How can software development teams ensure that their products respond to future market needs at the time of release? Strategic foresight—traditionally applied in executive-level planning—can be effectively integrated into Agile and Scrum-based development processes. When embedded in the early and continuous phases of digital product design, foresight practices help teams navigate uncertainty, anticipate market shifts, and adapt their solutions accordingly. This approach enables the development of more resilient and future-proof digital products, supporting long-term competitiveness and profitability.
Photo by Industry, Industry 4 (Gerald 2025) / Pixabay
The world is changing rapidly, with disruptions and uncertainties more pronounced than in previous decades. To keep businesses aligned with these changes and remain successful in this volatile and unpredictable environment, decision-makers should adopt new approaches by combining two emerging disciplines: strategic foresight and strategic design. (Buehring & Bishop 2020, 408-410.) All organizations should prepare for the future, and the effort put into foresight practices depends on the complexity and volatility of the environment (Rohrbeck & Kum 2018, 108).
Strategic foresight differs from traditional, often quantitative and extrapolative forecasting by taking uncertainty into account and recognizing that decision-makers may lack sufficient information about the current situation to make adequate judgments. Strategic foresight involves continuous scanning of the environment for change drivers, which can be any events that impact the organisation – climate change, the war in Ukraine, a TikTok video gone viral, or a new technology. By applying appropriate techniques to analyse these drivers, foresight helps anticipate changes, understand their consequences for the organization, and make decisions that best address uncertainty (Buehring & Bishop 2020, 401-411).
Strategic design involves applying future-oriented design principles to create visions that guide and support the implementation of an organization’s strategic goals (Buehring & Bishop 2020, 410-411). Most information technology companies follow a methodology known as Agile, an active, iterative approach for adapting to rapidly changing environments (Sinha & Das 2021, 1). For a software development team, the strategic goal is to develop an excellent digital product that stands the test of time. In these volatile times, combining Agile with strategic foresight is essential.
To introduce a structured and practical approach to combining strategic design and foresight, software development teams can choose to use “a 3Ps foresight process model“ (Perceiving, Prospecting and Probing) developed by Rohrbeck and Kum (2018), thereby integrating strategic foresight to product development and Agile methodology.
Perceiving: This layer involves identifying signals of change in the environment. Often referred to as horizon scanning or environmental scanning, this process involves detecting signals of change, such as technological advancements, market shifts, or legislative updates. These signals can range from clear, significant events and trends to subtle, weak signals whose implications may not yet be fully understood. To ensure wide coverage of potential change drivers, organisations can use frameworks like PESTEL when scanning the environment. This involves staying alert to a wide variety of changes – in Political, Environmental, Social, Technological, Economic and Legislative conditions. The value of this perceiving process lies not only in gaining a lead-time advantage over competitors but also in redirecting focus toward emerging opportunities and threats. (Gordon, Rohrbeck & Schwarz 2019, 35.) Perceiving involves various practises related to information usage, people and networks, such as scanning the current and adjacent businesses and technological, political and economic environment proactively both in the long and medium term using a large variety of sources (Rohrbeck & Kum 2018, 115).
Prospecting: Once signals are identified, this phase focuses on making sense of them and exploring alternative futures. Prospecting consists of two main activities: (a) Sensemaking, which involves interpreting the evidence from the Perceiving phase, analysing data, identifying patterns and assessing their potential impact and probability; and (b) Futuring, which entails generating knowledge about alternative futures through methods such as scenario planning or back-casting. Futures knowledge can take the form of trend analyses or hypotheses about alternative futures, each carrying different and important implications for present decision-making. The Prospecting phase ensures companies don’t just limit their focus to the most obvious or probable outcomes but also consider unlikely yet plausible scenarios. By simulating various possibilities, organizations can understand the potential implications of change and plan strategies to navigate these futures. (Gordon et al. 2019, 36-38.) In prospecting, corporate culture and method sophistication make a significant difference. When information is freely shared across functions, basic assumptions are explicitly and frequently challenged, and foresight methods are selected to reflect the specific context of the company – including factors such as environmental volatility – the organisation is better prepared for the future (Rohrbeck & Kum 2018, 115).
Prospecting: Once signals are identified, this phase focuses on making sense of them and exploring alternative futures. Prospecting consists of two main activities: (a) Sensemaking, which involves interpreting the evidence from the Perceiving phase, analysing data, identifying patterns and assessing their potential impact and probability; and (b) Futuring, which entails generating knowledge about alternative futures through methods such as scenario planning or back-casting. Futures knowledge can take the form of trend analyses or hypotheses about alternative futures, each carrying different and important implications for present decision-making. The Prospecting phase ensures companies don’t just limit their focus to the most obvious or probable outcomes but also consider unlikely yet plausible scenarios. By simulating various possibilities, organizations can understand the potential implications of change and plan strategies to navigate these futures. (Gordon et al. 2019, 36-38.) In prospecting, corporate culture and method sophistication make a significant difference. When information is freely shared across functions, basic assumptions are explicitly and frequently challenged, and foresight methods are selected to reflect the specific context of the company – including factors such as environmental volatility – the organisation is better prepared for the future (Rohrbeck & Kum 2018, 115).
Probing: This final layer transitions to practical experimentation and learning by turning the futures knowledge created in the previous stage into design decisions or innovations. This may involve testing new ideas through prototyping, research and development projects, consumer tests, or strategic initiatives. Organizations prototype, test, and refine potential innovations or strategies based on insights from the previous layers. It bridges the gap between foresight and action by enabling companies to actively shape their responses to future challenges. (Gordon et al. 2019, 37-38.) For successful probing it’s critical how strategic foresight activities are organised. In an organisation with a high-level of future preparedness, every employee is responsible for detecting weak signals and there are incentives in place that reward for scanning change. Continuous strategic foresight activities are in place, triggered both top-down and bottom-up, and are linked to corporate development, strategic management, controlling, marketing, research and development and innovation management. (Rohrbeck & Kum 2018, 115).
Agile software development is a flexible approach that emphasizes customers, people, communication, and the product itself. Development work is organized into iterations, known as Sprints, allowing items to be released incrementally and enabling rapid adaptation to changes. There are numerous agile software development frameworks (e.g. Scrum), techniques, and tools available. (Layton, Ostermiller and Kynaston 2020, 13-14.) In agile development, planning is a continuous process carried out throughout the product lifecycle and involves the entire team working on the product (Layton et al. 2020, 161).
The Product Owner is often responsible for engaging with clients and stakeholders to understand the product’s market position and determining development priorities (Heath 2021, 33). The Product Owner is also responsible for ensuring that software development aligns with the desired direction and fostering collaboration between the development team and business stakeholders (Layton et al. 2020, 225). He/she defines the product vision, meaning product destination/end goal; the product roadmap, which is a high-level plan for the product’s requirements; and the release plan, a high-level timetable for delivering working functionalities to the customer (Layton et al. 2020, 162-163). The requirements for the product are documented in the product backlog. (Layton et al. 2020, 181). Requirements documentation and refinement of the product backlog are completed prior to the development phase; for further illustration, refer to Diagram 1.
In the Scrum framework (Diagram 1), the duration of a Sprint is typically 1—4 weeks. Each Sprint begins with Sprint Planning, during which the work to be completed is defined. (Heath 2021, 43, 45.) During the Daily Scrum, developers share updates on what they have been working on, what they plan to work on next, and any obstacles they are currently facing. A Sprint Review is conducted to evaluate the product increment and update the Product Backlog as necessary. The Sprint concludes with a Sprint Retrospective, where the development team identifies opportunities to improve the process for the next Sprint. (Heath 2021, 48-50.)
Diagram 1: Scrum software development process (Backman and Syrjänen 2025)
As illustrated in Diagram 2, strategic foresight can be integrated into multiple phases of the software development process. To support the long-term viability of a software product, it may be advantageous to initiate Perceiving and Prospecting practises at the outset of development. These strategic foresight activities can facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the operational environment and potential future developments. Change signals can be continuously gathered and analysed throughout the development process by all team members, with primary responsibility resting with the Product Owner and other stakeholders responsible for shaping the product’s strategic direction. The Probing practises can be embedded into ongoing development planning, particularly in the generation, designing and refinement of future requirements. Product Owner collaborates with stakeholders to define development requirements and can then add foresight insights accumulated over time to complement these requirements. Furthermore, insights derived from Prospecting can be utilized during Sprint Review meetings to inform and shape the scope of forthcoming sprints, ensuring alignment with emerging market and user needs.
Diagram 2: Foresight in software development (Backman and Syrjänen 2025)
Incorporating strategic foresight into agile software development enables teams to create digital products that better align with future market demands. By applying the 3Ps foresight process model—Perceiving, Prospecting, and Probing—development efforts become more responsive to emerging signals of change, alternative future scenarios, and evolving user needs. This structured approach enhances long-term adaptability, resilience, and competitiveness in volatile environments.
Beyond practical applications in industry, these insights have implications for education. Finnish universities of applied sciences, including Laurea University of Applied Sciences, emphasize the development of transversal competencies that prepare students to work in complex and uncertain futures (Laurea 2024; Arene 2022). At Laurea, integrated foresight and design approaches have already been embedded into master’s programmes, supporting the development of future-oriented problem-solving skills (Hario 2022; 2023). The findings of this article can inform how such practices are further embedded into teaching and learning—bridging theory and application to prepare graduates to lead change in dynamic contexts.
Future research could explore how specific foresight techniques function within software organizations and how their use varies across different industries and project types. This would provide valuable knowledge for both academic and practical development of foresight capabilities.
- Arene 2022. Suositus ammattikorkeakoulujen yhteisistä kompetensseista ja niiden soveltamisesta 2022. Ammattikorkeakoulujen rehtorineuvosto Arene ry. January 2022. Accessed 15 December 2024.
- Buehring, J. & Bishop, P. C. 2020. Foresight and Design: New Support for Strategic Decision Making. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 6(3), 408-432. Accessed 14 April 2025.
- Gordon, A., Rohrbeck, R. & Schwarz, J. O. 2019. Escaping the ”Faster Horses” Trap: Bridging Strategic Foresight and Design-based Innovation. Technology innovation management review, 9(8), 30-42. Accessed 25 April 2025.
- Hario, P. 2022. Tulevaisuusmuotoilulla työelämärelevanssia tutkintoihin. Laurea Journal. Accessed 3 May 2025.
- Hario, P. 2023. ”Suoraan altaan syvään päätyyn” – Tapausesimerkki ennakoinnin opettamisesta kehittämispohjaisesti (LbD). Laurea Journal. Accessed 3 May 2025.
- Heath, F. 2021. Professional Scrum Master (PSM I) Guide: The Unofficial Guide to Scrum with Real-World Projects. E-book. Packt Publishing Ltd.
- Laurea 2024. Laurean strategia 2035. Accessed 6 April 2025.
- Layton, C., Ostermiller, S. & Kynaston, D. 2020. Agile Project Management for Dummies. E-book. John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated.
- Rohrbeck, R. & Kum, M. E. 2018. Corporate foresight and its impact on firm performance: A longitudinal analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, (April 2018), 105-116. Accessed 14 April 2025.
- Sinha, A. & Das, P. 2021. Agile Methodology Vs. Traditional Waterfall SDLC: A case study on Quality Assurance process in Software Industry. 5th International Conference on Electronics, Materials Engineering & Nano-Technology (IEMENTech), 1-4. Accessed 25 April 2025.
- Diagram 1: Backman, A. & Syrjänen, H. 2025. Scrum software development process.
- Diagram 2: Backman, A. & Syrjänen, H. 2025. Foresight in software development.
Copilot has been used to edit the language of this text. Used prompt “Please improve the fluency and readability of the following text without altering its original meaning or key details.”
