IAF experience indicates an inability for organizations to think systematically about the future. Reasons for this short-term focus in the courts include the pressure to deal with the present, the establishment of judicial priorities in annual or biannual legislative sessions that keep timelines close to the present, the training of legal personnel to apply the past in the present, the fact that speculation cannot satisfy the rules of evidence essential to a fair jury trial, and the notion that judges have a built-in preference for assessing the facts before them. The result of short-term thinking is often a lack of creative ideas. Futures thinking about the courts must encompass trends and alternative scenarios. Plausible futures must be guided by visions and strategies that are based on factors internal and external to the court organization. Several court-related trends are noted such as the rise of courts as a business, the death of the adversary system, the increasing independence of courts as the "third" branch of government, the use of nonlawyer or citizen pro-tem judges in small claims matters, the depoliticization of courts, the use of technology to evaluate large amounts of data in judicial decisionmaking, the involvement of courts to resolve social problems, the growth of a national community of separate courts sharing information, decentralization, and reliance on a network style of management. 8 notes