Another interesting discussion!

Perhaps it might be worthwhile to challenge the underlying assumption on which this presumed problem of goal setting and future orientation is based. That is, it assumes that aspiring to some ideal future state and paying full attention to what’s happening in the ‘here and now’ are mutually exclusive pursuits. A couple of contrasting perspectives might suggest different ways of looking at this apparent current-future dichotomy and offer new possibilities.

The first of these is very familiar to you. What the ‘Stacey School’ refers to as “the living present” includes the idea that “… the future, as expectation and anticipation, is in the detail of actual interactions taking place now …” (Douglas Griffin, “The Emergence of Leadership”). To me, this suggests that the meaning we extract from the present will unavoidably be influenced by the nature of the future that we perpetually construct, by way of anticipation, in this same present. That is, our in-the-moment experience unavoidably contains within it our hopes/ fears, aspirations/ resignations and expectations of ‘what is to come’. If we shift these expectations – or how we view the “future in the present” – the way that we experience and make sense of the ‘here and now’ will also shift.

Secondly, at the other end of the philosophical spectrum is the Solutions Focus approach. As you may be aware, this begins by defining an ideal future state or “future perfect”. It also sets out to establish a view of the current state in relation to this perceived ideal. In these respects, it is not significantly different from other goal-focused approaches. However, in contrast to conventional practice, the ensuing conversation does not concern itself with the gap between these two. Instead, it looks in detail at what’s happening now. If this is supported by a technique known as “scaling” (where the ideal = 10, on a scale of 0 to 10, and the current = X, say), the conversation then homes in on why the present state merits a ‘score’ of X and not zero. This shifts the focus onto what is going well (an appreciative stance), rather than on faults and deficiencies (a deficit-based approach).

As these positive attributes of the present state emerge, the explicit challenge becomes one of building on these incrementally, to move towards a more rewarding state (the “future perfect”). At the same time, for those of us who believe that change happens through the conversations that people have, this shift in tone and content will naturally lead to change in those who participate in them – even if the nature and outcome of these changes cannot be predicted or controlled!

Chris.

I am talking about life in organisations. The literature exhorts people to have goals for the future. This is particularly so in organisations where the orientation towards achieving future goals is so strong. My point is that this drive towards the future in our organisational life has a price – the overlooking of what is currently going on in the organisation.

If people have a ghastly present, then the focus on aspiration for the future can also get in the way of having an accurate view of the current situation and how to change it.

For example, reflecting on what led to the current situation can help to understand how it came to be the way it is now. Especially when such reflection is done with a trusted other. Instead, people are exhorted to focus on an ideal future, which has a temporary uplifting effect that can divert attention from the pain of the present by concentrating on intentions for the future, but does not help to really understand the present situation.