This chapter introduces action learning as a practical, experience-based approach that enhances strategic foresight by applying theoretical knowledge to real-world policy challenges. It explains that through collaborative problem-solving, pilot cases enable participants to work on actual issues, build essential soft skills such as teamwork and networking, and create valuable outputs that benefit their organisations. Examples from Malta illustrate the use of innovative tools like Futures Personas for education policy and an Uncertainty Dashboard for poverty reduction, demonstrating how these pilot projects not only build individual and institutional capacity but also foster a proactive approach to policymaking.
Building Anticipatory Capacity with Strategic Foresight in Government
Lessons from Lithuania, Italy, and Malta
Abstract
“Action learning” is an experience-based approach to learning in which the participants come together to solve complex, real-world problems, take action, and ultimately, reflect on the experience (Scott, 2017[1]).
Action learning should be integrated with any group-based strategic foresight activity and can be an important part of an institutionalisation pathway for building strategic foresight capacity (see more on the proof-of-concept pathway for institutionalisation in Chapter 4). Perhaps the most notable benefit of action learning for foresight is that it increases the transferability of theoretical knowledge to practical application. Additionally, it builds collaborative leadership, develops soft skills such as teamwork and networking, and enhances the opportunity to incorporate diverse perspectives (Scott, 2017[1]).
Pilot projects can provide a safe space for action learning and capacity building. This creates better opportunities for individual skill retention and learning transfer, and moreover, outputs generated during the pilot also benefit the organisation.
The OECD collaborated with partners in Malta on two short-term action research activities in the form of pilot cases. These pilot cases supported individual and institutional capacity building, providing partners with tailored foresight advice to benefit their work, e.g. strategy development. The two specific entities supported and the policy areas addressed were selected based on national priorities and OECD criteria for selecting cases, such as having a planned strategy or action under way, partners interested in exploring alternative futures, linkages to key government priorities, and high-level support. The following section includes further information on the process for pilot selection as well as key reflection questions that can be helpful for others designing their own pilot cases.
6.2.1. What is a pilot case?
Pilot cases apply theoretical concepts to concrete policy situations to build capacity and knowledge, and to generate insights that can support the broader development of strategic foresight capabilities in government and public administrations. A pilot case can be designed in support of any policy objective, strategy, project, or topic of importance to a particular department or unit.
Each pilot case is centred on a tailored strategic foresight intervention. Hands-on engagement and collaboration between the OECD and the pilot case partner were necessary to ensure an impactful learning experience (see Figure 6.1). The steps of the process are as follows:
1. Scoping: Collaborating with the case partner to understand the needs of the case, set objectives, and choose appropriate approaches and methods
2. Intervention: Conducting research, workshops, and interviews to develop and apply foresight analysis
3. Dissemination: Sharing insights and outputs of the intervention with relevant stakeholders
4. Review: Presenting results and discussing how far the objectives have been met; consolidating overall lessons and developing generalised findings for the public sector.
6.2.2. What should pilot case partners keep in mind?
The intervention may generate valuable insights for relevant policy debates and decision-making processes. The partner may also learn through exposure to strategic foresight methods, increasing capacity for futures work in other contexts.
Pilot case partners must understand that a pilot case is inherently experimental and novel. The approach may feel unfamiliar, and the results will differ from standard policy analysis and advice. The experience should help pilot case partners and other contributors grow comfortable handling uncertainty and preparing for change.
6.2.3. What role does a pilot case partner play?
The commitment of a pilot case partner is integral to the success of the intervention. Pilot case partners take responsibility for ensuring that sufficient resources are available, and that the appropriate people are engaged to achieve the goals set out in the scoping phase.
For scoping, the pilot case partner assigns one or more focal points and shares relevant background materials. The OECD guides the pilot case partner in preparing for the intervention and assigning sufficient and appropriate resources. For the intervention, an activity is designed to execute the foresight methodologies chosen. The pilot case partner provides contacts and convenes meetings as needed. For dissemination, the focal points identify relevant stakeholder groups and policy forums to disseminate outputs of the intervention and generate impact. The OECD advises on and supports these efforts. For the review, the OECD gathers feedback on how far the pilot met its objectives and discusses these with the contributor to determine next steps.
6.2.4. What makes a good pilot case?
An ideal pilot case should be at an organisational level that involves some kind of imminent decision making and is connected to a current strategy or innovation process.
Criteria for a good pilot case include:
A planned strategy or action under preparation during the window of OECD intervention
Being connected to ongoing work, with resources available
Partners who are willing to explore alternatives and maintain an open mind to new approaches
An aim to brief a decision maker or inform a specific policy action
Involvement of different policy sectors
Connection to an important government priority
Top-level legitimacy such as ministry-level or centre of government-level ownership
Pilot cases should not knowingly generate threats or cause harm.
Does engaging in a strategic foresight pilot case seem beneficial for your work at this time? What resources and time can you commit to the process? Who would be involved?
6.2.5. Guidance for understanding the purpose(s) of strategic foresight within a pilot case
The pilot case partners should reflect carefully on the purpose(s) of introducing strategic foresight for societal, governmental, and organisational needs. These could include:
Developing a shared purpose and vision of the future: Through collaborative foresight exercises, policymakers can encourage dialogue, build consensus, and co-create a vision of the future. This shared purpose and vision serve as a guiding framework for policymaking and strategy development. By involving citizens, experts, and various stakeholders in the process, public policy can reflect the aspirations and values of the society it serves, leading to more inclusive, accountable, and sustainable policies.
Revealing future challenges: Strategic foresight can help imagine alternate futures that have not been widely considered as possible. By suspending disbelief about what might occur and understanding and preparing for these challenges in advance, policymakers can develop proactive, more resilient strategies.
Identifying new solutions: Strategic foresight can build a culture of innovation and adaptability, challenging conventional thinking and exploring new ideas. The practice can actively promote the development and adoption of innovative policy solutions that take advantage of new or potential opportunities.
Early warning system: Strategic foresight can act as an early warning system, alerting policymakers to potential issues and risks. By scanning the horizon for signals of change, such as technological advancements, demographic shifts, or environmental challenges, foresight helps policymakers detect emerging trends and anticipate disruptions.
Stress-testing: Strategic foresight can stress-test policies to assess their effectiveness under various future scenarios. By subjecting policies to rigorous analysis and simulations, policymakers can evaluate their resilience and identify potential vulnerabilities. Stress-testing can test how policies and strategies may perform in different conditions, such as economic downturns, geopolitical shifts, or environmental crises. Then, policymakers can proactively address weaknesses.
Strategy reframing: Strategic foresight can reframe policy directions by challenging existing mental models, assumptions, and paradigms. It encourages policymakers to step back and critically examine prevailing narratives and perspectives about societal issues. Through foresight exercises, policymakers can explore alternative futures and consider different lenses through which to view complex problems. Strategic reframing helps policymakers question ingrained beliefs, identify blind spots, and embrace innovative approaches that go beyond traditional policy solutions.
Which of these purposes are most relevant to your case and why?
6.2.6. The relevance of strategic foresight across the policy cycle
Strategic foresight offers a powerful means to enhance policymaking and strategy development. However, its value depends significantly on choosing the appropriate tools and methods suited to the specific needs and objectives at each stage of a policy development process. A one-size-fits-all approach to foresight risks overlooking critical nuances.
Different phases of the policy cycle—ranging from agenda setting to monitoring and evaluation—present unique challenges that require tailored foresight approaches. For instance, understanding large-scale trends at the early stages demands different methods than those needed for building shared visions or stress-testing strategies later in the cycle. Carefully matching tools to purpose helps policymakers navigate complexity, engage stakeholders more effectively, and craft strategies that are both forward-looking and grounded in present realities.
Table 6.1 below illustrates how strategic foresight practices can be integrated meaningfully throughout the policy cycle. It pairs typical policy needs at each stage with a set of relevant example tools and methods that can be deployed.
This guidance was instrumental in supporting project partners during the pilot cases of the project. It provided a practical framework for selecting the most appropriate foresight tools and methods in line with the specific objectives and challenges they faced within their respective policy contexts.
Which is the most relevant foresight tool or method according to your policy development context?
6.3.1. Futures Personas: A strategic foresight approach for person-centred and futures-oriented policies and services
Futures Personas were developed in a collaboration between the OECD, Malta’s Ministry of Education, Sports, Youth, Research, and Innovation (MEYR), and the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM). The process aimed to support the development of person-centred and futures-oriented strategies, policies, and services for the education system in Malta, through an interactive engagement with future changes and trends and exploration of their impact on key stakeholders, including students, educators, and parents. While the focus in this pilot case was on the education system, Futures Personas show potential for application in other policy domains and contexts, enabling public servants to work collaboratively with key stakeholders to explore systemic changes and their impact on individuals.
The OECD proposed a project plan focused on the development of Futures Personas to support testing and consultation for the renewed National Education Strategy 2024-2030. Personas are character archetypes commonly used in the design of products and software to model users’ needs, challenges, behaviour, and motivation. A persona will most often take the form of a short, evidence-based “pen portrait” of an imaginary individual representing a particular user segment. By considering the persona at various points in the design process, designers and developers can anticipate the needs and challenges a similar user may experience when using a product. The OECD has developed teacher personas as part of CERI’s “New professionalism and the future of teaching project” (Nilsson Brodén, 2022[2]). Based on data from the OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) and other sources of evidence, they are intended to help governments develop strategies to attract and retain teachers in an evolving educational landscape.
Futures Personas are distinct from the traditional personas described above, in that they are used to help designers and policymakers anticipate the needs, challenges, and behaviour of future users of a product or service in the context of future trends or changes.1 They allow for systemic changes to be understood through the lens of individual experience. For example, increased migration to Malta will affect the environment for teaching and learning. By developing a Futures Persona for a student, policymakers can explore the potential needs of students and teachers in the new context, encouraging active exploration of the future through inductive scenario building. The resulting Futures Persona reflects both systemic changes and personal responses to changes and can be used to assess the design of policies, strategies, and services and align them with the needs of future citizens and service users.
A Futures Persona can be seen as a future mini scenario, focused on personal characteristics, aspirations, and experiences, and exploring interactions with surrounding systems. Compared to standard foresight scenarios, which provide an overall view of systemic elements, futures personas have the potential to provide key insights at a personal level.
An online scoping discussion with partners in MEYR was undertaken to explore areas in which the development and application of strategic foresight capabilities would be most valuable. For this, two workshops were delivered to MEYR.
The first included heads of college networks, topic experts, and public servants from MEYR. It aimed to:
Introduce Futures Personas as a tool to inform education policy
Stimulate discussion about trends shaping education in Malta
Prompt participants to consider how trends and changes might impact education stakeholders in Malta.
The second workshop also included heads of college networks, topic experts, and public servants from MEYR. It aimed to:
Refine personas of future stakeholders
Explore the future through the experiences of these stakeholders
Use insights from this exploration to assess the National Education Strategy
Suggest improvements to and applications of the Futures Personas.
Future developments and next steps for MEYR
Participants felt that the development of future Futures Personas exercises could be improved by enlisting educators and others, including student councils, school council, educators, and the business community.
The OECD proposed three areas for next steps:
Repeat the exercise with other participants and different combinations of trends. These trends could be selected by participants based on criteria such as perceived impact. It would also be possible to look at combinations of more than two trends.
Refine the personas by asking stakeholders to provide feedback on the personas that represent their group and by using additional evidence and data.
Apply the personas for a more in-depth stress-testing of the strategy against plausible future changes and stakeholder needs.
6.3.2. Anticipating uncertainty to lay foundations in Malta for a robust, adaptive approach to address poverty and social inclusion
The OECD partnered with the Research and Evaluation Directorate in the Ministry for Social Policy and Children’s Rights (MSPC), which was preparing a renewed National Strategy for Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion (2025-2035).
The MSPC recognised that innovative approaches are needed to achieve its poverty reduction and social exclusion goals, including a national target to reduce poverty and social exclusion by -3.1% (from a 2019 baseline) by 2030. The ministry asked that strategic foresight be introduced as a complementary practice and capability, to support the preparation and development of the renewed strategy.
From the outset, it became evident that a three-session concept, subsequently named an “Uncertainty Scan”, would be suitable for testing to identify, frame, and provide data on uncertainties. The purpose of the Uncertainty Scan was to:
Uncover uncertainties in current trends and developments in the surrounding environment
Clarify available data and indicators to track and categorise uncertainties through an Uncertainty Dashboard.
Identify and review capabilities to address and tackle uncertainties.
Specifically, the Uncertainty Dashboard is a prototype tool that was designed during the pilot case to allow MSPC to navigate and respond to uncertainties. The Uncertainty Dashboard offers a quick but comprehensive overview of the most significant uncertainties, prompting users to adopt a more proactive approach to stay ahead of emerging trends and challenges (Dal Borgo and Bengtsson, 2024[3]).
Future developments and next steps for MSPC
The development and use of the Uncertainty Dashboard (Dal Borgo and Bengtsson, 2024[3]) served as a practical and structured tool for managing uncertainties. These strategic tools are likely to help visualise complex information and make informed decisions going forward. Given the limited period of engagement in the pilot case, it would be useful for MSPC to learn how to address the uncertainties in further detail. A more detailed discussion would allow MSPC to position itself better to draft detailed measures in the strategy, something to consider if the process is run again.
Additional considerations on the case study might include:
Further automation of the Uncertainty Dashboard to propose directions and actions, depending on the type and dimension of uncertainty
Identification of further indicators on uncertainties
Gathering knowledge on high-impact uncertainties about which little is known
Activating projects on some capabilities and actions
Further progress on the format and design of the Uncertainty Dashboard
A new round of Uncertainty Scans focused on scanning the horizon for new uncertainty developments and data
A toolkit of the process with open guidelines that can be used by all policymakers.
Strategy development is an ideal case for action learning, because the combination of training and simultaneous generation of results allows action learning to occur in the realities of policy and practice. This is especially relevant given that a strategy should be a living document regularly updated with new insights and informed by stakeholder consultation. In the Malta pilot cases, strategy updates were planned, which is likely to provide further opportunities for valuable action learning.
The Ministry for Social Policy and Children’s Rights (MSPC), for example, included a strategic foresight chapter intended for public consultation as part of the renewed National Strategy for Poverty Reduction and Social Inclusion. Additionally, the use of a “living” tool, such as the Uncertainty Dashboard, helped MSPC reassess the uncertainties and create a customised, streamlined version for its needs.
A key success factor for the Ministry of Education, Sports, Youth, Research, and Innovation (MEYR), was the support of the Permanent Secretary, which gave the project legitimacy and encouraged participation. The creation of a Directorate for Planning and Strategic Foresight in the Ministry increased engagement, signalling a commitment to developing anticipatory capability. This, coupled with a focus on the National Education Strategy 2024-2030, provided a clear purpose for applying strategic foresight. Moreover, a well-resourced and engaged team from MEYR gave valuable support to make sure that key stakeholders were invited and able to join the workshops.
Finally, it is also important to consider the schedules of partners and stakeholders, and the timing of policy processes, to avoid consultation fatigue. In Malta, where ministries had already engaged stakeholders in frequent consultations, further activity could overburden participants and might be counterproductive.
References
[3] Dal Borgo, R. and D. Bengtsson (2024), “Steps towards an Uncertainty Dashboard: Exploring the known and unknown in Malta”, OECD-OPSI blog, https://oecd-opsi.org/blog/steps-towards-an-uncertainty-dashboard-malta/ (accessed on 15 July 2024).
[2] Nilsson Brodén, D. (2022), “Cross-sector and interprofessional collaborations: A powerful tool for the teaching profession?”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 283, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7144c6ac-en.
[1] Scott, K. (2017), “An Integrative Framework for Problem-Based Learning and Action Learning”, Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 16/1, pp. 3-34, https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484317693090.
← 1. For an example of other applications, see the work of The Norwegian Digitalisations Agency: https://www.digdir.no/innovasjon/fremtidspersonas/3584