Skip to main content

Beyond the Five-Year Plan: Alexander Friton on Scenario Thinking

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight Method, Future Topic, News.

Most companies have a strategy. Far fewer have a picture of the future. Alexander Friton, Managing Director of Qesar, explains that this is true of many companies in mechanical engineering, and that scenario thinking can close that gap.

In two short conversations with the Futurewise Company, Alexander explains what scenarios add to strategy work. He also shares why developments that seemed merely plausible to him two years ago now feel very real.

Strategy without a future

Alexander is candid about where they started. For a long time, nobody really asked how industry, mechanical engineering and special-purpose machinery would evolve, or what role a partnership should play in that future. “We just didn’t ask those questions.”

Planning started from the present, with a horizon of three to five years at most. Nobody looked ten or twenty years ahead. “It may sound like a contradiction,” he says, “but we work on strategy without really thinking about the future.”

Carina Stöttner sums up the gap: strategy is derived from the here and now, or from the past, instead of being shaped by several possible futures. “And that was what was missing.”

Scenarios bring structure to your thinking

For Alexander, the first benefit of scenarios is clarity. “First of all, it structures your thinking,” he says. You’re working with several options, each with its own set of conditions.

That lets him see exactly where he stands. If these conditions hold, the future could look like this. If they change, or if he starts from different assumptions, it might look completely different.

The result is a set of three, four or five scenarios he can weigh side by side. Sometimes the answer turns out to be a combination of two, but that comes later. First he thinks each scenario through on its own, and only then decides whether his future matches one of them or a mix.

Only then comes the practical question: “What does this mean for my company, for my strategy, for the company’s future?” For him, the benefit is twofold: he covers a whole range of possibilities, and he does so in a structured way.

When “plausible” becomes real

Alexander connects this to what he sees happening around him. He remembers a chart Carina showed in one of her talks at Qesar on the fragmentation of the political landscape. Twenty years ago, things were fairly stable, with three or four parties. Today there are many more, and the results of the once-large and once-small parties are much closer together. That means more frequent changes of government, which is exactly what he’s seeing now. Her point back then, that companies could no longer count on a steady political course and should take matters into their own hands, has increasingly become reality.

He sees business owners doing exactly that and turning their focus inward. They concentrate on what they can control and shrug off the rest: “It’s out of our hands anyway.” The external conditions are still there, he says, but they matter less, “or at least they’ve lost some of their power to frustrate us.”

That’s exactly why scenarios matter so much to him. Because external conditions are harder to predict than they used to be, companies need to ask what that means for the future and which scenarios might follow.

When Carina raised this two years ago, it felt to him “plausible, but not quite real yet.” Today he says: “Okay, this is real now. We’re already there.”

Look further ahead, check in more often

A longer horizon doesn’t mean waiting decades to find out whether you were right. Even with a long-term perspective, Alexander says, you can check after two years whether you’re on track or need to adjust course a little.

His advice to other leaders is clear: “Look further into the future, and review more often to see whether it still fits.”

And what if things turn out completely differently? For him, that’s part of it too: you have to learn to break out of familiar templates and patterns.

For leaders rethinking their own approach, his experience offers three lessons:

  • Build strategy from several possible futures, not just forward from the present.
  • Develop several scenarios first, and only combine them once each one has been fully thought through.
  • Pair a long horizon with regular reviews, and be willing to break out of familiar patterns.

Watch the full video here:

Why Your Leadership Offsite Needs an External Facilitator

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in News.

A leadership offsite is one of the few moments in the year when the entire top management team has time for the big questions at the same time. All the more frustrating, then, when it ends up being mostly slides, familiar positions restated and decisions postponed.

The difference between a pleasant day out of the office and an offsite that genuinely moves the organization forward rarely comes down to the venue or the agenda. It comes down to facilitation. In this article, you’ll learn why an external facilitator is worth it for your leadership team, how scenario work makes your strategy more resilient and what to look for when hiring one.

Why an external facilitator makes the difference for your leadership team

When senior leaders facilitate their own offsite, they inevitably end up wearing two hats: running the process while also weighing in on the content. That rarely works. Either neutrality suffers, or their own voice goes missing from the discussion.

An external facilitator resolves this dilemma. They have no stake in a particular outcome, only in a good process. That allows them to raise things nobody inside the company says out loud, rein in the people who dominate the conversation and bring in the quieter voices.

At C-level, there’s another factor: hierarchy. Even in experienced teams, the discussion often unconsciously aligns with the CEO’s opinion. A good facilitator makes sure that arguments count, not rank.

The key benefits at a glance:

  • Neutrality: Every member of the leadership team can focus fully on the content.
  • Structure: The available time goes into the questions that really matter, not into side issues.
  • Clarity: You come away with concrete decisions, clear ownership and next steps.
  • An outside view: An experienced facilitator spots patterns that stay invisible in day-to-day business.

Scenarios as a stress test for your strategy

Every strategy rests on assumptions about markets, customers, competition, technology and regulation. The problem is that these assumptions are rarely questioned in everyday business. They sit in the presentation, seem plausible and suddenly carry decisions about budgets worth millions.

In our offsites, we use scenarios to take a hard look at exactly this. Instead of considering just one version of the future, we work with the leadership team to develop several plausible futures. We then hold the existing strategy up against each of these scenarios and ask: does it still hold?

This makes it objectively visible where things could break:

  • Which assumptions are essential to success, yet uncertain?
  • In which scenario would our business model come under pressure?
  • Which measures work in every conceivable future, and which only work in one?
  • Which early signals tell us that a particular scenario is unfolding?

The result isn’t a forecast but a more resilient strategy. Afterwards, the leadership team knows where it stands on solid ground, where it should keep options open and which developments it needs to watch closely.

Scenarios create an unemotional space for better decisions

Strategy discussions in leadership teams are rarely purely objective. Behind every position are departments, budgets, careers and sometimes old conflicts. Anyone who questions the current strategy can quickly end up criticizing the colleague responsible for it.

Scenarios defuse this dynamic. They shift the conversation from “Who’s right?” to “What if?”. Nobody has to defend their position, because no scenario claims to be the one true future. The point is to play through possibilities, not to win a bet.

This change of perspective has a noticeable effect in the room:

  • Concerns can be voiced: Risks can be framed as a feature of a scenario rather than as personal criticism.
  • Assumptions become comparable: Different views within the team stand side by side on equal footing.
  • Decisions become better informed: The team takes an objective look at the consequences before committing to a major strategic direction.

This clear-eyed view is invaluable, especially ahead of far-reaching decisions such as international expansion, an acquisition or a realignment of the portfolio. A mistake played through at the offsite costs nothing. The same mistake made during implementation costs years.

How a facilitated leadership offsite works

An effective offsite starts long before the first day on site. A typical process looks like this:

  1. Clarifying the brief: In a conversation with the CEO or senior leadership, we clarify the goals, expectations and key questions for the offsite.
  2. Preliminary interviews: Short one-on-one conversations with participants reveal where there’s agreement and where unspoken tensions lie.
  3. Design: Based on this, we create a tailored agenda with the right methods, such as scenario work, structured decision formats or work on how the team collaborates.
  4. Delivery: On site, the facilitator guides the process, keeps the focus and makes sure every perspective gets space.
  5. Capturing results: Decisions, responsibilities and deadlines are recorded and agreed.
  6. Follow-up: A check-in a few weeks later reviews whether implementation is on track and keeps the energy of the offsite from fizzling out in day-to-day business.

What to look for when hiring a facilitator

Not every good workshop facilitator is the right fit for a C-level offsite. These criteria will help you choose:

  • Experience with top management: The facilitator should understand the dynamics of boards and executive teams and be able to engage with them as peers.
  • Strategic understanding: Anyone who wants to challenge a strategy has to be able to understand it in depth.
  • Methodological range: Scenario work, decision formats and team development should be part of their toolkit, not just standard formats.
  • The courage to confront: A good facilitator raises uncomfortable topics, even when the person who hired them is in the room.
  • A focus on results: Ask how decisions will be captured and followed up after the offsite.
  • Personal fit: An initial conversation quickly shows whether the chemistry is right and whether your team will trust this person.

Conclusion: More clarity before the big decisions are made

A leadership offsite is too valuable to leave to chance. With an experienced external facilitator, your team gains the space to discuss openly, critically examine its own strategy and use scenarios to look objectively at decisions before they take effect.

Planning an offsite with your leadership team? Let’s have a no-obligation initial conversation about the questions on your team’s mind and what a tailored format could look like. Get in touch

More about our Offsites

Seeing the Future Differently: Hasmeet Kaur on Diversity of Thought

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in News.

What happens when a leadership team stops assuming it shares one picture of the future? For Hasmeet Kaur, President of the Transportation Division at MANN+HUMMEL, the answer was a wider view of her own organization and, in her words, becoming a better leader.

In a short conversation with Carina Stöttner, CEO of Futurewise Company, Hasmeet looked back on the futures work our teams did together. Carina’s opening question was simple: has anything changed about the way you think and plan for the future?

Same framework, different futures

Hasmeet’s first realization was how differently people imagine the future, even inside one company. “I think it opened up also my perspective on how different we all see and imagine the future to be,” she said.

Everyone in her organization works within more or less the same framework. Yet, as she put it, “we have a completely different perspective on how certain things could shape.” Making those differences visible was the first step.

Escaping the confirmation trap

Leaders can easily surround themselves with people who think the same way. Hasmeet named this risk directly: “sometimes we can fall into the trap of confirmation.” The futures exercise pushed her not to take shared thinking for granted.

She found diversity well beyond international background or gender. What mattered most was “the diversity of thought that is in our organization.”

That discovery paid off across the hierarchy. Hasmeet called it “extremely rewarding for me at all levels”: the levels above her, her peers and her own teams. Her teams challenged her and brought perspectives to the table that she had not considered before.

A new discussion culture

Carina described what Hasmeet experienced as “a new sort of discussion culture.” When people talk about the future, they lay out their personal options and assumptions. Those are shaped less by the work and more by how each person was shaped in the past.

Laying those assumptions out in the open is something teams rarely do on a regular basis. The value comes from discussing them without emotion. The question is not whether a colleague’s view of the future matches your own, but how to look at it objectively.

A better leader for the future

Asked if she had anything else to share, Hasmeet summed up the experience in one line: “I think I am a better leader in terms of steering the future of the company.” She added that she enjoyed the work and learned a lot, and closed by thanking the team “for the fun work we did together.”

For leaders planning their own futures work, her story points to three lessons:

  • Assume your team holds different pictures of the future, even within a shared framework.
  • Look for diversity of thought, not only diversity of background.
  • Make assumptions explicit, then discuss them objectively rather than emotionally.

Watch the full video here:

Our CEO at Digital Connect in Bolzano: Putting people first in AI

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, News.

On 7 October, our founder and CEO Carina Stöttner had the honour of closing the third edition of Digital ConnecT at the Four Points by Sheraton in Bolzano with her keynote. Under the motto “from promises to results”, the day focused on AI strategy, marketing, automation and cybersecurity. The event was held bilingually in German and Italian.

Carina looked ahead: which AI tools are available to companies today and tomorrow, and which human skills remain irreplaceable? Her talk centred on three key learnings:

1. Start with people, then ask where the value lies. Most companies start with the tool or the business case. If you first ask what your employees are proud of, what fits your values and what people actually enjoy doing, you’ll see which tasks should stay with people and where AI can genuinely lighten the load.

2. Time gained needs space for human connection. AI doesn’t automatically create more time; above all, it creates more output. If the time freed up is filled with even more tasks, AI amplifies exactly the acceleration described by sociologist Hartmut Rosa. Carina’s recommendation: deliberately create spaces for resonance and genuine connection, because that is where creativity and new ideas emerge.

3. AI is never neutral. Data and training determine the outcome. Companies should therefore recognise bias, clarify their goals and deliberately build their values into the models, to avoid risks and a loss of trust.

Carina’s conclusion: the tools are becoming ever more powerful, but what makes the difference is how we use them. Her question to the audience: in your company, is AI approached from the tool, from the value, or from people?

A heartfelt thank you to IDM South Tyrol and all partner organisations for the invitation and an inspiring day!

Beyond AI: actively shaping your company’s future
Artificial intelligence is just one of many developments shaping businesses today. Whether geopolitical shifts, new technologies, social change or economic upheaval: we support your leadership team with strategic questions about the future, through scenario work, strategy development or by creating a vision of the future for your company. We’d love to hear from you!

How dangerous is artificial intelligence? Carina Stöttner on Rai Tagesschau

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in News.

The biggest risks of AI don’t lie in a machine that takes on a life of its own, but in how we use it. That is the core message of futurist and sociologist Carina Stöttner. On the occasion of Digital ConnecT in Bolzano, she spoke about it on Rai Radio’s morning show and on Rai South Tyrol’s evening news, Tagesschau.

Moral panic, not doomsday

Stöttner considers a dark AI scenario far less likely than it is often portrayed. In her view, the debate is shaped by a kind of “moral panic” that regularly accompanies new technologies. When the railway arrived, people feared that high speeds would cause blindness.

According to Stöttner, some warnings also serve strategic purposes: whoever warns of the dangers also presents themselves as the one holding the reins.

AI is only as powerful as we let it be

Modern AI systems can act autonomously to a certain extent, and that brings new risks. But they need servers, energy and data centres, and they cannot accumulate unlimited power. “An AI is only as powerful as the access we give it to this world,” says Stöttner.

Critical decisions or entire infrastructures should therefore not be handed over to AI without scrutiny. What’s needed are clear legal frameworks and ethical guardrails.

What companies should do now

Stöttner advises South Tyrolean businesses not to invest in AI tools out of fear of missing out. First, it should be clear which problem needs solving. For trades, hospitality and retail, she sees great potential in administration: scheduling appointments, invoicing, handling enquiries.

What people enjoy doing and take pride in, however, should stay with them. “If I take away that part, the core competence, then I also take away some of what people look forward to at work every day,” says Stöttner.

Trust, too, remains human. AI can detect patterns in large amounts of data, for example in breast cancer diagnostics, often earlier than humans can. But no one wants to hear a serious diagnosis from a computer voice. Especially in family-run businesses in hospitality and tourism, personal contact is often what makes the difference.

Not human versus machine

Stöttner’s conclusion: the key question is not “human or machine”, but where people create greater value, and where AI can provide meaningful support.

Listen and watch (in German):

Neue Chancen in neuen Welten: Carina Stöttner beim 7. QESAR Symposium in Schwäbisch Hall

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, News.

Wie sieht die Zukunft des Maschinenbaus aus, wenn sich Technologie, Märkte und Geopolitik gleichzeitig verschieben? Dieser Frage widmete sich das 7. QESAR Symposium am 17.09.2026 in der Fassfabrik Schwäbisch Hall. Unter dem Motto „Neue Chancen in neuen Welten“ kamen Lieferanten, Partner und Gäste des Maschinenbau-Netzwerks zusammen, um den Blick bewusst nach vorne zu richten. Mit dabei: Zukunftsforscherin Carina Stöttner, die mit ihrem Impulsvortrag den Tag inhaltlich eröffnete.

Ein Symposium mit Blick nach vorn

Das QESAR Symposium hat sich als Treffpunkt für Entscheiderinnen und Entscheider aus dem Maschinenbau und seinem Zuliefer-Umfeld etabliert. In diesem Jahr stand die Frage im Mittelpunkt, was technologische Entwicklungen, wirtschaftliche Veränderungen und geopolitische Verschiebungen konkret für die Branche bedeuten – und welche Chancen darin liegen. Durch den Tag führte Moderatorin Petra Bindl, die die Gespräche mit Klarheit und viel Energie zusammenhielt.

Der Impuls von Carina Stöttner: Zukunft als Gestaltungsraum

In ihrem Impulsvortrag lud Carina Stöttner das Publikum ein, die aktuellen Umbrüche nicht als Bedrohung, sondern als Möglichkeitsraum zu lesen – und spannte dafür drei Szenarien auf. Zunächst die Frage, wie sich ein zunehmend protektionistisches Umfeld auf die Industrie auswirken würde: Was passiert mit exportgetriebenen Geschäftsmodellen, wenn Zölle, Handelsbarrieren und geopolitische Blockbildung zur neuen Normalität werden? Dem gegenüber stellte sie ein „Made in Europe“-Szenario, das die Skaleneffekte des europäischen Absatzmarktes konsequent nutzt. Ihre These: Damit dieses Szenario Realität wird, braucht es einen echten europäischen Wirtschaftsraum, der deutlich über die heutigen Verbindungen hinausgeht – mit harmonisierten Regeln, gemeinsamer Infrastruktur und industriepolitischer Zusammenarbeit statt nationaler Insellösungen.

Als drittes Bild skizzierte sie ein technologisches Szenario, in dem kreative Erneuerung im Mittelpunkt steht: der gezielte Aufbau von Industrien, die neue Wachstumsmöglichkeiten eröffnen – ob Quantencomputing, Künstliche Intelligenz, Rechenzentren, Halbleiter oder Klima-Adaptionstechnologien. Für den Maschinenbau bedeutet das nicht, das Bestehende aufzugeben, sondern die eigene Kompetenz dort einzubringen, wo die Fabriken, Anlagen und Komponenten dieser neuen Industrien entstehen.

Was ihre Perspektive für eine Branche wie den Maschinenbau besonders wertvoll macht: Als Gründerin der Futurewise Company arbeitet Carina Stöttner seit Jahren mit Industrieunternehmen an Szenarien, die nicht bei Trends stehen bleiben, sondern strategische Entscheidungen vorbereiten.

Podiumsdiskussion: Was jetzt für den Maschinenbau zählt

Nach einem zweiten Impuls von Julian Nuss ging es in der Podiumsdiskussion „Technologie, Märkte, Geopolitik: Was jetzt für den Maschinenbau zählt!“ in die Praxis. Auf der Bühne diskutierten Andrea Conradty, Dr. Christoph Müller, Ralf Schubert und Alfons Riek engagiert und nah an den Realitäten der Unternehmen.

Fazit: Aufbruchsstimmung in der Fassfabrik

QESAR-Geschäftsführer Alexander Friton fasste den Tag mit den Worten zusammen, die Stimmung sei offen, positiv und voller guter Gespräche gewesen – man nehme viele Perspektiven, neue Kontakte und eine große Portion Motivation mit nach Hause. Ein Fazit, das die Atmosphäre des Tages gut trifft: Zukunftsdenken wird im Maschinenbau nicht mehr als Kür verstanden, sondern als Teil der strategischen Pflicht.

Für Carina Stöttner war das QESAR Symposium ein weiterer Beleg dafür, wie groß der Bedarf in der Industrie ist, Unsicherheit in konkrete Handlungsoptionen zu übersetzen. Wer die Chancen in neuen Welten nutzen will, muss sie zuerst sehen – und genau dort setzt Zukunftsforschung an.

Sie möchten Carina Stöttner als Keynote-Speakerin oder Impulsgeberin für Ihre Veranstaltung buchen? 

The Most Useful Foresight Methods for Companies

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, Foresight Method, News.

The future can’t be predicted — but it can be shaped by looking ahead. For mid-sized companies, hidden champions and international groups alike, recognizing change early and staying able to act under uncertainty is decisive. Futurewise Company works with established and emerging methods from strategic futures research to make that possible. The question at the center is always the same: how do today’s signals, trends and uncertainties become decisions that hold up tomorrow?

Which method makes sense depends on the strategic question. Is it about new growth markets, technological upheaval, the future of a business model, or the long-term direction of an entire company? Here’s an overview of the foresight methods we work with regularly at Futurewise Company.

The Delphi method

What is the Delphi method?

Delphi is a qualitative method used in futures research. Over several rounds, experts from different fields are systematically asked about possible future developments. The method was developed at the RAND Corporation and takes its name from the ancient oracle at Delphi.

The first step is in-depth interviews with a carefully selected panel, usually 15 to 35 experts. We condense what they say into hypotheses, which are then assessed and commented on anonymously in a second round. What emerges is a well-grounded picture of possible developments — including dissenting views, blind spots and the uncertainties that matter strategically.

What is Delphi good for?

  • Widening your perspective beyond the boundaries of your sector and your company
  • Assessing trends, technologies and future shifts in the market
  • Finding strategic direction under high uncertainty

In practice

We use Delphi when management and leadership teams want to get properly to the bottom of a strategic question: where are the future growth areas? How are customer requirements, value chains or regulatory conditions changing? And which risks are still being underestimated in the day-to-day business?

To answer that we talk to people from academia and government, existing and potential customers, sector specialists, start-ups and other companies. For a hidden champion it might mean assessing the future of a highly specialized technology. A mid-sized company might want to find out which new customer groups it could reach with the capabilities it already has. At group level, Delphi can help bring different perspectives on a single question about the future together systematically. The most valuable findings often aren’t in the headlines or the published studies — they come out of direct conversations with the people actually working on technological, political or social change.

Scenario analysis

What is scenario analysis?

Scenarios are narrative, plausible pictures of the future built on assumptions, drivers and the central uncertainties. They help companies understand several possible paths rather than building a strategy around one expected outcome alone.

Coined in part by Herman Kahn and made famous by Shell, the method makes it possible to work systematically through different developments and what they would mean for markets, business models, investments and organizations.

What are scenarios good for?

  • Developing strategic options that hold up across several futures
  • Preparing for uncertainty and disruptive change
  • Giving leadership teams a shared basis for discussing complex futures

In practice

There are dozens of ways to build scenarios. The video below explains three of them briefly. Compact approaches like the 2×2 matrix work well for examining a specific strategic question efficiently from several directions: what happens if a key customer segment’s purchasing power grows — and what if it stalls? What if demand for a new technology stays niche — and what if it becomes a mass market?

For owner-run mid-sized companies this creates a structured basis for major investment decisions. Hidden champions can test how robust their specialization is against technological or geopolitical change. Group leadership teams use more comprehensive scenarios to assess portfolios, regions or business units under different future conditions. In contentious strategy discussions in particular, scenarios help everyone step back from personal conviction and look at several plausible developments as objectively as possible.

Backcasting

What is backcasting?

Backcasting doesn’t start in the present but in a future worth having. Working from a clear picture of that future, the necessary steps are traced systematically back to the present. That opens up new perspectives and stops long-term strategy from becoming a simple extension of today’s business.

Together with management and leadership teams, we develop a concrete picture of the future and derive short-, medium- and long-term decisions, milestones and responsibilities from it.

What is backcasting good for?

  • Developing strategies that are ambitious and deliverable at the same time
  • Getting past short-term, purely reactive planning
  • Giving innovation, growth and transformation programs a clear direction

In practice

Talking about the future usually generates plenty of good ideas. But in the daily operating business, time, resources and clear ownership for long-term topics run short fast. Backcasting creates accountability: if a company wants to reach a particular goal by a particular date, what has to be in place three, five or ten years beforehand?

For mid-sized companies, the method translates big ambitions into realistic steps that match the resources actually available. Hidden champions can use it to build the capabilities, partnerships and technologies that will secure their market position long-term. In larger groups, backcasting helps connect a shared picture of the future with concrete transformation paths for business units, functions and regions.

The Futures Triangle

What is the Futures Triangle?

Developed by Sohail Inayatullah, the Futures Triangle analyzes three forces that shape any future:

  • Push: the drivers and changes of the present
  • Pull: compelling pictures of the future and shared ambitions
  • Weight: the structures, experiences and habits of thought from the past that hold things back

The method makes visible the tensions a strategic decision sits within — and why a change might not be moving forward despite every argument in its favor.

What is the Futures Triangle good for?

  • Analyzing contradictory demands on the future
  • Setting strategic priorities
  • Reflecting on cultural, structural and historical blockers

In practice

“We discussed this three years ago. It didn’t work then, so we don’t touch it now.” We hear sentences like that in companies of every size. The Futures Triangle helps surface the experiences and beliefs behind them, and test whether they still hold under changed conditions.

In family businesses and mid-sized companies, long-established decision paths or tight resources can stall an initiative aimed at the future. For hidden champions, the very specialization that has been so successful can stand in the way of a necessary shift. In large groups, structures, target systems or earlier transformation programs can prevent a convincing vision from taking hold. The method also helps put hyped trends in perspective: is this a short-term pull, or a development the company genuinely needs to respond to strategically?

The Futures Wheel

What is a Futures Wheel?

Developed by Jerome C. Glenn, the Futures Wheel is a visual thinking tool for systematically mapping the direct and indirect consequences of an event, a trend or a strategic decision.

At the center sits a single impulse — a technological innovation, a regulatory change, a shift in customer behavior. Working outward from there, we examine first-, second- and third-order effects across several rings.

What is the Futures Wheel good for?

  • Analyzing new developments systemically
  • Involving different functions and levels of leadership
  • Identifying opportunities, risks and unintended consequences early

In practice

The first-order effect of a trend is usually easy to name: AI will take over parts of what graphic designers do. For strategic decisions, though, that statement isn’t enough. What matters is what happens next. Can designers handle ten commissions instead of one? Do clients then expect lower prices and shorter turnarounds? Do creatives become managers of parallel AI processes? And what does that mean for skills, management, workload and how agencies are organized?

A Futures Wheel helps mid-sized companies grasp the operational consequences of a trend early and without excessive effort. Hidden champions can connect effects on products, customers, capabilities and supply chains. Group leadership teams use the method to make the interactions between business units, markets and functions visible. An abstract trend becomes a concrete strategic question.

Trend radar

What is a trend radar?

A trend radar is a structured analytical tool that captures, assesses and prepares relevant trends, signals and possible ruptures for use in strategy work. Developments are positioned by relevance, time horizon and uncertainty, and visualized clearly.

We build trend radars for sectors, technologies and company-specific questions — the future of work, industry, mobility or sustainability, for instance. What matters isn’t collecting as many trends as possible but what each one means for the particular company.

What is a trend radar good for?

  • Strategic early warning
  • Identifying and prioritizing new fields for innovation and growth
  • Communicating knowledge about the future clearly across the company

In practice

For mid-sized companies, a focused trend radar provides orientation without adding to the flood of information. Hidden champions can use it to watch developments outside their established market that could change their technological lead or their access to customers. In larger groups, a shared radar creates a solid basis for assessing future topics across business units, assigning ownership and reviewing strategic priorities regularly.

Want to work out which foresight method fits your strategic question and your organization? Futurewise Company supports mid-sized companies, hidden champions and group leadership teams in choosing a method, running it, and translating the results into concrete strategic decisions.

Send an email

Zukunftsforschung als Hilfe in Krisenzeiten: ein Artikel über die Arbeit der Futurewise Company

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, News.

Wenn eine Regionalzeitung eine Zukunftsforscherin zum Thema Krisenfestigkeit befragt, ist das ein gutes Zeichen. Es bedeutet, dass die Frage nach dem Umgang mit Unsicherheit dort angekommen ist, wo sie hingehört: bei den Unternehmen vor Ort.

Der SÜDKURIER hat Carina Stöttner, Gründerin der Futurewise Company, beim Friends & Family Day des Instituts für strategische Innovation und Transformation (IST) der HTWG Konstanz begleitet. Entstanden ist ein Porträt, das nicht bei der üblichen Frage stehenbleibt, was die Zukunft wohl bringen möge – sondern bei der deutlich unbequemeren, warum Organisationen so oft zu spät reagieren.

Worum es in dem Artikel geht

Autor Joshua Tress greift zwei Denkmuster auf, die im Vortrag eine zentrale Rolle spielten und die in der Beratungspraxis immer wieder auftauchen.

Das erste ist die Neigung, bedrohliche Informationen besser zu erinnern als neutrale oder positive – ein evolutionär sinnvoller Reflex, der heute allerdings dazu führen kann, dass unternehmerische Entscheidungen gar nicht erst getroffen werden. Wer die Welt vor allem durch Krisenmeldungen wahrnimmt, hält Gestaltung irgendwann für aussichtslos.

Das zweite Muster ist das gegenteilige und mindestens genauso folgenreich: die Annahme, dass alles ungefähr so weiterläuft wie bisher. Carina Stöttner hat das im Saal mit einer schlichten Frage überprüft – und die Reaktion des Publikums fiel so aus, wie sie in solchen Situationen fast immer ausfällt. Wie die Probe konkret verlief und was sie über den Umgang mit Warnsignalen verrät, steht im Artikel.

Dazu kommt ein historisches Beispiel, das wir gern erzählen, weil es einen weit verbreiteten Irrtum über Szenarioarbeit aufräumt: Ein Ölkonzern begann Anfang der Siebzigerjahre gegen die Skepsis der Branche mit systematischer Szenarioplanung. Als die Ölkrise kam, lagen die entworfenen Szenarien allesamt daneben – und das Unternehmen war trotzdem besser vorbereitet als seine Wettbewerber. Der Ertrag von Szenarien liegt eben nicht in der Trefferquote, sondern in der Reaktionsfähigkeit.

Was uns an dem Text besonders gefreut hat

Zwei Aspekte, die im Gespräch mit dem SÜDKURIER Raum bekommen haben und die im Alltag oft untergehen:

Der Markt hat sich verschoben. Vor Pandemie und Ukrainekrieg drehten sich Anfragen überwiegend um Digitalisierungsvorhaben. Heute geht es häufiger um Orientierung in einer Komplexität, die viele Organisationen nicht mehr einordnen können. Dass ausgerechnet Krisen die Nachfrage nach Zukunftsarbeit befeuern, ist ein zwiespältiger Befund – im Artikel formuliert Carina Stöttner es so: „Die Krisen haben mir in die Karten gespielt.” Verzichtbar wäre der Rückenwind allemal gewesen.

Ziele dürfen sich unterwegs verändern. Ein Punkt, der es selten in Projektbeschreibungen schafft. In der Arbeit mit Kundinnen und Kunden steht nicht das anfangs definierte Ergebnis im Mittelpunkt, sondern eine gemeinsame Suchbewegung, in deren Verlauf sich die Zielvorstellung mehrfach verschiebt. Wer unterwegs klüger wird, sollte umdisponieren dürfen.

Zum Weiterlesen

Der vollständige Beitrag beschreibt außerdem, in welchen drei Phasen sich Organisationen durch Umbruchsituationen bewegen, und wie eine Zukunftsforscherin persönlich nach vorn blickt, die beruflich täglich mit Unsicherheit zu tun hat.

👉 Was, wenn die eigene Branche wankt? Zukunftsforscherin will Unternehmen durch Krisen helfen – SÜDKURIER, 25. Juli 2026, von Joshua Tress

Unser Dank geht an das IST der HTWG Konstanz für die Einladung und an den SÜDKURIER für das Interesse an unserer Arbeit: die Bereitschaft, mehrere Zukünfte gleichzeitig ernst zu nehmen.

Warum Szenariendenken essenziell ist - Carina Stöttner in Konstanz

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, News.

Eine Methode aus den 1970er-Jahren erlebt gerade ihr Comeback. Carina Stöttner, CEO der Futurewise Company, erklärt, warum das kein Zufall ist – und was Szenarioarbeit wirklich verändert.

Die meisten Unternehmen planen mit genau einer Zukunft: der fortgeschriebenen Gegenwart. Umsatz plus X Prozent, Kosten minus Y, Marktanteil bleibt stabil. In dieser Logik steckt eine stille Annahme – dass das Morgen ein leicht verändertes Heute sein wird.

In stabilen Zeiten funktioniert das erstaunlich gut, sagt Carina Stöttner. In komplexen Zeiten wird es zum Risiko.

Genau hier setzt Szenariodenken an. Und die wichtigste Klarstellung kommt gleich zu Beginn: Szenarien sind keine Prognosen. Es geht nicht darum, richtig zu liegen. Es geht darum, auf mehrere Möglichkeiten vorbereitet zu sein.

Was Shell in den 70er-Jahren gelernt hat

Die vielleicht bekannteste Geschichte der Szenarioplanung beginnt Ende der 1960er-Jahre in der Planungsabteilung von Royal Dutch Shell. Ein paar Pioniere bekamen den Auftrag, sich mit einer damals wenig populären Möglichkeit zu beschäftigen: dass der Ölpreis steigen könnte.

Niemand bei Shell hat die Ölkrise in ihrer Schwere von 1973 vorhergesagt. Das ist, so Stöttner, der entscheidende Punkt.

Aber als sie eintrat, war sie für die Führungskräfte kein völlig unbekanntes Terrain. Sie hatten diese Welt gedanklich schon einmal betreten. Sie mussten nicht erst monatelang fassungslos sein, bevor sie handlungsfähig wurden. Während andere noch damit beschäftigt waren, das Geschehene überhaupt einzuordnen, traf Shell bereits Entscheidungen – und ging aus der Krise deutlich stärker hervor, als es hineingegangen war.

Für Carina Stöttner ist das bis heute die wichtigste Lektion der ganzen Methode:

Szenarien verändern nicht die Welt. Sie verändern die Landkarte, die Entscheider:innen im Kopf tragen.

Das eigentliche Produkt von Szenarioarbeit ist nicht das Dokument, das am Ende im Regal steht. Es ist das veränderte Denken der Menschen, die damit gearbeitet haben. Deshalb funktioniert es auch nicht, sich Szenarien einfach von außen einkaufen und präsentieren zu lassen. Wer nicht selbst durch den Prozess gegangen ist, findet den Weg nicht.

Warum unser Gehirn ein schlechter Zukunftsforscher ist

Wenn Szenarioarbeit so wirksam ist – warum tun wir uns dann so schwer damit?

Die Antwort liegt zu einem guten Teil in unserem Kopf. Unser Gehirn ist nicht darauf optimiert, über offene Zukünfte nachzudenken, erklärt Stöttner. Es ist darauf optimiert, schnell und energiesparend zu Entscheidungen zu kommen. Drei Verzerrungen stehen dabei besonders regelmäßig im Weg:

Wir denken Entwicklungen als Geraden. Exponentielles Wachstum, Kipppunkte und Sättigungskurven unterschätzen wir systematisch – erst zu lange zu wenig, dann zu spät zu viel.

Wir halten an der Normalität fest. Wenn eine Situation sich verändert, bleiben wir oft erstaunlich lange bei der Annahme, es werde schon alles beim Alten bleiben. Das ist keine Dummheit, sondern der Normalfall menschlicher Wahrnehmung unter Unsicherheit.

Der Negativitätsbias. Negative Erfahrungen wiegen schwerer als positive. Was wir kürzlich gelesen haben, was emotional aufgeladen ist, was in der eigenen Branche gerade alle diskutieren – das prägt unser Zukunftsbild stärker, als uns lieb ist.

Diese Verzerrungen sind keine Denkfehler im Sinne eines Defekts. Sie waren evolutionär sinnvoll: schnelle Urteile in einer weitgehend stabilen Umwelt. In einer komplexen Umwelt werden sie zur Schwachstelle. Und – auch das gehört zur unbequemen Wahrheit – man bekommt sie nicht dadurch weg, dass man sie kennt. Sondern nur durch Methode: durch einen Prozess, der einen zwingt, mehrere Zukünfte gleichzeitig ernst zu nehmen.

Was Szenarien konkret verändern

Was Organisationen aus guter Szenarioarbeit mitnehmen, ist selten ein fertiger Plan. Es ist eher dies:

Sprachfähigkeit. Teams bekommen Begriffe für Entwicklungen, die noch nicht sichtbar sind. Man kann nur besprechen, wofür man Worte hat.

Frühindikatoren. Wer die Szenarien kennt, weiß, worauf zu achten ist – und erkennt Bewegungen früher als der Wettbewerb.

Robuste Entscheidungen. Welche Schritte zahlen sich in allen Zukünften aus? Diese No-Regret-Moves sind oft das wertvollste Ergebnis des gesamten Prozesses.

Entkopplung von Wahrscheinlichkeit und Relevanz. Ein Ereignis kann unwahrscheinlich und trotzdem existenziell sein. Wer nur nach Eintrittswahrscheinlichkeit priorisiert, sortiert genau diese Fälle aus.

Erlaubnis zum Widerspruch. Szenarien machen es sozial zulässig, im Meeting eine abweichende Zukunft auszusprechen, ohne als Pessimist:in oder Spinner:in zu gelten. Unterschätzt – und vielleicht der größte Kulturhebel von allen.

Resilienz beginnt mit der zweiten Zukunft

Vorgetragen hat Carina Stöttner diesen Impuls beim Friends & Family Day des IST in Konstanz am Bodensee. Am 9. und 10. Juli hatte das Institut zu zwei Tagen mit Unternehmer:innen, Alumni, Projektpartner:innen und langjährigen Wegbegleiter:innen geladen. Den Auftakt bildete ein Get-Together in der IHK Hochrhein-Bodensee, gestaltet von Lucas Sauberschwarz, Sebastian Strohmaier, Lukas Dieterle und Carina Stöttner. Das gemeinsame Thema: Resilienz in der Zukunft.

Nach den Impulsen ging es aufs Wasser: eine Rundfahrt über den Bodensee, gute Gespräche, ein entspanntes Anstoßen in einer Kulisse, die man sich kaum besser ausdenken könnte. Am Freitag klang der Friends & Family Day im Institut aus.

Was von diesen Tagen bleibt, ist für Stöttner vor allem eine Beobachtung: Die Bereitschaft, gemeinsam über unbequeme Zukünfte nachzudenken, ist da – und sie wächst. Genau diese Bereitschaft ist der Anfang von Resilienz. Nicht die Fähigkeit, die Zukunft vorherzusagen, sondern die Fähigkeit, auf mehr als eine vorbereitet zu sein.

Ein herzlicher Dank geht an das IST-Team für Einladung und Gastfreundschaft – und an alle, die mitgedacht, mitdiskutiert und mitgefeiert haben.

What Shell Knew Before the Crisis Hit

Written by CarinaS on . Posted in Foresight, Foresight Method, News.

When the oil crisis struck in 1973, most companies were caught flat-footed. Shell wasn’t. They’d already spent two years thinking through how they’d need to adapt.

Why? Because back in 1971, two senior Shell managers dared to ask a simple question: what would happen if oil prices swung dramatically?*

The scenarios they built weren’t great forecasts. Their price estimates were set far too low. But it didn’t matter — and that’s the whole point. Whether oil tripled or quadrupled, the consequences rhymed: a wobbling economy, social tension and fuel theft, shifting mobility paradigms (remember car-free Sundays?), a push toward diversified supply chains, and new pricing policies.

Shell had already reasoned through those consequences. So when the shock came, they weren’t panicking, but rather already in the execution mode.

Thinking in scenarios

Thinking in scenarios is far more than playing out the single most likely outcome. It means:

  • Reasoning through many possible futures, not just one.
  • Continuously adapting your strategy, because you’ve learned to watch for the signals that one future or another is emerging.
  • A huge cultural shift — building an organization that welcomes people asking challenging questions, rather than punishing it.

That last point is the hard one. Asking “What if a pandemic shuts down the country?”, “What if kerosene is no longer available?”, or “What if the Rhine becomes unnavigable?” isn’t always welcome. It requires leaders willing to engage seriously with divergent futures — and, in doing so, to admit they don’t have 100% certainty about the years ahead.

That admission is uncomfortable. It’s also exactly what let Shell move while everyone else was still reacting.

*How it all played out at Shell is told by Dr. Henk Alkema in a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9WZQU8_HnA