This is the presentation of my research I recently gave at the MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning, to members of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence and others.
It covers the basic principles of scenario planning, of crowdsourcing and collective intelligence, and then proposes a way to bring them together into an effective online system for futures work.
Inclusivity Essentials_ Creating Accessible Websites for Nonprofits .pdf
Online Scenario Planning
1. Large-Scale Participatory
Futures Systems
Harnessing Collective Intelligence for
Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
Noah Raford
PhD Candidate, UIS/CDD
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
Department of Urban Studies and Planning
nraford@mit.edu
http://news.noahraford.com/
Friday, April 9, 2010
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
2. Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
3. Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.
Me
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
4. Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.
Me Your brains
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
5. Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.
Ideas
Feedback
Me Your brains
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
6. Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.
Ideas
Ph
D
Feedback
Me Your brains
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
8. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
9. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
10. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
11. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
12. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
5. Schema for an online approach
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
13. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
5. Schema for an online approach
6. Case studies
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
14. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
5. Schema for an online approach
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
15. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
5. Schema for an online approach
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses
8. Evaluation criteria
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
16. Outline
1. De nitions & overview
2. Research questions
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”
4. Theoretical foundations
5. Schema for an online approach
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses
8. Evaluation criteria
9. Limitations & future work
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
17. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
18. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
“Creation, aggregation and interpretation of strategically relevant information for
decision-making [through distributed means]” (Por, 2008)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
19. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
“Creation, aggregation and interpretation of strategically relevant information for
decision-making [through distributed means]” (Por, 2008)
“The act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by
employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of
people in the form of an open call.” (Howe, 2006)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
20. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
“Creation, aggregation and interpretation of strategically relevant information for
decision-making [through distributed means]” (Por, 2008)
“The act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by
employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of
people in the form of an open call.” (Howe, 2006)
“Tools for foresight discussions... whose purpose is not a prediction or a plan,
but a change in the mindset of the people who use them.” (de Gues, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
21. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
“Creation, aggregation and interpretation of strategically relevant information for
decision-making [through distributed means]” (Por, 2008)
“The act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by
employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of
people in the form of an open call.” (Howe, 2006)
“Tools for foresight discussions... whose purpose is not a prediction or a plan,
but a change in the mindset of the people who use them.” (de Gues, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
22. De nitions & overview
Collective Intelligence for Crowdsourced Scenario Planning
“Creation, aggregation and interpretation of strategically relevant information for
decision-making [through distributed means]” (Por, 2008)
“The act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by
employees and outsourcing it to an undefined (and generally large) network of
people in the form of an open call.” (Howe, 2006)
“Tools for foresight discussions... whose purpose is not a prediction or a plan,
but a change in the mindset of the people who use them.” (de Geus, 1997)
Gues,
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
24. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
25. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
26. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
27. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
28. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?
Which aspects of online, Web 2.0 approaches are most in uential to the stated
goals of SP, in what way and why?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
29. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?
Which aspects of online, Web 2.0 approaches are most in uential to the stated
goals of SP, in what way and why?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
30. Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?
What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?
Which aspects of online, Web 2.0 approaches are most in uential to the stated
goals of SP, in what way and why?
Can the design & testing of such a system provide more rigourous data for
understanding the effects of SP on group process in general?
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
31. Typical scenario method*
* i.e., The most common, Shell-style,
Client defines key questions through initial Meetings,
“inductive logics” approach, distinct from a
ID Issues range of other rich approaches including
conversations & meetings conversations
Causal Layered Analysis (Inayatullah,
2004), La Prospective (Berger, 1964), the
Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone Manoa Method (Schultz, 1994), or the
key themes desktop research interviews Three Horizons framework (Hodgson &
Curry, 2008).
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group
forces timelines, key events workshop
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by
Rank factors
uncertainty / impact, predetermined drivers
Develop draft Create scenario snippets, draft systems
scenario logic diagrams, mix and match trends, 2x2 grids
Create draft Integrate themes from draft scenarios, create Consultant
final scenarios headlines and scenario narratives report
Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group
scenarios narrative to final form workshop
Identify key strategic themes, reflect on
Consider
strategic questions in the context of each
implications
scenario
Identify ID key indicators in each scenario for Consultant (Raford, 2010 after
indicators strategic concerns report Schwartz, 1991;
van der Heijden, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
33. Example, “Future of Cities”
23 interviews world wide:
• Architecture
• Commercial tenants
• Entrepreneurship
• Environment
• Governance
• Infrastructure
• Non-governmental organisations
• Planning
• Real estate
• Technology
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
34. Political
• Most city governments will lack the resources to meet increasing citizens demands
• Weaken central government and open room for other players
• Civil society and community based organisations will be the rst to ll this role
• Bottom-up participatory approaches to development and management will become
important
• Local government will need to shift from regulation to enabling and facilitating
• Boundaries of where city authorities ends will blur, administrative implications are unclear
• Grassroots' innovation could lead to transformational change
• Insecurity more important factor, with high unemployment and economic, political and
environmental migration
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
35. Economic
• Increased division of wealth between rich and poor
• The world’s poor are an increasingly powerful force in urban development
• Current urban development models not t for their emergent needs
• Global warming will disproportionately effect the poor
• International nance will become more important, domestic capital less
• International nance will become more selective, comparing between cities
• Taxation will continue to be a strong determinant of capital ows
• New ecological accounting mechanisms will play an increasing role in real estate nance
and development
• Building obsolescence will become an increasingly important factor
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
36. Technological
• ICT will enable acceleration of social dynamics already in place
• Could have signi cant destabilising effects through asymmetric warfare, etc.
• May allow for breakthroughs in decentralised infrastructure and governance
• ICT enables relocation of activities, such as public administration
• ICT will enable more social surveillance and government control
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
37. Drivers of change
Growing income inequality
Lack of capital availability
Role of centralized governance
Infrastructure decay
Lifestyle change & value shifts
Resource shortages
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
41. Gulliver’s Massive socio-
World technical revolution
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
42. Gulliver’s Massive socio- Triumph of the
World technical revolution Triads
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
43. Scenario 1:
Gulliver’s World
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
44. Scenario 2:
Massive socio-technical revolution...
Or bust
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
45. Scenario 3:
Triumph of the Triad’s
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
46. Components of scenarios
Contextual
Focused on the uncertainty &
discontinuities over which we have
limited or no control
Narrative, with actors, motives,
chronology & events
control
Materially different along key
strategic dimensions
some control
Primarily qualitative but often with
quantitative support
no control Use rich media & diverse
presentation styles
(van der Heijden, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
47. Components of scenarios
Contextual
Focused on the uncertainty &
discontinuities over which we have
limited or no control
Narrative, with actors, motives,
chronology & events
control
Materially different along key
strategic dimensions
some control
Primarily qualitative but often with
quantitative support
no control Use rich media & diverse
presentation styles
(van der Heijden, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
48. Theoretical foundations
Studies of group decision-making reveal important shortcomings which
limit our ability to make effective decisions under conditions of dynamic
uncertainty (Dorner, 1997).
These include the “availability bias”, whereby people estimate the future probability
of events based on easily remembered experiences from their past (Tversky &
Kahneman, 1974)
“Experimenter bias”, whereby people look for and select data that con rms pre-
existing expectations (Rosenthal, 1966)
“Ambiguity effect”, whereby subjects are ignored or discounted for which we have
partial or incomplete information (Frisch & Baron, 1988)
“Groupthink biases”, whereby groups seek to minimize con ict and reach
consensus without critically testing, analyzing, or evaluating ideas (Janis, 1972).
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
49. Theoretical foundations
As a result we build operational theories of the way the
world works based on past experience and data, then are
reluctant to revise them in the face of change.
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
51. Theoretical foundations
"We will not have any more
crashes in our time."
John Maynard Keynes, 1927
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
52. Theoretical foundations
"There will be no interruption
of our permanent prosperity."
Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce
Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12,
1928
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
53. Theoretical foundations
"Stock prices have reached
what looks like a permanently
high plateau.”
Irving Fisher, Ph.D, Economist, Oct.
17, 1929
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
54. Theoretical foundations
"This crash is not going to
have much effect on
business."
Arthur Reynolds, Chairman of
Continental Illinois Bank of Chicago,
October 24, 1929
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
55. Theoretical foundations
"... the present depression has
about spent its force..."
HES, Aug 30, 1930
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
56. Theoretical foundations
"Stabilization at [present]
levels is clearly possible."
HES Oct 31, 1931
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
57. Theoretical foundations
"All safe deposit boxes in banks or financial
institutions have been sealed... and may only
be opened in the presence of an agent of the
I.R.S."
President F.D. Roosevelt, 1933
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
58. Theoretical foundations
Scenarios focus on decision-makers’ internal landscape
“A company’s perception of its business environment is as important as its
investment infrastructure because its strategy comes from this perception.
I cannot over-emphasize this point: unless the corporate microcosm changes,
managerial behavior will not change; the internal compass must be re-calibrated.”
(Wack, in Chermack, 2003)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
59. Theoretical foundations
They produce learning & strategic awareness
Scenarios are a game board of the future, designed to break down people’s
perceptions of the present & their assumptions of the future, in a way that allows
them to better understand changing contexts and see new insights &
opportunities, today.
“Leading from the future, as it emerges in the present” Scharmer, 2009
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
60. Theoretical foundations
Proposition 1: If scenarios are positively associated
Scenarios with learning, then learning will increase as a result of
participation in scenario planning.
Proposition 2: If learning is positively associated with
Increased the alteration of mental models, then mental models
learning change as a result of learning.
Proposition 3: If a chance in
More accurate mental models alters decision
mental models structure, then a change in mental
models implies a change in the
approach to decision making.
Better
decisions Proposition 4: If changes
in decision making are
positively associated with
Proposition 5: If scenarios are positively rm performance, then rm
associated with learning, learning is positively Improved performance will increase
associated with altered mental models, altered performance as a result of altered
mental models are positively associated with decision making strategies.
rm performance, then scenarios can be
positively associated with rm performance.
(Chermack, 2003)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
61. Theoretical foundations
How does SP do this?
Includes diverse, contrary and
non-traditional viewpoints and
evidence
Focuses explicitly on
“game-changing” events
and trends
Uses creative workshops &
methods to understand
organizational strategy making,
“get inside”, then creatively
disrupt it
(Innes & Booher, 2001)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
62. Theoretical foundations
Why does it work?
A focuses on organizantional learning, sensemaking and decision-making:
Argys & Schon (1974) Double loop organizational learning
Piaget (1977) Constructivist & social learning theory
Weick (1979) Sensemaking & organizational awareness
Klein (1999) Recognition-primed decision making
Jarzabkowski (2005), Orlikowski (1992) Activity- & practice-based strategizing
Boyd (1976) Competitive advantages of perception management
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
66. Theoretical foundations
Collaborative sensemaking in the public realm
“Urban planning has lost sight of the future... creating
increasingly feeble, myopic, degenerate frameworks that
are more likely to react to yesterday's events than to
prepare the way from here to the future.”
(Isserman, 1985)
Innes & Booher (1999) - Critique of public participation
Healy (2001) - Role and need for community visioning
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
67. Theoretical foundations
Collaborative sensemaking in the public realm
“Scenarios are developed collectively to build shared
images of possible futures… scenarios nurture openness
to change by allowing more complexity in futures states of
a system and environment to be taken into account.”
(Van der Heijden, 1997)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
69. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
70. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Labor intensive & expensive
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
71. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Labor intensive & expensive
Bene ts poorly documented (no veri cation or reputation systems)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
72. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Labor intensive & expensive
Bene ts poorly documented (no veri cation or reputation systems)
Limited participation (time, space & numbers)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
73. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Labor intensive & expensive
Bene ts poorly documented (no veri cation or reputation systems)
Limited participation (time, space & numbers)
Predominance of senior decision-making elite (participant bias)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
74. Schema for online approach
Current challenges (Raford, 2010; Pang, 2010)
Labor intensive & expensive
Bene ts poorly documented (no veri cation or reputation systems)
Limited participation (time, space & numbers)
Predominance of senior decision-making elite (participant bias)
Highly dependent on facilitation skills & consultant synthesis (facilitator &
author bias)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
75. Schema for online approach
(Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
76. Schema for online approach
Who is performing the task? Why are they doing it?
(Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
77. Schema for online approach
Who is performing the task? Why are they doing it?
What is being accomplished? How is it being done?
(Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
78. Schema for online approach
(Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
79. Schema for online approach
The problem
Can activities be divided into
pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
locations?
Yes No
Crowd Hiearchy
Are there adequate incentives to
participate?
Direct Influence / Love,
Learning
compenstion self-promotion friendship
(Raford, 2010, after
Yes Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
80. Yes
Schema for online approach
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
Yes No
No
Collect Collaborate Individual
decisions
Mechanisms for
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative
solutions needed? exchange hands or motivate
workspaces, etc. decision? Voting Averaging
No Yes Yes No
(Raford, 2010, after
Market Trust Malone et al., 2010)
Finished
exchange networks
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
81. What kind of activity needs to be
Schema for online approach
done?
Create
Can the activity be divided into
small, independent pieces?
Yes No
No
Collect Collaborate Individual
decisions
Mechanisms for
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative
solutions needed? exchange hands or motivate
workspaces, etc. decision?
No Yes Yes No
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
(Raford, 2010, after
Malone et al., 2010)
Finished Finished
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
82. Schema for online approach Decide
Does the entire group need to
abide by the same decision?
No Yes
Individual Group
decisions decision
r
ums Are money or resources required to
exchange hands or motivate
c. Prediction
decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
markets
Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
exchange networks
Finished Finished
(Raford, 2010, after
Malone et al., 2010)
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
83. Schema for online approach
The problem
Can activities be divided into
pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
locations?
Yes No
Crowd Hiearchy
Are there adequate incentives to
participate?
Direct Influence / Love,
Learning
compenstion self-promotion friendship
Yes
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
Yes No Yes
No
Individual Group
Collect Collaborate
decisions decision
Mechanisms for
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative
solutions needed? exchange hands or motivate
workspaces, etc. Prediction
decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
markets
No Yes Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
Finished Finished
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
84. Schema for online approach
The problem
Client defines key questions through initial Meetings, Can activities be divided into
ID Issues pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
conversations & meetings conversations locations?
Yes No
Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone
Crowd Hiearchy
key themes desktop research interviews
Are there adequate incentives to
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group participate?
forces timelines, key events workshop
Direct Influence / Love,
Learning
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by compenstion self-promotion friendship
Rank factors
uncertainty / impact, predetermined drivers
Develop draft
scenario logic
Create draft
Create scenario snippets, draft systems
diagrams, mix and match trends, 2x2 grids
Integrate themes from draft scenarios, create
headlines and scenario narratives
Consultant
report
+ Yes
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
final scenarios Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
scenarios narrative to final form workshop
Yes No Yes
No
Identify key strategic themes, reflect on
Consider
strategic questions in the context of each
implications Collect Collaborate Individual Group
scenario Mechanisms for
decisions decision
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative exchange hands or motivate
Identify ID key indicators in each scenario for Consultant solutions needed? workspaces, etc. decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
Prediction
markets
indicators strategic concerns report
No Yes Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
Finished Finished
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
85. Schema for online approach
The problem
Client defines key questions through initial Meetings, Can activities be divided into
ID Issues pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
conversations & meetings conversations locations?
Yes No
Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone
Crowd Hiearchy
key themes desktop research interviews
Are there adequate incentives to
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group participate?
forces timelines, key events workshop
Direct Influence / Love,
Learning
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by compenstion self-promotion friendship
Rank factors
uncertainty / impact, predetermined drivers
Develop draft
scenario logic
Create draft
Create scenario snippets, draft systems
diagrams, mix and match trends, 2x2 grids
Integrate themes from draft scenarios, create
headlines and scenario narratives
Consultant
report
+ Yes
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
final scenarios Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
scenarios narrative to final form workshop
Yes No Yes
No
Identify key strategic themes, reflect on
Consider
strategic questions in the context of each
implications Collect Collaborate Individual Group
scenario Mechanisms for
decisions decision
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative exchange hands or motivate
Identify ID key indicators in each scenario for Consultant solutions needed? workspaces, etc. decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
Prediction
markets
indicators strategic concerns report
No Yes Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
Finished Finished
Schema for online scenario planning
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
86. Schema for online approach
The problem
Client defines key questions through initial Meetings, Can activities be divided into
ID Issues pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
conversations & meetings conversations locations?
Yes No
Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone
Crowd Hiearchy
key themes desktop research interviews
Are there adequate incentives to
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group participate?
forces timelines, key events workshop
Direct Influence / Love,
Learning
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by compenstion self-promotion friendship
Rank factors
uncertainty / impact, predetermined drivers
Develop draft
scenario logic
Create draft
Create scenario snippets, draft systems
diagrams, mix and match trends, 2x2 grids
Integrate themes from draft scenarios, create
headlines and scenario narratives
Consultant
report
+ Yes
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
final scenarios Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
scenarios narrative to final form workshop
Yes No Yes
No
Identify key strategic themes, reflect on
Consider
strategic questions in the context of each
implications Collect Collaborate Individual Group
scenario Mechanisms for
decisions decision
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative exchange hands or motivate
Identify ID key indicators in each scenario for Consultant solutions needed? workspaces, etc. decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
Prediction
markets
indicators strategic concerns report
No Yes Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
Finished Finished
Schema for online scenario planning
Wednesday, 21 April 2010
87. Schema for online approach
The problem
ID Issues
Client defines key questions through initial
conversations & meetings
Meetings,
conversations
Can activities be divided into
pieces? Are necessary resources
widely distributed or in unknown
locations?
= Key
Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone
Yes
Crowd
No
Hiearchy
decision
key themes desktop research interviews
Are there adequate incentives to
points for
Group
system
participate?
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and
forces timelines, key events workshop
Rank factors
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by
uncertainty / impact, predetermined drivers
Direct
compenstion
Learning
Influence /
self-promotion
Love,
friendship
design
Develop draft
scenario logic
Create draft
Create scenario snippets, draft systems
diagrams, mix and match trends, 2x2 grids
Integrate themes from draft scenarios, create
headlines and scenario narratives
Consultant
report
+ Yes
What kind of activity needs to be
done?
final scenarios Create Decide
Can the activity be divided into Does the entire group need to
Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?
scenarios narrative to final form workshop
Yes No Yes
No
Identify key strategic themes, reflect on
Consider
strategic questions in the context of each
implications Collect Collaborate Individual Group
scenario Mechanisms for
decisions decision
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
- discussion forums Are money or resources required to
Are only a few good (best) - collaborative exchange hands or motivate
Identify ID key indicators in each scenario for Consultant solutions needed? workspaces, etc. decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
Prediction
markets
indicators strategic concerns report
No Yes Yes No
Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks
Finished Finished
Schema for online scenario planning
Wednesday, 21 April 2010