How Organizations Manage the Future 2018
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-74506-0_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What Scenarios Are You Missing? Poststructuralism for Deconstructing and Reconstructing Organizational Futures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Such imaginative storylines are often viewed with skepticism as storylines developed in a group setting makes scenario products subjective, which raises the questions about scientific credibility (Lloyd and Schweizer, 2014) and face validity (Kurniawan and Kundurpi, 2019). Further, Scheele et al (2018) explain that storylines, as a product of scenario exercises, can be influenced simply by using different scenario methods or engaging different groups of participants. However, proponents of imaginative scenarios argue that the "process" of scenario development is more useful than any scenario "product" for integrating and mobilizing knowledge and internalizing different future options that will benefit the participants involved (Anderson, 2010;Swart et al, 2004;Wilkinson and Kupers, 2014;Kitchin and Kneale, 2001).…”
Section: Figure 3 Virtual World Illustrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Such imaginative storylines are often viewed with skepticism as storylines developed in a group setting makes scenario products subjective, which raises the questions about scientific credibility (Lloyd and Schweizer, 2014) and face validity (Kurniawan and Kundurpi, 2019). Further, Scheele et al (2018) explain that storylines, as a product of scenario exercises, can be influenced simply by using different scenario methods or engaging different groups of participants. However, proponents of imaginative scenarios argue that the "process" of scenario development is more useful than any scenario "product" for integrating and mobilizing knowledge and internalizing different future options that will benefit the participants involved (Anderson, 2010;Swart et al, 2004;Wilkinson and Kupers, 2014;Kitchin and Kneale, 2001).…”
Section: Figure 3 Virtual World Illustrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First, more thorough applications of CIB to cases of value change are needed to learn about its benefits and limitations. For example, its application in a multi-stakeholder context could help us understand how to cope with conflicting opinions of the descriptors and judgement affecting value change (a theoretical discussion of potential benefits can be found in Scheele et al (2018). Second, more work is needed to understand the mechanisms of value change.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The behavior and decisions of today's actors is influenced by their perceptions of the future [67]. When scenarios present a pinched aperture on the future, the danger is a pinched repertoire of anticipatory changes in behaviors and decisions.…”
Section: Consequencesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding methods, Scheele et al [67] usefully call for an examination of "the particular ontological and epistemological commitments embedded in methodological choices for scenario development". These commitments shape which scenarios are explored and accepted as plausible, tending to privilege predictive over exploratory or normative methods, and model-based over narrative emphasis.…”
Section: Ways Forwardmentioning
confidence: 99%