Future Management Group helps organisations see possible futures. Strategy Quest lets your team live through them and act. The two work well together, but they are not the same thing.
| Future Management Group | Strategy Quest | |
|---|---|---|
| Focus | Seeing possible futures | Acting inside them |
| Output | Scenarios and future landscapes | Decisions, triggers and a tested plan |
| Team role | Reading and discussing | Deciding under pressure, round after round |
| Best used | Early in the planning cycle | To stress-test the plan that follows |
Our summary of how the two approaches differ, based on publicly available information about Future Management Group. Talk to both before you choose.
Foresight and scenario planning are essential. Real capability comes when a team can turn future-facing insight into investment and action under pressure.
That is the leap many teams struggle with. Trend decks feel exciting. Making decisions from them is harder.
Scenario work produces compelling narratives and future landscapes. It usually stops before simulating how your team behaves inside those futures: there is no decision to make, no budget to move and no stakeholder who pushes back.
We turn futures into rehearsal environments. If a trend hits, how do you respond? What if your main bet is delayed, or the money dries up?
Your team plays each round under new conditions, with triggers and tensions that resemble the real world.
Teams become faster, more adaptive and more disciplined about money, without losing the bigger picture. Keeping options open stops being a buzzword and becomes a skill.
I've participated in Strategy Quest twice now. Both times were incredibly enriching, full of learning and fun.
Strategy Quest is one of the most engaging ways I've seen to explore what it feels like to lead innovation.
I would trade my MBA for such an immersive learning experience.
A safe rehearsal of a real strategic decision. Participants step into a living organisation, work with the people in it, make choices and see the consequences play out over several rounds, instead of reading about them in a case study.
A facilitator builds an organisation in about 20 minutes: its market, its numbers and an executive team of AI stakeholders, each with a role, an agenda and a memory. Participants get a mandate, email those stakeholders, gather information, build support and submit a strategy. The executive team reacts to it, and the next round starts from where they left it.
Consultancies that want to rehearse an engagement, in-house strategy and transformation teams, leadership programmes and business schools. Anyone who has to make a high-stakes call with incomplete information and other people who disagree.
You decide. A single quest fits in a two to three hour session, and a series can run over several weekly rounds. Workshops, offsites and multi-week programmes all work.
Yes. Start from a new organisation in a real market, build one from scratch, or base it on a specific organisation. The people inside the simulation are always fictional.
Yes. Everything runs in the browser, so participants can play from anywhere, alone or in teams.
Every submission gets a reaction from the executive team, and the facilitator sees decisions, conversations and scores as they happen. That gives the debrief real material to work with instead of opinions.