Articles

10.1177/1523422303254627
Advances
Dewey, Carter
in Developing
/ EXPLORING
Human
THE
Resources
FUTURE ARTICLE August 2003

Exploring the Future of HRD:

The First Future Search
Conference for a Profession
Jennifer D. Dewey
Teresa J. Carter

The problem and the solution. What methodologies exist to

explore the future of human resource development? This article
describes one, the future search conference, and how a global
team of volunteers planned and executed the first such confer-
ence dedicated to the future of a profession. It summarizes the
process, lessons learned, and outcomes in terms of common
ground statements. These outcomes are explored in more detail
in subsequent articles.

Keywords: future search; virtual team; whole system change

How does an entire profession engage in planning for its future? This was
the challenge facing ASTD (formerly the American Society for Training
and Development) and the Academy of Human Resource Development
(AHRD) when they decided to undertake an exploration of the future of
human resource development (HRD). For the first time, the innovative
whole system approach of future search (Weisbord, 1987, 1992;
Weisbord & Janoff, 2000) was used to inform the future of a profession. It
was also the first time that future search preconference planning was accom-
plished virtually without benefit of face-to-face planning meetings. In this
article, we describe the future search conferencewhat it is and how it
worksand tell how a small group of ASTD volunteers in the United States
and abroad planned the conference using only e-mail and teleconferencing.
We discuss the challenges involved in organizing a multistakeholder event
with a virtual planning process, the lessons we learned, and the conference
outcomes to illustrate how whole system efforts such as this one can add to
the effectiveness of HRD strategies when used to create a strategic vision.

Advances in Developing Human Resources Vol. 5, No. 3 August 2003 245-256

DOI: 10.1177/1523422303254627
Copyright 2003 Sage Publications
246 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

What Is a Future Search Conference?

Future search is a unique type of strategic planning meeting that has been
used successfully by hundreds of organizations and communities to bring
diverse stakeholders together to discover shared intentions and take responsibil-
ity for the plans they create (Weisbord & Janoff, 2000, p. 4). There are no speak-
ers, no rows of chairs facing a podium, no predetermined topics for discussion.
Instead, future search reflects trust in the capacity of people to envision a desired
future when they are provided an opportunity to share individual perspectives
and determine what they have in common. The success of future search rests on
these basic principles (Weisbord & Janoff, 2000):

Get a cross-section of the whole system in one room

Explore the whole before seeking to act on any part
Focus on common ground and desired futures
Treat problems and conflicts as information, not action items
Let participants self-manage and take responsibility for action

Future search has a rich theoretical tradition in the history of organization

development (Bunker & Alban, 1997). Search conference methods are indebted
to Lewins (1947) early insights into the importance of involving people affected
by change (stakeholders) in planning for it and the power of group dynamics for
creating commitment. Whole system approaches rest solidly on von
Bertalanffys seminal ideas in general systems theory (Weisbord, 1987, pp. 158-
159). Future search methods, developed and refined by Weisbord and Janoff
(2000), have theoretical roots that spring directly from Emery and Trists classic
work with managers at the Bristol/Siddeley aircraft engineering company in
Great Britain in the late 1950s (Weisbord, 1987, p. 282). There, Emery and Trist
discovered that innovation was possible in a fast-changing and turbulent envi-
ronment when the whole system was involved in a collaborative inquiry to dis-
cover new possibilities. Weisbord was also influenced by Ronald Lippitt and
Eva Schindler-Rainmans concept of images of potential in the 1970s. Lippitt
and Schlindler-Rainmans approach of envisioning a desired future instead of
bemoaning the current reality was a breakthrough in conceptualizing how
groups engage in problem solving and future thinking (Weisbord, 1987, p. 283).
Another key concept that has been expanded and refined in the future search pro-
cess is credited to the futurist Edward Lindaman, who discovered that when
people plan present actions by working backward from what is really desired,
they develop energy, enthusiasm, optimism, and high commitment (Weisbord,
1987, p. 283). For this reason, todays future search participants imagine a
desired future as if it has already occurred and then enact it in a dramatic scenario
on the 2nd day of the conference.
Large group methods offer several distinct advantages for creating
change and stimulating future thinking in organizations and communities
 Dewey, Car ter / EXPLORING THE FUTURE 247

(Bunker & Alban, 1997). Unlike traditional data collection and feedback
mechanisms that depend on a trickle down effect to disseminate ideas,
whole system approaches build commitment and alignment through partici-
pation. Access to information held by stakeholders is instant; consultants
are not needed to gather and feed data back into the system. Ideas spread rap-
idly when everyone has an opportunity to hear diverse perspectives and
engage in dialogue about them. Bunker and Alban (1997) note that the diver-
sity that comprises a system creates a synergy that seldom occurs in small
group processes. For these reasons, and the experiences that a number of
ASTD Research-to-Practice committee members already had in participat-
ing in successful future search conferences, the committee began to con-
sider the possibilities of future search for an exploration of the HRD
profession.

The ASTD/AHRD Future Search Conference

Shaping the Future: Leading Workplace Learning and Performance in the
New Millennium was held in Orlando, Florida, in June 2001, 3 days prior to
the annual ASTD conference. Sixty-four individuals with distinguished
backgrounds in business, academe, and government were invited to partici-
pate in the conference. Conference attendees were selected to include stake-
holder groups all affected by the future of workplace learning and perfor-
mance: public and private sector HRD practitioners, management,
individual learners/employees, HRD researchers, HRD providers, higher
education, and HR and related disciplines. They came from public, private,
and nonprofit sectors and were composed of a wide variety of racial and eth-
nic backgrounds. The 4 months of planning that led to the first future search
conference for a profession began in February 2001, with seven volunteers
from the Research-to-Practice committee, one administrative support staff
person from ASTD, and a volunteer future search facilitator.

A Virtual Team Does the Preconference Planning

Both of this articles authors were involved in the virtual planning team as
a Research-to-Practice committee member (Dewey) or cofacilitator of the
event (Carter). Along with other committee members, we recognized that
the planning challenges of this conference extended beyond the usual ones
in most whole system approaches. The planning team had to identify a rela-
tively complete mix of stakeholders from multiple organizations and enti-
ties rather than focus on diverse stakeholders from within our entity. With
support from Sandra Janoff in cofacilitating our conference, ASTD/AHRD
embarked on the first future search dedicated to exploring the future of a
profession. In doing so, the conference has contributed to an understanding
248 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

of the potential for future search methods in two practice areas of HRD: (a)
the use of a virtual team in planning the conference from inception to execu-
tion and (b) an assessment of the potential for noninterdependent partici-
pants to cocreate a future vision and come to an understanding of common
ground.
In most future search efforts, 8 to 10 stakeholders are chosen as a plan-
ning committee to meet regularly over several months to plan for the confer-
ence. They are assisted by an internal coordinator as a focal point for plan-
ning activities in between the two or three planning meetings with future
search facilitators. Planning tasks, in addition to the usual logistical require-
ments of any large group event, include determining the task focus for the
conference and selecting participants. Considerable time and attention to
detail are also necessary to arrange the right space for a conference. Win-
dows that provide light and air are a must, as is substantial wall space for
large foam core boards that will be covered with participants work during
the conference. The essential up-front work done by a planning team,
although nearly invisible during the participant-driven process of the con-
ference itself, largely determines success or failure in future search.
Even though we were experimenting with a new design for virtual plan-
ning, the result of our effortsthe future search conferenceremained the
same 2-day format that has been used successfully in conferences all over
the world. Figure 1 contrasts the typical future search planning by a steering
group internal to an organization with that of the ASTD/AHRD virtual plan-
ning team.

Getting the Whole System in the Room

One of the most difficult tasks in any future search is constructing the list
of participants and inviting them to take part in the conference. Any meeting
strategy, whether it be organizational, community, or global in nature, can
never include every potential contributor; however, the whole system
approach of future search depends upon getting the broadest possible range
of diverse perspectives for its success.
To determine our conference nominees, all 16 members of the ASTD
Research-to-Practice committee brainstormed names of national and inter-
national colleagues to create a list of over 170 potential participants, each of
whom was known to be a significant contributor to the HRD profession. We
sought experienced professionals who would be interested in conference
outcomes and were in a position to influence the profession. We sought
diversity on multiple levels, looking for membership in large and small
organizations in private, public, and nonprofit sectors, in addition to diver-
sity in age, gender, ethnicity, and geographic location. Prospective partici-
pants were chosen to ensure that all stakeholder groups were represented,
 Dewey, Car ter / EXPLORING THE FUTURE 249

Comparison of Virtual and Typical

Future Search Conference Processes

ASTD/AHRD Future Search Typical Future Search Conference

Conference to Discover the Future to Discover the Future for an Issue of
of the HRD Profession Strategic Importance to an Organization

Virtual Planning Team Internal Organization Steering

Group

Planning via teleconference & e-mail Largely face-to-face planning process

3-4 months planning time
ASTD logistical support from team member
7 Volunteer members, including team leader
Facilitator as part of virtual team
ASTD/AHRD sponsorship
Diversity within the HRD profession
Non-interdependent participants as
stakeholders
3-4 months planning time
Internal HRD logistical support
8-10 planning members within organization
Facilitator meets with group for 2 days
Senior management support
Diversity within the organization
Interdependent participants as stakeholders

2 1/2 - Day Future Search Conference

Day 1: Reviewing the Past
Timeline of Personal, Global, and Local History
Storytelling about Our History
Mindmap of Trends Affecting Our Future

Day 2: Focus on the Present

Stakeholder Perspectives on Trends
Prouds and Sorries: Owning Up to Our Own Roles
Focus on the Future
Ideal Future Scenarios

Day 3: Common Ground Themes

Action Planning

FIGURE 1: Comparison of Virtual and Typical Future Search Conference Processes

including internal and external HRD professionals, business leaders, indi-

vidual employees, educators and students, researchers, and professional
bodies associated with people and change in organizations.
After the brainstorming session, the planning team created an electronic
spreadsheet of all nominees and sent it to the Research-to-Practice commit-
tee for additional suggestions. We whittled our list of nominees into eight
250 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

groups of eight stakeholders with additional names as alternates through a

series of e-mails and teleconferences, a long and difficult process because
we had so many qualified prospective participants. In future search, 64 is an
ideal numberlarge enough to represent the diversity of the system but
small enough to ensure that all participants can talk together as a whole
group.

Analyzing Our Effectiveness as a Virtual Team

The planning team had 4 months to put the conference together without
benefit of a face-to-face meeting, relying instead on e-mail and
teleconferences as primary modes of communication. To explore the suc-
cess factors in this collaboration as well as the stumbling blocks, three plan-
ning team members conducted a case study of the learning outcomes for this
virtual team (May, Carter, & Dewey, 2002). All those involved in the plan-
ning process completed ITAP Internationals Global Process Team Ques-
tionnaire (GTPQ), a diagnostic instrument designed to help teams
improve effectiveness and productivity (Bing, 2001). Telephone interviews
with each team member, asking questions that pertained to our effectiveness
in three areasteam design, individual contributions (or inputs in the lan-
guage of open systems theory), and process criteria that were related to our
virtual planning taskwere also conducted.
Four major themes emerged from the case study of our effectiveness as a
virtual planning team: (a) the importance of energizing and highly effective
leadership; (b) the presence of intrinsic rewards that motivated team mem-
bers; (c) the necessity of a trustful environment for collaboration; and (d)
creation of specific enabling virtual communication techniques and pro-
tocols in our work.
We learned many lessons from the effort expended in future search plan-
ning and the knowledge and skills that planning team members brought to
bear on the project. Preexisting relationships that had been established ear-
lier in a face-to-face environment proved essential to our commitment in a
virtual one. Telephone conferences added the emotion of tone and voice to
messages exchanged electronically, and humor created and sustained a
group culture that grew through weeks of conference preparation. Most
important, each team members commitment to the task and to the other
members functioned to prop up the group as a whole and maintain a high
level of intensity without a long lag time between virtual meetings or e-mail
exchanges.
Many of the process techniques the planning team adopted became
enabling structures and protocols that evolved over time as the team worked
together in a virtual environment. A preset agenda, sent out by e-mail the
day before a teleconference, was essential to effective time management.
 Dewey, Car ter / EXPLORING THE FUTURE 251

Not only did it allow block leaders to summarize their work ahead of time for
all to read in advance, but also team members were able to pose questions to
each other before a scheduled call. This enabled us to move through and
come to resolution on a sizable number of items in an hour and a half call.
Dates and times for the calls were set after posing alternatives, and
teleconference calls were scheduled well in advance. During the call, the
formal team leader kept notes on the discussion and any agreed-on actions,
sending out an updated summary of the agenda as soon as the call ended.
These enabling protocols, however, were only mechanical processes. We
discovered that individual attributes, skills and abilities, shared commit-
ment, and desire to contribute to the field provided the relational processes
of virtual collaboration, and they proved to be essential in accomplishing the
task.

Using Future Search to Create a Vision for a Profession

Future search is a 16-hour event, held over 3 consecutive days. We began
early Friday afternoon preceding the ASTD annual conference and ended
Sunday at 1 p.m. During the conference, people sat in circles of eight
according to the task at handeither as groups of stakeholders (participants
who share a common interest area, such as HRD consultants) or in mixed
stakeholder groups. Conference tasks are organized in time progression,
focusing first on the past, then the present, and finally, the desired future.
From these tasks, participants arrive at statements of common ground.
On the first afternoon, we created a three-decade timeline that reflected
(a) the personal history of conference participants, (b) a global history of
world events, and (c) the history of workplace learning and performance
since 1971. The walls were quickly covered with memorable events and
notable milestones in the history of our profession and lives. Timelines were
interpreted by mixed stakeholder groups as each told our story from a per-
sonal, global, and HRD perspective.
Then we constructed an enormous mindmap of present-day trends in
societyglobal, economic, technological, political, and environmental.
Participants all gathered in one location to share their thoughts and con-
cerns. By the end of the 1st day, each participant had identified seven key
trends by marking them with stick-on dots, color coded to stakeholder iden-
tification. The next morning, when we tallied our consensus on trends most
affecting us at present, three dominated our discussion: the increasing
effects of globalization and diversity, demand for just-in-time learning, and
shareholder pressure for short-term profits.1
The 2nd day in a future search conference often marks a turning point in a
groups understanding of its own role in being accountable for the present
and able to influence the future. In stakeholder groups, participants list
252 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

prouds and sorries by identifying actions that express individual and

collective responsibility for the present reality that has been identified.
By lunch time on the 2nd day, conference participants were back in mixed
groups, each assigned the task of envisioning a desired future for workplace
learning and performance. Each group was tasked to choose a creative way
to express its vision for the future. Most chose to do so in the form of a skit or
dramatic scenario. Participants had a host of supplies to use, ranging from
costume materials to construction paper, glue, and glitter. Energy and
excitement built in the room as each group presented its version of a more
technological, diverse, inclusive, and innovative future for workplace learn-
ing and performance and the role of HRD in creating it. Afterward, all par-
ticipants identified the values and principles expressed in enacting our
desired futures. From these would come our common ground statements.
On the third and final morning of the conference, participants prepared
lists of common ground themes and ideas about how to make them happen.
We clustered similar ideas and thoughts, narrowing our list on walls of foam
core. We held a large-group dialogue on the meaning of each statement, an
essential step in creating shared understanding of ideas. Disagreements
were set asideto be honored as information but not worked as conflict.
Ultimately, 12 areas of common ground emerged from the dialogue. We
were given opportunities to meet in groups one last time before the confer-
ence ended to determine how we might begin to take action steps to make our
desired future the new reality.

Discovering Our Common Ground

The ASTD/AHRD future search conference was successful in presenting
us with a picture of HRD history, current challenges, and future trends. We
discovered differences that we would often like to get beyond in thinking
about our field; for example, the relationship between learning and perfor-
mance in HRD remains one of contention. We also discovered that we share
much in common in spite of our disagreements. The conference resulted in
12 areas of common ground. They are presented here as they were developed
by the participants themselves, edited only for clarity.
1. Creating synergy between research and practice. We value the essential
synergy between HRD research and practice as a basis for creating successful
and meaningful individual, group, organizational, and community outcomes.
We see the necessity of academic institutions and professional associations
working in partnership with practitioners to generate the expertise and resources
to accomplish such synergy.
2. Leveraging available technology without losing the human touch and
social component of learning. As a profession, we must learn to leverage avail-
 Dewey, Car ter / EXPLORING THE FUTURE 253

able technology to increase the speed of learning (anytime, anywhere) without

losing the human touch and social component of learning. We need to remember
that technology is not an end but the means.
3. Striking a healthy balance between work life and personal life. HRD inher-
ently involves creating organizational cultures that recognize the need for pro-
moting a healthy balance between work life and personal life.
4. Striving to create humane workplaces. We serve as the conscience of the
organization. We advocate and model organizational practices that respect the
individual and support a humane workplace in times of stability and change. We
also value multidimensional learning experiences that facilitate the develop-
ment of both emotional and spiritual intelligence as well as knowledge skills.
We believe that an enjoyable learning experience can enhance an otherwise
meaningful learning experience.
5. Acknowledging intellectual capital as the life blood of the organization
(The true bottom line). Intellectual capital is the true lifeblood of the organi-
zation. HRD must play a significant role in valuing, propagating, and effectively
applying intellectual capital across the enterprise to the benefit of stakeholders.
6. Developing a sense of social responsibility. We expect every individual and
organization to be socially and ethically responsible, and we value the role of
HRD in creating systems and processes to support individual, organizational,
community, national, and global well-being.
7. Embracing globalization. To foster increased creativity, productivity, and
learning, and for sustained results in organizational settings, we will promote
research and organizational change that (a) moves from a tolerance of differing
cultures in the workplace to embracing synergistic advantage for increased pro-
ductivity; (b) utilizes appropriate communication approaches, processes, and
systems to improve both distant and face-to-face communications; and (c) con-
nects global organizations to local communities to provide mutual advantage.
8. Embracing multiculturalism. We will use research to implement strategies
to (a) advance workplace learning in ways that are both effective and varied for
the entire workforce, including culturally diverse groups, recognizing that tech-
nology cannot substitute for a learning environment in which models, mentors,
and support systems are not available and (b) remove barriers to the develop-
ment of culturally diverse employees, some of whom have unequal access to
power and authority in the corporate hierarchy.
9. Partnering in the fundamentally changing role for education. HRD has a
fundamental role as a strategic partner in educational reform efforts that foster
and integrate lifelong learning on all levels of public and private educational
systems.
254 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

10. Managing knowledge and learning effectively. We seek performance that

adds value to the individual, to the organization, and to society. This requires that
the management of knowledge and learning involve the right knowledge, the
right people, the right way, the right time, and at the right cost.
11. Developing partnerships and collaboration internal and external to the
organization. The complexity of the problems now being confronted requires
that broad-based partnerships and collaborative arrangements be developed to
bring the necessary intellectual and economic resources together to solve them.
12. Fostering lifelong learning. HRD has a vital role in developing critical
and continuous learners at all levels and in all roles within organizations. These
lifelong learners will be able to apply higher order social and psychosocial skills
in pursuit of individual empowerment, to function successfully as team learners,
and to contribute to the shared learning within larger systems.
These shared beliefs emerged from our vision for the future of HRD. For
most of us, they are neither new nor unrecognized goals for our profession.
So what did our future search accomplish? We learned that when envision-
ing the future for a profession, shared goals are likely to be broad and diffuse
because our membership interests are more varied than those in an organiza-
tion or community setting. In an effort to discover what is common among
us, we found ourselves drawn to core beliefs and values to create better
workplaces where learning and community thrive.
At the end of the conference, future search participants commented that
they no longer perceived themselves as noninterdependent members of a
professional community but as intricately linked to one another through our
common experience in fostering learning wherever it occurs. We learned
that future search can be successfully planned with a virtual planning team,
geographically disbursed in many locations with only computers and tele-
phones to connect us. We also pioneered the first such conference for a pro-
fession. Our noninterdependence gave us cause for concern before the con-
ference, wondering if this process would work for those who come from
many walks of life in HRD. What we discovered, however, is how much
could be learned through dialogue about what we want the future of HRD to be.

Note
1. For an in-depth discussion of the three major present-day trends that emerged
from the ASTD/AHRD future search conference, see the May, June, and July issues
of T&D, 2002 (Bierema, Bing, & Carter, 2002; May & Kahnweiler, 2002; Weintraub
& Martineau, 2002), in which ASTD Research-to-Practice committee members
have explored each of the trends in a feature article.
 Dewey, Car ter / EXPLORING THE FUTURE 255

References
Bierema, L. L. Bing, J. W., & Carter, T. J. (2002, May). The global pendulum. Training &
Development, pp. 70-78.
Bing, J. W. (2001). Developing a consulting tool to measure process change on global
teams: The global team process questionnaire. Paper presented at the 2001 Academy
of Human Resource Development Conference, Tulsa, OK.
Bunker, B. B., & Alban, B. T. (1997). Large group interventions: Engaging the whole
system for rapid change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics, part II: Channels of group life; social
planning and action research. Human Relations, 1, 143-153.
May, G. L., Carter, T. J., & Dewey, J. D. (2002, February). Collaborating in a Volunteer
Virtual Environment: A Case Study on Planning the ASTD/AHRD Future search Con-
ference. Paper presented at the Academy of Human Resource Development Annual
Meeting, Honolulu, HI.
May, G. L., & Kahnweiler, B. (2002, July). Shareholder value: Is there common ground?
Training & Development, pp. 45-52.
Weintraub, R. S., & Martineau, J. (2002, June). The just-in-time imperative. Training &
Development, pp. 51-57.
Weisbord, M. R. (1987). Productive workplaces. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Weisbord, M. R. (1992). Discovering common ground. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Weisbord, M. & Janoff, S. (2000). Future search (2 ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
nd

Jennifer D. Dewey is Director of Internal Evaluation at the North Central Regional

Educational Laboratory in Naperville, Illinois, a nonprofit organization providing
research-based expertise, resources, and professional development to educators
and policy makers. She has a doctorate in applied experimental psychology (pro-
gram evaluation specialization) from Southern Illinois University at Carbondale.
Jennifer has worked for the Center for Prevention Research at the University of Ken-
tucky and Andersen (formerly Arthur Andersen) on project management, proposal
development, methodological and statistical design for research studies, qualitative
and quantitative analysis, needs assessment, survey development, telephone and
individual interviews, and group facilitation. Jennifer has published in the Journal
of Primary Prevention, American Journal of Evaluation, and Human Resource
Development International and has made over 30 conference presentations.
Jennifer has been a member of ASTDs Research-to-Practice committee since 1998,
acting as a reviewer for Human Resource Development Quarterly and serving on the
steering panel for the ASTD/AHRD 2001 future search conference.

Teresa J. Carter is an independent educator and consultant in Richmond, VA. She

has a doctorate in executive leadership in human resource development from
George Washington University and teaches part-time in the HRD programs at
256 Advances in Developing Human Resources August 2003

George Washington University and Virginia Commonwealth University. She has

worked with managers on issues of organizational change, leadership, and team
development for more than 15 years. Teresa is a trained facilitator of large-group,
whole system change strategies and cofacilitated the 2001 ASTD/AHRD future
search conference. Her research interests focus on how professionals learn in the
workplace, with an emphasis on transformative learning and mentoring through
developmental relationships.

Dewey, J. D., & Carter, T. J. (2003). Exploring the future of HRD: The first future
search conference for a profession. Advances in Developing Human Resources,
5(3), 245-256.