Schwartz starts by defining a test case. This is in essence a question; How can I future-proof my career? Once you know the question, you can then set about identifying key influences on your question–e.g. technological change–scenarios that may bring about the change–e.g. new competing technologies, lack of technological development in your sector, or the collapse of a key stakeholder–and finally, future implications.

Here is what Schwartz says in more detail:

1. List driving forces

What variables, trends and events will affect your mission? The first step is to list them. Next, divide them into uncertainties (such as economic, political and social conditions) and relative certainties (such as global population growth and climate change). Finally, rank the items according to their importance, from most to least significant. The result: a catalogue of factors that will determine the future of your area.

If I take web development as an example:

• Pace of technological change.
• Number of companies using the chosen technology.
• Number of people available in the industry (permanent and contract).
• State of the [digital] economy.
• Competing technologies, e.g. Ruby on Rails vs ColdFusion, AJAX vs Flash, offline vs online, desktop vs mobile.
• Support of the community, e.g. open-source software, tutorials and application servers.
• Support of key stakeholders, e.g. Adobe’s support of Flash, Flex and ColdFusion.

2. Make a scenario grid

Now it’s time to map out possible futures. The two most important uncertainties from the top of your list form the axes of the grid, with each of the quatdrants representing a potential future. Some may be more likely than others–and some may seem downright improbable–but they all depict the interplay of key forces. Thus, they’re within the range of possibility and deserve attention. They help you prepare for a range of possibilities and bolster core actions with those related to the future you deem most likely.

3. Imagine the possible futures

Sketched as a grid, these 4 possible scenarios are so abstract that it would be hard to recognise them if they merged. Make them more concrete by fleshing them out into imaginery, but plausible, news stories of the forces at play.

To continue the web development example:

• Global financial crisis prevents companies investing in technology. They cannot raise the adequate funding to push through key development projects, even if it means increasing efficiencies within the company.
• Adobe drops support for ColdFusion causing turmoil in the community. Railo picks up a lot of business, but can’t scale to fill the demand. Far-sighted companies migrate to other suitable platforms.
• Ruby on Rails booms under the paradigms: Convention over Configuration and Don’t Repeat Yourself, eating into ColdFusion’s key mantra: Rapid Application Development.
• Key advances in technology on the desktop and mobile continue at pace. Micro-payments allow people to create relatively cheap applications that appeal to a mass audience. Development frameworks allow developers to transfer their skills between technologies without the need for significant retraining.

4. Brainstorm implications and actions

Now it’s time to develop strategies for coping with each of the four possible futures you’ve imagined. Start by listing all the implications of each of the scenarios and then come up with actions that would enable you to prosper under any of the new conditions. Some actions would apply to almost any scenario: these should form the basis of your plan, since they help you to prepare for a range of possibilities. Bolster these core actions with those related to the future you deem most likely.

Examples of possible implications:

• Scarce funding.
• Limited demand for new technologies.
• Few companies to work for.
• Few new projects to work on.
• Increased competition for places.
• Increased demand for people with key skills, e.g. mobile.

and possible actions:

• Concentrate on existing technologies.
• Develop and exit strategy, e.g. cross-train into a new technology.
• Cultivate your network, make new contacts at major development houses.
• Polish skills in areas of uncertainty.
• Start your own cutting-edge business.

5. Track the indicators

The main value of the scenarios is that they sensitise you to the way the future is unfolding. Over time, the world is likely to gravitate toward one of your four quadrants. The trick is to recognise the shif in progress. As you monitor the news, look for signals that a particular possibility is becoming a concrete reality. Keep a file of news relevant to your scenarios, jotting down a quick note, along with the date, whenever you come across a significant story. Evaluate these developments on a quarterly basis so you can track the trends. Keep adjusting your action strategy to anticipate the future as it emerges.

Of course it is possible that none of your four quadrants becomes true. If this is so, you will need to go back and re-evaluate your scenario grid. Keeping a critical eye on your grid and apace of industry developments, you can be assured that the future will not change so quickly that you’ll miss an opportunity.

The key to affecting the development of tomorrow’s mobility lies in our readiness to challenge what is established and in the ability to present new options.

The design team was not just interested in answering the question of how the car of the future will look but primarily wished to explore the creative freedom that it has to offer. Both of these aspects are affected by the requirements that future cars are expected to meet. All ideas that the GINA presents were therefore derived from the needs and demands of customers concerning the aesthetic and functional characteristics of their car and their desire to express individuality and lifestyle. The GINA has an almost seamless outer skin, a flexible textile cover that stretches across a moveable substructure. Individual functions are only revealed if and when they are needed.

(Click on the images to see a larger view)

GINA produces dramatically different solutions that affect the design and functionality of future cars. The GINA Light Visionary Model is an optical expression of selective, future-oriented concepts which provide an example of the manner and extent of this transformation.

You can see more of the GINA on BMW’s web-tv website.

(Click on the images to see a larger view)

You can see more of Igarashi Design’s work on the ID Performance website.

What is clear, however, is that it has a futuristic appeal that would look great in conjunction with the hugely successful British Olympic Cycling Team.

(Click on the images to see a larger view)

You can check the article, Future Directions for Rich Internet Applications out on the Flex Developer’s Journal.

It is clear that RIAs offer the potential to fundamentally change the user experience and in doing so, yield significant business benefits. However, in order for RIAs to be widely employed, and for more companies to receive these kinds of returns, technologies to build RIAs will need to appeal to a wider range of developers. The ability to cost effectively create rich, engaging user experiences that support corporate objectives and reach a broader developer audience without sacrificing development productivity require a new generation of RIA tools. These tools are being developed by a large number of organisations with Adobe, Microsoft, Google, Apple and Sun leading the way with the AIR/Flash/Flex combination, Silverlight, Gears, Quicktime and JavaFX respectively.

The new generation of RIA tools being developed by the likes of Adobe and Microsoft must do the following to allow developers to truely harness the power of RIAs in the commercial environment:

1. Allow developers to write applications using familiar development models to utilise and extend their current skills without requiring them to adopt entirely new or different skills
2. Use standard and standards-based technologies
3. Use industry specific programming models and patterns
4. Use and/or leverage the existing IT infrastructure through wrap and reuse rather than rip and replace
5. Provide pervasive, familiar programming models and an expressive user interface across platforms and devices; and
6. Allow developers to create a solution that delivers scalable, secure, high performance solutions that are bandwidth efficient

These new RIA tools will need to provide the features that enhance IT developer’s abilities to be more creative and to accomplish RIA development with the same or less effort than the tools they use to create other types of applications. What is required are the tools that can help developers achieve these objectives without relying on only HTML or other scripting languages, or having to learn a completely new development approach.

Two vendors which have the technology and capaibility to fully deliver Rich Internet Applications are Adobe and Microsoft. With Microsoft’s Silverlight and XAML, developing rich internet applications to run on Windows platforms will progress at a fast rate. In turn, Adobe has had a head start with the aquisition of Macromedia and the subsequent addition of Flash and Flex to its product offering. Flash and its relative ubiquity across platforms and devices ensures that RIA development and production will be accessible to a large user base and as such puts Adobe at a distinct advantage over Microsoft.

So what is the distinction between a leader and a manager? Will the definitions help?

Leader noun

• someone or something that leads or guides others.
• someone who organises or is in charge of a group.

Manager noun (abbreviation Mgr)

• someone who manages, especially someone in overall charge or control of a commercial enterprise, organisation, project, etc.

Does this help me…not yet!

Both a manager and a leader may know the business reasonably well, but the leader must know the business to a finer degree and from a different view point. They must grasp the underlying market forces that determine the past and present trends in the businesses niche, so that they can generate a vision and strategy to bring about its future development and growth. A crucial sign of a good leader is an honest attitude towards the facts and objective truth. Conversely, a subjective leader obscures the facts for the sake of narrow self-interest, partisan interest or prejudice.

Effective leaders continually probe all levels of the organisation for information, challenging their own perceptions and validating the facts. They talk to their constituents and employees to find out what is working and what is not. They keep an open mind to the knowledge they gain. An important source of information for a leader is the knowledge of the mistakes and failures that have been and are being made within their organisation.

Leaders conquer the context, the turbulent and ambiguous events that conspire to blur the facts, while managers surrender to the events in a reactionary manner.

Leaders investigate reality, taking the pertinent factors and analysing them carefully. On the basis they produce visions, concepts, plans and programs of change. Managers adopt the truth from others and implement it without regard to the facts.

There is a profound difference between leaders and managers. A good manager does things right whilst a good leader does the right thing. Doing the right thing implies a goal, a direction, an objective, a vision, a dream, a strategy, a path, a reach.

Many people spend their lives engrossed in the ‘rat-race’, attempting to climb the corporate management ladder in a vein attempt to beat mediocrity and make a difference. Unfortunately, many find themselves climbing the wrong ladder. Most companies and organisations become over-managed through this constant, unending, highly competitive race and under-led by those who lack vision. The managers accomplish nothing or the wrong things beautifully and efficiently. They climb the wrong ladder.

Managing is as much about efficiency as leadership is about effectiveness. Managing is about how things need to be done, leadership is about what things need to be done and why these things should be carried out. Management is about systems, controls, procedures, policies and structures whereas leadership is about, trust, vision and hum capital, people.

Leadership is about innovating concepts, inspiring others and initiating projects. Management is about carrying out these visions and managing the status quo. Leadership is creative, adaptive and agile. Leadership looks to the future whilst also being mindful of the bottom line.

Leaders base their vision, appeal and integrity on a careful estimation of the facts, trends and contradictions. They develop the means to re-define the status quo so that their vision can be realised, hopefully, successfully, whilst also enrolling others into the vision of the future. Without, other peoples buy in, a vision will stall and a period of transition will ensue. Leaders, therefore, have to empower others to accomplish the over-arching goal whilst also rewarding their achievements.

There is a profound difference between management and leadership, but both are important. To manage means “to bring about or succeed in accomplishing, sometimes despite difficulty or hardship“. To Lead means “to guide in direction, course, action, opinion, etc.” The distinction is important.

The most dramatic differences between leaders and managers are found at the extremes. Poor leaders are despots while poor managers are bureaucrats. Leadership is a human process and management is a resource allocation process. Both are important and in many instances managers need to also perform as leaders. Indeed first-class managers have significant leadership ability.

So where does this leave me? My opening gambit included the words “…an important aspect of my role is managing expectations, ideas and developments…” this must naturally lead me to a combination of both a leader and manager. Indeed, in my new role as a web development consultant, I have to set directions for developing concepts and applications whilst also planning, organising and promoting effective action of the task at hand. So I could say I am in a period of transition. In the past few years I have learnt much from those I consider mentors, whether they were aware or not. I have seen how things are managed and lead and from these experiences have built upon my own skill-set. I can neither categorically say I am a leader or a manager, or say what I would rather be; this is something that can only come with time.