The ‘Cone of (Un) Certainty’ has been a fixture in strategic planning for a few decades [1].  In reviewing these models I was struck by the assumption that planning ends…. and well that is it. To correct this, I would like to propose a planning model entitled: ‘The NOW-Event Map’. which considers both planning and delivery.  

Cone Varieties

Cones come in two varieties.  The Cone of Uncertainty starts with a known fact at the apex and then broadens to include likely, plausible and probable scenarios with impossible existing outside of the cone (e.g. Black Swans).  For example, this cone from the Singularity University [2]:

The Cone of Certainty is the reverse of the above.  Its base is a collection possibilities which narrow to a single possible outcome.  By the way, if you happen to live in an universe in which time is linear, this is happening to you every day (hey, I LIVE in such a universe!). The following graphic demonstrates this from modernanalyst.com [3].

Cone of Certainty Leading to the NOW-Event

The purpose of the planning process is to select a course of action.  This is why the NOW-Event Map uses the Cone of Certainty.  Time runs along the graphic from left to right.  The further left one goes, the less certainty and data available but also the larger the potential opportunity.  The further right, the better the certainty, shorter the time lines but also the greater the opportunity costs of options foregone.  

Let’s Now Talk About NOW

The apex of the cone ends at the ‘NOW-Event‘, the grey dot in the middle of the white circle at the center of the graphic.  The NOW-Event is the enduring current moment we find ourselves in.  Traditionally, most planning models assume that this point in time will occur in the future.  Conversely, most performance reporting models assume that it has occurred in the past.  This model assumes that the NOW-Event is constantly occurring.  Think of it like the center of a digital map.

Adding a Forest of Results

What is new is the right-hand side of the graphic, specifically the ‘Performance & Results Measures‘. I wanted a catchy phrase for the right hand side but the best I could come up with is the ‘Forest of Results‘?  The triangles kinda look like coniferous trees… growing side ways (let me know if you can think of a better phrase!).  In sequence, the are as follows: 

• Green-Time-Line: A green line running vertically through the NOW-Event represents the current moment of time and the creation of information.  Information is nearly perfect at this point but it degrades quickly because of noise, loss of fidelity or the loss of information itself. Degradation of information is proportional to the amount of time that has passed (the various triangles discussed below) [4].  
• (Near) Real Time: The first dark green triangle represents operational/(near) real time information.  This might be sales for the day, the number of widgets produced in the past hour or the actual energy consumption.  This is big data and there is lots of it and it rapidly becomes less useful except in aggregate [5].
• Monthly/Quarterly Time: The next triangle is the more traditional 30 day or quarterly report.  These are the aggregation of Real Time information.  Each successive triangle relies on pre-existing information that can be aggregated or synthesized. 
• Quarterly & Annual Reporting: Annual reporting is highly relevant to regulators, investors, lenders, citizens, etc.  Last year’s results are less relevant to line staff or even planners.  Past information provides a solid foundation to ‘START TO‘ make predictions but changing circumstances must be taken into account.
• Year over Year and Historical Reporting: the triangles at this level begin to narrow.  Over time, prior year results become less relevant.  Even if relevant, these results are also subject to loss.  Updated storage mediums, information comparability or a catastrophic events may degrade or destroy the data.  The cost of keeping the information as compared to its relevance also becomes a factor in its loss.  

Calling Attention to Call Outs

I will admit the above graphic is a bit busy particularly with the call outs and titles.  The text is provided to orientate the user as to the relative placement of a planning/reporting effort as compared to the NOW-Event. 

The successive cone slices or green triangles are not meant to represent linear time.  Nor are they intended to be mutually exclusive.  Although there is a distinct border between these time units, time blurs across the cones and triangles.  To reinforce this, I have purposely overlapped the time descriptions.  

Don’t Forget the White Space

While the cones and triangles are important, so to is the white space – this represents the area of loss for an organization.  To the left of the NOW-Event, an increasing white space represents Opportunity Cost but also Risk Mitigation.  Thus, the closer the planning function gets to ‘now’, the fewer options available to it but also the fewer risks because of (hopefully) good mitigation activities.  

The converse is true on the other side of the NOW-Event.  Here the white space represents the loss of information as results become consolidated, summarized, synthesized or event forgotten.  

A Shape for Every Organization

The above graphic is a stylized representation of the above concepts.  For some organizations, the triangles might quickly become green-wisps of irrelevance.  For other organizations, the focus may be more on the Green-Triangles than on the Blue-Cones.  Governments, for example, have a harder time planning but are in the business of maintaining long term records.  You want your birth certificate, land title description or citizenship record to remain unchanged over time.  

The speed of change (e.g. technological, social or environmental) is a factor impacting the shape of the model.  A strategic plan from the 1950’s ‘might’ have reasonably articulated a 10-year vision and worked that idea through to a work order on some future shop floor.

Seventy years later, a planner in the 2020’s needs to compress the timelines on the left and resign themselves to the irrelevance of available information on the right of the map.  

NOW-Event- NOW-What

Nice graphic, So What?  This blog was meant to be an introduction to this thought exercise.  The next blog, Using the NOW-Event Map, presents some thoughts on how the map can be used to help an organization to better navigate the challenges of planning and performance management.  

Before getting to how to use the NOW-Event map, any initial thoughts or comments?  Does it help to tie together the planning and execution portions of the organization?  Is this a map you would use to plan for your organization’s planning?  

Special Thanks to Amy

A quick note of thanks to Amy Webb who took the classic Cone of Certainty construct and made a much more elegant representation [6].  I adjusted the timelines and added to the cone slightly, nevertheless, her Harvard Business Review article and work was the basis for the NOW-Event Map (well at least the left hand side, I won’t blame her for the Forest of Results catch phrase). 

Notes and a History of Cones

1. Wikipedia indicates that the Cone of Uncertainty was first described in 1958 as an engineering term.  It has since been used in planning, meteorology, astronomy and any science/art requiring statistical estimation of an even’s likelihood.  
2. Lisa Kay Solomon: How Leaders Dream Boldly to Bring New Futures to Life, Feb 23, 2017.
3. Chris Adams: What is the Cone of Uncertainty?, undated.
4. Eagle-eyed readers might point out the Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and its limitations on measurement.  I will assume for the moment that quantum physics is not typically a concept discussed at most strategic planning retreats for most organizations.  Very eagle eyed readers may also recognize the role of the vertical green line as being similar to an event horizon.  Thus, at this instant in time, plans fall into a black hole of opportunity cost and performance management information quickly atrophies on the other side.  
5. For more on this concept, see my 2001 article, Event to Knowledge.
6. Amy Webb: How to Do Strategic Planning Like a Futurist, July 30, 2019, Harvard Business Review.
7. Mike Willis, in his 2018 blog, ‘Cones of Uncertainty and Certainty and Organizational Change‘, managed to combine both Cones!  A good read about the overlap of a technical change and its organizational impact.