Department of Management

Defining Scenario

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Defining Scenario. / Spaniol, Matthew Jon; Rowland, Nicholas James.

In: Futures and Foresight Science, Vol. 1, No. 1, e3, 2019.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Spaniol, MJ & Rowland, NJ 2019, 'Defining Scenario', Futures and Foresight Science, vol. 1, no. 1, e3. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.3

APA

Spaniol, M. J., & Rowland, N. J. (2019). Defining Scenario. Futures and Foresight Science, 1(1), [e3]. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.3

CBE

Spaniol MJ, Rowland NJ. 2019. Defining Scenario. Futures and Foresight Science. 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.3

MLA

Spaniol, Matthew Jon and Nicholas James Rowland. "Defining Scenario". Futures and Foresight Science. 2019. 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.3

Vancouver

Spaniol MJ, Rowland NJ. Defining Scenario. Futures and Foresight Science. 2019;1(1). e3. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.3

Author

Spaniol, Matthew Jon ; Rowland, Nicholas James. / Defining Scenario. In: Futures and Foresight Science. 2019 ; Vol. 1, No. 1.

Bibtex

@article{d0fcb278d8f64ee9b6803e33b34e1fce,
title = "Defining Scenario",
abstract = "Scholars claim that futures and foresight science should overcome “confusion” regarding the definition of core concepts, for example, the scenario. Admittedly, defining scenario has been a challenge. Current practice, which results in repeated attempts to clarify said confusion with yet another new definition of scenario, has apparently not advanced the field. An alternative option is not to redefine scenario, but to, instead, create a shared definition composed of component parts of pre-existing definitions. The result is an operant or synthesized definition based on analysis of claims indicating what “a scenario is” and “scenarios are” in the literature on scenario planning. The authors find that scenarios have a temporal property rooted in the future and reference external forces in that context; scenarios should be possible and internally plausible while taking the proper form of a story or narrative description; and that scenarios exist in sets that are systematically prepared to co-exist as meaningful alternatives to one another. Despite claims to the contrary, the authors find that the academic community of futures and foresight science does not seem to suffer from so-called confusion over the definition of scenario, and, thus, it is time to sunset the use of claims to this end.",
keywords = "Definition confusion, Futures studies, Intuitive logics, Scenario, scenario planning",
author = "Spaniol, {Matthew Jon} and Rowland, {Nicholas James}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1002/ffo2.3",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
journal = "Futures and Foresight Science",
issn = "2573-5152",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Defining Scenario

AU - Spaniol, Matthew Jon

AU - Rowland, Nicholas James

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Scholars claim that futures and foresight science should overcome “confusion” regarding the definition of core concepts, for example, the scenario. Admittedly, defining scenario has been a challenge. Current practice, which results in repeated attempts to clarify said confusion with yet another new definition of scenario, has apparently not advanced the field. An alternative option is not to redefine scenario, but to, instead, create a shared definition composed of component parts of pre-existing definitions. The result is an operant or synthesized definition based on analysis of claims indicating what “a scenario is” and “scenarios are” in the literature on scenario planning. The authors find that scenarios have a temporal property rooted in the future and reference external forces in that context; scenarios should be possible and internally plausible while taking the proper form of a story or narrative description; and that scenarios exist in sets that are systematically prepared to co-exist as meaningful alternatives to one another. Despite claims to the contrary, the authors find that the academic community of futures and foresight science does not seem to suffer from so-called confusion over the definition of scenario, and, thus, it is time to sunset the use of claims to this end.

AB - Scholars claim that futures and foresight science should overcome “confusion” regarding the definition of core concepts, for example, the scenario. Admittedly, defining scenario has been a challenge. Current practice, which results in repeated attempts to clarify said confusion with yet another new definition of scenario, has apparently not advanced the field. An alternative option is not to redefine scenario, but to, instead, create a shared definition composed of component parts of pre-existing definitions. The result is an operant or synthesized definition based on analysis of claims indicating what “a scenario is” and “scenarios are” in the literature on scenario planning. The authors find that scenarios have a temporal property rooted in the future and reference external forces in that context; scenarios should be possible and internally plausible while taking the proper form of a story or narrative description; and that scenarios exist in sets that are systematically prepared to co-exist as meaningful alternatives to one another. Despite claims to the contrary, the authors find that the academic community of futures and foresight science does not seem to suffer from so-called confusion over the definition of scenario, and, thus, it is time to sunset the use of claims to this end.

KW - Definition confusion

KW - Futures studies

KW - Intuitive logics

KW - Scenario

KW - scenario planning

U2 - 10.1002/ffo2.3

DO - 10.1002/ffo2.3

M3 - Journal article

VL - 1

JO - Futures and Foresight Science

JF - Futures and Foresight Science

SN - 2573-5152

IS - 1

M1 - e3

ER -