IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intfor/v33y2017i1p254-266.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Augmenting the intuitive logics scenario planning method for a more comprehensive analysis of causation

Author

Listed:
  • Derbyshire, James
  • Wright, George

Abstract

This paper shows that, in practice, the standard approach to scenario planning, known as ‘intuitive logics’, is overly focused on uncovering causes of one type, known as ‘efficient cause’. We outline and apply a broader consideration of causes, leading to a more sophisticated analysis of uncertainty. Our focus is on the incorporation of Aristotle’s nuanced analysis of causation. We incorporate the features of our augmented scenario development approach in a practical step-by-step methodology, and draw out several implications for expert knowledge elicitation.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:33:y:2017:i:1:p:254-266
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.01.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169207016300152
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijforecast.2016.01.004?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. Hughes, Nick, 2013. "Towards improving the relevance of scenarios for public policy questions: A proposed methodological framework for policy relevant low carbon scenarios," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 687-698.
    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. Makridakis, Spyros & Taleb, Nassim, 2009. "Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 716-733, October.
    4. Ramírez, Rafael & Österman, Riku & Grönquist, Daniel, 2013. "Scenarios and early warnings as dynamic capabilities to frame managerial attention," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 825-838.
    5. Willy Aspinall, 2010. "A route to more tractable expert advice," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7279), pages 294-295, January.
    6. Bradfield, Ron & Cairns, George & Wright, George, 2015. "Teaching scenario analysis—An action learning pedagogy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 44-52.
    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. Schoemaker, Paul J.H. & Day, George S. & Snyder, Scott A., 2013. "Integrating organizational networks, weak signals, strategic radars and scenario planning," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 815-824.
    9. 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.
    10. Shackle,G. L. S., 2010. "Decision Order and Time in Human Affairs," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521147491, October.
    11. Fushing, Hsieh & Jordà, Òscar & Beisner, Brianne & McCowan, Brenda, 2014. "Computing systemic risk using multiple behavioral and keystone networks: The emergence of a crisis in primate societies and banks," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 797-806.
    12. 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.
    13. Orrell, David & McSharry, Patrick, 2009. "System economics: Overcoming the pitfalls of forecasting models via a multidisciplinary approach," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 734-743, October.
    14. George Burt & George Wright & Ron Bradfield & George Cairns & Kees van der Heijden, 2006. "The Role of Scenario Planning in Exploring the Environment in View of the Limitations of PEST and Its Derivatives," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 50-76, January.
    15. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13443 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. 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.
    17. Mark de Rond & Raymond‐Alain Thietart, 2007. "Choice, chance, and inevitability in strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 535-551, May.
    18. MacKay, Brad & Tambeau, Paul, 2013. "A structuration approach to scenario praxis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(4), pages 673-686.
    19. 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.
    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. Bolger, Fergus & Wright, George, 2017. "Use of expert knowledge to anticipate the future: Issues, analysis and directions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 230-243.
    2. Christian Stummer & Lars Lüpke & Markus Günther, 2021. "Beaming market simulation to the future by combining agent-based modeling with scenario analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 91(9), pages 1469-1497, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Venmathy Samanaseh & Zainura Zainon Noor & Siti Norasyiqin & Che Hafizan & Muhammad Amani Mazlan & Florianna Lendai Michael, 2023. "A review of scenario planning for emissions in environmental assessments," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(4), pages 924-936, July.
    5. Bezjian, James & Stoyanova, Veselina & McKiernan, Peter & MacKay, R. Bradley, 2020. "Synthesizing scenario planning and industry recipes through an analysis of the Hollywood film industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    6. 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.
    7. 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).
    8. Tser-Yieth Chen & Chi-Jui Huang, 2019. "A Two-Tier Scenario Planning Model of Environmental Sustainability Policy in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-21, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Chen, Kaihua & Ren, Zhipeng & Mu, Shijun & Sun, Tara Qian & Mu, Rongping, 2020. "Integrating the Delphi survey into scenario planning for China's renewable energy development strategy towards 2030," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Sirikhan, Kulacha, 2022. "Potentials and Challenges of The Connected Autonomous Shared Electric Vehicle (CASE) from Urban Geography Perspective in Southeast Asia Mega-Urban Regions," 31st European Regional ITS Conference, Gothenburg 2022: Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging monopolies, promoting competition and developing regulatory regimes 265670, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    13. 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.
    14. Hanna, Richard & Gross, Robert, 2021. "How do energy systems model and scenario studies explicitly represent socio-economic, political and technological disruption and discontinuity? Implications for policy and practitioners," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    15. Bouhalleb, Arafet & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2023. "The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Anamaria Bukvic, 2019. "Visualizing the Possibility of Relocation: Coastal Relocation Leaf," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-12, June.
    18. Pieter Bloemen & Tim Reeder & Chris Zevenbergen & Jeroen Rijke & Ashley Kingsborough, 2018. "Lessons learned from applying adaptation pathways in flood risk management and challenges for the further development of this approach," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 1083-1108, October.
    19. Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 2020. "Thematic reflections on 18 expert commentaries," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    20. James Derbyshire, 2019. "Use of scenario planning as a theory‐driven evaluation tool," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), March.
    21. Ilkka Tuomi, 2019. "Chronotopes of foresight: Models of time‐space in probabilistic, possibilistic and constructivist futures," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), June.
    22. Solomiia Fedushko & Tomáš Peráček & Yuriy Syerov & Olha Trach, 2021. "Development of Methods for the Strategic Management of Web Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    23. Megan M. Crawford & Eoin Plant‐O'Toole, 2023. "A review of strategic planning for dynamic supply chains: Preparing for uncertainty using scenarios," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3-4), September.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Crawford, Megan M., 2019. "A comprehensive scenario intervention typology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Cairns, George & Wright, George & Fairbrother, Peter, 2016. "Promoting articulated action from diverse stakeholders in response to public policy scenarios: A case analysis of the use of ‘scenario improvisation’ method," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 97-108.
    13. Metz, Ashley & Hartley, Paul, 2020. "Scenario development as valuation: Opportunities for reflexivity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    14. Ram, Camelia, 2020. "Scenario presentation and scenario generation in multi-criteria assessments: An exploratory study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    15. 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.
    16. 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).
    17. James Derbyshire, 2019. "Use of scenario planning as a theory‐driven evaluation tool," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), March.
    18. 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.
    19. Kishita, Yusuke & Mizuno, Yuji & Fukushige, Shinichi & Umeda, Yasushi, 2020. "Scenario structuring methodology for computer-aided scenario design: An application to envisioning sustainable futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    20. Frith, David & Tapinos, Efstathios, 2020. "Opening the ‘black box’ of scenario planning through realist synthesis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).

    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:intfor:v:33:y:2017:i:1:p:254-266. 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.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast .

    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.