IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v88y2014icp122-139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Axiomatic foundation and a structured process for developing firm-specific Intuitive Logics scenarios

Author

Listed:
  • Phadnis, Shardul
  • Caplice, Chris
  • Singh, Mahender
  • Sheffi, Yossi

Abstract

This paper presents an axiomatic foundation for developing firm-specific scenarios in the tradition of the Intuitive Logics School (ILS), a structured scenario creation process built on that foundation, and its application to a case. The ILS outlines a high-level scenario-development process, but without a theoretical basis or prescriptions for executing different process steps. The lack of theoretical grounding has led to a proliferation of methods for developing scenarios, without any basis for comparing them. We fill this gap in the literature by articulating a set of axioms characterizing the nature of human knowledge about the business environment and scenarios as depictions of that environment. Using this theoretical foundation, we devise a structured process for developing scenarios. Finally, we demonstrate this process by applying it to develop four scenarios for a firm in the U.S. healthcare sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Phadnis, Shardul & Caplice, Chris & Singh, Mahender & Sheffi, Yossi, 2014. "Axiomatic foundation and a structured process for developing firm-specific Intuitive Logics scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 122-139.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:88:y:2014:i:c:p:122-139
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.06.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162514002194
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.06.019?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eden, Colin, 1988. "Cognitive mapping," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-13, July.
    2. 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.
    3. Gerard P. Hodgkinson & Gerry Johnson, 1994. "Exploring The Mental Models Of Competitive Strategists: The Case For A Processual Approach," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 525-552, July.
    4. 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.
    5. Warth, Johannes & von der Gracht, Heiko A. & Darkow, Inga-Lena, 2013. "A dissent-based approach for multi-stakeholder scenario development — The future of electric drive vehicles," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 566-583.
    6. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    7. Paul Goodwin & George Wright, 2001. "Enhancing Strategy Evaluation in Scenario Planning: a Role for Decision Analysis," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 1-16, January.
    8. Sarah Kaplan, 2011. "Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 665-695, May.
    9. Hoffman, Robert R. & Shadbolt, Nigel R. & Burton, A. Mike & Klein, Gary, 1995. "Eliciting Knowledge from Experts: A Methodological Analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 129-158, May.
    10. Sarah Kaplan & Wanda J. Orlikowski, 2013. "Temporal Work in Strategy Making," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 965-995, August.
    11. Karl E. Weick & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe & David Obstfeld, 2005. "Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 409-421, August.
    12. MacKay, Brad & Tambeau, Paul, 2013. "A structuration approach to scenario praxis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 673-686.
    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. Cheng, M.N. & Wong, Jane W.K. & Cheung, C.F. & Leung, K.H., 2016. "A scenario-based roadmapping method for strategic planning and forecasting: A case study in a testing, inspection and certification company," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 44-62.
    2. Shardul Sharad Phadnis, 2021. "Advancing scenario planning theory: A commentary on Fergnani and Chermack, 2021," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. John J. Oliver, 2023. "Scenario planning: Reflecting on cases of actionable knowledge," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3-4), September.
    6. Perez-Franco, R. & Phadnis, S. & Caplice, C. & Sheffi, Y., 2016. "Rethinking supply chain strategy as a conceptual system," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 384-396.
    7. 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.
    8. Gary Bowman & R. Bradley MacKay, 2020. "Scenario planning as strategic activity: A practice‐orientated approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    9. Shardul Sharad Phadnis & Inga‐Lena Darkow, 2021. "Scenario planning as a strategy process to foster supply chain adaptability: theoretical framework and longitudinal case," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(2), June.
    10. Giulia Parola, 2020. "Escape from parents? basement? Post COVID-19 scenarios for the future of youth employment in Italy," QUADERNI DI ECONOMIA DEL LAVORO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2020(111), pages 51-71.
    11. 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.
    12. Bowman, Gary & Parks, Ryan W., 2024. "Between episodes of strategy: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and dysfunction in a scenario planning process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(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. 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.
    2. Bowman, Gary & Parks, Ryan W., 2024. "Between episodes of strategy: Sociomateriality, sensemaking, and dysfunction in a scenario planning process," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    3. Gary Bowman & R. Bradley MacKay, 2020. "Scenario planning as strategic activity: A practice‐orientated approach," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Lehr, Thomas & Lorenz, Ullrich & Willert, Markus & Rohrbeck, René, 2017. "Scenario-based strategizing: Advancing the applicability in strategists' teams," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 214-224.
    8. Gino Cattani & Daniel Sands & Joe Porac & Jason Greenberg, 2018. "Competitive Sensemaking in Value Creation and Capture," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 632-657, December.
    9. Camblanne, Lionel, 2013. "Family vision and cognition: An illustration through forest owners’ harvesting decisions," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 245-259.
    10. 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.
    11. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    12. MacKay, R. Bradley & Stoyanova, Veselina, 2017. "Scenario planning with a sociological eye: Augmenting the intuitive logics approach to understanding the Future of Scotland and the UK," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 88-100.
    13. Stea, Diego & Foss, Nicolai J. & Christensen, Peter Holdt, 2015. "Physical separation in the workplace: Separation cues, separation awareness, and employee motivation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 462-471.
    14. Coget, Jean-Francois & Haag, Christophe & Gibson, Donald E., 2011. "Anger and fear in decision-making: The case of film directors on set," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 476-490.
    15. Moshe Farjoun & Christopher Ansell & Arjen Boin, 2015. "PERSPECTIVE—Pragmatism in Organization Studies: Meeting the Challenges of a Dynamic and Complex World," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1787-1804, December.
    16. Jan-Erik Vahlne & Jan Johanson, 2017. "From internationalization to evolution: The Uppsala model at 40 years," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(9), pages 1087-1102, December.
    17. Abrahamsen, Morten H. & Halinen, Aino & Naudé, Peter, 2023. "The role of visioning in business network strategizing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    18. Cheng, M.N. & Wong, Jane W.K. & Cheung, C.F. & Leung, K.H., 2016. "A scenario-based roadmapping method for strategic planning and forecasting: A case study in a testing, inspection and certification company," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 44-62.
    19. Bäumer, Marcus, 2020. "What matters to investment professionals in decision making? The role of soft factors in stock selection," EIKV-Schriftenreihe zum Wissens- und Wertemanagement, European Institute for Knowledge & Value Management (EIKV), Luxembourg, volume 44, number 44.
    20. Goodwin, Paul, 2002. "Forecasting games: can game theory win?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 369-374.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:88:y:2014:i:c:p:122-139. 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.