13 Keys to Spotting Great Futures Work

Allan Lichtman, a distinguished professor of history at American University, is renowned for his 13 Keys to the White House model, which he developed in 1981 alongside seismologist Vladimir Keilis-Borok. This system employs 13 true-or-false criteria to predict the outcomes of presidential elections in the United States. Lichtman's model has accurately forecasted nine out of the last eleven elections since 1984. In the 2024 election, Lichtman predicted a victory for Vice President Kamala Harris over former President Donald Trump. We all know how that turned out.

From my point of view, Lichtman's model may be exceptionally well founded, and deserve the success it has experienced. It may also just be lucky—after all, if a thousand pundits each flipped a coin every four years, it's probable at least one of them would outperform Lichtman's accuracy. For me though, there's a deeper point: even the best forecasting models have the potential to fail, and you can never tell in advance whether this time might be that one time.

Great futures work helps you constantly perceive, make sense of, and act on ideas of the future as they emerge in the present.

So what to do? I would say the place to start is to get good and spotting great futures work: not just who's returning a few good predictions, but the really great analytical work that helps you constantly perceive, make sense, and act on ideas of the future as they're emerging in the present.

In this article I present 13 keys to spotting great futures work, as well as some red flags to pick off the punditry which might not be so helpful. Note that not all these keys need to be present for futures work to be great, and a few red flags can be acceptable too. What follows is just a starting point for reflection and, following my own advice, I invite you to join the dialogue!

1. Is there a warning label?

In our complex, uncertain world, there are limits to how certain we can be about anything. Great futures work recognises that it cannot make forecasts more certain than the world on which they’re based. Instead it explores a range of possibilities, which, when considered might help you to make more confident decisions. A red flag is statements that sound unduly definitive, or the certainty of someone who thinks they’ve got the future ‘all figured out’.

2. Are there multiple outcomes?

Building on the previous point, by considering multiple alternatives, we make our decisions more robust. Great futures considers that building today’s strategy on only one version of the future risks leaving us unprepared in case our assumptions turn out wrong. A red flag is wishful thinking that accepts only favourable ideas about the future.

3. Is it messy?

Human brains like coherence and logic. We like the future to be explained to us step-by-step, in the way we hear stories. But the world is not like that, so we shouldn’t expect to reduce it to that. Great futures work explores messy connections, leaves loose ends, and accepts contradictions and dissonance. A red flag is an overly tidy, simple explanation that ties everything up neatly.

4. Is it multidisciplinary?

It is rare for future developments to stay neatly within the expertise of one subject matter. In fact, when disruptions hit, it’s usually because they come from an outside domain that the experts didn’t understand or consider relevant. Great futures work combines multiple disciplines to get a bigger picture. A red flag is a study called ‘the future of this or that’ which only cites sources from the same domain.

5. Does it look below the surface?

You only get so far with the understanding you get from headlines and numbers like who won the election, how fast the economy grew, or how many people were affected by an event. Looking beneath at the social and structural systems causing those numbers, is good. Looking at the worldviews underlying those systems is better still. Looking at the myths and metaphors for why it matters and what we can do about it—that’s a key to great futures futures work. A red flag is focusing only on what meets the eye.

6. Does it see tech as more than just tech?

Tech definitely changes the world. But often, the most profound of those changes do not flow directly from the tech itself. The inventor of the postage stamp never imagined the role it would play in women’s liberation. Likewise, technology rarely appears out of nowhere: someone had to develop it, deliberately or otherwise. Great futures work explores the social, economic, environmental, and political dynamics around technologies. A red flag is the assumption that tech appears out of nowhere and inexorably changes society in only the way first imagined.

7. Does it spark dialogue?

The future is not an objective, absolute thing you can passively study. It always means something to someone, and that varies from person to person. Great futures work is interactive and engaging, responds to your ideas, and challenges you to develop your perception. A red flag is a presentation or report ‘about the future’, which expects the audience to passively take it.

8. Does it make you feel uncomfortable?

Confirmation feels nice, which is why we have confirmation bias. But the future isn’t in the business of confirming your beliefs. Great futures work seeks out the weaknesses in your plans, and helps you strengthen those plans by better preparing them. That may not feel good—admitting weakness rarely does—but doing so is necessary to learn. A red flag is when futures work only confirms your existing beliefs (or those of your organisation).

9. Does it respect your emotions?

Although discomfort can be a healthy side effect of great futures work, emotional manipulation is not. Great futures work senses and responds to the emotional reactions it elicits, and supports you in figuring them out. A red flag is sensationalist, emotive language—especially appeals to anger, frustration, or lust.

10. Are the catchphrases fresh?

Communication is indispensable to getting knowledge off the shelf and into people’s brains. But knowledge should be the foundation on which we build catchy communication, not the other way around. Great futures work does the deep thinking, and then finds compelling ways to convey the ideas. A red flag is clichés like ‘new paradigm’ and ‘quantum’ anything.

11. Could it help you change your mind?

New information is coming in all the time, and responding to it—proportionately and wisely—keeps knowledge relevant. Changing your mind little and often is a sign of great futures work. A red flag is prediction systems that stick rigidly to a set of criteria even as the world around them changes radically.

12. Does it own its biases?

Biases are a feature not a bug of human cognition. Great futures work is aware of potential biases and manages them. This includes our worldview and the kinds of ideas we think are worth considering. More diversity and inclusion also tends to improve futures work. A red flag is when everyone working on a futures project has the same background and way of thinking.

13. Can you use it?

Trivia can be engaging and even entertaining. Generic forecasts can be interesting too. But what makes futures work truly useful is that it considers what matters to you, what future changes could affect you, and what you might be able to do about it. That last point is particularly important: you don’t necessarily need to predict correctly to prepare. You might judge that the outcome of a big election does have strategic consequences for you but consider whether the time spent trying to predict that outcome is a good return on investment when you could instead be spending it developing scenarios and strategising ways to succeed regardless of the outcome. A red flag is futures work that is designed more for journalism than judgement.

This article contains my own views, and does not represent the OECD or any of its members.

Works cited by ?zge Aydogan , Pupul Bisht , Kwamou Eva Feukeu , Sandile Hlatshwayo , Sohail Inayatullah , Miguel Jiménez , Alanna Markle , Rafael Ramirez , and Prateeksha S. among others.