations related to redeeming and leading emerging fields in the coming Molecular age (Meyer & Davis, 2003). This could be agricultural genetics, material engineering, astronomical sciences, artificial intelligence, environmental management, governance, health or gerontology.

My working definition of foresight follows the lead of Dr. Richard Slaughter. He sees foresight as an internal capacity of leadership, much like creativity or vision. He defines foresight as “the ability to create and maintain a high quality, coherent, and functional forward view and to use the insights arising in organizationally useful ways…” (1998, p. 382). Useful ways in a faith context might mean to illuminate emerging issues in ethics, reinvent aging institutions, leverage outreach through strategic alliances, reach new generations, or act proactively in light of demographic changes.

Changing the Future by Degrees

One of the critical tasks to ensure that Christian futuring is properly framed, learned and practiced is to see it become embedded in the academy. In this regard, for several years I have followed the work of Dr. Leonard Sweet and Dr. Robert Duncan through Drew Theological School. Four years ago I took my own plunge into academics to help Regent University, in Virginia Beach. Together with the Dean of the School of Global Leadership & Entrepreneurship, I began to help their 500 MBA, M.A., Doctorate and PhD students grapple with the field of Christian futuring, from the framework of strategic and social foresight. After much labor we launched a separate M.A. in Strategic Foresight, with introductory, theory, methods and elective courses.

Futuring also has become the first course of our entrepreneurial MBA, an elective concentration with our Masters of Organizational Leadership, a third year option within the Doctor of Strategic Leadership, and research options within our PhD in Organizational Leadership. Both these examples illustrate how our teaching ministries, whether in graduate schools, colleges or denominations, need to encompass this field and help people from all walks of life grapple with change, innovation and creativity. We must focus on missional, not just church futures.

Conclusion

The parable of the Dishonest Manager challenges us to view our failures not as the end, but as new beginnings. We should not be dismayed by leadership scandals, natural disasters, broken government, financial meltdowns, or even personal tragedy, because God is all and in all. The calling for our time is to move from leadership failure to foresight. The future according to Jesus shows us the creative path. The realm of first things lets us explore the divine limits of human possibility. The call to be missional, rather than provincial, challenges us to be engaged in all walks of life. Let us avoid the ethics of the Dishonest Manager, but let us emulate how he responded to disaster. Let us approach the future with faith to make all things new.

About the Author:

Dr. Jay Gary is president of PeakFutures.com, a foresight consulting group. Over the past twenty years Jay has helped non-profits, foundations, civic leaders, and strategic alliances to create more promise filled futures. He also teaches strategic foresight, innovation and leadership at the graduate level and through professional development courses.

Discussion Starters:

1. What is the message of the Parable of the Dishonest Manager? Why does Gary suggest that Jesus’ anti-hero might be a fitting biblical example for our time?

2. What was the catastrophe of the First-Century? How does the “future according to Jesus” help you understand Jesus’ world? Our world?

3. Why is End-Time Christianity limited? How can Christian futuring move beyond it’s blind-spots?

4. How does our language of time limit us? How does Gary think futures studies can help the church move beyond just strategic planning?

References:

Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1977, Sept – Oct). Double-loop learning in organizations. Harvard Business Review, 55(5), 115-125.

Barrett, D. B., Kurian, G. T., & Johnson, T. M. (2001). World Christian encyclopedia: A comparative survey of churches and religions in the modern world (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Brandon, S. G. F. (1968). The fall of Jerusalem and the Christian church: A study of the effects of the Jewish overthrow of A. D. 70 on Christianity. (2nd ed.). London: S.P.C.K.

Brewin, K. (2007). Signs of emergence: A vision for church that is organic/networked/decentralized/bottom- up/communal/flexible/always evolving. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker.

Crossan, J. D., & Reed, J. L. (2001). Excavating Jesus: Beneath the stones, behind the texts. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco.

Donovan, V. J. (2004, e-book). The church in the midst of creation. Colorado Springs, CO: Bimillennial Press.

Easum, W. M., & Cornelius, B. (2006). Go big: Lead your church to explosive growth. Nashville: Abingdon.

Faulkner, N. (2002). Apocalypse: The great Jewish revolt against Rome, AD 66 – 73. Charleston, SC: Tempus Publishing Ltd.

Fletcher-Louis, C. H. T. (1997). The destruction of the temple & the relativization of the Old Covenant: Mark 13:31 & Matthew 5:18. In K. E. Brower & M. W. Elliott (Eds.), Eschatology in Bible & theology: Evangelical essays at the dawn of a new millennium (pp. 145-170). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

Gary, J. E. (2004, Spring). Creating the future of faith: Foresighted pastors and organic theologians. Dialog: A Journal of Theology, 43(1), 36-40.

Gary, J. (2004, 24 May). The future according to Jesus.

Gary, J. E. (2006). The future of business as mission: An inquiry into macro-strategy. In T. Steffen & M. Barrett (Eds.), Business as mission: From impoverishment to empowered (pp. 253-273). Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library.

Gary, J. (2008, September). The future according to Jesus: A Galilean model of foresight. Futures, 40(7), 630-642.

Hoekema, A. A. (1979). The Bible and the future. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

Landes, R. A. (1988). Lest the millennium be fulfilled: Apocalyptic expectations and the pattern of western chronography, 100-800 C.E. In W. D. F. Verbeke, D. Verhelst & A. Welkenhysen (Eds.), Medievalia Lovaniensia, ser. 1(pp. 137-211). Louvain: Studia XV.

Kung, H. (1988). Theology for the third millennium: An ecumenical view. New York: Doubleday.

Malphurs, A. (2005). Advanced strategic planning: A new model for church and ministry leaders (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

Meyer, C., & Davis, S. M. (2003). It’s alive: The coming convergence of information, biology, and business. New York: Crown Business.

McNeal, R. (2003). The present future: Six tough questions for the church. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

McKnight, S. (1999). A new vision for Israel: The teachings of Jesus in national context. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

Pate, C. M. (1995). The end of the age has come: The theology of Paul. Grand Rapids , MI: Zondervan.

Peters, T. (2005, e-book). Futures, human and divine. Colorado Springs, CO: Bimillennial.

Schwarz, C. A. (1996). Natural church development: A guide to eight essential qualities of healthy churches. Carol Stream, IL: ChurchSmart Resources.

Schwarz, H. (2000). Eschatology. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.

Schweitzer, A. (1929). Civilization and ethics (C. T. Campion, Trans.). London: A. & C. Black.

Sherden, W. A. (1998). The fortune sellers: The big business of buying and selling predictions. New York: John Wiley.

Slaughter, R. A. (1998, November – December). Futures studies as an intellectual and applied discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(3), 372-386.

Templeton, C. B. (1996). Farewell to God: My reasons for rejecting the Christian faith. Toronto, ON: McClelland & Stewart.

Vincent, R. J. (2007, e-book). Integral Christianity. Colorado Springs, CO: Bimillennial.

Wright, N. T. (1999). The challenge of Jesus. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

What has occupied your executive team’s attention the past three years? Chances are you have been restructuring departments or reengineering core programs for immediate gain, rather than regenerating your strategies or reinventing your organization for the future. It is said that on average, corporate management devotes 90% of [...]]]> by Jay Gary, PhD, Jun 22, 2004

What has occupied your executive team’s attention the past three years? Chances are you have been restructuring departments or reengineering core programs for immediate gain, rather than regenerating your strategies or reinventing your organization for the future. It is said that on average, corporate management devotes 90% of their time on the “Inside and Now,” leaving 10% of their energy to focus on the “Outside and Then.”

That forward focus might be even less in the non-profit or small business sectors given that the urgent often preempts the important due to limited resources. While shoring up today’s operations is vital and necessary, it is no substitute for creating tomorrow’s programs. So, how can we lead from the future, rather than the past?

Enter Strategic Foresight

Over the past decade, an applied field has emerged that holds great promise for any Christian leader who seeks to raise their organization to the next level, 30, 60 or even 100-fold. This field has been christened “strategic foresight,” and has emerged from four disciplines: future studies, organizational development, technological forecasting and strategic planning.

The premise is straightforward. Leaders should cultivate foresight, or broaden their forward sight to complement planning. Planning develops strategies for present operations, while foresight creates the framework for future actions, five to ten years out. Where certainty and continuity prevail, planning works best. By contrast, foresight aims to identify those uncertainties and discontinuities that could become “game changers.”

Australian educator Richard Slaughter sees foresight as an internal capacity of leadership, much like creativity or vision. He defines foresight as “the ability to create and maintain a high-quality, coherent and functional forward view and to use the insights arising in organizationally useful ways.”

Useful ways in a faith context might mean to illuminate emerging issues in ethics, reinvent aging institutions, leverage outreach through strategic alliances, reach new generations, act proactively in light of demographic changes, or introduce a more holistic paradigm for cross-cultural organizations.

Mental Model 2

Strategic foresight is largely about creating a “Mental Model 2″ (MM2) to follow your present “Mental Model 1″ (MM1). This is typically found in a ministry context, but can easily be applied by Christian leaders within a variety of organizations. MM1 is the prevailing ministry paradigm. It is the way you see the world and the future of faith. It is the predominant view of the present and the assumption that, given past success, the future will be more of the same. MM2 is a new set of assumptions that your team develops in view of prevailing change in your sector. Rather than a traditional belief, MM2 is an emerging view of how your audience and core competencies might change in ten years. In the midst of preserving the gains that MM1 has spawned, MM2 aims to shift your ministry or organization to match future realities.

Developing a MM2 is an intentional journey that executive teams take together, usually lasting from six months to one year. The foresight process is either led from the inside by a CEO or development director, or led from the outside by ministry association leaders. Ultimately, however, strategic foresight can be used by anyone in any type of organization.

When asked for the secret to his goal-scoring success, Canadian hockey player Wayne Gretsky expressed the essence of strategic foresight: “I don’t skate to where the puck is. I skate to where the puck is going to be.”

About the Author

Dr. Jay Gary is president of PeakFutures.com, a foresight consulting group. Over the past twenty years Jay has helped non-profits, foundations, civic leaders, and strategic alliances to create more promise filled futures. He also teaches strategic foresight, innovation and leadership at the graduate level and through professional development courses.

What will Christian faith formation in churches look like in 2020? Can we begin now to envision the shape of faith formation in the year 2020? Can we prepare our churches for the future of faith formation? This new decade will demand new thinking and new models, practices, resources, and [...]]]> by staff, July 5, 2010

What will Christian faith formation in churches look like in 2020? Can we begin now to envision the shape of faith formation in the year 2020? Can we prepare our churches for the future of faith formation? This new decade will demand new thinking and new models, practices, resources, and technologies to address the spiritual needs of all generations.

The Faith Formation 2020 National Initiative seeks to address the question “What will Christian faith formation in churches look like in 2020?”and to develop processes, strategies, and resources to help churches plan for the future. A comprehensive and far-reaching effort is now required to envision the future of faith formation and ensure that it is relevant and effective in the 21st century. The first phase of the project, a Working Paper on Faith Formation in 2020, explores the driving forces affecting the future of faith formation 2010-2020 and envisions the future of faith formation through four scenarios that describe what faith formation in 2020 could be like. The second phase of the project is designed to empower and equip pastors, church staffs, and faith formation leaders to envision and plan faith formation for all ages and generations, at home and church through Resources — two new books and online materials in 2010, Training — a national conferences series conducted regional beginning in the summer of 2010, and Networking — an online resource center and innovations exchange.

For more see the national initiative web page.

In the January 2010 issue, writing for Church Executive Magazine, Dr. Jay Gary offered three letters from imaginary pastors, written as if it was 2020. They give a retrospective look on what might be the prospects of the US Evangelical church looking forward. They are not projections, nor [...]]]> by Jay Gary PhD, Jan 1, 2010

In the January 2010 issue, writing for Church Executive Magazine, Dr. Jay Gary offered three letters from imaginary pastors, written as if it was 2020. They give a retrospective look on what might be the prospects of the US Evangelical church looking forward. They are not projections, nor prophecies. But they can help us weigh how immigrants, women or emerging generations might shape the church in greater measure over the next decade.

The Multi-church
The Voca-church
The Hybrid-church

Click for more.

‘What’s wrong with organized religion?’ That’s the question that the dean of strategic management, Gary Hamel, put to America’s largest churches. Claiming that religion needs a management reboot, his hypothesis was that the problem with organized religion isn’t that it’s too religious, but that it’s too organized.

Hamel closes [...]]]> by Gary Hamel, Nov 9, 2009

‘What’s wrong with organized religion?’ That’s the question that the dean of strategic management, Gary Hamel, put to America’s largest churches. Claiming that religion needs a management reboot, his hypothesis was that the problem with organized religion isn’t that it’s too religious, but that it’s too organized.

Hamel closes with these two questions, What do you think is wrong with “church?” What are the forces of inertia that keep the church from changing? For more.

My name is Frank Spencer, and I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce myself and tell you a little about my experience as a mid-career professional in the Master of Strategic Foresight (MSF) program at Regent University.

I live in Savannah, Georgia, I’ll be 42 this coming January, [...]]]> by Frank Spencer, Nov 18, 2006

My name is Frank Spencer, and I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce myself and tell you a little about my experience as a mid-career professional in the Master of Strategic Foresight (MSF) program at Regent University.

I live in Savannah, Georgia, I’ll be 42 this coming January, and have been married to Sherry – my wonderful wife – 20 years this coming March. My wife and I have 2 boys (15 and 12) and 2 girls (9 and 7). I have served as a worship leader, student minister, and pastor of a non-denominational church for approximately 12 years. This has been an experience that had both incredible highs as well as its share of lows!

In late 1999, I began to be drawn to “futures thinking,” primarily in regards to my ministerial lifestyle. This quickly evolved into a broader view of foresight possibilities beyond the confines of church settings. It was then that I realized how closed I had actually been to God’s larger call to action in every quadrant of human activity.

Over the next few years, I studied “futures” independently, and this allowed me access to the teachings of those who had been practicing in the field of foresight extensively. It was during this time that I developed a futures foundation, as well as a desire to apply it to both personal and occupational domains. Wow – what an eye-opener!

I learned of Regent’s Masters of Organizational Leadership with a minor in Strategic Foresight at Regent in early 2005, and was led to apply to the program (an extended story with some great Divine intervention!). I was accepted to the program and began my first semester in the Fall of 2005. It was shortly thereafter that the Masters of Strategic Foresight (MSF) was launched, and I transferred into it in the Fall (2006).

I have since met several other students who are in the distance learning program as well, and I have presently been able to take about half of the core courses required for the MSF. I am also meeting new students entering the MSF on a continual basis, and this influx is bringing about an exciting growth to the futures community at Regent University.

I am now finishing my fourth semester in the MSF, and I have found the program to be very challenging and enriching in terms of foresight and futures thinking, as well as providing in-depth instruction that paves the way toward practicing professional futures in organizational and societal settings. Many futurist methods are explored and modeled through “hands-on” projects, and the program is extremely academic as well.

I have personally seen a greater transition toward complexity and diversity thinking in my own life as I view personal, organizational, and even ecclesiastical domains. This has increasingly opened a whole new world to me in terms of impacting multiple drivers in society rather than simply being locked into a more linear or “closed-system” view and practice of human systems.

Personally, I have been interested in creating sustainable structures as well as transitional development globally, and I (along with several others individuals) created a network in late 2000 that acts as a “launching pad” for future thinkers, trans-modern faith communities, and social initiative enterprises that are creating aspirational and preferable futures.

This program has helped me to advance the Banner Community through access to foresight strategists, their areas of expertise  and the new foresight theories and methods they promote. I also look forward to practicing futures in a professional setting while continuing to build the network. I would even like to teach futures at the collegiate level someday.

For anyone looking to broaden their view of the future, or who may need to help others find creative and innovative ways to prepare for emerging issues within their organization or community – I would highly recommend considering the Master of Strategic Foresight.

Update: [In 2009, I started my own foresight consultancy called KedgeFutures.] Please keep in touch with me. Check out my blog focused on “Bringing Aspirational Change and Transformational Futures to Individuals, Organizations, and Society through Strategic Foresight.”