In one minute
Discuss the dominant system, emerging experiments and preferred future as competing patterns in the present.
Horizon 1 is the prevailing pattern, Horizon 3 the desired alternative, and Horizon 2 the transition space where experiments may reinforce either. These are qualities of change, not three calendar buckets.
The problem it addresses
A long-term vision and today's operating pressures are discussed as separate, incompatible conversations.
A regional college wants AI-assisted tutoring. Existing funding rewards lecture attendance, while pilots improve access for working adults but raise privacy concerns.
When to use it
- Use Three Horizons when a long-term vision and today's operating pressures are discussed as separate, incompatible conversations.
- The team can examine: Evidence on current performance and strain, alternative futures, emerging initiatives and affected voices.
- A relevant situation is: A regional college wants AI-assisted tutoring. Existing funding rewards lecture attendance, while pilots improve access for working adults but raise privacy concerns.
When not to use it
Do not use it to replace evidence, accountable judgement or affected people's participation.
Treating Horizon 3 as inevitable or labeling every shiny pilot transformative.
Inputs required
Evidence on current performance and strain, alternative futures, emerging initiatives and affected voices.
Step-by-step process
1. Bound the decision and name its owner.
Write the scope, decision owner and people who can veto or revise the result before starting the workshop.
2. Collect the necessary evidence and affected perspectives.
Collect and date the necessary evidence: Evidence on current performance and strain, alternative futures, emerging initiatives and affected voices.
3. Describe what the present system achieves and where it fails.
Record what Horizon 1 delivers today, who benefits and which strains suggest that its pattern may not endure.
4. Describe a preferred future with explicit values and trade-offs.
Describe Horizon 3 as a preferred pattern with explicit values and costs, not a guaranteed forecast.
5. Identify weak signals and present-day experiments.
Find Horizon 2 experiments already happening and note who supports each and what they are learning.
6. Distinguish transition moves from repairs that entrench the old system.
Ask whether each transition move builds capacity for Horizon 3 or makes the old system more durable.
7. Choose reversible steps and signals for periodic review.
Fund a reversible experiment, identify a disconfirming signal and revisit the map on a stated date.
8. Record the output, next test and review trigger.
Store the artifact with its evidence links, owner, bounded next test and date or trigger for review.
AI automation lens
AI may sort authorised notes and expose missing evidence. It must not invent observations, silently decide for affected people or present a generated map as validated.
Visual model
Text alternative: Describe what the present system achieves and where it fails; Describe a preferred future with explicit values and trade-offs; Identify weak signals and present-day experiments; Distinguish transition moves from repairs that entrench the old system; Choose reversible steps and signals for periodic review.
Interactive example
Scenario: A regional college wants AI-assisted tutoring. Existing funding rewards lecture attendance, while pilots improve access for working adults but raise privacy concerns.
Worked answer: Map the current attendance model, a preferred accessible learning system and transition pilots; fund privacy controls and evaluate learning, not tool uptake alone.
Facilitation notes
Record disagreements before synthesising; ask whose evidence is missing; state who may revise the result.
Expected output
- An inspectable decision artifact, its assumptions and evidence, a responsible owner, a bounded next test and a review date.
- Choose reversible steps and signals for periodic review.
- A named owner, test and review date.
Common mistakes
Treating Horizon 3 as inevitable or labeling every shiny pilot transformative.
Quality checklist
- The decision and system boundary are explicit.
- Affected people and alternative accounts are included.
- Each important claim has a source or is marked as an assumption.
- An owner, safeguard and disconfirming signal are named.
Template
Knowledge check
Question: What mistake would undermine this method in the scenario?
Answer: Treating Horizon 3 as inevitable or labeling every shiny pilot transformative.
Related tools
References
- Three Horizons — method source (opens in a new tab). Accessed 2026-09-28.
- Independent practice reference (opens in a new tab). Accessed 2026-09-28.
Method profile
The method structures a discussion and a test; it does not establish causal proof or guarantee success.