FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE最新文献

{"title":"Selecting futures: The role of conviction, narratives, ambivalence, and constructive doubt","authors":"Mark Fenton‐O'Creevy, D. Tuckett","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.111","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.111","url":null,"abstract":"Institutional decisions about the future, that matter, are usually made in a context of considerable uncertainty. Although the intention is success the possibility of failure must inevitably be present, whether recognized or not. The principal purposes of this study are twofold. First, we argue that uncertainty contexts require that decisions to create the future are supported by a particular type of future oriented or foresight narrative which we call a conviction narrative . Its essential function is to combine available knowledge about how to achieve desired outcomes with the feeling that the selected action will achieve the aim. Second, we introduce two states, in which conviction may be achieved, divided, and integrated, to argue that research into how conviction is achieved by individuals or institutions making decisions, can be an extremely promising and practical avenue for foresight studies, throwing light on several issues, particularly the oft ‐ noted reluctance to change course and attachment to single stories of the future. The focus on the reality of uncertainty and the two states in which it can be met, can also enhance the research and practice of narrative foresight, through more systematic theorization of the role of emotion and ambivalence in narrative thought and in the processes through which future ‐ focused narratives generate action under uncertainty.","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82200918","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From Shell engineer to social architect and thought leader: A commentary on Rowland and Spaniol (2021)","authors":"Paul J. H. Schoemaker","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.115","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.115","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77045091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Professor Kees van der Heijden: Commentary on Rowland and Spaniol (2021)","authors":"Ronald M. Bradfield","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.114","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.114","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Working with Kees as his apprentice scenario planner, I have been fortunate to have participated in many scenario workshops, both on the Strathclyde MBA program and with organizations. Alongside these workshops, I am also very privileged to have been an assistant to Kees on a number of scenario projects with organizations in a range of countries. I have learned many things in the time spent with Kees, and consider his book, “Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation” to be the definitive field guide to the art and craft of scenario planning, albeit there have been a plethora of books on the subject since. The objective of this commentary is to discuss from a practical perspective, three things I have learned from my years of experience with Kees which have proved useful in my scenario work with client organizations, namely the elicitation of client views and insights, the value of the “Business Idea” and the scenario development timescale</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89571198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Tracing the progress of scenario research in business and management","authors":"Arbrie Jashari,&nbsp;Victor Tiberius,&nbsp;Marina Dabić","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.109","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.109","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Business and management research on scenarios has been highly productive over the decades but led to a complex literature that is hard to oversee. To organize the field and identify distinguishable research clusters, we conducted a co-citation analysis focusing on the long-term history of research. We compare our findings with a previously published bibliographic coupling, focusing on the more recent research to trace its development over time. Our study revealed six research clusters: (1) Planning the Future with Scenarios, (2) Scenario Planning in Strategic Management, (3) Reinforcing the Scenario Technique, (4) Integration of Scenario Planning and MCDA, (5) Combination of Different Methods, and (6) Decision-making through Stochastic Programming, whereas the bibliographic coupling generated 11 clusters. Some former research clusters were divided into separate new clusters, while others were united. Additionally, completely new clusters emerged. Future research on scenarios is expected (1) to further differentiate into strategy and operations, (2) to be based on “behavioral futures” or “behavioral foresight” as a new research stream, (3) to advance the scenario technique methodically and include new specific scenario generation methods, and (4) to put forth new application areas.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.109","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90144541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Start-ups and the art of ignoring the future: Commentary on Rowland and Spaniol 2021","authors":"Rixa Georgi-Kröhl","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.108","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.108","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Record amounts of money flowed into start-ups in 2020 and yet, founders are acting detached from the future. At the same time, the range of entrepreneurship-related programs has multiplied. Scenario-based planning must become a mandatory part of those programs. To keep the strategic conversation with and about scenarios going.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.108","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72790908","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"What's luck got to do with it? Commentary on Rowland and Spaniol (2021)","authors":"Heiko A. von der Gracht","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.107","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.107","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This commentary refers to the retrospective review by Rowland and Spaniol in <i>Futures and Foresight Science</i> (2021), which provides interesting insights into Kees van der Heijden's character and work 25 years after his famous book <i>Scenarios: The art of strategic conversation</i> was first published. The commentator draws on his own personal experience of Kees' work and book, including a seminar with him at the University of Oxford in 2011, as well as applying the book's fundamentals in his own research and advisory work over the past ten years.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.107","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"103386192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Kees van der Heijden, a personal reflection: Commentary on Rowland and Spaniol 2021","authors":"Trudi Lang","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.110","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.110","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This piece is a personal reflection on the work and impact of Kees van der Heijden as part of the retrospective book review by Rowland and Spaniol (2021).</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.110","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91519149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“It depends on the client”—Kees van der Heijden and client-centric scenario planning: A commentary on Rowland and Spaniol 2021","authors":"Rafael Ramirez","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.106","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.106","url":null,"abstract":"<p>October 9, 2021</p><p>The “it depends on the client” mantra highlighted by Matt Spaniol in this essay about Kees van der Heijden's approach to scenario planning brought me back to an experience, from 1986 to 1991, when Kees and the late Jaap Leemhuis were the clients with whom Richard Normann and I worked in the so-called “Shell Manufacturing Reorientation Project”.</p><p>The way Jaap and Kees acted as clients, with Richard and I as advisors, taught me a lot about how clients and advisors can collaborate effectively and work together in scenario planning and beyond.</p><p>My recollection of this intervention benefits from its having been written up already twice. The first write-up of that experience was by Peter Checkland and Scholes (<span>1999</span>). I find it fascinating how Checkland, who was a consultant to Shell alongside Normann and Ramirez, saw “the same” engagement so differently from how I remember seeing it. This difference is reminiscent of Gareth Morgan's excellent 1983 book “<i>Beyond Method</i>” (Morgan, <span>1983</span>), where he contrasted 20 well-accepted methods in the social sciences with which to consider organizational phenomena, and where he showed how a given situation is seen uniquely with the lens of one method, while it is inescapably to be seen very differently with the lens of another. Importantly, for efforts in scenario planning to mix methods and to attempt to produce “hybrid” methods, Morgan found that as there is no meta-method providing a “neutral” (meta-)stance from which to assess different methods. Instead, he found that any comparison among methods must inevitably be from the stance of one single method. The one method whose stance is used to assess the other methods frames all of them, and this perspective in effect entails a “hostile” takeover of the other methods which are compared from its own specific stance. Morgan's conclusion was that all we can do is see a situation from the individual points of view afforded by different methods, and then seek to learn about the situation we are examining from and with these differences. Not coincidentally, this is also what scenario planning seeks to help its users to do—to see the here and now from the point of view of different and contrasting stances in the conceptual future.</p><p>My experience of this intervention was also about how difficult it is to work with soft systems and scenario planning concurrently (cf., Lang &amp; Allen, <span>2008</span>). But if anyone has the intelligence, skill, nuance, and patience to do so, Kees certainly would come top of mind as someone who can succeed—and indeed he adapted the CATWOE mnemonic from soft systems methodology in the second edition of his book, repurposing it into the VOCATE analysis as part of contracting with a client. My colleague Trudi Lang tells me that this emerged after a strategic conversation organized at Curtin Business School in Perth in which Kees and Peter were hosted to explore the two met","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.106","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81314743","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From alternative pictures of the future to an organizational intervention: A commentary on Rowland and Spaniol","authors":"Jan Oliver Schwarz","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.105","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.105","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Rowland and Spaniol's (<span>2021</span>) in-depth piece on Kees van der Heijden's seminal text, <i>Scenarios</i>, cued several memories for me, sparked a bit of self-reflection on my learning journey as a scenario planner, and encouraged me to reconsider <i>Scenarios</i> in the context of Open Strategy.</p><p>I first met Kees in 2008. I was working on my PhD in foresight. George Burt recommended I take a well-known scenario planning course, noting that this would be the last time Kees van der Heijden would offer it. I do not recall if this actually was the case, but it, along with a modest PhD discount, convinced me to join this training in Glasgow, where Kees van der Heijden and George Burt were delivering the lessons as a team.</p><p>Of course, by then van der Heijden's work had already influenced my PhD research on foresight. Those descriptions of scenario planning practices at Shell (Schoemaker, <span>1993</span>; Schoemaker &amp; Heijden, <span>1992</span>; Schwartz, <span>2004</span>, <span>2012</span>; van der Heijden, <span>1996</span>) were not only essential for my research but, at that time, also for establishing credibility in the/my German context vis-à-vis the field of foresight—a context in which scenario planning had not been even modestly institutionalized.</p><p>While I was grateful to have attended this particular scenario planning training program, in retrospect, I now realize that I had not yet truly connected to many aspects of the training and will note that I was not actually able to apply the training for the next several years.</p><p>My journey with scenario planning did not start until some 2 years after the training. By then, I had completed my PhD and joined the strategy department in the global headquarters of an insurance company, Allianz, in Munich, Germany. At Allianz, I was asked to establish foresight processes. After several discussions, we collectively decided to conduct a scenario planning exercise, focusing on current trends in the organization.</p><p>This was the moment when I returned to my training materials, specifically, to <i>Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation</i> and <i>The Sixth Sense</i> (van der Heijden, <span>1996</span>; van der Heijden et al., <span>2002</span>). At this point, my applied learning journey began by applying scenario planning in Allianz and, subsequently, in other organizations, something that I have now been doing for more than 10 years. This included also working for Paul Schoemaker's consulting firm Decision Strategies International (DSI, later acquired by Heidrick and Struggles) and later with Felix Werle, a former member of the Shell Scenario Planning team, and his consulting firm the Institute for Innovation and Change Methodologies. Throughout the course of this ongoing learning journey, I have continued, without exception, to apply the practice of scenario planning in a manner that closely reflects the work of Kees van der Heijden.</p><p>While my first encoun","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.105","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88954874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The strategic conversation, 25 years later: A retrospective review of Kees van der Heijden's Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation","authors":"Nicholas J. Rowland,&nbsp;Matthew J. Spaniol","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.102","DOIUrl":"10.1002/ffo2.102","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Kees van der Heijden is an icon in the futures and foresight academic and practitioner community. Educated at the Technische Universiteit Delft, his work at Royal Dutch Shell, the Global Business Network, the Strathclyde Business School at University of Strathclyde, the Saïd Business School and the Templeton College at University of Oxford, and the Netherlands Business School at Nijenrode University has shaped the scholarly field of futures studies as well as the practical world of scenario facilitation. This article is a 25-year reflective and retrospective book review of Kees van der Heijden's seminal text <i>Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation</i>. The authors conducted interviews with colleagues, coworkers, collaborators, students, and friends of Kees van der Heijden to add depth and dimension to this retrospective work. To bring van der Heijden's work into scholarly conversation with the extant literature, we also situated this return to <i>Scenarios</i> in the context of related works and other reviews of both editions of the book.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75034259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}