Book reviews

change and how change actually takes place. Here, the basic idea of how institutions func- tion comes into play. And maybe this is one of the points where the author’s experiences with Shell might be standing in the way of realizing how radically new ways of creating change in organizations can be managed. The image of the organization adopted is that of a system, the whole-scale behaviour of which can be managed and/or controlled by a (rather small) group of people with enough power and foresight capacity to know where the organi- zation must be led in face of its uncertain futures.

As they are presented in the book, scen- arios and scenario planning are tools of superior quality to support management in this task. The refinement of its concepts, method- ology and techniques is clearly outstanding. However, this basic view holds that strategic change is best managed by carefully tapping the environmental scanning resources of an organization within rather small scenario teams first, and then informing the rest of its

members by creating involvement (e.g., in institutional workshops and seminars).

The important value of strategic thinking being out of question, this rather time-consum- ing approach may nonetheless get to its limits once organizations learn how change can be created on a whole-scale level. In the field of organization development methods such as Whole System Intervention have come of age during the last two decades. They view com- panies as self-organizing communities, the potential of which can best be tapped by get- ting the whole (or at least a critical mass of its members) into one room and have radical change take place in ways and timeframes hitherto unknown. It would be interesting to explore how scenario thinking might be used in such events to speed up learning, longing for organizations which become capable of changing themselves as a whole. This requires nothing less than rethinking the role of man- agement and revising our mental models of organizations striving for successful change.

Forwards and backwards into the New Zealand future

Alan Fricker

Our Country: Our Choices A collection of 11 sectoral perspectives of New Zealand in 2020 NZ Futures Trust, Wellington, New Zealand, 1997, 119 pages, NZ$19.95, ISBN 0 473 04322-X

To those unfamiliar with New Zealand, the indigenous Maori often portray the Pakeha (effectively those of European descent) as strid- ing through the present with their eyes on the future, whereas they (the Maori) walk back- wards into the future whilst looking back into and drawing from the past. The metaphor has

The author may be contacted at the Sustainable Futures Trust, 30 Akatea Rd, Petone, New Zealand (Tel: t64 4 589 1575; fax: +64 4 589 0447; email: frickera@actrix.gen.nz).

become somewhat kitsch but it reflects the spectrum of perspectives in these contri- butions. The contribution on the economy (Gough) reads like a mission statement from New Zealand Co Ltd, full of hype and unbounded faith in technology, the market and management skills. There is no other alter- native. Fortunately the Maori perspective (Love) is not the only perspective that draws from the past. The effects of the Maori fight for identity and justice, although rooted in the reclamation of a traditional culture, can already be seen in the future culture of Aotea- roa New Zealand where the children of non- Maori parents are much more bicultural and multi-cultural than their parents. In the interim however we seem to be going through ado- lescence as a nation, all hormones and drama.

The Preface warns us that some assertions will be provocative and that a purpose of the

Book reviews

book is to stimulate the debate of what future we want for New Zealand. The debate could be prickly as the contributors reflecting the drivers of change, the corporate world, show little of the ‘doubt that is the hallmark of civil- ized man’ that is present in the other contri- butions. The unpacking of the languages (jargons) would be a start.

The ever-insightful Geering foresees the further secularization of the world, the rise of individualism and the decline of authori- tarianism. (Isn’t individualism at risk of becom- ing corporatism in drag?) As the traditional civil- izing forces of the great religious traditions recede, the more brutal capacities of the human condition are more free to emerge. There is also emerging however a globalizing spirituality, but it could be a close call whether, in this crowded world with a depleted larder, we can learn how to use our new found freedom for the benefit of all and not just for ourselves alone, something which the right wing ideologies are loath to acknowledge.

The unconscious ecological experiment played out in New Zealand over the last 150 years (Park) has parallels with the modern con- scious economic experiment. The former has been devastating for the indigenous fauna and flora. The jury is still out on the latter. The preservation of biodiversity is essential but it cannot be achieved in a piecemeal fashion but only at the large scale. The real work however is with ourselves. We must get beyond the blaming and shaming so pervasive in the con- servation movement, and convert it into coop- erative energy. Park senses a rediscovery and reconnection with ecosystems which will be stronger in 2020 than today.

Newell would like to see an inclusive society in 2020 when it comes to Work but she foresees a society where there are still people who have opted out (a euphemism for excluded). She recognizes the value in unpaid and voluntary (some involuntary) work and airs the concept of an unconditional basic income but does not see it as being viable or plausible by the year 2020. If not then, then when?

A decade ago a health futures project (Salmond) derived five principles for a future health service, which concluded that only a system based on public funding and public provision could satisfy all these principles.

Their recommendation was usurped by another agenda, that of public funding and private provision, the consequences of which are clearly before us today. Salmond is hopeful that good sense will prevail as we approach 2020.

McQueen sees a need for reform in edu- cation but seems uncritical of the reforms of recent years. Whilst acknowledging that edu- cation is lifelong, he appears to see it as an investment (a public good) for the compulsory years (ages 6-16) but a commodity (a private good) outside of those years. The challenges of equity in access, differentials in the instru- mental value of specialist education, edu- cation that advances the human condition ver- sus training for sector interests, and incentives for students are not traversed into a perspec- tive for 2020.

The contributions on New Zealand’s place in the world community (Peren), the economy (Gough), and energy (Makeig) are effectively projections of the present-of business as usual but a little bit greener-and in that they may well be correct. I would have expected, from such a stable however, something from ‘outside the square’, which presented a challenge to conventional thinking.

The contributions on local (McDermott) and central (Clark) government are more cir- cumspect, particularly the former as reform in local government is more advanced than in central government. They are both optimistic of a more participatory democracy, but this may require a more integrated workforce (Newell) with the time and/or the means. Ulti- mately politics is about slicing up the cake. The change to MMP itself is no guarantee of greater democracy. We shall still need to rely on the eternal vigilance of the citizens.

There are 12 contributors, if we include the introductions, only two of whom are women. There is no women’s perspective. There is a Maori perspective but none of other cultures. Futures Studies is already criticized as a white male domain. The Preface and the back cover tell us that . ../t is in our power to create the future we want, and to decide how it should be achieved. The New Zealand Futures Trust has been around long enough to have grave reservations about pop futurism. So it must be this matter of language and meaning that we must address before the debate begins.

881