Evolution of futures studies

This article discusses the evolution of futures studies. The article starts with an evaluation of the different rival taxonomies and definitions for futures studies, and proceeds to discuss the very concept of paradigm. Are there paradigms in this discipline? If we think there are, what kind of arguments can we use to define those? I argue that there have been two paradigms in the evolution of futures studies so far, and there are signs of emergence of a new one. Both of the existing paradigms have had many rival macro-level methodological approaches, ontological and epistemological branches, and phases of evolution. The first paradigm is the age-old prediction tradition that combines thinking about the future into mystic explanations. This line of thinking bases its argument on the deterministic future and effects of the world of spirits. The second paradigm was basically started in the U.S. military after World War II. This modern line of thinking bases its argument on indeterministic futures, probabilities, aim to control and plan, modelling and systems thinking, and the effects of external trends. The new emerging paradigm may base its line of thinking on disconnecting from the western control based technical thinking, and accepting internal dynamic fluctuations, paradoxes and dialectic thinking.     

Predispositions as determinants of the future

Futures studies has been dominated by the concerns of forecasting and control. This paper suggests that predispositions held by people, especially attitudes and assumptions, have a significant impact on the future and thus constitute an important field of research in futures studies. It discusses three major types of predisposition, and outlines two mechanisms by which they affect the future, especially as it relates to technology. Three examples drawn from real life are then analysed to illustrate the variety of impacts that predispositions have on the future. It is not the intention of this paper to provide a full treatment of the topic, but rather to make an initial proposal. So, finally, the simplifications made in the paper are discussed, and suggestions made about fruitful avenues of further research.     

‘The True and Fair View’ of Executive Stock Option Valuation

ABSTRACT

We compare the market values of executive stock option (ESO) trades with their Black & Scholes (1973) model values calculated following the major accounting standards, SFAS No. 123r and IFRS2. Our results show major underpricing compared to the traditional B&S method values. This should be considered while applying SFAS No. 123r and IFRS2 for estimating fair values. Especially time to expiration has a major influence on the undervaluation suggesting that the possibility of a change in corporate structure lowers the cost of ESOs to shareholders.