The Practice of Scenario Planning: An Analysis of Inter‐ and Intra‐organizational Strategizing

Abstract

Strategic activity is often punctuated through the application of strategy tools. Despite widespread use, a lack of understanding exists regarding the impact such tools and their practices have on an organization's strategy process. Of the growing body of research tackling the phenomenon, none appears to extend beyond an intra-organizational setting. Acknowledging the importance of multi-organizational partnerships, particularly in the public sector, in this paper an attempt is made to help fill this void through examining the application and effect of a scenario planning process at an inter-organizational level. Conceptualizing scenario planning as a practice of simplexity, where complexity of thought combines with simplicity of action, an in-depth, longitudinal case study is used to demonstrate the importance and interaction of sensemaking, storytelling and organizing in creating meaning within strategizing activities at the inter-organizational level. However, also demonstrated is the relative weakness of the output of the scenario planning process − the stories − as a boundary object capable of transferring knowledge and meaning to the intra-organizational level. Through empirical and theoretical integration a model is developed presenting the flow of practices and artefacts used in sensemaking within inter-and intra-organizational strategizing.

Scenario planning: An investigation of the construct and its measurement

“…This tool has been developed largely by practitioners and, as such, lacks theoretical aspects (Derbyshire, 2016;Goodwin & Wright, 2001). Bowman (2015) similarly states that "an absence of theoretical belonging has left scenario-based approaches drifting between a multitude of frameworks." Bowman (2015) similarly states that "an absence of theoretical belonging has left scenario-based approaches drifting between a multitude of frameworks."…”

“…Furthermore, while indicators of scenario planning have varied widely across approaches, the most cited literature presents scenario planning as a structured and analytical process to create characterization of multiple futures to enable stakeholders to rethink strategic decisions and policies (Bowman, 2015). As such, scenarios are constructed through actors' interpretations of their environment.…”

“…Sarpong and Maclean (2011) state that scenario planning could be considered as a social practice, where learning from the past, perception of the present, and prediction of the future together enable us to reperceive the organization and its environment. Moreover, based on the concept of simplixity, Bowman (2015) argues that the complexity of thought combined with the simplicity of action enables us to focus on two aspects of scenario planning: the process and scenario. Moreover, based on the concept of simplixity, Bowman (2015) argues that the complexity of thought combined with the simplicity of action enables us to focus on two aspects of scenario planning: the process and scenario.…”

Increasing the effectiveness of participatory scenario development through codesign

“…The intuitive logics model is a plausibility-based approach that enables participants, usually within a workshop setting, to create narratives describing unfolding causal processes, resulting in a set of distinct, alternative possible future worlds. Its popularity stems from its accessibility, providing a good mix of sophistication and ease of use for both project organizers and process participants (Wright et al 2013, Bowman 2016. Its flexibility also lends itself to a wide range of scenario purposes and allows for easy adaptation to a wide variety of contexts.…”

“…Our stakeholders, for instance, indicated that one day for scenario development would be all that it would be reasonable to ask people to commit, a design requirement that runs counter to the sufficient time required for scenarios to prompt deeper reflection and exploration (see also Table 2). This risk is particularly relevant when codesigning scenario-based processes, given the disconnect between typical preferences toward pragmatic and time driven outcomes with a concrete focus versus the embracing of uncertainty and openness for exploration and new ideas through which scenarios are most truly successful (Burt and Chermack 2008, Ramírez and Selin 2014, Vervoort et al 2015, Bowman 2016.…”