| Thinking | Concepts | Abilities developed as part of each way of thinking | Enhancement approaches |
|---|
| Futures thinking | Time including: a) short and long term, b) past, present, and future temporal phases, c) states, and d) continuity Uncertainty Disruption Probability Plausibility Desirability
| Recognizing the rapid pace of change in the world (Burt & van der Heijden, 2003) Pro-actively hypothesizing ‘what if’ scenarios and contrasting them with present status (Inayatullah, 2008, Radcliffe, 2005; Robinson et al., 2011) Shifting mental models and frames to different temporal times (Klein et al., 2011) Identifying emerging issues, possible outcomes, potential threats, and exciting opportunities (National Academy of Sciences, 2007) Connecting a “collection of methods, theories, and findings” to recognize trends and their potential future trajectories (Miller, 2003, p. 7; Robinson et al., 2013) Re-scoping problem spaces by projecting an idea or design into the future (Lande & Leifer, 2009) Anticipating positive and negative consequences of an idea (Radcliffe, 2005) Anticipating the potential future consequences of inaction during present times (Wiek et al., 2011) Considering disruption of existing patterns (Borrego & Henderson, 2014) Handling uncertainty and ambiguity in the contextual environment (Burt & van der Heijden, 2003) Acknowledging that multiple futures exist depending on our actions (Warren et al., 2014)
| Scenario building Participatory workshops focused on anticipatory approaches Delphi studies focused on envisioning engineering education Trend analysis using statistical and simulation models
|
| Values thinking | Justice Fairness Reflexivity Responsibility Inclusion Ethics
| Assessing a problem and its context comprehensively within and across cultures (Warren et al., 2014) Discussing how decisions can be made, not which decisions are the correct ones (Vesilind, 1991) Collaborating with stakeholders when designing a solution to consider positive and negative aspects of the solution from a variety of perspectives (Veugelers, 2000) Recognizing cultural norms, including conscious and unconscious statements of values (Vesilind, 1991) Recognizing micro-inequities in the system that contribute to the “non-inclusive” groups’ experience (McKenna et al., 2018)
| Value-oriented assessment methods Life-cycle analysis used in sustainability research Immersing in the community of practice to strengthen inclusive approaches Participatory approaches of consensus building
|
| | | |
| Systems thinking | Sub-systems Non-linearity Feedback loops Constraints Cascading effects Multiple domains of society, including environment, economy, technology, etc.
| Assessing system complexity across different domains (e.g. society, environment, economy) and across different scales from local to global (Kellam et al, 2008; Wiek et al., 2011) Considering cascading effects and feedback loops among system elements (Warren et al., 2014) Seeing true causes of the problem that are further in time or space and may originate from different parts of the system (Nehdi & Rehan, 2007) Uncovering different knowledge systems through which a problem in a particular territory can be perceived and then exploring different parameters and measurements that could be applied (Godfrey et al., 2014) Conceptualizing a situation in a bigger context and articulating problems in new and different ways (Stroh, 2018) Recognizing that there are no perfect solutions and that the choices made will have an impact on other parts of the system (Meadows, 2008)
| |
| Strategic thinking | Action planning Viability Feasibility Efficiency Effectiveness Intentionality Alliances Adaptation Flexibility
| Developing a plan of action and framing decisions by how they contribute to achieving a particular vision (Warren et al., 2014) Allocating resources of time, talent, and budget more effectively (Darji & Jani, 2009) Identifying thrust areas for future research proposals (Halpin & Huang, 1995) Working with the system and leveraging resources (Stollar et al., 2006) Discerning real-world situations, including logistics, relationships, and changing political positions (Wiek et al., 2011) Negotiating with all stakeholders to collaboratively achieve the vision (Wiek et al., 2011) Continuously shaping and re-shaping the intent of a project and accordingly shifting directions (Halpin & Huang, 1995; Lawrence, 1999) Adopting ‘intelligent opportunism’ to take advantage of the situation (Jasinski, 2004; Lawrence, 1999)
| Planning methodologies Workshops focused on game theory, behavioral change, and decision support methodologies Participatory approaches to collectively define criteria, critical success factors, and action items
|
