A very interesting post Natalie. I agree that creating scenario axes is very difficult. I’m feeling inspired by a conversation I just had with Caroline Copeman about how to think about the ‘so what?’ question (what impact will this driver have on my organisation?) and think that it has some relevance to the problem you talk about. Caroline was talking about a model which encourages organisations to think about how something external to the organisation impacts on the resources available to an organisation (which then impacts on the capacities of an organisation) – I forget whose model it was. Anyway, perhaps by focussing the axes on different resources it is easier to make them independent. To do this your scenario question need to be reasonably focussed – so whereas ‘cultural and religious futures’ may have been quite broad, some scenarios we developed on the future of the advice sector were comparatively focussed. In this case our two axes were reasonably independent because we focussed on different ‘resources’ (although that wasn’t how we thought about it at the time!) One axis was about staff and knowledge and the mode of delivery (remote advice vs face-to-face) and another axis was about how funding was organised and about the relationships with partners/competitors (rationalisation vs networks).
The model is one by Connolly and York. Proper reference: Connolly, P and York, P (2003) Building the capacity of capacity builders, TCC Group. Basically it helps us think about the resources impacted by drivers: time, facilities, human resources, technology, programme design and model (I like this one very much), finance/funding. So if you take your chosen drivers and consider how each might affect each resource area – you open up your thinking. Need to get my head round how you use them in scenarios…maybe just as you suggest!
What is the output of a futures exercise? Some people say that a set of scenarios might be the output that you can expect, but I think that the answer is different. I feel that a good futures project will deliver a set of questions, and those questions will relate to the critical uncertainties.
In our futures projects, we aim to devote 50% of the project to finding the right questions and then about 50% of the time to looking at where we might find the answers to those questions.
In looking for critical uncertainties, if none stand out as clear favourites, then you need to either examine further the assumptions underlying the differing points of view or widen the set of stakeholders present. You might not get the right questions because you are not asking the right people.
Finally, the 2×2 scenario project is the most commonly encountered, but they are n-dimensional. Our last big scenario project (250 people over 4 years) had a 6×5x2 scenario set, generating just under 650 alternative scenarios framed around a single question – admittedly with two halves! The point is that scenarios can be as complex as the time and budget allows them to be, and yet is all boils down to one factor – to ask the right question.
Thanks everyone for your responses. I was lucky enough to spend all of Friday at the London Futures Symposium with a group of futurists (who are experts in thinking about the future and working with tools such as scenarios) so I took the chance to raise some of these issues there. I was offered lots of tips such as spending more time on prioritising the drivers first, in order to get agreement from everyone about which drivers are the most important and uncertain. When you do this, the two axes should in theory, stand out more obviously. However, everybody seemed to come to the same conclusion you’ve all suggested – our scenario question was not focused enough. We did not know what we were trying to find the answer to or create a scenario for! As Stephen says half the time should be devoted to the question, but in a day long session in which we had to identify drivers, cluster them, then create the axes and scenarios, it was unfortunately something which we didn’t have time to do! So the answer for such short sessions might be to at least have list of drivers first for participants to work from.
Megan
Third Sector ForesightA very interesting post Natalie. I agree that creating scenario axes is very difficult. I’m feeling inspired by a conversation I just had with Caroline Copeman about how to think about the ‘so what?’ question (what impact will this driver have on my organisation?) and think that it has some relevance to the problem you talk about. Caroline was talking about a model which encourages organisations to think about how something external to the organisation impacts on the resources available to an organisation (which then impacts on the capacities of an organisation) – I forget whose model it was. Anyway, perhaps by focussing the axes on different resources it is easier to make them independent. To do this your scenario question need to be reasonably focussed – so whereas ‘cultural and religious futures’ may have been quite broad, some scenarios we developed on the future of the advice sector were comparatively focussed. In this case our two axes were reasonably independent because we focussed on different ‘resources’ (although that wasn’t how we thought about it at the time!) One axis was about staff and knowledge and the mode of delivery (remote advice vs face-to-face) and another axis was about how funding was organised and about the relationships with partners/competitors (rationalisation vs networks).
Caroline
The model is one by Connolly and York. Proper reference: Connolly, P and York, P (2003) Building the capacity of capacity builders, TCC Group. Basically it helps us think about the resources impacted by drivers: time, facilities, human resources, technology, programme design and model (I like this one very much), finance/funding. So if you take your chosen drivers and consider how each might affect each resource area – you open up your thinking. Need to get my head round how you use them in scenarios…maybe just as you suggest!
Stephen
Dear Natalie,
What is the output of a futures exercise? Some people say that a set of scenarios might be the output that you can expect, but I think that the answer is different. I feel that a good futures project will deliver a set of questions, and those questions will relate to the critical uncertainties.
In our futures projects, we aim to devote 50% of the project to finding the right questions and then about 50% of the time to looking at where we might find the answers to those questions.
In looking for critical uncertainties, if none stand out as clear favourites, then you need to either examine further the assumptions underlying the differing points of view or widen the set of stakeholders present. You might not get the right questions because you are not asking the right people.
Finally, the 2×2 scenario project is the most commonly encountered, but they are n-dimensional. Our last big scenario project (250 people over 4 years) had a 6×5x2 scenario set, generating just under 650 alternative scenarios framed around a single question – admittedly with two halves! The point is that scenarios can be as complex as the time and budget allows them to be, and yet is all boils down to one factor – to ask the right question.
With best wishes,
Stephen
Natalie
Third Sector ForesightThanks everyone for your responses. I was lucky enough to spend all of Friday at the London Futures Symposium with a group of futurists (who are experts in thinking about the future and working with tools such as scenarios) so I took the chance to raise some of these issues there. I was offered lots of tips such as spending more time on prioritising the drivers first, in order to get agreement from everyone about which drivers are the most important and uncertain. When you do this, the two axes should in theory, stand out more obviously. However, everybody seemed to come to the same conclusion you’ve all suggested – our scenario question was not focused enough. We did not know what we were trying to find the answer to or create a scenario for! As Stephen says half the time should be devoted to the question, but in a day long session in which we had to identify drivers, cluster them, then create the axes and scenarios, it was unfortunately something which we didn’t have time to do! So the answer for such short sessions might be to at least have list of drivers first for participants to work from.