{"title":"为不同的未来编织情节","authors":"T. Kippenberger","doi":"10.1108/EUM0000000006706","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Advocates a good scenario as one that captures the dynamics of the situation and communicates the point effectively. Suggests the best way to develop a manageable number of such scenarios is at two‐day off‐site seminars, and those attending should include: senior managers; people operating at the organization's periphery; people with a thorough knowledge of functions and operations; and outsiders useful in provoking discussions. Concludes scenario making is intensely participatory — or it fails.","PeriodicalId":178456,"journal":{"name":"The Antidote","volume":"134 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Weaving plots for alternative futures\",\"authors\":\"T. Kippenberger\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/EUM0000000006706\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Advocates a good scenario as one that captures the dynamics of the situation and communicates the point effectively. Suggests the best way to develop a manageable number of such scenarios is at two‐day off‐site seminars, and those attending should include: senior managers; people operating at the organization's periphery; people with a thorough knowledge of functions and operations; and outsiders useful in provoking discussions. Concludes scenario making is intensely participatory — or it fails.\",\"PeriodicalId\":178456,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Antidote\",\"volume\":\"134 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Antidote\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006706\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Antidote","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006706","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Advocates a good scenario as one that captures the dynamics of the situation and communicates the point effectively. Suggests the best way to develop a manageable number of such scenarios is at two‐day off‐site seminars, and those attending should include: senior managers; people operating at the organization's periphery; people with a thorough knowledge of functions and operations; and outsiders useful in provoking discussions. Concludes scenario making is intensely participatory — or it fails.