Scenarios and counterfactuals as modal narratives

Booth, Charles; Rowlinson, Michael; Clark, Peter; Delahaye, Agnès; Procter, Stephen

doi:10.1016/j.futures.2008.07.037

Cited by 52 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Booth et al 2009). To clarify our argument: we did not find any critical account of Nokia's transformation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Booth et al 2009) Singular causation and general causation are two different levels of causal claim that also require a short introduction. Singular causes are particular and scenario-specific, which means that they contain more information and are difficult to generalize unless they can be reduced to general causes (Pearl 2000).…”

Section: Causality and Corporate Mythsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The anatomy and causal structure of a corporate myth: Nokia by the book

Lamberg

Laukia

Ojala

2014

Management & Organizational History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we conceptualise explanations of company-specific commercial performance as corporate myths. To improve our understanding of anatomy and causal structure of corporate myths, we analyse publications that deal with Nokia's historical transformation from a lossmaking 1980s conglomerate to a focused and successful telecommunications company in the early 1990s. From a corpus of related literature, 89 causal arguments are identified and analysed in terms of the logic of the arguments employed. The analysis shows that (1) most existing analyses offer either a specific or a biased explanation for Nokia's success; (2) very few explanations are either plausible or logical; (3) it is most unlikely that another company would achieve the same outcomes even if exactly the same decisions were made. Even though combining and comparing different explanations does not enhance the validity of any specific historical interpretation of Nokia's evolution or commercial success, it does offer an improved conceptual understanding of the ingredients found in corporate myths.

show abstract

“…Booth et al 2009). To clarify our argument: we did not find any critical account of Nokia's transformation.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Causality and Corporate Mythsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The anatomy and causal structure of a corporate myth: Nokia by the book

Lamberg

Laukia

Ojala

2014

Management & Organizational History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, it creates a new space of the unacceptable. This is a very important point to emphasise here, as we will return to this notion below when encountering some thoughts on scenario planning, especially in terms of the discomfort of the unknown (Ramírez and Selin, 2014) and the modalities of contradiction and surprise (Booth et al, 2009).…”

Section: Stylesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Li's paper concludes by taking the concepts of 'modal narratives' from Charles Booth, Peter Clark and others into his discussion of sense making and scenarios. For Booth et al (2009a and2009b) modal narratives -those that posit the question 'what if…?' -not only subvert the accepted authorities' expressions of the real, but also actively undermine them.…”

Section: Scenarios Styledmentioning

confidence: 99%

Styling the future. A philosophical approach to design and scenarios

Brassett

O’Reilly

2015

Futures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article as: Jamie Brassett, John O'Reilly, Styling the future.A philosophical approach to design and scenarios, Futures http://dx. HighlightsRecent discourses championing the strategic value of design, including Design Thinking, regard Style and Styling as an immature concern. We refute this.At its most productive, styling helps us create affective means of innovating future strategies and scenarios.An affective style is not imposed upon inert matter, but emerges from matter in unpredictable ways.An affective style explodes narratives, stories, plots and other meaning-making devices to champion uncertainty and experimentation.Most importantly, an affective style positions all of us who are implicated in an emergent creativity to reconsider our relation to the future. Abstract Since the end of the 1980s -the Decade of Style (Mort, 1996) -the value of style in design has fallen. Recent times (Whicher et al., 2015) see a focus on style as a sign of design's immaturity, while a more mature design should be attending to process, strategy and policy creation. Design Thinking has been enjoying its success in the same spirit, where it is championed (Brown

show abstract

“…Examples include alternative scenarios, counter-factual reasoning [6], role-playing and computer based models.…”

Section: Descriptive Differencementioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing futures: A social constructionist perspective on foresight methodology

Fuller

Loogma

2009

Futures

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the relationship between a particular epistemological perspective and foresight methodology. We draw on a body of social theory concerned with the way that meaning is produced and assimilated by society; specifically, the social construction of knowledge, which is distinguished from its near-neighbour constructivism by its focus on inter-subjectivity. We show that social constructionism, at least in its weak form, seems to be implicit in many epistemological assumptions underlying futures studies. We identify a range of distinctive methodological features in foresight studies, such as time, descriptions of difference, participation and values, and examine these from a social constructionist perspective. It appears that social constructionism is highly resonant with the way in which knowledge of the future is produced and used. A social constructionism perspective enables a methodological reflection on how, with what legitimacy, and to what social good, knowledge is produced. Foresight that produces symbols without inter-subjective meaning neither anticipates, nor produces futures. Our conclusion is that foresight is both a social construction, and a mechanism for social construction. Methodologically, foresight projects should acknowledge the socially constructed nature of their process and outcomes as this will lead to greater rigour and legitimacy.

show abstract

Scenarios and counterfactuals as modal narratives

Cited by 52 publications

References 35 publications

The anatomy and causal structure of a corporate myth: Nokia by the book

The anatomy and causal structure of a corporate myth: Nokia by the book

Styling the future. A philosophical approach to design and scenarios

Constructing futures: A social constructionist perspective on foresight methodology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About