"Look at the future, because it’s where you’ll spend the rest of your lives."

— ADA President Richard F. Mascola’s charge to the ADA Future of Dentistry panels

A man was walking through a field when he came upon a fence on which three targets were nailed. All three had been shot with perfect bull’s-eyes. He asked a young man standing nearby, "Who is the extraordinary marksman who never misses his mark?"

"I am," said the lad.

"How did you learn to shoot like that?"

"I shoot first," said the young man, "and then I draw the circle."

With the "predictive" hoopla surrounding entry into the new millennium, it was no surprise when ADA Immediate Past President Tim Rose’s promotion of a "new" Future of Dentistry, or FOD, planning effort gained collegial support. His vision: look beyond the ordinary; anticipate, plan, then act. The ADA, he maintained, has the expertise and resources to construct dental blueprints that will lead to the coveted bull’s-eyes. And no need to draw circles after the fact.

The ADA House of Delegates supported the FOD project by an overwhelming margin—but not before thoroughly airing concerns that the finished document not be allowed to sit on a shelf gathering dust. Their message to the ADA hierarchy: Do it. Do it well, but make sure the end product is relevant, understandable and useful to all of the profession’s constituents.

Prophecies alone will not suffice. The final document must contain action plans, steps to achieve potentially favorable outcomes and (if the predicted trends are not considered in dentistry’s best interest) action plans to alter the unfavorable direction.

To develop this plan, experts have been selected from all areas of dentistry. While some have been drawn from dentistry’s affirmed leaders, a significant number of the FOD panelists represent the "new guard," chosen to offer fresh perspectives on the future dental environment. Led by Dr. Leslie Seldin, a full-time practicing general dentist, the majority of the oversight committee and panel members are actively involved in the clinical practice of dentistry.

The timetable for the FOD panelists is tight. A draft product of their initial efforts will be circulated to communities of interest late this year. It will be followed by public sessions to ensure communitywide participation. This will be an open process, no secrets, no surprises.

This present initiative is not without precedent. In 1983, the ADA published a Future of Dentistry document that, had the profession adhered to its projections and recommendations, could have been the basis for proactivity.

Consider a couple of the forecasts from the 1983 report:

– Computer use was predicted to develop at an accelerated pace. It did. In 1984, only 11 percent of dentists had a computer in their primary dental practice. By 1994, 67 percent did. Today, the rate is probably close to 90 percent.

– Changes in licensure requirements were given little chance for success. Actually, a great deal of movement has been noted since that time. Thirty-four states presently offer provisions for licensure by credentials, compared with just 16 in 1979. Yet, some would still agree with the 1983 panel’s vision and say even that pace is far too slow.

– In the area of dental research, the 1983 panel’s prophecies were on target. The report predicted that "unless dentistry can secure more funding for research, the profession will have decreased ability to generate new knowledge." This is exactly what happened.

Many dental research grants with high scientific scores are not funded owing to lack of sufficient funds. This dearth of support dollars, coupled with a growing shortage of early- and midcareer dental researchers, does not bode well for dentistry’s continued need for new knowledge.

The 1983 FOD panel also was correct in its prediction that dental education would have problems in its financial support structures. What’s more, the panel successfully predicted that dental schools would reduce their class sizes in response to market forces.

The panelists who studied dental work-force trends 17 years ago may have been correct in predicting large-scale reductions in the numbers of dental graduates, but they missed the mark when they predicted that a shortage of auxiliaries was not expected throughout the rest of the century.

Had they headed the thoughts of their panel on dental practice, which forecast that oral hygiene and prevention activities in the dental office would increase dramatically, perhaps there would have been more encouragement for the training of additional dental hygienists. In 1980, 5,184 dental hygiene graduates entered the marketplace. In 1997, even with population increases, only 5,023 dental hygiene graduates joined the work force, obviously not enough.

The major drawback of the 1983 FOD report was not its content but that so few dentists actually used it. I can assure you, that won’t happen with this forthcoming document. Plans are already under way to ensure that the new report will reach each ADA member in a variety of user-friendly formats.

Getting insider information in today’s fast-paced world often has proved to be the road to financial success. The FOD document will do just that for you. There are a number of recent documents focused on specific segments of dentistry—The Institute of Medicine’s "Dental Education at the Crossroads" and the soon-to-be-released "Surgeon General’s Report on the Oral Health of America." None addresses the specific future needs of practicing dentists. The FOD will.