1 / 8

Scenario(planning) - definitions

Scenario(planning) - definitions. “--- scenarios are a set of reasonably plausible, but structurally different futures.” 1) “--- that part of strategic planning which relates to the tools and technologies for managing the un-certainties of the future.” 2)

alfonso-blackwell
Download Presentation

Scenario(planning) - definitions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Scenario(planning) - definitions • “--- scenarios are a set of reasonably plausible, but structurally different futures.”1) • “--- that part of strategic planning which relates to the tools and technologies for managing the un-certainties of the future.”2) • “This technique has become relatively wide-spread as a way of visualising alternative futures, and thus of designing flexible strategies that can be developed to cope with these visions of the future.”3) • __________ • 1) van der Heijden, K.: Scenarios. The Art of Strategic Con-versation. John Wiley & Sons Chichester. 1996, p 29. • 2) Ringland, G.: Scenario Planning. Managing for the Future. John Wiley & Sons. Chichester. 1998, p 2. • 3) Channon, D.F. (Ed.): The Blackwell Encyclopedic Dictionary of Strategic Management. Blackwell Publisher. Oxford. 1997, p 225. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  2. Government (primarily ministries for Foreign Affairs and Defence) Parliamentary defence committee HQ Armed Forces Civil defence agencies Context of the scenarios Background (security policy environment) to deliberations concerning the future of the Swedish total defence. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  3. Year 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Comments PPBS introduced. ”Classical scenarios” (”novels”) (long term). Shorter scenarios. Emphasis on factors which could imply structural changes (long term). Scenarios of minor interest. Transformation according to 1982 defence decision prioritised. New scenarios, not including, however, the dissolution of the WP and the SU. Examples of ”civilian crisis” of importance for defence. Short term scenarios. Scenarios in the Swedish defence planning. Overview. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  4. Criteria of ”good” scenarios (not necessarily easy/possible to combine) • They cover important parts of possible out-comes. • They are considered being possible even if not probable. • The content of the scenarios make it possible to draw conclusions concerning the organis-ation you plan for. (e.g. the value of options). • They contribute constructively to the dialogue between actors. (e.g. learning process, discus-sion about goals and means, uncertainties, ---). • They can be part of the directives from parlia-ment/government to agencies. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  5. A detailed story from today to the distant future made it possible to say after a year that the scenario was wrong (not the way to use scenarios). The interaction between actors was initially imagined like this: the government decides on scenarios, the armed forces calculate the costs of the defence structure needed to manage the tasks derived from the scenarios, the Parliament Government pays. It did not function like that. The scenarios contained much information which was of no use. At the same time much needed information was missing. Experiences. The sixties. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  6. Scenarios covering uncertainties. Scenarios with a suitable content for their purpose. Scenarios contributing to a dia-logue. Too much stress on scenarios for the distant future. The scenarios gave no help making the trade-off between investment/options for the future and near-term readiness. Experiences. The seventies. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  7. It is no good for an organisation to be too introvert. Scenarios con-cerning the environment must be dealt with more or less continuous-ly. It is problematic in itself but there are also consequences for the future. You lose a generation of officers used to thinking about uncertainties. What can be done about such un-probable scenarios like the disso-lution of the WP and SU? Experiences. The eighties. Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

  8. On the civilian side: the examples are being taken for every-thing you have to manage, if no examples are given but only some general goals not much will be done. On the military side: scenarios are being used to a certain extent both for near term and long term, there is a certain scepticism towards scenarios (they are not considered probable). It is better (some say) that the politician decide which capacities they think are needed. Experiences. 2000 - Swedish Defence Research Agency Division of Defence Analysis Jan Foghelin 19 ISMOR 2002-08-29

More Related