Foresight, Insight, and Hindsight—how these relate to good governance…

Introduction

I have always been interested in the operation of organizations. What makes an organization work and succeed and what causes it to fail and eventually die? By an “organization” I mean any type—a church, a family, a business, a nation, a government, a non-profit organization, or any group of any size that has some semblance of unity and shares one or more common goals. An analysis such as this can yield countless volumes of books that can contain tons of drivel and redundant rhetoric. Yet, I feel that there are a few fundamental elements that create an environment that is conducive to growth, development, and progress. Put another way, I sincerely believe that the elementary principles that cause a company or nation to succeed, when applied, will have the same effect upon a family or church. Within these basic components is the concept of sight. A general description of sight is the ability to see. Sight is technically the sense that allows one to absorb through visual perception things such as colors, values, shades, brightness, and contrast in this world. But on a more figurative level, sight is the ability to look at, study, and analyze things (i.e. ideas, concepts, objects, people, etc.). This type of sight is purely figurative and, to me, is broken down into three main categories: foresight, insight, and hindsight. All three of these types of sight also relate to the three rudimentary aspects of time: past, present, and future. Furthermore, it is my intent to explain how both sight and time are major contributors, when incorporated properly, to the success of organizations. In addition, these categorical aspects of time and sight directly relate to what I believe are the three (again) necessary pillars of any successful organization: leaders, managers, and outside observers/advisors/critics/opposition (more on this last group later). But firstly, let’s get a brief clarification of these three categories of sight.

Breaking down “sight”

 Foresight is (like the rest of the proceeding words under analysis) a compound word taken from two words, fore, meaning in or of the future, before, or in front of, and sight. Therefore, this word speaks of having the ability to either see into the future or recognize something in the future on its way to the present. It suggests that a person with foresight has the ability to make certain predictions or can anticipate what others fail to recognize. Based on this ability, such individuals often make decisions that others question because at the time these decisions seem odd. However, as time unfolds, the wisdom of such decisions is recognized and this person’s foresight is better trusted and eventually relied upon.  This quality is found within successful leaders. Leaders are said to hold the vision of their particular organization. In other words, a leader, more than anyone else in that group, knows what direction to take that group; what goals to go after and what things to avoid. Without foresight, organizations tend to become stagnant or can expend time, money, and/or energy trying to move forward but make little or no progress. In extreme examples, these same organizations that suffer a lack of vision can actually weaken and eventually vanish. Although this piece of writing is not at all religious in nature, I believe that the Bible has two great examples of this found in its non-doctrinal but pragmatic verses. One is found in Luke 6:39. It says, “And he spake a parable unto them; Can the blind lead the blind? Shall they not both fall into the ditch?” These timeless words from Jesus are not so religious or doctrinal, but they serve as a universal truth. Without a leader with foresight, those who follow this leader will be lost and eventually fail with him/her. Apparently, without vision, progress is impossible. Here is another found in the book of Proverbs 29:18; “Where there is no vision, the people perish… ” This suggests that, in general, where no clear direction is provided—failure is a surety. Thus, quality leadership in an organization begins with that leader having foresight and this leader articulating the vision based on his/her foresight to those under his/her leadership in order for the whole organization to move forward. But as we shall see, great leadership does very little without management with insight.

Insight is the quality of being able to see “into” something in a way that is not as easily recognized by most other people. In other words, someone with insight uses this capacity to gain a deeper or more accurate grasp or understanding of something that is not readily on the surface. This quality deals with the present. People with insight seem to be able to see more than the rest of us. Where most of us see an opportunity, an insightful person recognizes unseen flaws, risks, and/or disadvantages. Or where most of us see nothing of any significance, a person with insight sees a grand opportunity and/or overwhelming potential. This may sound a bit like foresight, but these two qualities are quite distinct. As stated earlier, insight deals with the present—or things already here… tangible things if you will. Whereas, foresight pretty much involves things not here yet—it’s futuristic in nature. I would say that where foresight is a telescope (bringing things far away into a visionary field of grasp) then insight is a microscope (bringing a more clear focus on what is already before you). Organizations need both of these assets to succeed. Insight is best suited for management.

Now in grad school, when I took courses like Organizational Theory, the question would often arise concerning the difference between a leader and a manager. Some would argue that there really was no difference and that these two descriptions really overlapped in regards to responsibilities, qualities, etc. Others would state that these two terms were very different and that they were for the most part mutually exclusive in a lot of ways. Though I am not 100% in agreement with either school of thought, I tend to side with the latter point of view. To lead is to direct or to show the way. To manage is to organize, run, or supervise. Yes, these may seem to overlap a bit, but they are more different than usually perceived. While a leader has his/her head in the future--a visionary, the manager is more grounded and focused on the here and now. The leader steers the organization in a direction dictated by the vision. The manager makes sure the organization holds together and stays healthy enough for the journey. The manager is the organizer of what the leader provides. One does not lead money, one manages money. One cannot lead time, but one manages time. A shepherd may lead the sheep, but the sheepdog manages them. Daddy usually leads the family but mommy manages them. A general leads his troops, but his sergeants manage them. The leader clarifies and gives the orders; while the manager makes sure they are carried out. In terms of governmental branches, the executive would be the leadership, while the administrative would be the management. It is not enough to have a great leader with an awesome vision. It is through the union of a well articulated vision and excellent management fueled by insight that organizations proper. Time and money alone do very little. However, when both are managed properly, they yield tremendous results.

Finally we arrive at hindsight. Hindsight is more simplistic of a term and is practiced by everyone. Hindsight is the ability to understand something only after it has occurred. How many times have you said, “If I would have known that earlier I would have done things differently.” or “If I would have known then what I know now, I would be so much better off.”? How many times do sports fans criticize their favorite athlete’s decisions the day after the big game? This may not seem as important or valuable as the other two forms of sight discussed earlier, but this serves as another vital component to the success of an organization. Why would I say this if hindsight is so readily attainable? The truth is, leadership and management are often so preoccupied with their foresight and insight that what may seem so easy to recognize to the majority of us, is often times unreadable to them.

How many times have you been in an organization that keeps doing things the same way but at the same time expecting different results? How many times have you wanted to ask management and/or leadership how is it that they cannot see that the current course or way of doing things is not working? There are other reasons. Sometimes leadership is too proud or stubborn to admit that their idea is not as easy as it seemed or that it just does not work. Other times the leadership is surrounded by incompetent management or the management is too afraid to be honest with the leadership concerning the current course of failure. This is often the case because the leadership is much too sensitive to criticism or too insecure to accept an idea or suggestion from someone else. No matter what the reason, those with hindsight become frustrated when they try to share what is so clear to them with the decision makers who often disregard their concerns. This leads to the organization suffering from internal strife, misunderstanding, and lack of communication. When left unchecked, challenges such as these can splinter an organization or even cause it to implode.

The ones that usually are the best to exercise this type of sight are outside advisors/observers, critics, and even opposition. Though hindsight may not always come across smoothly and is by default critical in nature, it is nonetheless vital. Without proper hindsight being utilized to create constructive and needed criticism, how can organizations survive let alone thrive and prosper? For example, if a new policy is created, it must have a purpose to serve. The policy is dreamed up and articulated by the leader or the one with foresight. The policy is then put into action and enforced by the management with the insight. Finally, the observer or critic looks at whether or not the policy does what it was intended to do and uses hindsight to gauge its effectiveness. You can see where in each step of the process, a different type of sight is needed. This is the synergistic nature of it all. They all succeed when used together, but without one, failure is imminent.  So what does this have to do with good and effective governance?

How This Relates to Governance…

In my travels, I have had the opportunity to visit many developing nations. When it comes to governance, these nations usually have very strong leadership. However, this leadership is more often than not surrounded by fearful, corrupt, and/or incompetent management. On top of that, there is little to no opposition. In terms of sight, these nations basically have very strong foresight but a paltry amount of insight and not really any hindsight. You need every type in order to succeed. Sure, these top heavy egotistic leaders can’t stand opposition or criticism—but it’s needed. Even when the opposition has ill will and their criticisms are based in selfish motives, one can still listen and learn. Opposition is needed in order to keep a government honest and on its toes. It’s needed as a prod of sorts to make sure that governments do not relax or deviate from their objective--to lead the nation into prosperity and maintain this prosperity in the face of numerous challenges.

 In these nations which are often controlled by either one or a few elites and/or one political party, what starts out as an organization focused on positive change and improvements most always morphs into a monolithic group of individuals consumed with the objectives of their party and personal gain rather than making life better and safer for the citizenry. When allowed to operate unchallenged, un-criticized, and unchecked, the people suffer tremendously and the leadership and management, blind to hindsight, lead these nations into despair. By those with foresight, rejecting those with hindsight, nations of multitudes of people continue to perish needlessly. Money is stolen and wasted and time is needlessly thrown away because those charged with positions which require insight, either don’t have it or do not use it. These three types of sight, dealing with the past, present, and future, operated by leadership, management, and those who are tasked with measuring effectiveness are all components that must be utilized properly in order for good governance to come forth and remain. Without any of the above, we as humanity will keep falling into ditches.