Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the concept of smart globalization and identify links with the Rockefeller Foundation's philanthropic activities in a number of areas, including health, climate change, urbanization, economic insecurities, and basic survival needs.Design/methodology/approachThe paper addresses how a new conceptualization of globalization intersects with the field of foresight by describing the Rockefeller Foundation's approach to addressing complex issues of human development.FindingsA forward looking research component is a valuable organizational structure that can add value by tracking and monitoring current and emerging trends relevant to the Foundation's strategic framework, operational initiatives, and areas of work.Practical implicationsThe paper suggests a closer interaction of foresight and development experts and practitioners by suggesting that individuals in both disciplines need to work more closely together to coherently address the multitude, interlocking global challenges of the 21st century.Originality/valueThe paper introduces the notion of "smart globalization" to the foresight community and details how this mindset has influenced and directed the ongoing work of the Rockefeller Foundation.

A reflection on a career in foresight, emphasizing the power of a collaborative process of foresight that connects the future to the present and shifts perception of control. This enables action today toward more preferred futures.

Roles of leadership in coping with uncertainty are explored in this paper. Through an in‐depth, empirically (CEOs of top, ASEAN publicly listed corporations) grounded discussion, the authors argued for the presence of a deep cultural divide between Eastern and Western leaders on coping with uncertainty. In the process, the authors devise a two dimensional, organic versus forecastability model of strategy behavior for polarizing East‐West leadership styles. Aspects of the Sun Tzu's Art of War and 5,000 years old, I Ching are discussed with respect to foreknowledge and foresight respectively.

The subject of evaluating foresight work has been around for almost as long as the professional practice itself has, but the field has done little to move closer to a systematic evaluation of its work. This special issue marks the second collection of articles on that project after a special issue of Futures in 2012 (Van Der Duin and Van Der Martin 2012). This issue takes a three-part approach: Part 1: evaluation of foresight in general and evaluation approaches and methods that can support designing an appropriate evaluation; Part 2: evaluation of foresight work in organizations and its impact on long-term thinking and decision-making; and Part 3: evaluation of specific foresight activities—an undergraduate learner foresight experience and a health sector scenario development exercise. The foreword ends with a reflection on the continuing issue of foresight and evaluation.