Online Scenario Planning

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

Purpose
An informal crowdsourcing charrette to harness your
collective intelligence and thereby scenario plan my PhD.


Purpose

Me


Purpose

Me Your brains


Purpose

Ideas

Feedback

Me Your brains


Purpose

Ideas

Ph
D

Feedback

Me Your brains


Outline


Outline
1. De nitions & overview


Outline
2. Research questions


Outline
3. An example, “The Future of Cities”


Outline
4. Theoretical foundations


Outline
5. Schema for an online approach


Outline
6. Case studies


Outline
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses


Outline
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses
8. Evaluation criteria


Outline
6. Case studies
7. Hypotheses
8. Evaluation criteria
9. Limitations & future work


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)





“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,


Research questions


Research questions
Can the bene ts of face-to-face scenario planning (SP) be
had using online, collective intelligence approaches?


Research questions

What do online approaches add to traditional SP and what do they take away?


Research questions


Which aspects of online, Web 2.0 approaches are most in uential to the stated
goals of SP, in what way and why?


Research questions


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?


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)


Example, “Future of Cities”


Example, “Future of Cities”

23 interviews world wide:

• Architecture
• Commercial tenants
• Entrepreneurship
• Environment
• Governance
• Infrastructure
• Non-governmental organisations
• Planning
• Real estate
• Technology


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


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


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


Drivers of change
Growing income inequality
Lack of capital availability
Role of centralized governance
Infrastructure decay
Lifestyle change & value shifts
Resource shortages


Ranking key drivers


Gulliver’s
World

Gulliver’s Massive socio-
World technical revolution

Gulliver’s Massive socio- Triumph of the
World technical revolution Triads

Scenario 1:
Gulliver’s World


Scenario 2:
Massive socio-technical revolution...
Or bust


Scenario 3:
Triumph of the Triad’s


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)


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).


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.



"We will not have any more
crashes in our time."
John Maynard Keynes, 1927



"There will be no interruption
of our permanent prosperity."
Myron E. Forbes, President, Pierce
Arrow Motor Car Co., January 12,
1928



"Stock prices have reached
what looks like a permanently
high plateau.”
Irving Fisher, Ph.D, Economist, Oct.
17, 1929



"This crash is not going to
have much effect on
business."
Arthur Reynolds, Chairman of
Continental Illinois Bank of Chicago,
October 24, 1929



"... the present depression has
about spent its force..."
HES, Aug 30, 1930



"Stabilization at [present]
levels is clearly possible."
HES Oct 31, 1931



"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


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)


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


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)


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)


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


Why does it work?


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


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)


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)



Predominance of senior decision-making elite (participant bias)
Highly dependent on facilitation skills & consultant synthesis (facilitator &
author bias)



(Malone et al., 2010)


Who is performing the task? Why are they doing it?



Who is performing the task? Why are they doing it?
What is being accomplished? How is it being done?



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)


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
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

Market Trust Malone et al., 2010)
Finished
exchange networks



done?

Create

Can the activity be divided into
small, independent pieces?

Yes No
No

Collect Collaborate Individual
decisions
Mechanisms for
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
workspaces, etc. decision?

No Yes Yes No

Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks

Malone et al., 2010)
Finished Finished

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

Malone et al., 2010)


The problem

locations?

Yes No

Crowd Hiearchy

participate?

Learning
compenstion self-promotion friendship

Yes

done?

Create Decide

small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?

Yes No Yes
No

Individual Group
Collect Collaborate
decisions decision
Mechanisms for
collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
workspaces, etc. Prediction
decision? Voting Averaging Concensus
markets

No Yes Yes No

Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks

Finished Finished


The problem

Client defines key questions through initial Meetings, Can activities be divided into

ID Issues pieces? Are necessary resources
conversations & meetings conversations locations?

Yes No

Generate Expert interviews, brainstorm with client, F2F & phone
Crowd Hiearchy
key themes desktop research interviews


ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group participate?


Learning
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by compenstion self-promotion friendship

Rank factors

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

done?

final scenarios Create Decide


Finalise Get client feedback, refine, detail, elaborate Group small, independent pieces? abide by the same decision?

Yes No Yes
No
Consider
implications Collect Collaborate Individual Group

scenario Mechanisms for
decisions decision

collaboration
- wikis
- blogs
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


The problem

Client deﬁnes key questions through initial Meetings, Can activities be divided into

ID Issues pieces? Are necessary resources
conversations & meetings conversations locations?

Yes No

Crowd Hiearchy


ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and Group participate?


Learning
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by compenstion self-promotion friendship

Rank factors

Develop draft
scenario logic

Create draft

Consultant
report
+ Yes

done?




Yes No Yes
No
Consider

decisions decision

collaboration
- wikis
- blogs

Prediction
markets

No Yes Yes No

Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks

Finished Finished

Schema for online scenario planning


The problem

ID Issues
Client deﬁnes key questions through initial
conversations & meetings
Meetings,
conversations
locations?
= Key
Yes

Crowd
No

Hiearchy
decision

points for
Group
system
participate?
ID driving Extract key themes, create trends and

Rank factors
Select key uncertainties and forces, list by
Direct
compenstion
Learning
Inﬂuence /
self-promotion
Love,
friendship
design
Develop draft
scenario logic

Create draft

Consultant
report
+ Yes

done?




Yes No Yes
No
Consider

decisions decision

collaboration
- wikis
- blogs

Prediction
markets

No Yes Yes No

Finished
Market Trust
Finished
exchange networks

Finished Finished

Schema for online scenario planning


Online Scenario Planning

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Online Scenario Planning

Similaire à Online Scenario Planning (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Online Scenario Planning