IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v149y2019ics0040162519306924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comprehensive scenario intervention typology

Author

Listed:
  • Crawford, Megan M.

Abstract

Scenario planning, as a recognised organisational intervention, has steadily grown in popularity since the mid-20th century. To date, there are arguably as many methods and techniques as there are practitioners, with applications across nearly all sectors of public and private industry. Many feel that scenario planning is forever consigned to the realm of chaos, incapable of being clearly defined. We disagree and see the field as a collective of experiences and knowledge that play upon a theme, where emerging realities slowly reveal a structure to the system. In response, we propose a comprehensive typology for scenario planning interventions – the Comprehensive Scenario Intervention typology – which incorporates all dimensions of existing typologies along with additional dimensions and functions that reflect previously unrecognized and emergent topics relevant to understanding the critical realities of an intervention. The Comprehensive Scenario Intervention typology expands the scope of scenario planning interventions and adds to the theoretical foundation of the field.

Suggested Citation

  • Crawford, Megan M., 2019. "A comprehensive scenario intervention typology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:149:y:2019:i:c:s0040162519306924
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119748
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162519306924
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119748?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. Boschetti, Fabio & Price, Jennifer & Walker, Iain, 2016. "Myths of the future and scenario archetypes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 76-85.
    2. Yaniv, Ilan, 2011. "Group diversity and decision quality: Amplification and attenuation of the framing effect," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 41-49, January.
    3. Yaniv, Ilan, 2011. "Group diversity and decision quality: Amplification and attenuation of the framing effect," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 41-49.
    4. Dufva, Mikko & Ahlqvist, Toni, 2015. "Knowledge creation dynamics in foresight: A knowledge typology and exploratory method to analyse foresight workshops," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 251-268.
    5. Duckett, Dominic George & McKee, Annie J. & Sutherland, Lee-Ann & Kyle, Carol & Boden, Lisa A. & Auty, Harriet & Bessell, Paul R. & McKendrick, Iain J., 2017. "Scenario planning as communicative action: Lessons from participatory exercises conducted for the Scottish livestock industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 138-151.
    6. George Soros, 2013. "Fallibility, reflexivity, and the human uncertainty principle," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 309-329, December.
    7. Wright, George & Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul, 2009. "Teaching scenario planning: Lessons from practice in academe and business," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 323-335, April.
    8. Philippe Durance & Michel Godet, 2010. "Scenario building: Uses and abuses," Post-Print hal-02864615, HAL.
    9. Allan W Shearer, 2005. "Approaching Scenario-Based Studies: Three Perceptions about the Future and Considerations for Landscape Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 32(1), pages 67-87, February.
    10. Gary D. Eppen & R. Kipp Martin & Linus Schrage, 1989. "OR Practice—A Scenario Approach to Capacity Planning," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 37(4), pages 517-527, August.
    11. Ine H. J. Van Der Fels‐Klerx & Louis H. J. Goossens & Helmut W. Saatkamp & Suzan H. S. Horst, 2002. "Elicitation of Quantitative Data from a Heterogeneous Expert Panel: Formal Process and Application in Animal Health," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(1), pages 67-81, February.
    12. 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.
    13. Shardul Phadnis & Chris Caplice & Yossi Sheffi & Mahender Singh, 2015. "Effect of scenario planning on field experts' judgment of long-range investment decisions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(9), pages 1401-1411, September.
    14. Bowman, Gary & MacKay, R. Bradley & Masrani, Swapnesh & McKiernan, Peter, 2013. "Storytelling and the scenario process: Understanding success and failure," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 735-748.
    15. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    16. Peter A Johnson & Renee E Sieber, 2011. "Negotiating Constraints to the Adoption of Agent-Based Modeling in Tourism Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(2), pages 307-321, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Dexter V. L. Hunt & D. Rachel Lombardi & Stuart Atkinson & Austin R. G. Barber & Matthew Barnes & Christopher T. Boyko & Julie Brown & John Bryson & David Butler & Silvio Caputo & Maria Caserio & Rich, 2012. "Scenario Archetypes: Converging Rather than Diverging Themes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-33, April.
    19. Bunn, Derek W. & Salo, Ahti A., 1993. "Forecasting with scenarios," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 291-303, August.
    20. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2013. "Cognitive benefits of scenario planning: Its impact on biases and decision quality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 801-814.
    21. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter & Phillips, Richard, 2017. "‘Branching scenarios’ seeking articulated action for regional regeneration – A case study of limited success," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 189-202.
    22. Phelps, R. & Chan, C. & Kapsalis, S. C., 2001. "Does scenario planning affect performance? Two exploratory studies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 223-232, March.
    23. David M. Iwaniec & Daniel L. Childers & Kurt VanLehn & Arnim Wiek, 2014. "Studying, Teaching and Applying Sustainability Visions Using Systems Modeling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-18, July.
    24. Ramirez, Rafael & Wilkinson, Angela, 2014. "Rethinking the 2×2 scenario method: Grid or frames?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 254-264.
    25. Worthington, William J. & Collins, Jamie D. & Hitt, Michael A., 2009. "Beyond risk mitigation: Enhancing corporate innovation with scenario planning," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 52(5), pages 441-450, September.
    26. Therese Jefferson & Alison Preston, 2005. "Australia'S "Other" Gender Wage Gap: Baby Boomers And Compulsory Superannuation Accounts," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 79-101.
    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. Shari De Baets & Dilek Önkal & Wasim Ahmed, 2022. "Do Risky Scenarios Affect Forecasts of Savings and Expenses?," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-28, February.
    2. Douglas, Conor M.W. & Panagiotoglou, Dimitra & Dragojlovic, Nick & Lynd, Larry, 2021. "Methodology for constructing scenarios for health policy research: The case of coverage decision-making for drugs for rare diseases in Canada," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Oughton,Edward J. & Comini,Niccolo & Foster,Vivien & Hall,Jim W., 2021. "Policy Choices Can Help Keep 4G and 5G Universal Broadband Affordable," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9563, The World Bank.
    4. Edward J Oughton & Niccol`o Comini & Vivien Foster & Jim W Hall, 2021. "Policy choices can help keep 4G and 5G universal broadband affordable," Papers 2101.07820, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    5. Crawford, Megan M. & Wright, George, 2022. "The value of mass-produced COVID-19 scenarios: A quality evaluation of development processes and scenario content," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Oughton, Edward J. & Comini, Niccolò & Foster, Vivien & Hall, Jim W., 2022. "Policy choices can help keep 4G and 5G universal broadband affordable," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Meadows, Maureen & O'Brien, Frances A., 2020. "The use of scenarios in developing strategy: An analysis of conversation and video data," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(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. 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.
    2. Frith, David & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2020. "Opening the ‘black box’ of scenario planning through realist synthesis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Filippo Zanin & Eugenio Comuzzi, 2019. "Scenarizzazione e pianificazione strategica nei contesti complessi," MANAGEMENT CONTROL, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(1 suppl.), pages 95-120.
    5. Ramboarison-Lalao, Lovanirina & Gannouni, Kais, 2019. "Liberated firm, a leverage of well-being and technological change? A prospective study based on the scenario method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 129-139.
    6. 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.
    7. Chang, Suk-Gwon, 2015. "A structured scenario approach to multi-screen ecosystem forecasting in Korean communications market," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-20.
    8. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    9. Minkkinen, Matti, 2019. "The anatomy of plausible futures in policy processes: Comparing the cases of data protection and comprehensive security," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 172-180.
    10. James Derbyshire & Mandeep Dhami & Ian Belton & Dilek Önkal, 2023. "The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), June.
    11. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    12. Metz, Ashley & Hartley, Paul, 2020. "Scenario development as valuation: Opportunities for reflexivity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    13. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Fabio Boschetti & Elizabeth A. Fulton & Nicola J. Grigg, 2014. "Citizens’ Views of Australia’s Future to 2050," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, December.
    15. Hussain, M. & Tapinos, E. & Knight, L., 2017. "Scenario-driven roadmapping for technology foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 160-177.
    16. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    17. Ramirez, R. & Bhatti, Y. & Tapinos, E., 2020. "Exploring how experience and learning curves decrease the time invested in scenario planning interventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    18. Jiang, Ruth & Kleer, Robin & Piller, Frank T., 2017. "Predicting the future of additive manufacturing: A Delphi study on economic and societal implications of 3D printing for 2030," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 84-97.
    19. Heinonen, Sirkka & Minkkinen, Matti & Karjalainen, Joni & Inayatullah, Sohail, 2017. "Testing transformative energy scenarios through causal layered analysis gaming," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 101-113.
    20. de Bruin, Jilske Olda & Kok, Kasper & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke Alberttine, 2017. "Exploring the potential of combining participative backcasting and exploratory scenarios for robust strategies: Insights from the Dutch forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P2), pages 269-282.

    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:149:y:2019:i:c:s0040162519306924. 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.