.jpg)
As I write, it's that time of year when a lot of company directors of software firms will be asked by colleagues or customers to look forward and speculate about how they see the future. For some reason, because of our obsession with technology and its development, they think we have a better grip on the future than someone who runs, say, a chemicals company. In fact, the irony is that a chemicals company is likely to employ far more sophisticated software than most technology houses.
Yet we all know the only thing we can accurately predict about the future is its utter unpredictability.
In spite of this, it hasn't prevented a whole futurology industry growing up (who would have foreseen that?) which attempts to second guess what people will be doing in around five or more years from now.
For those in charge of running a business or its marketing department, most futurology is about as useful as an ocean liner built out of cardboard.
A fundamental problem with futurology lies with the fact that it was born as an off-shoot of the marketing industry. If you look at the output of Faith Popcorn, one of its leading luminaries who runs a business called BrainReserve, you will find frequent reference to consumers.
The futurologists' focus on consumers and their habits makes it hard, if not impossible, to envision non-consumer driven events, thus exposing its essential limitations. For example, the futurology industry appeared to miss one of the biggest things ever to affect humankind: the mass acceptance and inexorable rise of the internet and the World Wide Web.
The reason why no-one (as far as I can see) was able to predict the mass acceptance and incredible popularity of the internet was because its creation was driven initially by military and academic needs, not by the needs of companies trying to shift vast amounts of products or services.
Even today, the organisation behind issuing and regulating domain names and other such web protocols is non-profit driven and Tim Berners-Lee, acknowledged to be the Web's principal creator, has not become a rich mogul from its invention.
BrainReserve specialises in being able to predict mass trends or changes in public behaviour that will be of commercial use to sales people and marketers so that they can create new products and services. Let's have a look at work they did earlier.
For example, check out what Popcorn had to say about 2002. In 2001, one of the 10 phenomena Popcorn was predicting for 2002 was an increase in over-indulgence on gourmet foods. Now, this prediction has little resonance beyond the shores of rich, western economies. Imagine how it looks if you are struggling to exist in sub-Saharan Africa, or grubbing for food in quake-torn Pakistan? And even in the West, where much of this futurology fodder is aimed, can we say we've really witnessed the demise of the hamburger or pizza or other non-gourmet offerings?
The ability to think or see beyond today is a rare gift beyond most of us mere mortals. Consequently, there are very few William Blakes or Picassos around. And where they do predominate, it is almost exclusively in the arts, rather than in business and commerce.
I am not deriding Popcorn herself who has cleverly made a nice niche for her business, and also has been able to spot early consumer trends. However, it is fair to say that most of her predictions, when analysed with the benefits of hindsight, appear to be firmly anchored in the conventions that dominated at the time of their making.
For example, when putting together 2002's predictions, the US was reeling from the economic downturn part-caused by the attack on the Twin Towers on September 11. Popcorn would have had to have been living in a different universe for this event not to have coloured her views. Hence at the time she forecast the rise of Deskperation (holding onto a duff job for its own sake, rather than for career fulfilment) while the US economy was taking a dive.
The fact of the matter is that it's not that hard for futurologists to score a few easy home runs. Indeed, even without the benefit of a crystal ball, just about anyone with common sense can make educated guesses about the near future.
Of course, the vaguer or looser the prediction, the more likely an audience will be able to find some kind of truth in it. No-one can better 16th century seer Nostradamus, the French astrologer born in 1503. His collection of prophecies published in 1555 is still being argued about today. His followers have used his vague verse ramblings as evidence of Nostradamus' ability to predict world events such as wars, natural disasters and the rise and fall of empires. The problem with his writing is that his verse was in such obscure language that people are able to read what they like into his words.
Apart from Popcorn's tendency to coin new words such as Mancipation or Deskperation in the hope of mass take-up, the real problem with futurology is its attempts to look for large societal leaps or massive shifts of behaviour, rather than slight tweaks and gentle modifications, which is how things tend to change in reality.
Let's face it. Much of what we have around us today is pretty similar to fifty years ago. OK, fashions have changed, and there are objects which patently couldn't have existed without the miniaturisation of electronics and the increased power of the silicon chip.
But so much remains the same. We still shop in shops, drink in bars and go to watch live sports events. We go to work, we start families, we fall out with friends and make new ones. We read, we discuss and philosophise, and we grow old. And we still don’t live on Mars!
What changes or improvements we make to our habits are therefore usually small ones, including in business. Reforms are achieved through small, steady changes.
Going forward, we are not looking for, or expecting, seismic shifts that turn on their head the way things have always been done. Even things that are more revolutionary by nature arrive in the workplace at a gentle enough pace to make us comfortable
with their arrival. We need only think how PCs on every desk and internet connections for most office workers started with early adopters and only gradually became integral throughout organisations. We slowly got used to their presence as one would a new member of staff.
Sometimes I wonder if modern technology drives the user, rather than vice versa. The speed of communications or, of more relevance, the potential for frequent interrupts (almost just for the sake of being seen to be using modern communication techniques) is so rapid with mobile phones, email and PDAs, that there is barely time to think, let alone reflect and come up with a considered opinion after allowing a decent amount of time to pause and review in acceptable depth the long term implications.
But maybe this is just me getting old. That said, most new technologies are variations on an existing theme. For example, early PCs were PC typewriters with added functionality. Today’s PDAs are mobile phones with diary and other software included. The fact that devices have become smaller and faster does not reflect in themselves the barrier to entry in terms of consumer acceptance and understanding.
In short, there is rarely anything that is so revolutionary in business that it takes a total rethink to accommodate it. Our way at CMS of keeping up with events, and even daring a little to predict the future, is by staying close to our clients. We talk to them with open ears, sensitive to the shifting dynamics of their market place.
It is only this constant contact with our clients, rather than using futurology, that lets us remain tuned to the nuances that affect our business. It also means the only popcorn I will be consuming next year will be at the cinema.
