Why shape the long view future

Going out 20 years in planning is not everyone's jam. Some people are more comfortable and interested in the translated near term sense of the future.

The value of the long view is that the depth of our aspiration, alignment and agility is equal to the  length of our vision. The longer our view, the less our vision is limited by self-interest and constraints. The shorter our view, the more we will sustain different versions of the status quo. In the long view, we can create a future different from the past.

Question-based planning

When we approach planning as a question-based process, there are many ways we can form new questions, including consideration of Ideas, hopes, wishes, concerns, problems, worries, obstacles, threats, decisions, research, uncertainty, expectations, assumptions, curiosity. All of these can be translated into questions that inspire and organize the process. The whole process of any kind of planning has optimum value and velocity when it's question based.

Time lining

Time lining is the simple act of associating actions with time frames. So we decide to start the next actions in a project on a specific date and time. This helps us work in sync together.

By not referring to time lining is planning it gives us more psychological freedom to be agile rather than rigid and inflexible in unresponsive when shifting momentum or approach is valuable to realizing the good we seek together. Timeline and doesn't have the connotation that we are necessarily needing to follow it and if we don't we have failed and must repent and defend our agility.

The real benefit of planning

The prime value of planning, as the shortest path to what we consider good, is unfolding new unknowns.

The most ubiquitous phenomenon in any kind of planning is the emergence of unknowns, some of which are actionable and others that are not. Each unknown represents at least one question we need to answer in order to move forward. Our momentum is equal to the rate at which we identify and answer these questions.

At the beginning of any process of planning we start with unknowns. Everything we do uncovers and unfolds new unknowns. This is true no matter how much our sense of predictability, certainty and commitment we have to any kind of actions in our planning process.

In planning that involves dreaming envisioning we dream and vision in order to discover new questions. And again this is true regardless of how much confidence we have in the certainty of our assumptions for the commitment to our convictions.

This is a very different way of looking at planning and certainly one which is far more realistic, agile and productive.

Agile and linear planning

There are two distinctly different kinds of planning.

In linear planning we start with our assumptions usually in the form of predictions and expectations about the future, but they are assumptions nevertheless. Then we form a plan based on these assumptions, not taking into account uncertainties that will certainly occur as we move forward. And then we try to implement the plan meaning trying to follow it based on our assumptions.

And because change is a constant in the universe things change. Unpredictable things happen unplanned. After we admit plan failure we either adjust or abort the plan. We hear people talking about following a plan it is usually code for linear planning.

In agile planning we start with our new unknowns. This is easy because every planning context is abundant with more unknowns than knowns. Out of these we form new questions and through these questions we gain new learning. Learning comes about through decision-making, research or some kind of experimentation.

Out of our new learning we then engage in new action which leads to another cycle of new unknowns, questions, learning and action. Agile planning is a cycle of iterations where questions and learning we take actions that are distinctively realistic because they're not based on assumptions but rather in the ever churning nature of reality.

The art of prioritization

In the art of prioritization we tend to either end up with a lot of conflict and tension or functional amount of alignment and momentum. This is true whether were talking about prioritization of actions or projects.

When it's a situation of conflict and tension what typically happens is that people prioritize according to the criteria of importance. This is the problem of asking people whose ideas are most important and it runs the risk of having everyone say each one's is the most important and so we have no functional prioritization just conflict and tension.

More functional way to approach this is by having people prioritize by sequencing rather than by importance. In sequencing we put things in the order in which they most logically need to occur. So for cooking a meal together and the main dish takes two hours to prepare and the salad takes 10 minutes to prepare we need to really start the main dish first because we don't have to start the salad until an hour and 50 minutes into the main dish. There's no value in delaying the whole meal by starting a salad first. The first main dish and then salad even though they're both vitally important to the meal. Importance is irrelevant to sequencing because sequencing has to do with the logic and timing of tasks in their interdependencies. Even though both the cake and its ultimate decorations are important we might consider decorations happening after we take the cake out of the oven rather than before we put the cake in the this is the art of sequencing the art of prioritization.

So we can save an amazing amount of time and planning if only go to do prioritization we do it from a position of sequencing rather than importance. Once people get this distinction it makes everything easier.

Two completely different planning approaches.

There are two distinctly different ways to approach planning of any kind. 

One is to move forward from our knowns and our weaknesses. Knowns include our facts and beliefs and weaknesses include deficiencies and gaps. This approach keeps our vision unclear and our momentum slow. 

The other way is to move forward from our questions and goodness. Questions include anything that's unknown, unresolved, undecided and unconfirmed. Our goodness includes our strengths, talents, abilities, qualities and knowledge. Focus on our questions and goodness is an accelerator heightening the velocity of our momentum in the clarity of our vision.

In any planning approach we move the rate of our questions and the quality of our progress is dependent on the engagement of our goodness.

The principles behind the Agile Canvas conversations

The 4 Agile Canvas conversations have power because of the principles behind them. 

Dreaming: The depth of our passion is equal to the length of our vision 

Clarity: The tempo of our dreams is equal to the rate of our questions 

Gifts: The scope of our success is equal to the engagement of our talents and resources

Doing: The momentum of our progress is equal to the cadence of our actions 

In business as unusual, these principles inspire and organize the process with unique power to keep us continously focused, realistic, aligned and productive.