Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
future_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-13 04:47] majafuture_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-19 05:03] maja
Line 1: Line 1:
-==== Scenario Methods ====+===== Scenario Methods =====
  
-This page is an evolving, non-exhaustive collection of different steps that can be used in scenario building, different methods that we (could) use and links to interesting people/project using scenarios in their work.+This page is an evolving, non-exhaustive collection of different steps that can be used in scenario building, different methods that we (could) use and links to interesting people/project using scenarios in their work. 
  
 +An overview of the whole process written for novice scenario builders can be found in [[http://www.wired.com/wired/scenarios/build.html|How to Build Scenarios]] by Lawrence Wilkinson. Interesting [[http://www.openthefuture.com/2012/08/ten_rules_for_creating_awful_s.html| Ten Rules for Creating Awful Scenarios]] by Jamais Cascio, can be used as a checklist of what NOT to do in scenario building.
  
-=== Preparation beforehand ===+There are many descriptions of scenario planning methods, with the biggest difference being whether the scenarios are designed to be exploratory (multiple alternative scenarios for different possible futures), or normative (designing a desired scenario, then figuring out what needs to be done in order to get there). When working with normative scenarios the most important task is 'backcasting' or 'retrocasting' as we prefer to call it (see chapter about this lower on this page). With exploratory scenarios a lot of the time is spent on creating the elements of the scenario based on the present of the internal and external environment, as well as forces that can influence change in both. Most scenario methods revolve around approximately the same phases: (1) delineating the space/issue/question (2) identifying elements of the scenario (factors, drivers, trends, measures, actors, events...) 3) selecting a reasonable amount of elements 4) projecting the elements in the given future in the form of multiple scenarios and 5) using scenarios to (re)design decisions, strategies and actions in the present. There are many different variations of scenario building flow. We list a few below: 
 + 
 +Joseph Coates wrote "Today the question of what scenarios are is unclear except with regard to one point-they have become extremely popular. Many people see scenarios as forecasts of some future condition while others disavow that their scenarios are forecasts. Yet looking at scenarios that do not come labeled as forecasts or non-forecasts. It is difficult to tell them apart. The purpose of the scenario is at a meta level, since the scenario usually does not speak for itself in terms of its purpose." [[http://www.josephcoates.com/pdf_files/232_Scenario_Planning.pdf|More in Scenario Planning]]. Another early in depth overview of [[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fhz95g00/pdf;jsessionid=D034F49912B794C5CCE293059B4BA299.tobacco03|How Companies Use Scenarios]] was written by Mandel and Wilson. 
 + 
 +<html><a href=http://horizon.unc.edu/courses/papers/Scenario_Figure2.gif"><img src="http://horizon.unc.edu/courses/papers/Scenario_Figure2.gif"></a></html> 
 + 
 +The scenario building exercise (step 1-6) in the [[prehearsal pocket guide]] is based on the method by Peter Schwartz in The Art of the Long View. On [[http://scenariosforsustainability.org/recipes/schwartz.html|this page]] Schwartz summarises the scenario building steps. 
 + 
 +<html><a href=http://lib.fo.am/_media/resilients/scenario-process-diagram.png?w=1000&tok=7eba6d"><img src="http://lib.fo.am/_media/resilients/scenario-process-diagram.png?w=1000&tok=7eba6d"></a></html> 
 + 
 + 
 +Michel Godet writes in [[http://en.laprospective.fr/dyn/anglais/articles/art_of_scenarios.pdf|The Art of Scenarios and Strategic Planning]]: "we strive to give 
 +simple tools that may be appropriated. However, these simple tools are inspired by intellectual rigor that enables one to ask the right questions. Of course, these tools do not come with a guarantee. The natural talent,common sense, and intuition of the futurist also count!" 
 + 
 +<html><a href=http://loganadia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fig208_01_0.jpg"><img src="http://loganadia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fig208_01_0.jpg"></a></html> 
 + 
 +The "Cone of Plausibility, according to [[http://www.dtic.mil%2Fcgi-bin%2FGetTRDoc%3FAD%3DADA231618&ei=rdUCU-3QBIeSkwWG5oCYBA&usg=AFQjCNFbeM4KuYTqsIZaZYoaNholFliILg&sig2=ipuUxnViugB2ksDibwNYHQ|Charles W. Taylor]], “serves as an enclosure that circumscribes the thought process of the players. The strength of their thought process to build these scenarios and to hold them together as they proceed outward in time is a counterforce to the pressures of wild cards to disrupt the cone. Scenarios within the cone are considered plausible if they ad|here to a logical progression of trends, events, and consequences from today to a predetermined time in the future” 
 + 
 +<html><a href=https://gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net/8019B6/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8wsufwhnz1qz8vtso1_1280.jpg"><img src="https://gs1.wac.edgecastcdn.net/8019B6/data.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8wsufwhnz1qz8vtso1_1280.jpg"></a></html> 
 + 
 +Anna Maria Orru and David Relan wrote [[:/resilients/scenario_symphony|The Scenario Symphony]] for the Resilients project, containing a whole range of scenario creation methods, including the dynamic [[:/resilients/from_pan_to_panarchy|panarchy]] and [[:/resilients/temporal model]]. 
 + 
 +<html><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/8480321093/" title="figure5 by _foam, on Flickr"><img src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8505/8480321093_4d0379e220_c.jpg" width="800" height="354" alt="figure5"></a></html> 
 + 
 +More methods are described in the Futures Research Methodologies [[http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDIQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cgee.org.br%2Fatividades%2FredirKori%2F3310&ei=R9n9UqixEIrmkAXymIDoBA&usg=AFQjCNGaA2QdNlSF3_6roa_YCSR0ez29SA&sig2=GEyGJ_CH5qo-INVR4kz0XQ&bvm=bv.61190604,d.dGI|chapter 13]] by Jerome C. Glenn and The Futures Group International. 
 + 
 +Finally, an interesting avenue to explore are remote scenario planning workshops using various online collaboration tools. Jamais Cascio describes [[http://www.openthefuture.com/2007/01/the_virtual_workshop_or_how_to.html|here]] how he conducted a virtual scenario workshop, Noah Raford describes another [[http://noahraford.com/?p=414|experiment]] in [[http://news.noahraford.com/?p=650|online scenario planning]]. 
 + 
 +Below we explore different elements of scenario building, ask questions that emerged from our practice and investigate methods that might be used to improve the process. 
 + 
 +  
 + 
 +==== Preparation beforehand ====
  
 //What can we/participants prepare for a scenario workshop beforehand?// //What can we/participants prepare for a scenario workshop beforehand?//
Line 29: Line 62:
   * ...   * ...
  
-=== Key question ===+==== Key question ====
  
 //How to craft good questions?// //How to craft good questions?//
Line 37: Line 70:
   * [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questions_%28game%29|questions game]]   * [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questions_%28game%29|questions game]]
  
-//How can we encourage an 'inquiring state of mind'?//+Questions encourage an [[inquiring mind]]
  
 Why does it seem more difficult to phrase questions rather than stating problems? Why does it seem more difficult to phrase questions rather than stating problems?
Line 44: Line 77:
  
  
-=== Plotting the present situation ===+==== Plotting the present situation ====
  
 //What are different ways to map-out the present situation surrounding the key question?// //What are different ways to map-out the present situation surrounding the key question?//
Line 62: Line 95:
   * on the other hand, in more open-ended workshops (say in the beginning of projects) talking about what's fixed created some discomfort (or perhaps it was just unclear what we meant by fixed)   * on the other hand, in more open-ended workshops (say in the beginning of projects) talking about what's fixed created some discomfort (or perhaps it was just unclear what we meant by fixed)
  
-=== Key factors ===+==== Key factors ====
  
-//How to best visualise and cluster the relationships between key factors//+//What are different ways to visualise and cluster the relationships between key factors// 
 + 
 +  * Affinity diagram 
 +  * [[http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_06.htm|Force Field Analysis by Kurt Lewin]], where the key question is placed in the middle, forces exerting pressure for the change on the left, and against the change on the right.
   * "interrogate anomalies:  data or incidents that seem anomalous - that somehow “don’t fit”, seem weird or don’t make sense, should receive immediate attention.  They could be pointers to a shift in the system as a whole" From: http://silberzahnjones.com/2012/10/04/crafting-non-linear-strategy-the-nature-of-the-problem/#more-799   * "interrogate anomalies:  data or incidents that seem anomalous - that somehow “don’t fit”, seem weird or don’t make sense, should receive immediate attention.  They could be pointers to a shift in the system as a whole" From: http://silberzahnjones.com/2012/10/04/crafting-non-linear-strategy-the-nature-of-the-problem/#more-799
  
Line 72: Line 108:
   * success criteria (what will make my question succeed or fail)   * success criteria (what will make my question succeed or fail)
  
-=== Change Drivers ===+==== Change Drivers ====
  
   * how much analysis is appropriate for the types of scenarios and prehearsals we’re making?   * how much analysis is appropriate for the types of scenarios and prehearsals we’re making?
Line 88: Line 124:
   * how effective are these methods and how can we usefully evalute them?   * how effective are these methods and how can we usefully evalute them?
  
-=== Ranking critical uncertainties ===+==== Ranking critical uncertainties ====
  
   * what are different ways in which this is done by others?   * what are different ways in which this is done by others?
  
-=== Scenarios ===+  * [[http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html|Morphological Analysis]] could be a great way to work with a large number of clustered drivers, that can be combined in different ways to select a smaller set of important and/or quickly create basic scenario skeletons. The foodprints ruler from FoAM Nordica works on a similar principle. 
 + 
 +==== Scenarios ====
  
 //When to use one, two, three or more axes// //When to use one, two, three or more axes//
Line 99: Line 137:
   * __Branch analysis method__: The ‘branch analysis’ method is suited to developing scenarios around specific turning-points that are known in advance (e.g. elections, a referendum or peace process). This approach works best for a shorter time horizon: generally up to five years.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]   * __Branch analysis method__: The ‘branch analysis’ method is suited to developing scenarios around specific turning-points that are known in advance (e.g. elections, a referendum or peace process). This approach works best for a shorter time horizon: generally up to five years.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]
   * __Cone of plausibility__ method: offers a more deterministic model of the way in which drivers lead to outcomes, by explicitly listing assumptions and how these might change. Of the three techniques, this approach is most suitable for shorter-term time horizons (e.g. a few months to 2-3 years), but can be used to explore longer-term time horizons. It also suits contexts with a limited number of important drivers.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]   * __Cone of plausibility__ method: offers a more deterministic model of the way in which drivers lead to outcomes, by explicitly listing assumptions and how these might change. Of the three techniques, this approach is most suitable for shorter-term time horizons (e.g. a few months to 2-3 years), but can be used to explore longer-term time horizons. It also suits contexts with a limited number of important drivers.[[http://www.eisf.eu/resources/download.asp?d=5764|The Horizon Scanning Centre (pdf)]]
-  * [[http://www.skymark.com/resources/tools/cause.asp|Cause & Effect Scenario Generation]] +   
-  * [[http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_06.htmForce Field Analysis]] +  * [[Morphological Analysis]] could be a great way to work with a large number of clustered drivers, that can be combined in different ways to select a smaller set of important and/or quickly create basic scenario skeletonsThe foodprints ruler from FoAM Nordica works on a similar principle"
-  * [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backcasting|Backcasting]]   +
-  * [[http://www.swemorph.com/ma.html|Morphological Analysis]] +
-  * [[http://www.systemdynamics.org/conferences/2000/PDFs/ducz124p.pdf|Field Anomaly Relaxation]]+
  
 +  * More on [[Field Anomaly Relaxation]]
 +
 +(After reading several papers about this, I wonder what is the difference between MA and FAR?-maja)
  
 //How to better structure building scenario skeletons with guiding questions (which questions could be generalised)?// //How to better structure building scenario skeletons with guiding questions (which questions could be generalised)?//
  
  
-=== From scenarios to story-worlds ===+==== From scenarios to story-worlds ====
  
   * what techniques can we use to flesh out the scenarios into interesting stories   * what techniques can we use to flesh out the scenarios into interesting stories
Line 115: Line 153:
   * how to create rich characters and meaningful plots?   * how to create rich characters and meaningful plots?
  
-=== Scenario testing === +==== Retrocasting ==== 
- + 
 +"The best kinds of stories are about how you get from here to there, not just what there looks like." --Jamais Cascio 
 + 
 +Searching for present signals, asking the question "how to get from here to there". Aka Backcasting [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backcasting|Backcasting]]: 
 +Backcasting starts with defining a desirable future and then works backwards to identify policies and programs that will connect the future to the present. 
 + 
 +However with retrocasting/retrotesting or scenario testing (as we also call it sometimes) we don't look at exclusively at a desirable future, but at different possible futures resulting from scenario building, and attempt to identify signals in the present that might point to the future moving in this or that direction. 
 + 
 + 
 +//What tools can we use to structure scenario testing?// 
 + 
 +[[http://www.skymark.com/resources/tools/cause.asp|Cause & Effect Diagram]]: "The cause and effect diagram is used to explore all the potential or real causes (or inputs) that result in a single effect (or output). Causes are arranged according to their level of importance or detail, resulting in a depiction of relationships and hierarchy of events." In scenario testing this could be used not as 'cause and effect', but how to get there from here (note down a topic from the scenario, then work backwards to see what would have to happen to make it happen). 
 + 
 +<html><a href="http://www.skymark.com/images/fishbone.gif"><img src="http://www.skymark.com/images/fishbone.gif"></a></html> 
 + 
 + 
 +Another interesting possibility is to abstract principles from a scenario and retrocast from them. In [[http://www.naturalstep.org/backcasting|this article]] they suggest not to use scenarios at all, but to work from agreed upon sustainability principles. 
 + 
 +<html><a href="http://www.naturalstep.org/sites/all/files/Backcasting_AllBox.png"><img src="http://www.naturalstep.org/sites/all/files/Backcasting_AllBox.png" width="500"></a></html>
  
-(signals, how to get from here to there) 
-  * how is this done by others? 
   * what are important things to focus on?   * what are important things to focus on?
  
-=== Visualising ===+==== Visualising ====
  
   * which methods could we use to visualise possible futures?   * which methods could we use to visualise possible futures?
  
-=== Prototyping ===+==== Prototyping ====
  
   * which methods could we use to prototype possible futures?   * which methods could we use to prototype possible futures?
  
-=== Prehearsals ===+==== Prehearsals ====
  
   * how to design them?   * how to design them?
Line 136: Line 190:
   * how to evaluate them?   * how to evaluate them?
  
-=== Follow-up ===+==== Follow-up ====
  
   * How can we follow-up what happens to the groups after we finish the workshops (especially to understand what happens to commitments to actions and preferred possible futures)?   * How can we follow-up what happens to the groups after we finish the workshops (especially to understand what happens to commitments to actions and preferred possible futures)?
   * How much do we need to be involved in the follow-up?   * How much do we need to be involved in the follow-up?
 +
 +
 +==== Futures research methods ====
 +
 +<html><a href=https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730080303002.png"><img src="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730080303002.png"></a></html>
 +
 +<html><a href=https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730120202001.png"><img src="https://www.emeraldinsight.com/content_images/fig/2730120202001.png"></a></html>
 +
 +
 +From: [[https://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1558553&show=html|Identifying systems' new initial conditions as influence points for the future]]
 +
 +
  • future_fabulators/scenario_methods.txt
  • Last modified: 2023-05-08 11:38
  • by nik