Initial commit

skills/environmental-scanning-foresight/resources/evaluators/rubric_environmental_scanning_foresight.json

@@ -0,0 +1,235 @@
+{
+  "criteria": [
+    {
+      "name": "PESTLE Comprehensiveness",
+      "1": "Scans only 1-2 PESTLE dimensions, significant blind spots, cherry-picks domains",
+      "3": "Covers 4-5 PESTLE dimensions systematically, minor gaps, reasonable source diversity",
+      "5": "Comprehensive scan across all 6 PESTLE dimensions, diverse credible sources, systematic coverage with geographic/temporal breadth"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Weak Signal Validation",
+      "1": "Treats all anomalies as weak signals without validation, single sources, unclear amplification path",
+      "3": "Validates signals using credibility + evidence criteria, plausibility assessed, some supporting evidence",
+      "5": "Rigorous validation (source credibility, multiple confirmations, plausible amplification mechanism, significant impact if scaled), clear path from weak to mainstream"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Scenario Plausibility",
+      "1": "Scenarios are predictions/wishes rather than plausible futures, inconsistent logic, implausible combinations",
+      "3": "Scenarios are plausible and internally consistent, span reasonable range of outcomes, based on critical uncertainties",
+      "5": "Scenarios are distinct, plausible, internally consistent, span full range of critical uncertainties, include predetermined elements, challenge assumptions, vivid narratives"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Cross-Impact Mapping",
+      "1": "Trends treated in isolation, no interaction analysis, misses reinforcing/offsetting dynamics",
+      "3": "Some interaction analysis, identifies key reinforcing or offsetting trends, distinguishes high/low impact",
+      "5": "Comprehensive cross-impact matrix, reinforcing/offsetting/cascading relationships mapped, feedback loops identified, critical uncertainties vs predetermined elements distinguished"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Signpost Quality",
+      "1": "Signposts are lagging indicators, vague thresholds, unobservable or unmeasurable",
+      "3": "Signposts are leading indicators with specific thresholds, observable, monitoring plan defined",
+      "5": "Signposts are leading (6-12+ month lead time), specific quantitative thresholds, observable data sources identified, update frequency set, action triggers pre-committed, graduated alerts"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Source Credibility",
+      "1": "Relies on single source type or low-credibility sources, no validation, echo chamber",
+      "3": "Mixes primary/secondary sources, includes credible sources (government, research, industry), some diversity",
+      "5": "Source diversity across primary/secondary/edge, balances credibility vs novelty, geographic breadth, temporal depth, actively seeks disconfirming evidence"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Strategic Implications",
+      "1": "No connection to decisions, analysis without recommendations, unclear actionability",
+      "3": "Strategic implications identified for key scenarios, connects to business decisions, some actionability",
+      "5": "Clear strategic implications for each scenario, no-regrets moves identified, hedges specified, decision triggers defined, robust across scenarios, actionable recommendations"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Uncertainty Management",
+      "1": "Treats uncertainties as predictions, assigns false precision, ignores ranges and confidence",
+      "3": "Distinguishes high/low uncertainty, acknowledges unknowns, uses scenarios to span range",
+      "5": "Explicit uncertainty quantification (high impact + high uncertainty = critical, high impact + low uncertainty = predetermined), wild cards acknowledged, confidence calibrated, avoids false precision"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Temporal Scope",
+      "1": "Time horizon mismatched to questions (too short/long), snapshots without trend analysis, recency bias",
+      "3": "Appropriate time horizon (1-2yr, 3-5yr, or 5-10yr based on need), some historical context, trends tracked",
+      "5": "Time horizon matched to strategic planning cycle, historical patterns analyzed (10-20yr lookback), trend trajectories projected, inflection points identified, milestones defined"
+    },
+    {
+      "name": "Update Mechanism",
+      "1": "One-time scan, no monitoring plan, static scenarios, stale data",
+      "3": "Monitoring cadence defined (quarterly/annual), some plan for updates, signposts tracked",
+      "5": "Comprehensive update plan (daily/weekly/monthly/quarterly/annual by indicator type), scenario validation process, scan refinement based on new signals, feedback loop to strategy"
+    }
+  ],
+  "guidance_by_type": {
+    "Industry Disruption Scanning": {
+      "target_score": 4.1,
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "Technology trends (PESTLE-T) comprehensive with patent/startup/VC data",
+        "Weak signals from edge sources (startups, research labs, adjacent fields)",
+        "Scenarios focus on disruption speed (rapid vs gradual) and winning model (incumbent vs entrant)",
+        "Signposts track technology readiness (TRL progression), adoption curves, incumbent response"
+      ],
+      "common_pitfalls": [
+        "Overweighting hype cycles, treating all startups as weak signals",
+        "Ignoring economic/social barriers to adoption",
+        "Linear extrapolation of exponential tech trends"
+      ]
+    },
+    "Regulatory & Policy Foresight": {
+      "target_score": 4.0,
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "Political & Legal dimensions (PESTLE-P,L) prioritized with legislative tracking",
+        "Weak signals from pilot programs, consultations, lead jurisdictions",
+        "Scenarios span stringency (light vs heavy) and speed (gradual vs sudden)",
+        "Signposts track proposals, stakeholder positions, enforcement patterns"
+      ],
+      "common_pitfalls": [
+        "Assuming current policy trajectory continues unchanged",
+        "Missing cross-border regulatory arbitrage opportunities",
+        "Ignoring industry lobbying and capture dynamics"
+      ]
+    },
+    "Market Evolution & Consumer Trends": {
+      "target_score": 4.2,
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "Social & Economic dimensions (PESTLE-S,E) deep, demographics and values shifts",
+        "Weak signals from subcultures, Gen Z behavior, influencer/creator economy",
+        "Scenarios explore value proposition evolution, channel dominance, price sensitivity",
+        "Signposts track early adopter behavior, sentiment, spending patterns"
+      ],
+      "common_pitfalls": [
+        "Overgeneralizing from small samples or vocal minorities",
+        "Confusing stated preferences with revealed behavior",
+        "Anchoring to recent trends (recency bias)"
+      ]
+    },
+    "Geopolitical & Macro Risk": {
+      "target_score": 3.9,
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "Political & Economic dimensions (PESTLE-P,E) comprehensive, global scope",
+        "Weak signals from diplomatic incidents, capital flows, social unrest indicators",
+        "Scenarios span geopolitical alignment (cooperation vs fragmentation), economic regime (growth vs stagnation)",
+        "Signposts track leading indicators (yields, commodity prices, policy shifts)"
+      ],
+      "common_pitfalls": [
+        "Home-country bias in geopolitical analysis",
+        "Treating low-probability tail risks as negligible",
+        "Missing second-order effects and contagion"
+      ]
+    },
+    "Climate & Sustainability Foresight": {
+      "target_score": 4.0,
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "Environmental dimension (PESTLE-E) deep with climate models, plus Political/Legal for policy",
+        "Weak signals from physical anomalies, stranded asset warnings, investor ESG shifts",
+        "Scenarios span transition speed (orderly vs disorderly), policy stringency, physical impacts",
+        "Signposts track carbon pricing, renewable cost curves, extreme weather frequency, commitments"
+      ],
+      "common_pitfalls": [
+        "Underestimating physical risks or transition risks",
+        "Ignoring just transition and social equity dimensions",
+        "Linear climate projections ignoring tipping points"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "guidance_by_complexity": {
+    "Simple/Focused Scan": {
+      "target_score": 3.5,
+      "description": "Single domain or narrow question, limited geographic scope, short time horizon (1-2yr)",
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "3-4 PESTLE dimensions covered (focus on most relevant)",
+        "2-3 validated weak signals from credible sources",
+        "2-3 simple scenarios (baseline, upside, downside)",
+        "3-5 leading signposts with clear thresholds"
+      ],
+      "time_estimate": "8-12 hours"
+    },
+    "Moderate/Strategic Planning": {
+      "target_score": 4.0,
+      "description": "Multi-domain scan, regional/national scope, medium time horizon (3-5yr)",
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "All 6 PESTLE dimensions systematically covered",
+        "5-8 validated weak signals with amplification paths assessed",
+        "3-4 scenarios (2x2 matrix method) with narratives and implications",
+        "8-12 signposts with graduated alerts (yellow/orange/red)",
+        "Cross-impact analysis identifying feedback loops"
+      ],
+      "time_estimate": "20-30 hours initial, 4-6 hours/quarter updates"
+    },
+    "Complex/Comprehensive Foresight": {
+      "target_score": 4.3,
+      "description": "System-level scan, global scope, long time horizon (5-10yr), high stakes",
+      "key_requirements": [
+        "PESTLE comprehensive with geographic breadth and temporal depth (10yr+ lookback)",
+        "10+ validated weak signals from edge sources, expert panels (Delphi)",
+        "4 scenarios with wild cards, advanced methods (backcasting, morphological analysis)",
+        "15+ signposts with real-time monitoring, dashboards, automated alerts",
+        "Cross-impact with system dynamics modeling, sensitivity analysis"
+      ],
+      "time_estimate": "40-60 hours initial, facilitated workshops, 8-12 hours/quarter updates"
+    }
+  },
+  "common_failure_modes": [
+    {
+      "failure": "Confirmation bias scanning",
+      "symptom": "All sources support existing strategy, no disconfirming evidence, echo chamber",
+      "detection": "Check source diversity, political/ideological spectrum, opposing views absent",
+      "fix": "Actively seek contrarian sources, assign devil's advocate, scan opposing geographies/sectors"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Weak signal inflation",
+      "symptom": "Every anomaly labeled weak signal, no validation, dozens of signals without prioritization",
+      "detection": "Weak signals lack credibility assessment, supporting evidence, or plausibility analysis",
+      "fix": "Apply validation framework rigorously (credibility + evidence + plausibility + impact), prioritize top 5-10"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Scenarios as predictions",
+      "symptom": "Probabilities assigned to scenarios, betting on one scenario, scenarios converge",
+      "detection": "Language like 'most likely scenario', resource allocation to single scenario, lack of hedges",
+      "fix": "Frame scenarios as 'what if' not 'what will', test strategy robustness across all, identify no-regrets moves"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Linear extrapolation",
+      "symptom": "Trends projected unchanged, ignores saturation/reversal/inflection, recent past = future",
+      "detection": "Exponential trends extended indefinitely, no consideration of limits or feedback",
+      "fix": "Analyze historical patterns for cycles, identify saturation limits, map feedback loops, consider discontinuities"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Lagging signposts",
+      "symptom": "Signposts are outcome measures (market share, GDP) not leading indicators",
+      "detection": "Indicators move after trend materializes, no advance warning, reactive not proactive",
+      "fix": "Identify indicators with 6-12+ month lead time (permits not prices, proposals not laws, VC not revenue)"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "PESTLE cherry-picking",
+      "symptom": "Only 2-3 PESTLE dimensions scanned, missing entire domains, blind spots",
+      "detection": "Environmental or Legal dimensions absent, geographic scope limited to home market",
+      "fix": "Systematically cover all 6 PESTLE, even if some seem less relevant (surprises come from blind spots)"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Stale scenarios",
+      "symptom": "Scenarios created once and never updated, signposts not monitored, strategy unchanged despite shifts",
+      "detection": "Scenario document >2 years old, no monitoring cadence, environmental shifts ignored",
+      "fix": "Quarterly signpost reviews, annual scenario validation, trigger-based updates when thresholds crossed"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Analysis paralysis",
+      "symptom": "Endless scanning without synthesis, hundreds of trends tracked, no strategic implications",
+      "detection": "Reports are data dumps not decision memos, no clear recommendations, 'more research needed'",
+      "fix": "Time-box scanning (80/20 rule), focus on critical uncertainties, prioritize actionability over comprehensiveness"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Missing cross-impacts",
+      "symptom": "Trends analyzed in isolation, interaction effects ignored, surprised by feedback loops",
+      "detection": "No cross-impact matrix, reinforcing/offsetting dynamics not mapped, additive not multiplicative thinking",
+      "fix": "Create interaction matrix, identify feedback loops (A→B→C→A), distinguish critical uncertainties from predetermined"
+    },
+    {
+      "failure": "Ignoring wild cards",
+      "symptom": "Focus only on likely scenarios, low-probability high-impact events dismissed, no contingencies",
+      "detection": "Scenarios all moderate outcomes, no discussion of tail risks or black swans, no resilience planning",
+      "fix": "Explicitly list wild cards (pandemic, breakthrough, collapse), create contingency for high-impact events, stress-test strategy"
+    }
+  ]
+}

skills/environmental-scanning-foresight/resources/methodology.md

@@ -0,0 +1,427 @@
+# Environmental Scanning & Foresight Methodology
+
+Advanced techniques for weak signal detection, cross-impact analysis, scenario construction, and horizon scanning.
+
+## Workflow
+
+```
+Environmental Scanning Progress:
+- [ ] Step 1: Define scope and focus areas
+- [ ] Step 2: Scan PESTLE forces and trends
+- [ ] Step 3: Detect and validate weak signals
+- [ ] Step 4: Assess cross-impacts and interactions
+- [ ] Step 5: Develop scenarios for plausible futures
+- [ ] Step 6: Set signposts and adaptive triggers
+```
+
+**Step 1: Define scope and focus areas**
+
+Set scanning boundaries and critical uncertainties to focus research using scoping frameworks.
+
+**Step 2: Scan PESTLE forces and trends**
+
+Systematically collect trends using [1. Horizon Scanning Approaches](#1-horizon-scanning-approaches) and source diversity principles.
+
+**Step 3: Detect and validate weak signals**
+
+Apply [2. Weak Signal Detection](#2-weak-signal-detection) techniques to identify early indicators and validate using credibility criteria.
+
+**Step 4: Assess cross-impacts and interactions**
+
+Map interactions using [3. Cross-Impact Analysis](#3-cross-impact-analysis) to distinguish critical uncertainties from predetermined elements.
+
+**Step 5: Develop scenarios for plausible futures**
+
+Construct scenarios using [4. Scenario Construction Methods](#4-scenario-construction-methods) (axes, narratives, consistency testing).
+
+**Step 6: Set signposts and adaptive triggers**
+
+Design signposts using [5. Signpost and Trigger Design](#5-signpost-and-trigger-design) with leading indicators and thresholds.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Horizon Scanning Approaches
+
+Systematic methods for identifying emerging trends and discontinuities.
+
+### Scanning Sources by Type
+
+**Primary Sources** (firsthand data, high credibility):
+- Government data: Census, economic statistics, climate data, regulatory filings
+- Research publications: Peer-reviewed journals, working papers, conference proceedings
+- Corporate filings: Annual reports, 10-K disclosures, patent applications, M&A announcements
+- Direct observation: Site visits, trade shows, customer interviews
+
+**Secondary Sources** (analysis and synthesis):
+- Think tank reports: Policy analysis, scenario studies, technology assessments
+- Industry research: Gartner, McKinsey, BCG analyses, sector forecasts
+- News aggregation: Specialized newsletters, trade publications, curated feeds
+- Expert commentary: Academic blogs, practitioner insights, conference talks
+
+**Edge Sources** (weak signals, lower credibility but high novelty):
+- Startup activity: VC funding rounds, accelerator cohorts, product launches
+- Social media: Reddit communities, Twitter trends, influencer content
+- Fringe publications: Contrarian blogs, niche forums, subculture media
+- Crowdsourcing platforms: Prediction markets, crowd forecasts, citizen science
+
+### Source Diversity Principles
+
+**Avoid echo chambers**: Deliberately seek sources with opposing views, different geographies, alternate paradigms. If all sources agree, expand search.
+
+**Balance credibility vs novelty**: High-credibility sources (government, peer-reviewed) lag but are reliable. Low-credibility sources (social media, fringe) lead but require validation. Use both.
+
+**Geographic breadth**: Trends often emerge in lead markets (Silicon Valley for tech, Scandinavia for policy innovation, China for manufacturing). Scan globally.
+
+**Temporal depth**: Review historical patterns (past 10-20 years) to identify cycles, precedents, and recurrence vs genuine novelty.
+
+### Scanning Cadence
+
+**Daily**: Breaking news, market movements, crisis events (filter for signal vs noise)
+**Weekly**: Industry news, startup activity, technology developments
+**Monthly**: Government data releases, research publications, trend synthesis
+**Quarterly**: Comprehensive PESTLE review, weak signal validation, scenario updates
+**Annually**: Deep horizon scan, strategic reassessment, long-term trend analysis
+
+---
+
+## 2. Weak Signal Detection
+
+Techniques for identifying early indicators of change before they become mainstream.
+
+### Identification Techniques
+
+**Anomaly detection**: Look for deviations from expected patterns. Methods:
+- **Statistical outliers**: Data points that diverge >2 standard deviations from trend
+- **Broken patterns**: Historical regularities that suddenly change (e.g., customer behavior shift)
+- **Unexpected correlations**: Variables that start moving together when they shouldn't
+- **Missing dogs that didn't bark**: Expected events that fail to occur
+
+**Edge scanning**: Monitor periphery of systems where innovation emerges. Scan:
+- **Geographic edges**: Emerging markets, frontier regions, lead adopter cities
+- **Demographic edges**: Youth culture, early adopters, subcultures, extreme users
+- **Technological edges**: Research labs, patents in adjacent fields, open-source experiments
+- **Organizational edges**: Startups, non-profits, activist groups, fringe movements
+
+**Wildcard brainstorming**: Imagine low-probability, high-impact events. Categories:
+- **Technological breakthroughs**: Fusion power, AGI, quantum computing at scale
+- **Geopolitical shocks**: War, regime change, alliance collapse, resource conflict
+- **Natural disasters**: Pandemic, earthquake, climate tipping point
+- **Social tipping points**: Value shifts, trust collapse, mass movement
+
+### Validation Framework
+
+Not every anomaly is a weak signal. Validate using four criteria:
+
+**1. Source credibility** (Is source knowledgeable and trustworthy?):
+- High: Peer-reviewed research, government data, established expert
+- Medium: Industry analyst, credible journalist, experienced practitioner
+- Low: Anonymous blog, unverified social media, promotional content
+
+**2. Supporting evidence** (Are there multiple independent confirmations?):
+- Strong: 3+ independent sources, different geographies/sectors, replication studies
+- Moderate: 2 sources, same sector, corroborating anecdotes
+- Weak: Single source, no corroboration, isolated incident
+
+**3. Plausibility** (Is amplification mechanism realistic?):
+- High: Clear causal path, precedent exists, enabling conditions present
+- Medium: Plausible path but uncertain, some barriers remain
+- Low: Requires multiple unlikely events, contradicts established theory
+
+**4. Impact if scaled** (Would this matter significantly?):
+- High: Affects core business model, large market, strategic threat/opportunity
+- Medium: Affects segment or capability, moderate market, tactical response needed
+- Low: Niche impact, small market, interesting but not actionable
+
+**Decision rule**: Weak signal validated if credibility ≥ Medium AND (evidence ≥ Moderate OR plausibility + impact both ≥ High).
+
+### Signal Amplification Assessment
+
+Once validated, assess how signal could scale:
+
+**Reinforcing mechanisms** (positive feedback that accelerates):
+- Network effects (value increases with adoption)
+- Economies of scale (cost decreases with volume)
+- Social proof (adoption begets adoption)
+- Policy tailwinds (regulation favors signal)
+
+**Barriers to amplification** (what could prevent scaling?):
+- Technical barriers (physics, engineering, materials)
+- Economic barriers (cost, capital requirements, market size)
+- Social barriers (values, culture, trust, resistance)
+- Regulatory barriers (legal constraints, compliance costs)
+
+**Tipping point indicators** (what would signal transition from weak to mainstream?):
+- Adoption thresholds (>10% market penetration often triggers acceleration)
+- Infrastructure readiness (charging stations for EVs, 5G for IoT)
+- Incumbent response (when major players adopt, legitimizes trend)
+- Media coverage shift (from niche to mainstream publications)
+
+---
+
+## 3. Cross-Impact Analysis
+
+Mapping how trends interact to identify system dynamics and critical uncertainties.
+
+### Interaction Types
+
+**Reinforcing (+)**: Trend A accelerates Trend B
+- Example: AI capability (**+**) remote work adoption (AI tools enable distributed teams)
+- System effect: Positive feedback loop, exponential growth potential, virtuous/vicious cycles
+
+**Offsetting (-)**: Trend A inhibits Trend B
+- Example: Privacy regulation (**-**) personalization (GDPR limits data collection for targeting)
+- System effect: Tension, tradeoffs, oscillation between competing forces
+
+**Cascading (→)**: Trend A triggers Trend B
+- Example: Pandemic (**→**) remote work (**→**) office demand collapse (**→**) urban exodus
+- System effect: Sequential causation, time lags, amplification chains
+
+**Independent (0)**: Trends do not significantly interact
+- Example: Arctic ice melt (0) cryptocurrency adoption (unrelated domains)
+- System effect: Additive, not multiplicative
+
+### Mapping Process
+
+**Step 1**: List 5-10 key trends from PESTLE scan (prioritize high impact)
+
+**Step 2**: Create interaction matrix (trend pairs in rows/columns)
+
+**Step 3**: For each cell, assess: Does Trend A affect Trend B? How (reinforce/offset/cascade)?
+
+**Step 4**: Identify feedback loops (A→B→C→A) that create acceleration or stabilization
+
+**Step 5**: Classify trends by impact and uncertainty into four quadrants:
+
+| Quadrant | Impact | Uncertainty | Implication |
+|----------|--------|-------------|-------------|
+| **Critical Uncertainties** | High | High | Build scenarios around these |
+| **Predetermined Elements** | High | Low | Plan for these, they will happen |
+| **Wild Cards** | High | Very Low (but non-zero) | Monitor, prepare contingency |
+| **Context** | Low | Any | Note but don't scenario around |
+
+### System Dynamics Patterns
+
+**Exponential growth** (reinforcing loop unchecked):
+- Example: Social media network effects → more users → more value → more users
+- Risk: Overshoot, resource depletion, regulatory backlash
+- Management: Look for saturation points, shifting limits
+
+**Goal-seeking** (balancing loop stabilizes):
+- Example: Price increase → demand falls → supply glut → price decrease
+- Risk: Oscillation, delayed response, policy resistance
+- Management: Identify equilibrium, reduce delays, smooth adjustments
+
+**Shifting dominance** (reinforcing dominates, then balancing kicks in):
+- Example: Technology hype cycle (enthusiasm → investment → growth → saturation → disillusionment)
+- Risk: Boom-bust cycles, stranded assets
+- Management: Recognize phases, adjust strategy as loops shift
+
+---
+
+## 4. Scenario Construction Methods
+
+Creating multiple plausible futures that span range of outcomes.
+
+### 2x2 Matrix Method (Most Common)
+
+**Step 1: Select two critical uncertainties** (high impact + high uncertainty from cross-impact analysis)
+- Criteria: Independent (not correlated), span broad range, relevant to strategic questions
+- Example Axes:
+  - Climate policy stringency (Low to High)
+  - Technology breakthrough speed (Slow to Fast)
+
+**Step 2: Define endpoints** for each axis
+- Climate policy: Low = Voluntary pledges, High = Binding global carbon price
+- Tech breakthrough: Slow = Incremental innovation, Fast = Fusion/battery paradigm shift
+
+**Step 3: Create four scenario quadrants**
+- Scenario A: High policy + Fast tech = "Green Acceleration"
+- Scenario B: High policy + Slow tech = "Costly Transition"
+- Scenario C: Low policy + Fast tech = "Innovation Without Mandate"
+- Scenario D: Low policy + Slow tech = "Muddling Through"
+
+**Step 4: Develop narratives** for each scenario (2-3 paragraphs)
+- Opening: What tipping point or series of events leads to this future?
+- Body: How do PESTLE forces play out? What does 2030 look like?
+- Implications: Winners, losers, strategic imperatives
+
+**Step 5: Test consistency**
+- Does narrative logic hold? (no contradictions)
+- Are all predetermined elements included? (high impact + low uncertainty trends must appear in all scenarios)
+- Is scenario distinct from others? (avoid convergence)
+
+### Incremental/Disruptive Axis Method
+
+Alternative to 2x2 when primary uncertainty is pace/magnitude of change:
+
+**Incremental scenario**: Current trends continue, gradual evolution, adaptation within existing paradigm
+**Disruptive scenario**: Discontinuity occurs, rapid shift, new paradigm emerges
+
+Develop 3 scenarios along spectrum:
+- **Optimistic disruption**: Breakthrough enables rapid positive transformation
+- **Baseline incremental**: Current trajectory, mix of progress and setbacks
+- **Pessimistic disruption**: Crisis triggers collapse or regression
+
+### Scenario Narrative Structure
+
+**Opening hook**: Event or trend that sets scenario in motion (e.g., "In 2026, three major economies implement carbon border adjustments...")
+
+**Causal chain**: How initial conditions cascade through system (policy → investment → innovation → adoption → market shift)
+
+**Signposts along the way**: Observable milestones that would indicate this scenario unfolding (useful for Step 6)
+
+**Endpoint description**: Vivid portrait of 2030 or target year (what does business/society/technology look like?)
+
+**Stakeholder perspectives**: Winners (who benefits?), Losers (who struggles?), Adapters (who pivots?)
+
+**Strategic implications**: What capabilities, partnerships, positioning would succeed in this scenario?
+
+### Wild Cards Integration
+
+Wild cards (low probability, high impact) don't fit neatly into scenarios but should be acknowledged:
+
+**Approach 1**: Create 3 core scenarios + 1 wild card scenario to explore extreme
+**Approach 2**: List wild cards separately with triggers and contingency responses
+**Approach 3**: Use wild cards to stress-test strategies ("Would our plan survive pandemic + war?")
+
+---
+
+## 5. Signpost and Trigger Design
+
+Designing early warning systems that prompt adaptive action.
+
+### Leading vs Lagging Indicators
+
+**Lagging indicators** (confirm trend but arrive too late for proactive response):
+- GDP growth (economy already shifted)
+- Market share change (competition already won/lost)
+- Regulation enacted (policy battle already decided)
+
+**Leading indicators** (precede outcome, enable early action):
+- Building permits (predict housing prices by 6-12 months)
+- VC investment (signals technology readiness 2-3 years ahead of commercialization)
+- Legislative proposals (indicate regulatory direction before enactment)
+- Job postings (show hiring intent before headcount data)
+
+**Rule**: Signposts must be leading. Ask: "How far ahead of the outcome does this indicator move?"
+
+### Threshold Setting
+
+Thresholds trigger action when crossed. Must be:
+
+**Specific** (quantitative when possible):
+- Good: "EV market share >20% in major markets"
+- Bad: "Significant EV adoption"
+
+**Observable** (data exists and is measurable):
+- Good: "US unemployment rate falls below 4%"
+- Bad: "Consumer sentiment improves" (subjective unless tied to specific survey)
+
+**Actionable** (crossing threshold has clear decision implication):
+- Good: "If battery cost <$80/kWh → green-light full EV platform investment"
+- Bad: "If battery cost declines → monitor" (what action?)
+
+**Calibrated to lead time** (threshold allows time to respond):
+- If building factory takes 3 years, threshold must trigger 3+ years before market shift
+
+### Multi-Level Triggers
+
+Use graduated thresholds for phased response:
+
+**Yellow alert** (early warning, intensify monitoring):
+- Example: "2 countries delay ICE ban announcements"
+- Response: Increase scanning frequency, run contingency analysis
+
+**Orange alert** (prepare to act, mobilize resources):
+- Example: "3 countries delay + oil prices fall below $60/bbl for 6 months"
+- Response: Halt EV R&D expansion, preserve ICE capability
+
+**Red alert** (execute adaptation, commit resources):
+- Example: "5 countries delay + major automaker cancels EV platform"
+- Response: Pivot to hybrid strategy, exit pure-EV bets
+
+### Monitoring Cadence
+
+Match monitoring frequency to indicator velocity:
+
+**Real-time** (dashboards, alerts): Financial markets, breaking news, crisis events
+**Daily**: Social media sentiment, competitive moves, policy announcements
+**Weekly**: Industry data, technology developments, startup funding
+**Monthly**: Economic indicators, research publications, market share
+**Quarterly**: PESTLE review, scenario validation, signpost assessment
+**Annually**: Comprehensive horizon scan, scenario refresh, strategy adaptation
+
+### Feedback Loops
+
+Signpost systems must feed back into strategy:
+
+**Decision triggers**: Pre-commit to actions when thresholds crossed (remove bias, speed response)
+**Scenario validation**: Track which scenario is unfolding based on signpost patterns
+**Scan refinement**: Add new signposts as weak signals emerge, retire irrelevant indicators
+**Strategy adjustment**: Quarterly reviews assess if signposts require strategic pivot
+
+---
+
+## 6. Advanced Techniques
+
+### Delphi Method (Expert Panel Forecasting)
+
+**Purpose**: Synthesize expert judgment on uncertain futures through iterative anonymous surveying
+
+**Process**:
+1. Recruit 10-20 domain experts (diversity of views, high credibility)
+2. Round 1: Ask experts to forecast key uncertainties (e.g., "When will EV cost parity occur?")
+3. Aggregate responses, share distribution (median, quartiles) anonymously with panel
+4. Round 2: Experts revise forecasts after seeing peer responses, justify outlier positions
+5. Round 3: Final forecasts converge (or persistent disagreement highlights critical uncertainty)
+
+**Strengths**: Reduces groupthink, surfaces reasoning, quantifies uncertainty
+**Limitations**: Time-intensive, expert availability, potential for false consensus
+
+### Backcasting (Futures to Present)
+
+**Purpose**: Work backward from desired future to identify pathway and necessary actions
+
+**Process**:
+1. Define aspirational future state (e.g., "Carbon-neutral economy by 2040")
+2. Identify milestones working backward (2035, 2030, 2025)
+3. Determine required actions, policies, technologies for each milestone
+4. Assess feasibility and barriers
+5. Create roadmap from present to future
+
+**Strengths**: Goal-oriented, reveals dependencies, identifies gaps
+**Limitations**: Assumes future is achievable, may ignore obstacles or alternate paths
+
+### Morphological Analysis (Configuration Exploration)
+
+**Purpose**: Systematically explore combinations of variables to identify novel scenarios
+
+**Process**:
+1. Identify key dimensions (e.g., Energy source, Transportation mode, Governance model)
+2. List options for each (Energy: Fossil, Nuclear, Renewable, Fusion)
+3. Create configuration matrix (all possible combinations)
+4. Assess consistency (which combinations are plausible?)
+5. Develop scenarios for interesting/high-impact configurations
+
+**Strengths**: Comprehensive, reveals overlooked combinations, creative
+**Limitations**: Combinatorial explosion (5 dimensions × 4 options = 1024 configs), requires filtering
+
+---
+
+## 7. Common Pitfalls
+
+**Confirmation bias in scanning**: Collecting evidence that supports existing beliefs while ignoring disconfirming data. **Fix**: Actively seek sources with opposing views, assign devil's advocate role.
+
+**Linear extrapolation**: Assuming trends continue unchanged without inflection points or reversals. **Fix**: Look for saturation limits, feedback loops, historical precedents of reversal.
+
+**Treating scenarios as predictions**: Assigning probabilities or betting on one scenario. **Fix**: Use scenarios to test strategy robustness, not to forecast the future.
+
+**Too many scenarios**: Creating 5+ scenarios that overwhelm decision-makers. **Fix**: Limit to 3-4 distinct scenarios; use wild cards separately.
+
+**Weak signals inflation**: Calling every anomaly a weak signal without validation. **Fix**: Apply credibility + evidence + plausibility + impact criteria rigorously.
+
+**Lagging signposts**: Monitoring indicators that confirm trends after they've materialized. **Fix**: Identify leading indicators with 6-12+ month lead time.
+
+**Stale scans**: Conducting one-time scan without updates as environment changes. **Fix**: Establish scanning cadence (quarterly PESTLE, monthly weak signals, annual scenarios).
+
+**Analysis paralysis**: Over-researching without synthesizing into decisions. **Fix**: Set deadlines, use "good enough" threshold, prioritize actionability over comprehensiveness.

skills/environmental-scanning-foresight/resources/template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,364 @@
+# Environmental Scanning & Foresight Templates
+
+Quick-start templates for PESTLE scanning, weak signal detection, scenario development, and signpost setting.
+
+## Workflow
+
+```
+Environmental Scanning Progress:
+- [ ] Step 1: Define scope and focus areas
+- [ ] Step 2: Scan PESTLE forces and trends
+- [ ] Step 3: Detect and validate weak signals
+- [ ] Step 4: Assess cross-impacts and interactions
+- [ ] Step 5: Develop scenarios for plausible futures
+- [ ] Step 6: Set signposts and adaptive triggers
+```
+
+**Step 1: Define scope and focus areas**
+
+Use [Scanning Scope Definition](#scanning-scope-definition) to clarify scanning theme, geographic scope, time horizon, and key uncertainties.
+
+**Step 2: Scan PESTLE forces and trends**
+
+Systematically collect trends using [PESTLE Scanning Framework](#pestle-scanning-framework) across Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental dimensions.
+
+**Step 3: Detect and validate weak signals**
+
+Identify early indicators using [Weak Signal Template](#weak-signal-template) with validation criteria for credibility, evidence, and impact potential.
+
+**Step 4: Assess cross-impacts and interactions**
+
+Map trend interactions using [Cross-Impact Analysis](#cross-impact-analysis) to identify reinforcing, offsetting, and cascading effects.
+
+**Step 5: Develop scenarios for plausible futures**
+
+Create 3-4 scenarios using [Scenario Development Template](#scenario-development-template) built around critical uncertainties.
+
+**Step 6: Set signposts and adaptive triggers**
+
+Define leading indicators using [Signpost Definition Template](#signpost-definition-template) with specific thresholds and monitoring cadence.
+
+---
+
+## Scanning Scope Definition
+
+**Scanning Theme**:
+- What aspect of environment? (Technology disruption, market evolution, regulatory shift, competitive dynamics, etc.)
+- What strategic questions? (Should we enter this market? Will our business model remain viable? What capabilities will we need?)
+
+**Geographic Scope**:
+- [ ] Global (worldwide trends)
+- [ ] Regional (continent, trade bloc)
+- [ ] National (country-specific)
+- [ ] Local (city, state, industry cluster)
+
+**Time Horizon**:
+- [ ] Short-term (1-2 years): Operational planning, current trend extrapolation
+- [ ] Medium-term (3-5 years): Strategic planning, inflection points
+- [ ] Long-term (5-10+ years): Visioning, transformational change, paradigm shifts
+
+**Key Uncertainties** (what we don't know that matters most):
+1.
+2.
+3.
+
+**Scanning Objectives** (what decisions will this inform?):
+-
+
+---
+
+## PESTLE Scanning Framework
+
+### Political
+
+**Government & Policy**:
+- Election outcomes and implications:
+- Policy priorities and shifts:
+- Political stability/instability:
+- Geopolitical tensions/alignments:
+
+**Regulation & Governance**:
+- Regulatory proposals in pipeline:
+- Deregulation or liberalization trends:
+- Government intervention patterns:
+- International agreements/treaties:
+
+**Sources**: Government announcements, policy think tanks, political risk indices, diplomatic cables
+
+### Economic
+
+**Macroeconomic Conditions**:
+- GDP growth/contraction forecasts:
+- Inflation and interest rate trends:
+- Employment and labor market:
+- Currency and exchange rates:
+
+**Market & Trade**:
+- Trade policy and tariff changes:
+- Foreign direct investment flows:
+- Supply chain and logistics costs:
+- Capital availability and credit:
+
+**Income & Spending**:
+- Income distribution and inequality:
+- Consumer spending patterns:
+- Savings and debt levels:
+
+**Sources**: Central bank reports, economic forecasts (IMF, World Bank), market data, trade statistics
+
+### Social
+
+**Demographics**:
+- Population growth/decline:
+- Age structure shifts (aging, youth bulge):
+- Migration patterns:
+- Urbanization trends:
+
+**Values & Culture**:
+- Shifting social values (sustainability, equity, individualism):
+- Trust in institutions:
+- Cultural movements and identity politics:
+- Generational attitudes (Gen Z, Millennials):
+
+**Lifestyle & Behavior**:
+- Work-life balance preferences:
+- Health and wellness trends:
+- Education and skill development:
+- Consumption patterns (sharing economy, minimalism):
+
+**Sources**: Census data, survey research (Pew, Gallup), social media trends, cultural commentary
+
+### Technological
+
+**Innovation & R&D**:
+- Breakthrough technologies emerging:
+- R&D investment levels and focus:
+- Patent filings in relevant domains:
+- Technology adoption curves:
+
+**Digital & Automation**:
+- Digitalization of industry:
+- AI and machine learning applications:
+- Robotics and automation:
+- Cybersecurity and data privacy tech:
+
+**Infrastructure**:
+- Broadband and connectivity expansion:
+- Cloud and edge computing:
+- Energy infrastructure and grids:
+- Transportation and logistics tech:
+
+**Sources**: Technology journals, patent databases, VC investment reports, tech conferences, research labs
+
+### Legal
+
+**Regulatory Frameworks**:
+- New laws and regulations:
+- Regulatory enforcement trends:
+- Compliance requirements expanding/contracting:
+- Cross-border regulatory harmonization:
+
+**Standards & Liability**:
+- Industry standards evolving:
+- Liability and litigation trends:
+- Intellectual property regime changes:
+- Data protection and privacy laws:
+
+**Sources**: Legislative trackers, regulatory agency announcements, legal journals, compliance advisories
+
+### Environmental
+
+**Climate & Weather**:
+- Climate change impacts (temperature, precipitation, extremes):
+- Physical risk to assets and operations:
+- Climate policy and carbon pricing:
+- Renewable energy adoption:
+
+**Resources & Pollution**:
+- Natural resource availability (water, minerals, land):
+- Pollution and waste management:
+- Circular economy and recycling:
+- Biodiversity and ecosystem health:
+
+**Sustainability**:
+- Corporate sustainability commitments:
+- Investor ESG pressure:
+- Consumer demand for sustainable products:
+- Supply chain sustainability requirements:
+
+**Sources**: IPCC reports, climate models, environmental agencies, sustainability indices, ESG ratings
+
+---
+
+## Weak Signal Template
+
+**Signal Identified**: [Brief description of anomaly or early indicator]
+
+**Source & Date**:
+- Where detected:
+- When observed:
+- Source credibility (high/medium/low):
+
+**Why This Is a Weak Signal** (not mainstream yet):
+- Diverges from current expectations:
+- Early/emergent (not widely recognized):
+- Edge of system (niche, subculture, fringe):
+
+**Validation Criteria**:
+- [ ] Source credibility: Is source reliable and knowledgeable?
+- [ ] Supporting evidence: Are there multiple independent confirmations?
+- [ ] Plausibility: Is amplification mechanism realistic?
+- [ ] Impact if scaled: Would this matter significantly?
+
+**Potential Amplification Path** (how could this scale?):
+-
+
+**Impact Assessment** (if signal amplifies):
+- Opportunities:
+- Threats:
+- Affected stakeholders:
+
+**Monitoring Plan**:
+- Track indicator:
+- Frequency:
+- Trigger for escalation:
+
+---
+
+## Cross-Impact Analysis
+
+Map how trends interact. Use matrix to identify reinforcing (accelerate), offsetting (tension), and cascading (trigger) relationships.
+
+**Key Trends Identified** (from PESTLE scan):
+1.
+2.
+3.
+4.
+5.
+
+**Interaction Matrix**:
+
+| Trend | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
+|-------|---|---|---|---|---|
+| **1** | - |   |   |   |   |
+| **2** |   | - |   |   |   |
+| **3** |   |   | - |   |   |
+| **4** |   |   |   | - |   |
+| **5** |   |   |   |   | - |
+
+Legend: **+** = Reinforcing (accelerates), **-** = Offsetting (inhibits), **→** = Cascading (triggers), **0** = Independent
+
+**Critical Uncertainties** (high impact + high uncertainty):
+-
+-
+
+**Predetermined Elements** (high impact + low uncertainty):
+-
+-
+
+**Feedback Loops** (self-reinforcing or self-limiting):
+-
+
+---
+
+## Scenario Development Template
+
+### Scenario Structure (2x2 Matrix)
+
+**Critical Uncertainty 1** (Axis 1): [e.g., "Speed of Technology Adoption"]
+- High:
+- Low:
+
+**Critical Uncertainty 2** (Axis 2): [e.g., "Regulatory Stringency"]
+- High:
+- Low:
+
+**Four Scenarios**:
+
+#### Scenario A: [Name] (High Axis 1 + High Axis 2)
+- **Probability/Plausibility**:
+- **Key Drivers**:
+- **Narrative** (2-3 paragraphs describing this future):
+
+
+- **Strategic Implications**:
+
+
+#### Scenario B: [Name] (High Axis 1 + Low Axis 2)
+- **Probability/Plausibility**:
+- **Key Drivers**:
+- **Narrative**:
+
+
+- **Strategic Implications**:
+
+
+#### Scenario C: [Name] (Low Axis 1 + High Axis 2)
+- **Probability/Plausibility**:
+- **Key Drivers**:
+- **Narrative**:
+
+
+- **Strategic Implications**:
+
+
+#### Scenario D: [Name] (Low Axis 1 + Low Axis 2)
+- **Probability/Plausibility**:
+- **Key Drivers**:
+- **Narrative**:
+
+
+- **Strategic Implications**:
+
+
+**Wild Cards** (low probability, high impact events not captured in scenarios):
+-
+
+**No-Regrets Moves** (strategies that work across all scenarios):
+-
+
+**Hedges** (actions that protect in some scenarios):
+-
+
+---
+
+## Signpost Definition Template
+
+Signposts are leading indicators that trigger adaptive responses before trends fully materialize.
+
+**Signpost 1**:
+- **What to monitor**: [Specific observable indicator]
+- **Current baseline**:
+- **Threshold for action**: [Specific value or condition]
+- **Action triggered**: [What we do when threshold crossed]
+- **Data source**:
+- **Update frequency**:
+- **Lead time** (how far ahead of outcome?):
+
+**Signpost 2**:
+- **What to monitor**:
+- **Current baseline**:
+- **Threshold for action**:
+- **Action triggered**:
+- **Data source**:
+- **Update frequency**:
+- **Lead time**:
+
+**Signpost 3**:
+- **What to monitor**:
+- **Current baseline**:
+- **Threshold for action**:
+- **Action triggered**:
+- **Data source**:
+- **Update frequency**:
+- **Lead time**:
+
+**Monitoring Cadence**:
+- [ ] Weekly (fast-moving indicators)
+- [ ] Monthly (medium-term trends)
+- [ ] Quarterly (strategic review)
+- [ ] Annually (comprehensive environmental scan update)
+
+**Dashboard Location**: [Where are signposts tracked?]
+
+**Review Process**: [Who reviews? What triggers escalation?]