IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v153y2020ics0040162519310169.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rigidities of imagination in scenario planning: Strategic foresight through ‘Unlearning’

Author

Listed:
  • Burt, George
  • Nair, Anup Karath

Abstract

The emergence of strategic foresight from scenarios has constantly puzzled theorists. Whilst practitioners and scholars of scenario planning contend that scenarios generate strategic foresight by both stretching a manager's mental model by exposing them to a wide range of equally plausible futures, and triggering and accelerating processes of organisational learning, the true nature of this link between strategic foresight and organisational learning remains vague and undertheorised. Our paper tackles this puzzle by explicitly focussing on how strategic foresight emerges from the organisational learning process that unfolds during scenario planning. We undertook a 24-month long longitudinal study capturing both ‘actions’ and ‘reflections’ of a leading Scotch whisky manufacturer during their scenario planning exercises. Surprisingly, and perhaps counterintuitively, our findings unearth the role of ‘unlearning’ rather than ‘learning’ as a key mechanism that leads to the emergence of strategic foresight within the scenario planning process. Further reflection on the ‘unlearning process’ reveals that unlearning involves a ‘letting go’ or relaxing of deeply held assumptions and this in turn inadvertently leads to strategic foresight. Overall, by developing and introducing ‘unlearning’ as a key mechanism for the generation of strategic foresight, our paper aims to improve the effectiveness of scenario planning interventions as practiced.

Suggested Citation

  • Burt, George & Nair, Anup Karath, 2020. "Rigidities of imagination in scenario planning: Strategic foresight through ‘Unlearning’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:153:y:2020:i:c:s0040162519310169
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162519310169
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119927?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tapinos, E. & Pyper, N., 2018. "Forward looking analysis: Investigating how individuals ‘do’ foresight and make sense of the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 292-302.
    2. Derbyshire, James & Wright, George, 2017. "Augmenting the intuitive logics scenario planning method for a more comprehensive analysis of causation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 254-266.
    3. Andrew H. van de Ven & George P. Huber, 1990. "Longitudinal Field Research Methods for Studying Processes of Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 213-219, August.
    4. Wilkinson, Angela & Kupers, Roland & Mangalagiu, Diana, 2013. "How plausibility-based scenario practices are grappling with complexity to appreciate and address 21st century challenges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 699-710.
    5. Haridimos Tsoukas, 2009. "A Dialogical Approach to the Creation of New Knowledge in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(6), pages 941-957, December.
    6. Wright, George & Goodwin, Paul, 2009. "Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability: Enhancing the scenario method," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 813-825, October.
    7. Haridimos Tsoukas & Robert Chia, 2002. "On Organizational Becoming: Rethinking Organizational Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 567-582, October.
    8. Wright, George & Bradfield, Ron & Cairns, George, 2013. "Does the intuitive logics method – and its recent enhancements – produce “effective” scenarios?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 631-642.
    9. Linda Argote & Ella Miron-Spektor, 2011. "Organizational Learning: From Experience to Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1123-1137, October.
    10. Sarpong, David & Maclean, Mairi, 2016. "Cultivating strategic foresight in practise: A relational perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 2812-2820.
    11. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    12. Mark Easterby‐Smith & Mary Crossan & Davide Nicolini, 2000. "Organizational Learning: Debates Past, Present And Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 783-796, September.
    13. Bootz, Jean-Philippe & Monti, Régine & Durance, Philippe & Pacini, Vincent & Chapuy, Pierre, 2019. "The links between French school of foresight and organizational learning: An assessment of developments in the last ten years," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 92-104.
    14. Jonathan I. Klein, 1989. "Parenthetic Learning in Organizations: Toward the Unlearning of the Unlearning Model," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 291-308, May.
    15. Joseph Coates & Philippe Durance & Michel Godet, 2010. "Strategic Foresight Issue," Post-Print hal-02864607, HAL.
    16. Bood, Robert & Postma, Theo, 1997. "Strategic learning with scenarios," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 633-647, December.
    17. Poole, Marshall Scott & Van de Ven, Andrew H. & Dooley, Kevin & Holmes, Michael E., 2000. "Organizational Change and Innovation Processes: Theory and Methods for Research," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195131987, Decembrie.
    18. Robert M. Grant, 2003. "Strategic planning in a turbulent environment: evidence from the oil majors," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(6), pages 491-517, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tran, Yen & Truong, Anh Tran Tram, 2022. "Knowledge recontextualization by returnee entrepreneurs: The dynamic learning perspective," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3).
    2. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2020. "Unpacking the process of overseas knowledge recontextualisation in returnee entrepreneurship - a learning perspective : a study of returnee entrepreneurs in Vietnam," OSF Preprints y5psh, Center for Open Science.
    3. Marinković, Milan & Al-Tabbaa, Omar & Khan, Zaheer & Wu, Jie, 2022. "Corporate foresight: A systematic literature review and future research trajectories," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 289-311.
    4. Areej Hijazin & Javier Tamayo-Torres & Nawras Nusairat, 2023. "Moderating the Synergies between Business Intelligence and Strategic Foresight: Navigating Uncertainty for Future Success through Knowledge Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    6. Ziyi Zhao & Yulu Yan, 2023. "The Role of Organizational Unlearning in Manufacturing Firms’ Sustainable Digital Innovation: The Mechanism of Strategic Flexibility and Organizational Slack," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Burt, George & Mackay, David & Mendibil, Kepa, 2021. "Overcoming multi-stakeholder fragmented narratives in land use, woodland and forestry policy: The role scenario planning and ‘dissociative jolts’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Bourgeois, Robin & Penunia, Esther & Bisht, Sonali & Boruk, Don, 2017. "Foresight for all: Co-elaborative scenario building and empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 178-188.
    3. Magnani, Giovanna & Zucchella, Antonella, 2021. "Portfolios of learning in entrepreneurial internationalisation," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(2).
    4. Burt, George & Mackay, David J. & van der Heijden, Kees & Verheijdt, Charlotte, 2017. "Openness disposition: Readiness characteristics that influence participant benefits from scenario planning as strategic conversation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 16-25.
    5. Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Potential surprise theory as a theoretical foundation for scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 77-87.
    6. Rinat Zhanbayev & Saule Sagintayeva & Abildina Ainur & Anton Nazarov, 2020. "The Use of the Foresight Methods in Developing an Algorithm for Conducting Qualitative Examination of the Research Activities Results on the Example of the Republic of Kazakhstan," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-19, November.
    7. James Derbyshire, 2019. "Use of scenario planning as a theory‐driven evaluation tool," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), March.
    8. Rowe, Emily & Wright, George & Derbyshire, James, 2017. "Enhancing horizon scanning by utilizing pre-developed scenarios: Analysis of current practice and specification of a process improvement to aid the identification of important ‘weak signals’," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 224-235.
    9. Frith, David & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2020. "Opening the ‘black box’ of scenario planning through realist synthesis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    10. Oh, Chang Hoon & Shin, Jiyoung & Oetzel, Jennifer, 2021. "How does experience change firms' foreign investment decisions to non-market events?," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1).
    11. Wayland, Rebecca, 2019. "Three senses of paradigm in scenario methodology: A preliminary framework and systematic approach for using intuitive logics scenarios to change mental models and improve strategic decision-making in ," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 504-516.
    12. Tiberius, Victor & Siglow, Caroline & Sendra-García, Javier, 2020. "Scenarios in business and management: The current stock and research opportunities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 235-242.
    13. Derbyshire, James & Wright, George, 2017. "Augmenting the intuitive logics scenario planning method for a more comprehensive analysis of causation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 254-266.
    14. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Richard Peter, 2017. "Experiential Learning, Competitive Selection, and Downside Risk: A New Perspective on Managerial Risk Taking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 915-930, October.
    15. Ojha, Divesh & Struckell, Elisabeth & Acharya, Chandan & Patel, Pankaj C., 2018. "Supply chain organizational learning, exploration, exploitation, and firm performance: A creation-dispersion perspective," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 70-82.
    16. Patricia Doyle Corner & Kathryn Pavlovich, 2016. "Shared Value Through Inner Knowledge Creation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 543-555, May.
    17. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Sakellariou, Evy & Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2022. "Foresight, sensemaking, and new product development: Constructing meanings for the future," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    19. Meissner, Philip & Brands, Christian & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Quantifiying blind spots and weak signals in executive judgment: A structured integration of expert judgment into the scenario development process," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 244-253.
    20. Li, Mingxiang, 2021. "Exploring novel technologies through board interlocks: Spillover vs. broad exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:153:y:2020:i:c:s0040162519310169. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.