three-horizons-learning-transition-mapper

To map a learning transition, you scope an inquiry topic and define a value dimension, then sequence the mapping across H1 (current system), H3 (preferred future), and H2 (innovations) to classify transitions as H2+ or H2-. This structured process reveals which changes genuinely move toward your desired future.

In systems change facilitation, H2+ classifications identify innovations that genuinely move toward a preferred future (H3), while H2- classifications expose adaptations that extend the dominant system (H1) using new language. This distinction prevents groups from mistaking superficial changes for genuine transitions.

You facilitate classroom mapping by having groups supply evidence for the current system under strain, specify a value-driven preferred future with present-day pockets, and evaluate innovations against that future. The mapper requires a strict mapping order of H1 then H3 then H2, validated by quality gates to prevent moral framing.

The three horizons model requires a grounded H3 preferred future to include real pockets already visible in the present, ensuring H2 innovations can be classified analytically as H2+ or H2-. Without this grounding, transition classifications become unsupported and fail quality-gate validation.

You cannot use the mapper without a defined value dimension, as it is a strict requirement for scoping the inquiry topic. The value dimension drives the evaluation of H2 innovations against the H3 preferred future and prevents vague classifications or unsupported transition narratives.

Limitations include the strict requirement for present-day H3 pockets and group-supplied evidence, meaning the mapper cannot function without grounded facilitation scenarios. Quality gates will flag failure modes like vague H3 definitions, structural weaknesses in H1, or moral framing, preventing unsupported classifications.