Watch now | Patrick Van Horne co-authored one of the best books I’ve ever read — Left of Bang. Since it was released over a decade ago, he has continued to evolve his company and work to create and apply this powerful concept at an organizational and team level.
Thanks Michael. I think there are two pieces with it: anticipating what future scenarios could be, and then orgs readying themselves for them.
I think sometimes we expect too much certainty out of the intelligence/forecasting/foresight functions before orgs make the decision to do anything about it.
But by the time you have certainty, it’s often too late to do anything about it. The goal is to get enough clarity to start acting.
I’m more of a reader than a listener so I appreciate your links to some of Patrick’s essays, Kyle. His clarification that reacting to imminent threats is a good approach except for dealing with existential threats farther out on the time horizon. Then you need early-er warning systems and capacity that’s all built and ready to go. Thanks to you and Patrick for shining a spotlight on some really important survival stuff! 👏
I’ve learned to become more of a listener due to time constraints for uninterrupted reading. That being said, I still prefer reading and always value your feedback brother 👊🏻
Baird - I'd rather write instead of speak, so thanks for digging into the articles!
Both models (left of bang or right of bang) have their benefits and limitations, but not being clear on which one you've chosen, whether that matches the expectations of the community or customers, and how those decisions impact the way a person leads their team, is often where organizations run into situations where they look confused and disjointed.
I should have spoken more in my career, but introversion is a thing. Fortunately my writing and word of mouth brought in enough work. So keep on talkin’ Patrick, especially with great hosts like Kyle!
I enjoyed this. The looking ahead sound a lot like the Foresight / Threatcasting community.
Thanks Michael. I think there are two pieces with it: anticipating what future scenarios could be, and then orgs readying themselves for them.
I think sometimes we expect too much certainty out of the intelligence/forecasting/foresight functions before orgs make the decision to do anything about it.
But by the time you have certainty, it’s often too late to do anything about it. The goal is to get enough clarity to start acting.
Appreciate the share.
Yeah, the certainty element drives with nuts with Futures because it’s more pattern recognition and adaptation. Certainty is why we keep failing.
I’m more of a reader than a listener so I appreciate your links to some of Patrick’s essays, Kyle. His clarification that reacting to imminent threats is a good approach except for dealing with existential threats farther out on the time horizon. Then you need early-er warning systems and capacity that’s all built and ready to go. Thanks to you and Patrick for shining a spotlight on some really important survival stuff! 👏
I’ve learned to become more of a listener due to time constraints for uninterrupted reading. That being said, I still prefer reading and always value your feedback brother 👊🏻
Baird - I'd rather write instead of speak, so thanks for digging into the articles!
Both models (left of bang or right of bang) have their benefits and limitations, but not being clear on which one you've chosen, whether that matches the expectations of the community or customers, and how those decisions impact the way a person leads their team, is often where organizations run into situations where they look confused and disjointed.
Yet, it doesn't have to be that way either.
I should have spoken more in my career, but introversion is a thing. Fortunately my writing and word of mouth brought in enough work. So keep on talkin’ Patrick, especially with great hosts like Kyle!