Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| future_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-19 01:12] – maja | future_fabulators:scenario_methods [2014-02-19 06:49] – [Scenario Methods] maja | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Morphological Analysis]] is a way to create one normative scenario, from which a number of critical uncertainties are selected and given a set of variables; by combining different variables several ' | ||
| + | |||
| + | < | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| Anna Maria Orru and David Relan wrote [[:/ | Anna Maria Orru and David Relan wrote [[:/ | ||
| Line 32: | Line 38: | ||
| Finally, an interesting avenue to explore are remote scenario planning workshops using various online collaboration tools. Jamais Cascio describes [[http:// | Finally, an interesting avenue to explore are remote scenario planning workshops using various online collaboration tools. Jamais Cascio describes [[http:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| 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. | 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. | ||
| Line 46: | Line 56: | ||
| * Interviews, questionnaires for participants beforehand | * Interviews, questionnaires for participants beforehand | ||
| * Collective horizon scanning (facilitators, | * Collective horizon scanning (facilitators, | ||
| + | * Insight meditation | ||
| * ... | * ... | ||
| Line 70: | Line 81: | ||
| * [[https:// | * [[https:// | ||
| - | //How can we encourage an 'inquiring | + | Questions |
| 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 88: | Line 99: | ||
| //What does a ' | //What does a ' | ||
| - | + | A few ideas on [[non_predictive_strategy]] | |
| //When does it help to talk about things that are fixed, or constraints that exist?// | //When does it help to talk about things that are fixed, or constraints that exist?// | ||
| Line 99: | Line 110: | ||
| //What are different ways to visualise and cluster the relationships between key factors// | //What are different ways to visualise and cluster the relationships between key factors// | ||
| - | * Affinity diagram | + | * [[https:// |
| + | * [[https:// | ||
| * [[http:// | * [[http:// | ||
| * " | * " | ||
| Line 119: | Line 131: | ||
| * See various methods on the [[horizon scanning]] page | * See various methods on the [[horizon scanning]] page | ||
| - | * should we make our own STEEP (or related) cards to avoid the ' | + | * should we make our own STEEP (or related) cards to avoid the ' |
| - | * are there other well understood methods to group trends other than the customary STEEP (in which cultural changes seem to be clumped in with social or political)? | + | * are there other well understood methods to group trends other than the customary STEEP (in which cultural changes seem to be clumped in with social or political)? |
| * is there another way to look at large scale changes aside from trends (without having to do a PhD in each of the changes)? | * is there another way to look at large scale changes aside from trends (without having to do a PhD in each of the changes)? | ||
| * how effective are these methods and how can we usefully evalute them? | * how effective are these methods and how can we usefully evalute them? | ||
| Line 126: | Line 138: | ||
| ==== 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? |
| * [[http:// | * [[http:// | ||
| Line 137: | Line 149: | ||
| * __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:// | * __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:// | ||
| * __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:// | * __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:// | ||
| - | | ||
| - | * [[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. " | ||
| - | * 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)?// | ||
| Line 149: | Line 156: | ||
| ==== 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? |
| - | * what elements do we need in a scenario | + | * [[https:// |
| - | * how to create rich characters and meaningful plots? | + | * [[https:// |
| + | * "a day in the life of..." (a character | ||
| + | |||
| ==== Retrocasting ==== | ==== Retrocasting ==== | ||
| Line 178: | Line 188: | ||
| ==== Visualising ==== | ==== Visualising ==== | ||
| - | * which methods could we use to visualise | + | // |
| + | * moodboards | ||
| + | * collages | ||
| + | * storyboard | ||
| + | * newspaper with headlines | ||
| + | * video mix | ||
| + | * [[|https:// | ||
| ==== Prototyping ==== | ==== Prototyping ==== | ||
| * which methods could we use to prototype possible futures? | * which methods could we use to prototype possible futures? | ||
| + | |||
| + | More on [[possible_futures_parallel_presents]] and [[experiential futures]] | ||
| ==== Prehearsals ==== | ==== Prehearsals ==== | ||
| Line 189: | Line 207: | ||
| * how to host them? | * how to host them? | ||
| * how to evaluate them? | * how to evaluate them? | ||
| + | |||
| + | continue research on [[prehearsal methods]] | ||
| ==== Follow-up ==== | ==== Follow-up ==== | ||
| Line 204: | Line 224: | ||
| From: [[https:// | From: [[https:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Mapping scenarios techniques. (Source: Andrew Curry) | ||
| + | ==== Analysis, Summaries and comparisons==== | ||
| + | |||
| + | Using four different scenario building methods: the 2x2 matrix approach; causal layered analysis; the Manoa approach; and the scenario archetypes approach. "This exploratory comparison confirmed that different scenario generation methods yield not only different narratives and insights, but qualitatively different participant experiences. " | ||
| + | |||
| + | Curry, Andrew and Wendy Schultz (2009), “Roads Less Travelled, | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | "The paper to review all the techniques for developing scenarios that have appeared in the literature, along with comments on their utility, strengths and weaknesses. [...] eight categories of techniques that include a total of 23 variations used to develop scenarios. There are descriptions and evaluations for each." | ||
| + | |||
| + | Bishop, Peter, Andy Hines and Terry Collins (2007), “The current state of scenario development: | ||
| + | http:// | ||
| + | |||
| + | "In my experience, scenario planning is an interpretive practice – it’s really closer to magic than technique. ... Look long enough, hard enough, and the pieces will fall into place. Magic is a very difficult thing – most people spend their whole life cutting magic out.” --Napier Collyns | ||
nik