In this contribution, I write my own opinion, not that of any organization
Scenario Planning Handbook by Mario van Rijn; René van der Burgt
In my knowledge, this book only exists in Dutch, but it is too good in my opinion not to mention it.
Context
A few years ago I had my first experience with future scenarios. The situation for me then began to play out in the elaboration of the shaping of the already determined scenarios into what is called in Scenario Planning Handbook the “imagination” of the exercise. At the time, it was designed as “serious gaming”. It ended for me with a one-day facilitator role in Bruges. With the cooperation of many leading officials, this exercise was set up at several tables. The results were recorded for later processing.
So I’m glad I came across this work, which taught me how much work goes into it. That it’s not just a game. In a nutshell, it is as follows:
The procedure according to Scenario Planning Handbook, in a nutshell:
- The scenario process is prepared, starting from a business idea, which is furnished with, among other things, stakeholders, feasibility of the project, and a scenario scope. Of course, support must be created in which the various roles of project management must be allocated to interested parties, and where “brains” must be brought around the table to think along about the approach and elaboration of a number of aspects. As in any project, one of the outcomes is a plan of action, with various possible working methods.
- Then scenarios will actually be developed. What one must be able to do is open oneself up to different possible futures that do not yet exist. One has to think about uncertainties and extremes, where the truth is likely to end up somewhere. Systems thinking is also a must. The future analysis is carried out on three levels: macroanalysis, mesoanalysis and microanalysis. Mnemonics such as PEST and Porter’s (1980) five-force model can be used for this. At the end of this analysis of the future, the links between the results at these three levels are made and the possible abrupt discontinuities are taken into account. The next step is the work that is done to determine the core uncertainties, so that one can choose from multiple types of frameworks. Only then do the scenarios be developed in which the design – the imagination as it is called here – completes the step of scenario development. It is here in this last step that I first got a taste of future thinking as a strategic management technique.
- And then it’s time to apply these scenarios. Goals for the organization are the development of strategic objectives, from which policy can emerge.
This introduction of Scenario Planning Handbook was necessary for a while to get to a point where I do not agree 100% with the authors, namely in the part of securing the scenario process.
The process must be safeguarded, I fully agree with that. However, in chapter 15 we speak of levels and competency profile.
In this competency profile, the roles of participant, practitioner and master practitioner are used, using a correlation with Bloom’s taxonomy. I can also agree with such a taxonomic interpretation for these roles. And finally, I even agree with some of the characteristics of these roles. What I do not agree with is that the role of master practitioner is placed in the hands of policy makers, advisors and directors. After all, it is stated that the master practitioner must be able to do the following:
- Master of scenario thinking.
- Master in the use of scenarios in plan development.
- Master in working and deploying strategic options.
- Able to supervise and implement scenario trajectories.
- Able to develop new methods.
Final thoughts
A large part of these tasks are not filled by those positions, for the simple reason that they do not have time for them. To become a master of this, you not only have to dedicate a large part of your time to it, you also have to be a jack of all trades. This makes a “mastery” as a master practitioner a specialism in itself. In my opinion, the safeguarding of the scenario process is therefore more complex than this in terms of roles and competencies. How is it better described? I don’t have an answer to this question, but perhaps it depends on the organization, with their available people and resources, and which of them is interested in joining a think-tank-working group combination to help shape a future.
Title: “Handboek Scenarioplanning – Toekomstscenario’s als strategisch instrument voor het managen van onzekerheid”, Authors: Mario van Rijn; René van der Burgt, Publishers: Kluwer; Vakmedianet; Management Impact, ISBN: 9789013106152