The Three Horizons Innovation Framework outlines a process for anticipating and responding to change across three time horizons: Horizon 1 (0-2 years), Horizon 2 (2-5 years), and Horizon 3 (5+ years). Key aspects of each horizon include the participants involved, budget allocation, prioritization criteria, and tools/activities used. The framework is intended to help organizations separate near-, mid-, and long-term planning and prepare for continuous as well as discontinuous changes in their transactional environment.

1. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20111
The Three Horizons Innovation Framework
1
2 4
Horizon 1
Present
(0-2 yrs)
Horizon 2
Next
(2-5 yrs)
Horizon 3
Future
(5+ yrs)Suppliers/
Vendors
Customers
Enabling
Technologies
Workforce
Competitors
Security
Environment
New Missions/
Programs
Scanning:
Anticipate and track change
drivers emerging from the
transactional environment
Framing:
Mission, CSFs
Goals, Objectives
Strengths/Weaknesses
Product Cycle Time
Risk Posture
Environment
Assessment:
Opportunity and/or Threat?
Power of Impact
Scope of Impact
Probability
Velocity
3
Assign items from scanning to one of the
three horizons as they are assessed
Budget/
Economy
5
Portfolio Management:
Separate prioritization schemes for each horizon
Tech Planning
Projects
Concept
Development,
Prototypes
Monitoring,
Research

2. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20112
Framing the Three Horizons for MOD
Mission, CSFs – What do you do and how do you measure success?
Goals, Objectives – Current vision and strategy
Strengths/Weaknesses – Necessary to understand sensitivity to change
Product Cycle Time – How much time do you need to react?
Risk Posture – Where do you want to be on the tech adoption curve?
Transactional Environment – Define the entities in the environment that
are relevant sources of external change
Rogers Diffusion of
Innovations Curve
Innovator?
Mainstream?
Risk Averse?
Gartner Hype Curve

3. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20113
Horizon 1
Present
Horizon 2
Next
Horizon 3
Future
Who Participates? Standard project
governance
MSRB with SRWG in support? SRWG facilitates process for all
of MOD
Horizon Length
(based on product cycle and
dynamic nature of the
environment)
0-2 Years 2-5 years 5+ years
Est. Percent of
Budget
(rule of thumb based on risk
posture, etc.)
70% for Early Adopter
~93% Late Majority
20% for Early Adopter
~5% Late Majority
10% for Early Adopter
~2% Late Majority
Prioritization
Criteria
Typical project portfolio
management.
Impact assessment matrix.
Horizon 3 impact
assessment with business
case/ROI considerations
Objective assessment of
drivers themselves -- impact,
probability, velocity…
Subjective assessment of
drivers against goals,
strengths, weaknesses…
Tools/Activities Legacy tech planning
process
Prototypes, trade studies, white
papers, roadmaps
Scenarios, Relevance Trees,
Cross-impact analysis, Delphi,
Signposts , Vision networks…
Three
Horizons
in Detail

4. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 2011
Appendix: Background on
Potentially Relevant Foresight
Concepts
Compiled and Created by Cody Clark

5. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20115
Characterizing Change
 Sources
- Incoming: Change we experience
- Outgoing: Change we create
 Location
- Internal
- External
 Change Rates
- Continuous: Trends, Cycles
- Discontinuous: Events, wildcards
 S-Curve
 Punctuated Equilibrium
S-Curve
Era
Era
EraTransition
Transition
1
2
3

6. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20116
Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations Curve
Web Beyond…
Offline Web, Internet Of
Things, Biological Web,
???
Web 3.0
Connecting
Programs/
Intelligence
Web 2.0
Connecting
People
Web 1.0
Connecting
Information

7. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20117
Cumulative Distribution of the Rogers
Curve is the “S- Curve” of change
S-Curve
1
2
3
Also called the “Issues Management Curve”

8. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20118
Anticipating Change
• Disruptive Change is not
completely
unforeseeable
• Evidence of the future is
always available in the
present (Horizon 1)
Era
Era
EraTransition
Transition
Era
Era
Transition
1
2
3
Anticipatory
Proactive
Reactive
Anticipate and Act Early

9. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 20119
Cone of Plausibility
Present
Past
More Risk, More
Strategic
Advantage
Less Risk, Less
Strategic
Advantage
Vision: Preferable Baseline: Probable
Alternatives:
Plausible,
Possible
1-3 yr horizon
5-10 yr horizon
20+ yr horizon
Futures
There is inherent risk that comes with
anticipation

10. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 201110
Technology Assessment
Analyze Timing
Current State
•Technology Readiness Level
•Awareness Level, Gartner’s
“Hype Curve”
•Technology Adoption Level
“Velocity” – Timing of past
states relative to present
Future States
•Time to Market
•Time to Awareness
Technology
Readiness Level
Technology
Diffusions Curve
Technology Adoption
Curve

11. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 201111
Estimate Probability of Impact
Anticipate Scope/Reach
•limited specialty/sub domain impacted
•entire domain/market impacted
•multiple domains/markets impacted
•universal social impact
Anticipate Disruptiveness
•Power – personal level of impact
•Which key domain constraints, assumptions may
be overturned?
•Leverage on System Dynamics
•System Dynamics Leverage Modeling, or
•Donella Meadows’ 12 Systemic Leverage
Points
•Vulnerability -- Consider client ability to respond
(flexibility, capability, etc.)
Technology Assessment
Potential Impact
Era
Era
Era
Transition
Transition
How
Disruptive?
Power: What level of personal
need might it affect?
How much
Systemic
Leverage?

12. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 2011
12
Visioning
Strategic
Actions
Forecasting
Futures Method Overview
What is likely to
happen:
Probable,
Possible Futures
What we want to
happen:
Preferable
Futures
What we do to close the
gap:
Planned Futures

13. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 2011
Scenario Generation Approaches
From University Futures, (http://www.universityfutures.org/prospective_methods)

14. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 2011
Incasting
 Method of exploring alternative futures
 Activities
- Input: Given a scenario logic/description as input (e.g. from scenario
generation exercise)
- Accept the scenario as basis of exercise. (Not allowed to question the scenario)
- Explore the scenario using STEEP and some “Day in the life” type questions,
such as….
 Who are the winners and losers in this scenario?
 What challenges does this scenario present to leadership?
 What new roles or professions exist in this scenario? Which existing ones have disappeared?
 How would our strategy have to change for us to survive or thrive in this scenario?
- Output: More fully developed scenario and more internalized “sense” of each
alternative future

15. Copyright Cody Clark, Creative Commons License, 2011
Backcasting
 Method of identifying intermediate future states from a longer-term
future (or a preferable future vision)
 Steps
- Input: Given a scenario logic/description as input (e.g. from scenario
generation exercise)
- Accept the scenario as basis of exercise. (Not allowed to question the
scenario)
- Explore briefly the scenario using STEEP
- Identify the prerequisite states needed to enable the scenario
- Recursively identify the prerequisite states for each intermediate state, all
the way back to present conditions
- Good for “Gap” analysis between a vision and a current change
framework. Input for strategic planning.
- Output: A “path forward” and “vision network” for a given future