Advancing scenario planning theory: A commentary on Fergnani and Chermack, 2021

Phadnis, Shardul S.

doi:10.1002/ffo2.72

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While no single study can generalize how scenario planning influences cognition, judgment, decisions, or strategic choices, evidence amassed from multiple studies can collectively enrich this body of knowledge. Numerous opportunities exist for such studies, some of which I have discussed elsewhere (Phadnis et al, 2022; Phadnis, 2021). I hope that the present discourse in the Futures & Foresight Science engenders greater use of experimental studies in the scenario planning literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These heuristics may transfer when the subjects act in familiar roles in the experimental settings. Thus, referring to the field settings "could trigger the use of specific heuristics from the field to solve the specific problems in the lab" opportunities exist for such studies, some of which I have discussed elsewhere (Phadnis et al, 2022;Phadnis, 2021). I hope that the present discourse in the Futures & Foresight Science engenders greater use of experimental studies in the scenario planning literature.…”

Section: Nature Of the Tasksmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Considering field factors to enhance external validity of scenario planning experiments: A commentary on Derbyshire et al. (2022)

Phadnis

2023

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Nature Of the Tasksmentioning

confidence: 98%

Considering field factors to enhance external validity of scenario planning experiments: A commentary on Derbyshire et al. (2022)

Phadnis

2023

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Besides their complementarity, comparison of ILS and ABM is another opportunity for advancing scenario planning theory. Future research may contrast the two for their effects on behavioral decision biases, organizational phenomena such as attention or interpretation, strategic choices, or information absorption and knowledge transfer (Phadnis, 2021).…”

Section: Complementarit Y Of Il S and Ab Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agent‐based modeling complements intuitive logics: A commentary on Lustick and Tetlock 2021

Phadnis¹

2021

Futures & Foresight Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Providing futures and foresight science with a stronger scientific basis has been the topic of several recent papers, commentaries and responses in this journal (Cairns, 2021; Fergnani & Chermack, 2021a, 2021b; Hodgkinson, 2021; Kishita et al, 2021; Mandel, 2021; Minkkinen, 2021; Münch & von der Gracht, 2021; Phadnis, 2021; Rowland & Spaniol, 2021a, 2021b; Salo, 2021; Schoemaker, 2021). The increased focus on this subject in this field is welcome.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning

Derbyshire

Dhami

Belton

et al. 2022

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An already pressing need to evidence the effectiveness of futures and foresight tools has been further amplified by the coronavirus pandemic, which highlighted more mainstream tools' difficulty with uncertainty. In light of this, the recent discussion in this journal on providing futures and foresight science with a stronger scientific basis is welcome. In this discussion critical realism has been proffered as a useful philosophical foundation and experiments a useful method for improving this field's scientific basis. Yet, experiments seek to isolate specific causal effects through closure (i.e., by controlling for all extraneous factors) and this may cause it to jar with critical realism's emphasis on uncertainty and openness. We therefore extend the recent discussion on improving the scientific basis of futures and foresight science by doing three things. First, we elaborate on critical realism and why the experimental method may jar with it. Second, we explain why the distinction between a conceptual and a direct replication can help overcome this jarring, meaning experiments can still be a valuable research tool for a futures and foresight science underpinned by critical realism. Third, we consider the appropriate unit of analysis for experiments on futures and foresight tools. In so doing, we situate the recent discussion on improving the scientific basis of futures and foresight science within the much longer running one on improving the scientific basis of business, management and strategy research more broadly. We use the case of scenario planning to illustrate our argument in relation to futures and foresight science.

show abstract

Advancing scenario planning theory: A commentary on Fergnani and Chermack, 2021

Cited by 3 publications

References 16 publications

Considering field factors to enhance external validity of scenario planning experiments: A commentary on Derbyshire et al. (2022)

Considering field factors to enhance external validity of scenario planning experiments: A commentary on Derbyshire et al. (2022)

Agent‐based modeling complements intuitive logics: A commentary on Lustick and Tetlock 2021

The value of experiments in futures and foresight science as illustrated by the case of scenario planning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About