Social Foundation of Scenario Planning

Nicholas James Rowland, Matthew Jon Spaniol

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Resumé

In this article, the authors establish that models of scenario planning typically involve a series of phases, stages, or steps that imply a sequenced (i.e., linear or chronological) process. Recursive models, in contrast, allow phases to repeat, thus, incorporating iteration. The authors acknowledge the concerns voiced in futures studies that while models based on practical experience are common in the literature, forming a theoretical basis for why those practices work is often considered elusive. This includes models that imply linearity and those that accommodate iterativity. With theory from science and technology studies (STS) on knowledge production, the authors explain transition from one phase to the next and iteration between and within phases based on social negotiation. To this end, the authors examine the interplay between the “scenario development” phase and the “scenario use” phase of a planning process with a non-governmental organization in Denmark. The upshot for facilitators is practical insight into how transition between phases and phase iteration in scenario planning can be identified, leveraged, and, thus, managed. The upshot for scholars is a related insight into why scenario planning is a kind of laboratory for futures studies wherein the future is experimented upon.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftTechnological Forecasting and Social Change
Vol/bind124
Sider (fra-til)6-15
ISSN0040-1625
DOI
StatusUdgivet - nov. 2017

Citer dette

@article{7400a950c51c44f0aed6980dd6e78daf,
title = "Social Foundation of Scenario Planning",
abstract = "In this article, the authors establish that models of scenario planning typically involve a series of phases, stages, or steps that imply a sequenced (i.e., linear or chronological) process. Recursive models, in contrast, allow phases to repeat, thus, incorporating iteration. The authors acknowledge the concerns voiced in futures studies that while models based on practical experience are common in the literature, forming a theoretical basis for why those practices work is often considered elusive. This includes models that imply linearity and those that accommodate iterativity. With theory from science and technology studies (STS) on knowledge production, the authors explain transition from one phase to the next and iteration between and within phases based on social negotiation. To this end, the authors examine the interplay between the “scenario development” phase and the “scenario use” phase of a planning process with a non-governmental organization in Denmark. The upshot for facilitators is practical insight into how transition between phases and phase iteration in scenario planning can be identified, leveraged, and, thus, managed. The upshot for scholars is a related insight into why scenario planning is a kind of laboratory for futures studies wherein the future is experimented upon.",
keywords = "Scenario development, Scenario method, Scenario use, science and technology studies, Sociology of science",
author = "Rowland, {Nicholas James} and Spaniol, {Matthew Jon}",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.013",
language = "English",
volume = "124",
pages = "6--15",
journal = "Technological Forecasting and Social Change",
issn = "0040-1625",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

Social Foundation of Scenario Planning. / Rowland, Nicholas James; Spaniol, Matthew Jon.

I: Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Bind 124, 11.2017, s. 6-15.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Social Foundation of Scenario Planning

AU - Rowland, Nicholas James

AU - Spaniol, Matthew Jon

PY - 2017/11

Y1 - 2017/11

N2 - In this article, the authors establish that models of scenario planning typically involve a series of phases, stages, or steps that imply a sequenced (i.e., linear or chronological) process. Recursive models, in contrast, allow phases to repeat, thus, incorporating iteration. The authors acknowledge the concerns voiced in futures studies that while models based on practical experience are common in the literature, forming a theoretical basis for why those practices work is often considered elusive. This includes models that imply linearity and those that accommodate iterativity. With theory from science and technology studies (STS) on knowledge production, the authors explain transition from one phase to the next and iteration between and within phases based on social negotiation. To this end, the authors examine the interplay between the “scenario development” phase and the “scenario use” phase of a planning process with a non-governmental organization in Denmark. The upshot for facilitators is practical insight into how transition between phases and phase iteration in scenario planning can be identified, leveraged, and, thus, managed. The upshot for scholars is a related insight into why scenario planning is a kind of laboratory for futures studies wherein the future is experimented upon.

AB - In this article, the authors establish that models of scenario planning typically involve a series of phases, stages, or steps that imply a sequenced (i.e., linear or chronological) process. Recursive models, in contrast, allow phases to repeat, thus, incorporating iteration. The authors acknowledge the concerns voiced in futures studies that while models based on practical experience are common in the literature, forming a theoretical basis for why those practices work is often considered elusive. This includes models that imply linearity and those that accommodate iterativity. With theory from science and technology studies (STS) on knowledge production, the authors explain transition from one phase to the next and iteration between and within phases based on social negotiation. To this end, the authors examine the interplay between the “scenario development” phase and the “scenario use” phase of a planning process with a non-governmental organization in Denmark. The upshot for facilitators is practical insight into how transition between phases and phase iteration in scenario planning can be identified, leveraged, and, thus, managed. The upshot for scholars is a related insight into why scenario planning is a kind of laboratory for futures studies wherein the future is experimented upon.

KW - Scenario development

KW - Scenario method

KW - Scenario use

KW - science and technology studies

KW - Sociology of science

U2 - 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.013

DO - 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.02.013

M3 - Journal article

VL - 124

SP - 6

EP - 15

JO - Technological Forecasting and Social Change

JF - Technological Forecasting and Social Change

SN - 0040-1625

ER -