An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning

Running head: VIRTUAL SCENARIO PLANNING 1
Copyrighted ©2013 Rochell McWhorter and Susan Lynham
An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning
Rochell R. McWhorter
The University of Texas at Tyler
Susan A. Lynham
Colorado State University
Note: This is the last author’s copy of this paper. The final definitive copy of this work is available online
at: http://adh.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/30/1523422314532096.abstract?rss=1 and will soon be
available in print in the Advances in Developing Human Resources Journal, 2014.

VIRTUAL SCENARIO PLANNING 2
Abstract
The Problem
Recent disruptive events introduced high volatility and uncertainty into the contemporary
organizational environment whereby well-established organizations found scenario planning
useful to craft strategy. However, because scenario planning is typically a very costly endeavor,
it is less accessible to new startups, small businesses, non-profits, and large-scale organizations
that could greatly benefit.
The Solution
We propose an initial conceptual model whereby sophisticated technologies that typically enable
virtual events be utilized to facilitate virtual scenario planning activities for real-time
participation from geographically disbursed locations reducing expenses and providing access to
one of HRD’s strategic learning tools. We posit that HRD professionals be involved in planning
and implementation through the scope of technology development within the context of Virtual
HRD.
The Stakeholders
This article provides researchers and scholar-practitioners with a conceptualization of current
thinking around the notion of utilizing technology to create an online environment conducive for
scenario planning. This article will be of particular interest to those involved in formulating
organizational strategy including those where costs of face-to-face scenario planning and other
forms of strategic initiatives are either time or cost prohibitive.

Keywords: Virtual Scenario Planning, Virtual HRD, Leadership Development, Virtual
Teams, Technology Development
An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning
Scenario Planning is well acknowledged in HRD literature and has been presented as
“HRD’s strategic learning tool” (Chermack & Swanson, 2008, p. 129) for assisting organizations
in planning for times of uncertainty. Scenario planning has been shown to facilitate a number of
valuable processes and outcomes including: learning collectively and institutionally, the
development of an increased capacity for leadership and strategy development and their
implementation, improved organizational performance, managing disagreement as an asset,
increased cross-functional communication, and increased clarity of strategic options (See:
Chermack, 2011; Schwartz, 1991; McWhorter, Lynham & Porter, 2008; Van der Heijden, 2005;
Van der Merwe, 2008).
In the past decade, scenario planning has realized a “renaissance” (Wilkins & Kupers,
2013, p. 120) and a “sustained surge” (Rigby & Bilodeau, 2007, p. 21) following the attacks of
September 11, 2001, the global credit crisis, and recent recession; all of which brought high
volatility and uncertainty into the organizational environment (Bradfield, Wright, Burt, Cairns, &
Niles, 2009; Ilbury & Sunter, 2011; Ramirez, Selsky & van der Heijden, 2008; Tuna, 2009; Van
der Heijden, 2005; Wilkinson & Kupers, 2013). A number of organizations such as IBM, Shell
Oil, Sprint and Google have utilized scenario planning as part of their strategic planning
(McWhorter & Lynham, 2011).
While very useful, scenario planning efforts of forward-thinking organizations are quite
costly in terms of time and travel to bring together many stakeholders in a single location over
multiple days (Johnston, Gilmore & Carson, 2008; McWhorter, Lynham & Porter, 2008). Some

have also suggested that travel required to participate in scenario planning activities is harmful to
the environment (Fazarro & McWhorter, 2011).
The purpose of this article is to begin to lay the groundwork for an initial
conceptualization of the phenomenon of Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP)—one that utilizes
modern information communication technologies (ICTs) to connect key stakeholders (such as
scenario planning experts, facilitators, and selected participants) to conduct scenario planning.
To fulfill this purpose, we present (1) an overview of conceptually informing literatures
foundational to VSP, (2) findings and how they inform initial conceptualization of a model of
VSP, and 3) concluding implications for related theory, research and practice.
Conceptually Informing Literatures Foundational to Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP)
According to Lynham (2002), conceptual development is concerned with the formulation
of initial ideas within a relevant world context such that it “depicts current, best, most informed
understanding and explanation of the phenomenon, issue, or problem…[developing] an informed
conceptual framework that provides an initial understanding and explanation of the nature and
dynamics of the issue, problem, or phenomenon” (p. 231). This article inaugurates the initial
conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP) in HRD by first examining three informing
literatures foundational to the building of such a conceptual framework, namely, Scenario
Planning (SP), Virtual HRD (VHRD), and Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP). An overview of
each follows.
Scenario Planning (SP)
Although the history of scenario planning spans decades, the first formal theory of
scenario planning was synthesized by Chermack (2003a) who identified key outcomes of this
process as being scenario stories, mental models, learning, improved decision-making, and the

ability of organizations to respond to change (See also Chermack, 2004; Chermack & Lynham,
2002; Lynham, Provo & Ruona, 1998; Ringland, 2006; Schwartz, 1991; Senge, 1990; Van der
Merwe, 2005; Wack, 1985, as cited in Chermack, 2003b).
Scenario Planning has been defined as “a structured process of thinking about and
anticipating the unknown future…to examine possible future developments that could impact
individuals, organizations, or societies and to find directions for decisions that would be… most
beneficial in any future environment” (Rajalanti, van der Hiejden, Janssen & Pehu, 2006, p. ix).
This broad contextual basis suggests that scenario planning is useful at the individual
(Schoemaker, 1995), small business (Foster, 1993), city-wide (Docherty & McKiernan, 2008),
regional (Center for Houston’s Future: The Region’s Think Tank, 2012), corporate (Shell.com,
2013), large non-profit (Means, Patrick, Ospina & West, 2005), and even national (United
Nations Environment Programme, 2012), continental (UNAIDS, 2005) and (perhaps in near
future) global levels. Indeed, the literature supports each of these levels of contextual utility of
scenario planning—also underscored by a notable scenario planner:
Scenarios are interesting because they don’t promise prediction, they actually encourage
us to keep an open mind about the fact that we live in an uncertain world. And, that
uncertainty is both empowering, not just frightening. And so the role of scenarios…is to
help lead us individually and collectively…and organizations and societies [to] keep an
open mind…and prepare more options about what might happen. (Angela Wilkinson in
The Smith School, 2011, [video], 1:02)
A number of methodologies have emerged for conducting a scenario planning project
(Illbury & Sunter, 2011; Ringland, 2006; Van der Merwe, 2008; Wilkinson & Kupers, 2013). A
globally experienced scenario planner, Louis Van der Merwe (2008), offered insight into

scenario planning through his Scenario Development Framework (SDF) giving us an idea of
what typical face-to-face (F2F) scenario planning looks like. He noted that a scenario-based
planning project normally develops over a six to nine month period. Seven common phases of a
typical project are depicted in Table 1.
Table 1: Van der Merwe’s (2008) Seven Phases of a Typical Scenario Planning Project
Phase Activity Description Resources/Method
1 Interviews with
decision makers, and
informal leaders in
the organization
(Internal
Environment)
Conduct, Document, Analyze and
Provide Feedback on 10-25 face-to-face
(F2F) interviews.
In Person or Phone Interviews,
recorded and transcribed
utilizing a computer.
2 Gathering Feedback,
Sorting and
Structuring of
Dynamics (External
Environment)
Gather information specific to the
environment in which the organization
operates, as well the social,
technological, economic, environmental
forces and critical trends.
Accessing Industry News
outlets, eNewsletters, Electronic
Databases, Web-based Industry
Magazines.
3,4 Rigorous Analysis
and Building
Capacity for Strategic
Conversation
Workshops held to consolidate and
integrate a set of 2-4 scenarios held 6-8
weeks apart to allow for deep reflection
and analysis.
Quantitative and Qualitative
Analysis involving the use of
tools such as systems loops and
links, story maps, ladder of
inference and a conversation
quality checklist. The
integration of scenarios is
normally done as a series of 3-4
F2F workshops of two days
each.
5 Constructing a
scenario artifact
Provides a written record of the
activities; the artifact should “use a wide
variation of tables and illustrations to
reflect both explicit and implicit aspects
of storylines” (p. 227).
Creation of a scenario
workbook, scenario web site, or
utilizing other media depicting a
set of vividly titled scenario
stories as “oral history of the
future” (p. 229).
6 Sustaining strategic
conversations
Holding a series of forums where
leadership comes together to discuss the
dynamics that may affect the
organization.
Series of forum-styled meetings
that capture the strategic
conversations.
7 Documenting
noticeable results
Because scenario-based strategy “builds
assets in the organization that could be
called intangible…it is essential to
measure...and document the results
Utilize instruments that
document co-created or surfaced
(tacit) knowledge; also, measure
quality of scenario conversations

flowing from the process” (p. 229). and the effects of the scenario
processes on the organization
Van der Merwe’s (2008) framework is further useful because it offered eight strategic
uses for scenario planning. These were given as: (1) decision scenarios (testing for robustness),
(2) normative scenarios (pushing a community toward a specific purpose), (3) community
dialogue (engaging a community), (4) policy alignment (enabling various ministries for aligning
policies), (5) organization alignment and engagement (providing an umbrella focus for strategic
conversation and alignment), (6) environmental scanning (enabling organization to learn
about/take positions on specific assumptions their strategy is based on), (7) scenario thinking (for
embedding in all decision making/choices), and (8) leadership coaching (for a personal inquiry)
(p. 225).
Burt and Chermack (2008) remarked that “scenario planning is an effective approach to
bring managers together to discuss their concerns” (p. 286). Further, Wilkinson and Kupers
(2013) said scenarios “create a safe place for dialogue and for acknowledging uncertainty—
allowing an organization to see realities that would have otherwise be overlooked” (p. 121). As
stated, scenario planning is not done in isolation—it is a social activity involving multiple
stakeholders. Historically carried out through F2F interactions, scenario planning is a highly
interactive endeavor that “builds social capital within and beyond the organization…aid[s] in
navigating complexity and conflict [and] managing disagreement” (Wilkinson & Kupers, 2013,
p. 127).
Virtual HRD
Virtual HRD is a relatively new concept evolving in direct relation to increased
availability of sophisticated technologies for increasing human learning and performance
(McWhorter, 2010; Yoon & Lim, 2010). As presented in the 12(6) issue of Advances in

Developing Human Resources introducing Virtual HRD to the field (McWhorter & Bennett,
2010), one definition of Virtual HRD is: a “media-rich and culturally relevant web environment
that strategically improves expertise, performance, innovation, and community-building through
formal and informal learning” (Bennett, 2009, p. 364). Further literatures relevant to Virtual
HRD and informative for this exploratory conceptualization include Technology Development,
Virtual Technologies, and Virtual Teams. Each is briefly considered next.
Technology Development. While Virtual HRD is primarily concerned with the
environment created from the joining of people and technology, the concept of Technology
Development is operational and an area of expertise for HRD professionals (Bennett &
McWhorter, 2014). Bennett (2010) advocated for the inclusion of Technology Development as a
fourth pillar of HRD alongside the existing pillars of: Organization Development, Career
Development and Training and Development.
According to Bennett and McWhorter (2014), Technology Development (TD) can be
viewed in two ways (or as having two facets): (1) a tool-level focus providing support for HRD
interventions in practice; and, (2) as strategically implemented technology requiring the informed
application of HRD processes, theories, and models. Thus, traditional HRD processes and
techniques lend support for TD with both of aforementioned facets appearing relevant for initial
conceptualization of VSP. For instance, the tool-level focus is crucial as we examine what
technology tools might be useful to enable VSP at the various stages presented in Table 1. Also,
traditional HRD processes and techniques that might be suitable or even critical for the success
of a VSP project ought to be determined. The next sub-section of literatures considered relevant
to Virtual HRD and informative to this exploratory conceptualization of VSP is that of virtual
technologies.

Virtual technologies. Modern technologies have evolved to the point where workers are
not only connecting to and through technology, but now they have the capability to connect
within the technology synchronously (in real-time) in an environment for collaborating with
others (Kapp & O’Driscoll, 2010; McWhorter, 2010). With the advent of sophisticated
workplace platforms, virtual collaboration of both small and large scale are becoming
commonplace in many organizations (Ausburn & Ausburn, 2014; Bennett, 2009, 2010; Bennett
& McWhorter, 2014; Fagan, 2014; Fazarro & McWhorter, 2011; Germain & McGuire, 2014;
McWhorter, 2010, 2014; McWhorter, Roberts & Mancuso, 2013; Raisor & McWhorter, 2014).
Consider a worker’s choices for collaboration with stakeholders such as the modern
telephone (cellular or voice-over internet protocol—VOIP), email, instant or text messaging
(Bennett, 2014a; Thomas, 2014), video conference (i.e. Skype.com or Zoom.us), webinar (i.e.
GoToMeeting.com, WebEx.com, or AdobeConnect.com), virtual world (Ausburn & Ausburn,
2014; Fagan, 2014; Mancuso, Chlup & McWhorter, 2010; McWhorter & Lindhjem, 2013), and
social media (Delello & McWhorter, 2014). These choices illustrate but a few virtual
technologies that utilize a traditional desktop computer or a myriad of mobile alternatives such as
smartphones, mini-tablets or laptops through bring your own device (BYOD) initiatives in the
workplace (Gruman, 2012; Marks, 2013).
The ubiquitous nature of workplace technologies allow us to consider collaboration not
tied to a specific location (Ardichvili, 2008; Bell, 2011; Bennett & Bierema, 2010; Chapman &
Stone, 2010; Fagan, 2014; Thomas, 2014), and affords participation in VSP activities anytime,
anywhere. Such technologies are also beneficial because they typically allow for easy archival
of documents and meetings through video playback accessible for on-demand and in the cloud
for a look-back during future meetings (Fazarro & McWhorter, 2011; McWhorter, Roberts,

Mancuso, 2013). In addition, many of the platforms available are highly integrated, scalable and
user-friendly and designed to promote collaboration and the sharing of ideas (Sreedhar, 2014).
When compared to virtual collaboration, traditional F2F meetings are much more costly
in time and consume many environmental and financial resources, so ‘greening’ scenario
planning might likely also be a preferred choice (Fazarro & McWhorter, 2011; Rogers, 2011).
Another advantage of using virtual technologies for collaboration beyond convenience and cost
savings is that of global participation. It is safe to speculate that utilization of contemporary
digital platforms allow for increased participation by additional key stakeholders (including
expert scenario planners) as virtual attendees are no longer confined to a geographical location.
However, participants are cautioned to remove distractions such as daily tasks and routines while
engaging in virtual activities such as VSP (Fazarro & McWhorter, 2011).
Virtual teams. In 2010, McWhorter pointed to virtual teams as a place to look for
Virtual HRD describing them as being “composed of workers connecting remotely to carry out
an objective or purpose” (p. 626) and expounded on the earlier work of Dewey and Carter (2003)
who described a case of virtual communication with a global virtual team who planned the
Future Search Pre-Conference for the American Society of Training and Development (ASTD)
leadership in 2001. Using only email (asynchronous communication) and teleconferencing
(utilizing telephone conferencing), the team planned the Pre-Conference in its entirety. They
found that as a virtual planning team, there were four emergent themes from their case that may
be useful for others considering virtual teams: “(a) the importance of energizing [a] highly
effective leadership; (b) the presence of intrinsic rewards that motivated team members; (c) the
necessity of a trustful environment for collaboration; and (d) creation of specific ‘enabling’
virtual communication techniques and protocols” (p. 250).

Workman (2005) also discussed virtual team culture and compared proximal (F2F) teams
with virtual teams. He found that virtual teams more tightly controlled performed better than
more loosely controlled virtual teams. Also, he commented that “Explicit virtual team
management apparently served to help regulate the forming, storming, norming, and performing
type of group adjustments (Tuckman & Jensen, 1977) typically experienced by teams by serving
to establish expectations and guidelines for group objectives quickly” (p. 454). These findings
are helpful and informative when considering the formation of virtual teams for VSP.
Bennett and Bierema (2010) noted that trust, incenting, and monitoring are important
factors when considering work with virtual teams. They commented that trust is “potentially
more difficult to establish than in face-to-face environments” (p. 641) and “traditional beliefs
about incenting and monitoring work may not hold true in virtual teams” (p. 641). While their
findings lend caution to those considering forming virtual teams for the purpose of scenario
planning, their and others’ findings—some of which are highlighted above—suggest it
reasonable to consider that a number of the steps in Van der Merwe’s Seven Phases of a Typical
Scenario Planning Project (see Table 1) can be accomplished through virtual teaming
methodologies (See Wild, Griggs & Li, 2005).
Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP)
Sophisticated virtual and social media technologies have been posited as plausible
technologies for scenario planning methodology (McWhorter & Lynham, 2011). McWhorter
(2011) remarked that VSP was possible and noted that two primary streams of inquiry, namely,
Scenario Planning and Virtual HRD were:
…moving closer to one another as sophisticated technologies are enabling the
phenomenon of VHRD in the workplace…as we connect to one another within

environments whether it be on a traditional computer or mobile device, developmental
efforts for virtual work teams and processes such as virtual training and development are
already being realized [whereby] virtual scenario planning (utilizing synchronous
technologies such as videoconferencing and virtual worlds for scenario planning) is a
reasonable next step to link geographically dispersed stakeholders. (p. 114)
McWhorter (2011) indicated that the technology existed for such a strategic endeavor as VSP,
and would be expected to be increasingly available to such end in the future. Additionally, a
search for examples of VSP-related projects revealed two instances of scenario planning that
primarily utilized modern technologies as their source of methodology. Each instance is
considered next.
In 2007, a scenario planner documented the first known case of VSP (Cascio, 2007). He
integrated various technologies for stakeholders in the U.S., Europe and New Zealand for the
purpose of real-time scenario planning. For example, he utilized voice through his digital call
system, email for private messages, shared documents through Google Docs, utilized Google
Spreadsheets for quick lists and spreadsheet, and utilized the text chat channel for collaboration
and questions.
If participants had a comment they would type the word HAND into the chat window
thus requesting to speak on audio. Speaker’s names were typed in bold type by one of the
moderators so participants would know who was speaking. The scenario planner remarked that
“everything else was…more or less parallel to a live event approach” (para. 9). The planner
noted that the primary advantage over a live event was that the text window became the most
novel part of their online technology, and that the text chat/backchat engaged the participants—
becoming an analytic to measure involvement. Additionally, he viewed the backchat or

backchannel (text conversation; Educause, 2011) in text window a stark contrast to side chat
(audio conversation) in live events that is typically highly discouraged.
Cascio (2007) concluded that he would use the process again and considered it a valuable
tool, but as an augmentation, not a replacement for F2F scenario planning workshops and
recommended a mix of hybrid meetings such as the first meeting online for informing key
stakeholders, then the second F2F to enhance social bonding/networking. Then, hold follow-up
meeting(s) virtually “as the participants now have a good working relationship” (para. 13). He
remarked: “one thing is absolutely certain: it is entirely possible to run a futures event using
distributed technology and still retain participant interest—and generate useful, novel content, as
well” (para. 1).
A second instance of VSP was located by the authors. Raford (2011) conducted extensive
research on web-based participatory approaches utilizing Web 2.0 and social media technologies
to crowdsource (asking the crowd on the Internet for innovative ideas; See also: Boudreau, &
Lakhani, 2013) to enhance urban scenario planning projects like roads and infrastructure often
projected 50 years into the future. He conducted focused research into qualitative scenario
planning and noted the inclusion of many stakeholders was ideal when contemplating making
decisions for decades into the future for a geographical region.
In addition, Raford’s (2011) work is important into conceptualizing VSP because he
documented a number of the limitations of traditional face-to-face scenario planning
methodology: (1) traditional scenario planning is labor-intensive including significant time
investment gathering data, conducting background interviews, group workshops and numerous
F2F discussions, (2) the number of key stakeholders that participate and benefit from the process
is limited due to time and financial constraints, and, (3) traditional participants are typically

subject matter experts (SMEs) and senior-level decision makers therefore limiting the input from
a variety of perspectives and information sources.
Through a mixed-methods multiple case study approach, Raford (2011) examined the
usefulness of technology for augmenting traditional scenario planning methodologies for urban
planning. The first case “Futurescaper” (See Raford, 2010, p. 82) employed Raford’s original
design and programming for an online platform to store reactions from individuals at various
locales for generation of drivers and trends and clustering them in high-level themes for
visualization. His second case, “SenseMaker Scenarios” (p. 83) followed up on themes found in
the first case and found to be useful for gathering large sets of participant contributions with
potential for generation of scenarios. Another case, “Foresight Engine” (p. 84), utilized Web 2.0
tools in a gaming platform to gather approximately 5,000 opinions from 81 countries on the
project website (see pp. 84-85). Raford (2011) concluded that “open-ended participation is a
strong example of leveraging stakeholder participation online” (p. 85). A third utilized social
media (Facebook, Twitter, blogs), and emails for promoting the project and employed 25 in-
depth video interviews over Skype with “thinkers in the field” (p. 86) that were later posted to
YouTube garnering in excess of 17,000 views. We can compare these cases to Van der Merwe’s
(2008) Step 2 described in Table 1.
The findings from the initial study indicated participants were involved at a greater
number and from more diverse locations and disciplines as compared to typical F2F scenario
planning. However, overall findings revealed that although there were more participants, fewer
participants were heavily engaged in the process. The data revealed that “less than 20% of the
total users (48 of 237) contributed over 70% of the content” (p. 178) with a similar pattern seen
in the second case. Therefore, one challenge will be the engagement of participants in virtual

events. Overall, Raford (2011) found that utilizing online technology for scenario planning was
advantageous specifically for time reduction in collecting critical information. Also, online tools
were seen as helpful to “automate or distribute basic analytical tasks amongst many users,
allowing for more complex analysis of their interaction in a shorter period of time” (Raford,
2011, p. 178). Also, the role of visuals and multimedia had a positive effect on the online
participatory scenario planning project by increasing interest in the subject and the enjoyment of
the experience for the participants. Overall, the conclusion was that technology-enabled
methodologies held promise for scenario planning due to their speed, efficiency, and
“distributed, crowd-sourced analysis” (Raford, 2011, p. 197).
The conceptual nature of VSP as evidence of a TD initiative is further explored for its
potential to utilize the “capacity of an organization to promote and leverage organizational
learning” (Bennett & McWhorter, 2014, p. 18) through the integrated use of sophisticated
technologies that bring together stakeholders in real-time across multiple modalities for events in
a scenario planning process. A number of modern technologies hold promise for the steps
outlined by an experienced scenario planning practitioner (van der Merwe, 2009) thereby
allowing us to consider VSP. See Table 2 for suggested methods for VSP. Note that these
suggestions in no way assume that these are the only technologies available for this purpose as
there are many varieties of modern technologies that could be beneficial for the steps outlined by
Van Der Merwe (2008).

Table 2: Van der Merwe’s (2008) Seven Phases of a Typical Scenario Planning Project
Augmented with Suggested Methods for VSP
Phase Activity Description Typical Resources/Method Suggested Methods for VSP
1 Interviews with
decision makers, and
informal leaders in the
organization (Internal
Environment)
Conduct, Document,
Analyze and Provide
Feedback on 10-25 face-
to-face (F2F) interviews.
In Person or Phone
Interviews, recorded and
transcribed utilizing a
computer.
Interviews could be
recorded on a web
conference platform such
as Zoom.us for later
playback for transcribing.
Survey and Polling
technology could be
utilized for gathering input
from decision makers and
informal leaders, as
appropriate.
2 Gathering Feedback,
Sorting and
Structuring of
Dynamics
(External
Environment)
Gather information
specific to the
environment in which
the organization
operates, as well the
social, technological,
economic,
environmental forces
and critical trends.
Accessing Industry News
outlets, eNewsletters,
Electronic Databases, Web-
based Industry Magazines.
Scenario Team could
utilize an electronic
repository such as
Dropbox.com and give
access to all participating
members for their review.
Survey, Polling, and Social
Networking platforms
could be utilized for input,
gathering feedback.
Gamification-type
platforms for gathering
multiple ideas/trends in a
short period of time.
3,4 Rigorous Analysis and
Building Capacity for
Strategic Conversation
Workshops held to
consolidate and integrate
a set of 2-4 scenarios
held 6-8 weeks apart to
allow for deep reflection
and analysis.
Quantitative and Qualitative
Analysis involving the use of
tools such as systems loops
and links, story maps, ladder
of inference and a
conversation quality
checklist is utilized.
The integration of scenarios
is normally done as a series
of 3-4 F2F workshops of
two days each.
Workshops could be
facilitated through
integrated web
conferencing platforms
such as On24.com or
Blackboard Collaborate or
other program utilizing a
digital whiteboard.
Quantitative analysis
software (i.e. SPSS.com)
and Qualitative analysis
software such as NVivo 10
(QSR.com) could be
utilized for large sets of
qualitative data.

5 Constructing a
scenario artifact
Provides a written record
of the activities; the
artifact should “use a
wide variation of tables
and illustrations to
reflect both explicit and
implicit aspects of
storylines” (van der
Merwe, 2008, p. 227).
Creation of a scenario
workbook, scenario web site,
or utilizing other media
depicting a set of vividly
titled scenario stories “oral
history of the future” (p.
229).
A myriad of web-based
options are available to
archive the scenario
artifacts such as a
Wordpress.com blog, a
Facebook or LinkedIn
page, or housed on an
Intranet for employee-only
access if proprietary
information is a concern.
Scenario stories could be
depicted in eBook format,
video format, depicted in a
3D virtual reality/virtual
world setting where
avatars could move around
and examine models and
key artifacts (McWhorter,
2010; Short, 2010, 2013),
or enhanced with
augmented reality.
6 Sustaining strategic
conversations
Holding a series of
forums where leadership
comes together to
discuss the dynamics
that may affect the
organization
Series of forum-styled
meetings that capture the
strategic conversations
Series of forum-styled
meetings that capture the
strategic conversations that
can be held over web
conferencing platforms can
be used and archived for
on-demand viewing. Or,
held in social networking
venues in real-time or
asynchronously (i.e.
Twitter or LinkedIn)
7 Documenting
noticeable results
Because scenario-based
strategy “builds assets in
the organization that
could be called
intangible…it is
essential to measure..and
document the results
flowing from the
process” (van der
Merwe, 2008, p. 229)
Utilize instruments that
document co-created or
surfaced (tacit) knowledge;
also, measure quality of
scenario conversations and
the effects of the scenario
processes on the
organization.
In addition to traditional
methods, these results
could be documented and
studied through electronic
surveys such as
Qualtrics.com with
participation from various
stakeholders, particularly
requesting open-ended
responses.
Findings and How They Inform
Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP)

The informing literatures considered above help inform initial conceptualization of VSP
in a number of ways. First, they help us represent the conceptual location of the construct of VSP
in the informing (and foundational) literature within the field of human resource development
(HRD). Second, they enable us to identify descriptive constructs and sub-constructs integral to
the theoretical conceptualization of VSP. Third, they enable us to begin constructing and thereby
developing a better understanding of VSP as an integrated system of inputs, processes, and
outputs.
Conceptually Locating the Phenomenon of VSP in the Landscape of HRD
The phenomenon of VSP occurs within the landscape of the field of HRD, at the
intersection of Scenario Planning and Virtual HRD—indicating that VSP occurs in the
confluence of these two bodies of HRD-related knowledge. Figure 1 graphically represents this
conceptual location.
Figure 1. Conceptually Locating Virtual Scenario Planning (VSP)
Context of Praxis: The Field of HRD

Informing Constructs and Sub-constructs
The previously presented informing literatures—on scenario planning, virtual HRD and
virtual scenario planning—enable us to begin to identify conceptually the descriptive constructs
and sub-constructs integral to the conceptualization of the phenomenon of VSP. Table 3 depicts
a synthesis of these informing constructs and sub-constructs from the first two bodies of
informing knowledge, and how they inform the initial conceptualization of VSP.
Table 3: How Constructs and Sub-constructs from Foundational Literature Inform Initial
Conceptualization of VSP
Informing Constructs
and Sub-Constructs from
Foundational Literature
How Inform Conceptualization of VSP
Scenario Planning (SP)
 SP utilizes has participant(s) and SP expert(s)
 SP is “HRD’s strategic learning tool”, then VSP should be
about strategy and learning
 7 phases of a typical scenario process
 Outcomes of Scenario Stories, Changed mental models
 Strategic conversation, improved decision making should be
outcome of VSP
 Ability to respond to change should be outcome of VSP
Virtual HRD (VHRD)
 VHRD is culturally relevant networked environment so VSP
will contain elements of culture and online environments
should include tools and processes to bring out the cultural
elements
 VHRD is a networked environment that is intentional and
strategic; therefore, selection of an environment for VSP should
be intentional and strategic to facilitate the VSP process
 VHRD is about improving community-building; therefore, VSP
should also enhance this characteristic as well
 VHRD includes both formal and informal learning; therefore
aspects of VSP will also involve both types of learning
- Technology
 TD integrates technology with HRD objectives and VSP
should have HRD objectives and integrated technology as
well

Development
(TD)
 TD should improve performance; therefore, VSP should
also have improving learning capacity and performance
through the integration of technology and HRD objectives
 HRD professionals will need to have competencies in the
selection of integrated environments to optimize learning
and performance in virtual environments
- Virtual Teams
 Virtual Teams connecting remotely for VSP will require
highly effective leadership to optimize VSP with specific
purpose outlined
 A trustful environment should be established when utilizing
virtual teams for VSP
 Specific enabling protocols and techniques for virtual
communication should be established for VSP when
utilizing the virtual team approach
 Explicit Virtual Team management should be examined
such that establishment of trust, expectations, guidelines for
the group
- Virtual
Technologies
 Sophisticated technologies should be examined for their
usefulness for VSP including high collaboration tools (i.e.
visual social media) and archiving for later on-demand
review since there may be a number of days or weeks
between VSP events
 Time should be set aside is for VSP for participants to be
immersed in the VSP activities so that they are not
distracted by daily tasks and routines
 Digital artifacts from the VSP activities should be readily
available
VSP as Interacting Inputs-Processes-Outputs (a First Conceptualization)
A content analysis of the foundational bodies of literature briefly explicated, and an
exploratory synthesis of findings reflective of the conceptual location and informing constructs
and sub-constructs (see Figure 1 and Table 3), together inform an initial conceptualization of the
phenomenon of VSP as an integrated system of inputs, processes and outputs. Figure 2
illustrates this initial, and indeed exploratory, conceptualization.

Figure 2: An Initial and Exploratory Conceptualization of VSP as Interacting System of
Inputs—Processes—Outputs
Inputs Processes Outputs
 Identified participants
with knowledge of
online environments
 SP expert(s) with
experience working in
online environments
 Specified Purpose
identified
 Media-rich
environment
 Collaborative,
networked Web 2.0
technologies chosen
intentionally and
strategically
 Analytical technologies
 Virtual team approach
 Tools and processes
enabling cultural
elements of
organization or project
aim
 Specific time set aside
for scenario planning
with minimized
distractions
 “Getting the system in
the room”
 7 Phases of SP
processes
 Virtual Teams
 Community Building,
Trust
 Virtual Team
communication
 Virtual strategic
conversations
 Virtual team
management and
monitoring of
objectives and incenting
 Participant engagement
 Scenario stories
 Digital artifacts of
virtual collaboration
 Changed mental
models
 Improved decision
making
 Increased technology
competencies
 Ability to respond to
change
 Formal and informal
learning
 Innovation
 Virtual Learning

The preceding presentations, analysis and synthesis of the foundational bodies of
knowledge informative to an initial conceptualization of the phenomenon of VSP holds promise
for further development and refinement of the same. This initial, and exploratory theorizing work
has a number of evident implications for HRD- and phenomenon-related research, theory and
practice. As such it should offer, at the very least, food-for-thought for current planners,
researchers, theorists, and practitioners.
Implications for HRD
What might be possible implications of this venture into the initial (and exploratory)
conceptualization of the phenomenon of VSP for the broader field of HRD? A discussion of
some of related possibilities follows.
Implications for Related Research
Three notable related research implications can be ventured. The first is that extended
inquiry should be carried out to garner cases of VSP such as locating scenario planners who may
have done parts of or all scenario planning in an online venue. Processes and results of such
cases have yet to be studied and documented in the literature. The second is that inquiry using
participants who have both experience with scenario planning and virtual activities might be
useful in informing the further development of VSP. A third is that developing methodologies
for researching VSP in the natural environment where it occurs (online) should be developed for
this context and studied. A fourth might be comparing and contrasting VSP with a spectrum of
conventional approaches to, kinds and outcomes (espoused and actualized) of scenario planning.
Such contrasting will help understand and highlight similarities and differences, as well as
strengths and weaknesses, among these kinds of, approaches to and philosophies of scenario
planning.

Implications for Related Theory
A few discernable theory-related implications might be concluded from this exploratory
venture of the concept of VSP. First, that while this exploratory theorizing has laid the
groundwork for an initial conceptualization of VSP, there is much more needed to advance
conceptual development and understanding of this phenomenon. As a result, additional and
focused theory building processes need to be followed, including further conceptual
development, operationalization, testing and application (Lynham, 2002), such that VSP can be
examined, described and understood in its real-world context. A second implication is that it can
be expected that a theory of conventional scenario planning will not be the same as one of virtual
scenario planning (McWhorter, 2011; McWhorter & Lynham, this article). For instance, units of
participant and contextual diversity, global boundary, levels of engagement and technological
expertise are not included in Chermack’s (2003a) theory of conventional SP—but would need to
be included in that of a theory of VSP (McWhorter & Lynham, this article). Furthermore, and
significantly, neither transferability (from context to context) nor transportability (to different
kinds of participants) (Lincoln & Lynham, 2011) can be assumed from the one theory to the
other.
Implications for Related Practice
Similarly to research and theory, a number of notable implications for related practice
might be ventured. The first is that using VSP allows for more richness (breadth) and depth of
inputs to the scenario planning—such as scanning—because it allows for more stakeholders to
be involved from multiple locations in the ongoing process. Following on this first implication
another is that using VSP activities allows access to such planning for those not otherwise able to
do so due to time and cost constraints. This implication in turn can be expected to afford the

organization/user a better chance of getting-the-whole-system-in the room, and thus optimizing
participation and ‘future’ preparedness of its members. It also can be expected to create
opportunities for a more diverse group of VSP participants and planners than possible in
conventional scenario planning.
A fourth discernable implication is that technology can archive activities for on-demand
playback. Doing so would in turn allow for further review and carryover from one session to the
next thus promoting cohesion and maximize the learning of participants from the process
(Nafukho, Graham & Muyia, 2010). Another implication is that utilizing VSP allows for a more
sustainable environment for “green computing” whereby carbon emissions are reduced due to
virtual communication alternatives. For organizations/users committed to as much this potential
impact on their ‘green ratio’ would likely be an important consideration. And, for nonprofit
organizations and small businesses struggling to stay viable, open source scenario planning at
relatively little or cost can be critical. Also, technology can be used to analyze some initial
scanning and other data if designed into the process, enabling a wider and deeper scan of this
important input information to scenario planning. Concomitantly, the ‘reach’ and ‘range’ of
scenario planning and related activities can be extended beyond the conventional
model/approach, enabled by using the medium of technology as core process.
It is important to underscore a further implication for practice, namely, that HRD
professionals should receive proper training in educational institutions for technology
development as one of the four primary content areas so that they can assist with, for example,
VSP initiatives. Suggestions by Fagan (2014) and Bennett (2014a) described the pairing of HRD
and Information Systems students to cross-pollinate and build their competencies in both areas.
A similar idea would be to utilize Service Learning projects or Internships (paid or unpaid)

where HRD students engage in experiential learning within technology-related organizations or
departments that utilize various forms of technologies such as organization-wide systems (i.e.
ERPs, Intranets) as well as professional usage of social networking platforms that develop social
media skills (Delello & McWhorter, 2014), and eLearning efforts for training and development.
Such knowledge will help HRD professionals to build expertise to design and leverage
technology for proper fit between VSP purpose and participants and methodology used (TD).
Finally, HRD professionals should understand scalability and proper selection of tools to support
VSP activities (technology development), particularly for large VSP efforts. Such understanding
will optimize the user experience in VSP such that the tool is not a hindrance to the scenario
planning process, but rather it is a facilitator of VSP.
This project, on the phenomenon of virtual scenario planning (VSP) and informing initial
conceptualization thereof, represents an exploratory endeavor of theorizing, and early steps in the
journey towards theory-building. Even so, the initial outcomes presented offer promise for
further and more rigorous such work. While we are all aware of the rapidity of change in the
contexts in which the field of HRD finds itself, none is both more daunting and promising than
that of the increasing complexity of these contexts, and the pace of technology development.
Virtual scenario planning (VSP) seems to hold much promise in helping us to bridge both and in
so doing continue to inform rigor and relevance within the field.

References
Ardichvili, A. (2008).Learning and knowledge sharing in virtual communities of practice:
Motivators, barriers, and enablers. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(4),
541-554.
Bell, S. (2011). A conference wherever you are. Library Journal, 136(16), 28-31. Retrieved from
http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/community/libraryculture/891899-
271/a_conference_wherever_you_are.html.csp
Bennett, E. E. (2009). Virtual HRD: The intersection of knowledge management, culture, and
intranets. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 362-374. doi:
10.1177/152342202237522
Bennett, E. E. (2010). The coming paradigm shift: Synthesis and future directions for Virtual
HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(6), 728-741. doi:
10.1177/1523422310394796
Bennett, E. E., & Bierema, L. L. (2010). The ecology of virtual HRD. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 12(6), 632-647.
Bennett, E. & McWhorter, R. R. (2014). Virtual Human Resource Development. In N.
Chalofsky, T. Rocco, & L. Morris (Eds.), The handbook of human resource development:
The discipline and the profession.
Boudreau, K., & Lakhani, K. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard
Business Review, 91(4), 60-69.
Bradfield, R., Wright, G., Burt., G., Cairns, G., & van der Heijden, K. (2005). The origin and
evolution of scenario techniques in long-range business planning. Futures, 37(8), 795-
812. doi 2048/10.1016/j.futures.2005.01.003

Burt, G., & Chermack, T. (2008). Learning with scenarios: Summary and critical issues.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(2), 285-295.
Cascio, J. (2007). The virtual workshop: Or, how to run a scenario event in your pajamas with
nobody the wiser. Retrieved from
http://openthefuture.com/2007/01/the_virtual_workshop_or_how_to.html
Center for Houston’s Future: The Region’s Think Tank (2012). Scenarios 2040. Retrieved from
http://www.futurehouston.com/cfhf.cfm?a=cms,c,261,3,29
Chapman, D. D., & Stone, S. J. (2010). Measurement of outcomes in virtual environments.
doi:10.1177/15233422310394792
Chermack, T. J. (2003a). A theoretical model of scenario planning. Human Resource
Development Review, 3, 301-325.
Chermack, T. J. (2003b). A methodology for assessing performance based scenario planning.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 10(2), 55-64.
Chermack, T. J. (2004). Improving decision making with scenario planning. Futures, 36(3), 295-
309. doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(03)00156-3
Chermack, T. J. (2011). Scenario planning in organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Chermack, T. J., & Lynham, S. A. (2002). Definitions and outcome variables of scenario
planning. Human Resource Development Review, 1(3), 366-383.
doi:10.1177/1534484302013006
Chermack, T. J., & Swanson, R. A. (2008). Scenario planning: Human Resource Development’s
strategic learning tool. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(2), 129-146.

Delello, J. A., & McWhorter, R. R. (2014). New visual social media for the higher education
classroom. In G. Mallia (Ed.), The social classroom: Integrating social network use in
education (pp. 368-393). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-4904-
0.ch019
Dewey, J. D., & Carter, T. J. (2003). Exploring the future of HRD: The first future search
conference for the profession. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5(3), 245-256.
Docherty, I., & McKiernan, P. (2008). Scenario planning for the Edinburgh city region.
Environment & Planning C: Government & Policy, 26(5), 982-997. doi:10.1068/c0665r
Educause.edu (2010). 7 things you should know about backchannel communication. Retrieved
from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7057.pdf
Fazarro, D., & McWhorter, R. (2011). Leveraging green computing for increased viability and
sustainability. Journal of Technology Studies, 37(2). Retrieved from
scholar.lib.vt.edu ejournals JOTS v37 v37n2 fazarro.html
Foster, M. J. (1993). Scenario planning for small businesses. Long Range Planning, 26(1), 123-
129.
Fourie, P. (2007). The future of AIDS in Africa: Lessons from two scenario projects. Ajar-
African Journal of AIDS Research, 6(2), 97-107.
Gruman, G. (2012). Who’s embracing BYOD? Infoworld.com. Retrieved from
http://www.infoworld.com/d/consumerization-of-it/guess-whos-embracing-
consumerization-probably-not-who-you-think-197872
Ilbury, C, & Sunter, C. (2011). The fox trilogy: Imagining the unimaginable and dealing with it.
Cape Town, South Africa: Human & Rousseau and Tafelberg.

Johnston, M., Gilmore, A., & Carson, D. (2008) Dealing with environmental uncertainty: The
value of scenario planning for small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). European
Journal of Marketing, 42(11) 1170 - 1178
Kapp, K. M., & O’Driscoll, T. (2010). Learning in 3D: Adding a new dimension to enterprise
learning and collaboration. San Francisco, CA: Pfieffer.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Lynham, S. A. (2011). Criteria for assessing theory in human resource
development from an interpretive perspective. Human Resource Development
International, 14(1), 3-22.
Lynham, S. A. (2002). General Method of Theory-Building research in applied disciplines.
Lynham, S.A., Provo, J.M., & Ruona, W.E.A. (1998). The role of scenarios in business strategy
and human resource development. In R.J. Torraco (Ed.), Proceedings of the Academy of
Human Resource Development (pp. 169-177). Baton Rouge, LA: AHRD.
Mancuso, D. S., Chlup, D. T., & McWhorter, R. R. (2010). A study of adult learning in a virtual
world. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(6), 681-699.
Marks, G. (2013). Do you really need a BYOD policy? Forbes. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/quickerbettertech/2013/02/25/do-we-really-need-a-byod-
policy/
McWhorter, R. R. (2010). Exploring the emergence of virtual human resource development.
McWhorter, R. R. (2011). Scenario planning as the development of leadership capability and
capacity; and virtual human resource development (Dissertation). College Station, TX:
Texas A&M University.

McWhorter, R. R., & Bennett, E. E. (Eds.). (2010). Exploring the construct of Virtual Human
Resource Development. Advances in Developing Human Resources 12(6).
McWhorter, R. R., & Bennett, E. E. (2012). Facilitating transition from higher education to the
workforce: A literature review of ePortfolios as Virtual Human Resource Development.
Academy of Human Resource Development International Conference, Denver, Colorado.
February 29-March 4, 2012.
McWhorter, R. R., & Lynham, S. A. (2011). Virtual scenario planning: A strategic learning tool
for the small business and non-profit organization. Presented at the Southern
Management Association Conference, November 9-12, Savannah, Georgia.
McWhorter, R. R., Lynham, S. A., & Porter, D. E. (2008). Scenario planning as the development
of leadership capability and capacity. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(2),
259-284.
McWhorter, R. R., & Lindhjem, K. A. (2013). Virtual learning environments: How they can
benefit nanotechnology safety education. IEEE Nanotechnology Magazine, 7(2), 15–17.
doi: 0.1109/MNANO.2013.2260460
McWhorter, R. R., Mancuso, D. S., Chlup, D. T., & Demps, E. L. (2009). The emergence of
virtual human resource development (T. J. Chermack, Ed.). Proceedings of the 2009
Academy of Human Resource Development, Washington, DC.
McWhorter, R. R., Mancuso, D. S., & Hurt, A. C. (2008). Adult learning in a virtual
environment. In T. J. Chermack, J. Storberg-Walker, & C. M. Graham (Eds.), Refereed
proceedings of the 2008 Academy of Human Resource Development Annual Research
Conference (pp. 1148-1152). Bowling Green, OH: Academy of Human Resource
Development.

McWhorter, R. R., Roberts, P. B. &, Mancuso, D. (2013). Exploring professional online
conferences for the adult learner. In C. Boden-McGill and K. P. King, eds. Developing
and Sustaining Adult Learners (pp. 267-281). Adult Higher Education Alliance (AHEA)
Book Series.
Means, E., Patrick, R., Ospina, L., & West, N. (2005). Scenario planning: A tool to manage
future water utility uncertainty. American Water Works Association, 97(10). 68-75.
Nafukho, F. M., Graham, C. M., & Muyia, H. M. A. (2010). Harnessing and optimal utilization
of human capital in virtual workplace environments. Advances in Developing Human
Resources, 12(6), 648-664.
Niles, D. (2009). The secret of successful scenario planning. Forbes. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/03/scenario-planning-advice-leadership-
managingplanning. html
Raford, N. (2010). Emergent futures mapping with Futurescaper. Retrieved from
http://noahraford.com/?p=807
Raford, N. (2011). Large scale participatory future systems: A comparative study of online
scenario planning approaches. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Retrieved from
http://www.noahraford.com/files/Raford_PhD_Thesis_vFinal.pdf
Raisor, C., & McWhorter, R. R. (2014). Teaching technical communication through virtual
world technology. In S. Gregory, M. Lee, B. Dalgarno, & B. Tynan (Eds.), Virtual worlds
in online and distance education. Athabasca University Press
Rajalanti, R., van der Hiejden, K., Janssen, W., & Pehu, E. (2006). Scenario planning to guide
long-term investments in Agricultural Science and Technology: Theory and practice from
a case study in India. New York: The World Bank. Retrieved from

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/Scenario_Planning_DP_29_final.
pdf
Ramirez, R., Selsky, J. W., & van der Heijden, K. (2008). Conceptual and historical overview. In
R. Ramirez, J. W. Selsky and K. van der Heijden (Eds.).Business planning for turbulent
times: New methods for applying scenarios, (pp. 17-30). London, UK: Earthscan.
Rigby, D., & Bilodeau, B. (2007). A growing focus on preparedness. Harvard Business Review,
85(7/8), 21-22.
Ringland, G. (2006). Scenario planning: Managing for the future, 2nd
edition. West Sussex, UK:
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Rogers, S. (2011). Green conferencing: Reducing a meeting’s carbon footprint. Retrieved from
http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/stories/green-conferencing-
reducing-a-meetings-carbon-footprint
Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1995). Scenario Planning: A tool for Strategic Thinking. Sloan
Management Review.
Schwartz, P. (1991). The art of the long view: Planning for the future in an uncertain world.
New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New
York: Doubleday/Currency.
Shell.com (2013). Shell scenarios. Retrieved from http://www.shell.com/global/future-
energy/scenarios.html
Short, D. (2010). Foreword: Reflections on virtual HRD from a scholar-practitioner. Advances in
Developing Human Resource Development, 12(6), 619-622.

Short, D. (2013). Designing a 3D Virtual HRD environment from a scholar-practitioner
perspective. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 15(3), 270-283.
The Smith School (2011). Angela Wilkinson, World Forum on Enterprise and Environment.
[video] Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH5zGc8FxWU
Sreedhar, S. (2014). Tech tools that can save pointless business meetings. Forbes. Retrieved
from http://www.forbes.com/sites/sungardas/2014/02/28/tech-tools-that-can-save-
pointless-business-meetings/
Tuckman, B., & Jensen, M. C. (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group and
Organization Studies, 2, 419–427.
Tuna, C. (2009). Pendulum is swinging back on scenario planning. Wall Street Journal, Eastern
Edition, 254(4), B6. Retrieved from
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124683295589397615.html
UNAIDS(2005). AIDS in Africa: Three Scenarios to 2025. Retrieved from
http://www.unaids.org
United Nations Environment Programme (2012). Short-term country scenarios – Mont Fleur.
Retrieved from http://www.unep.org/ieacp/iea/training/manual/module6/1248.aspx
Van der Merwe, L. (2005). Planning for certainty in uncertain times: Strategic conversation,
scenario based planning, and developing a sustainable business model. Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: Centre for Innovative Leadership.
Van der Merwe, L. (2008). Scenario-based strategy in practice: A framework. Advances in
Developing Human Resources, 10(2), 216-239. doi 10.1177/1523422307313321
Wild, R. H., Griggs, K. A., & Li, E. Y. (2005). An architecture for distributed scenario building
and evaluation. Communications of the ACM, 48(11), 80-86.

Wilkinson, A., & Kupers, R. (2013). Living in the futures: How scenario planning changed
corporate strategy. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 118-127.
Workman, M. (2005). Virtual team culture and the amplification of team boundary permeability
on performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 435-458.
Yoon, S. W., & Lim, D. H. (2010). Systemizing virtual learning and technologies by managing
organizational competency and talents. Advances in Developing Human Resources,
12(6), 715-727. doi:10.1177/1523422310394796
Bios
Rochell McWhorter is an Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development, College of Business
and Technology, at The University of Texas at Tyler. Her publications include Virtual HRD, scenario
planning and visual social media. She proposed and was lead editor of 2010 Special Issue titled
“Exploring the Construct of Virtual Human Resource Development” in 12(6) issue of Advances in
Human Resources. She chaired the Technology, eLearning and Virtual HRD Track, AHRD International
Conference in the Americas. Rochell can be reached at: rmcwhorter@uttyler.edu
Susan Lynham is an Associate Professor at Colorado State University. Her research areas include
responsible leadership, scenario planning based leadership development, national human resource
development, constructivist inquiry, and theory development in applied disciplines. She is a past board
member of the Academy of HRD, is past Editor-in-Chief of Advances in Developing Human Resources
journal, and serves on the editorial board of several core journals in the field. Susan can be reached at:
Susan.Lynham@colostate.edu
Note: This is the last author’s copy of this paper. The final definitive copy of this work is available online
at: http://adh.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/30/1523422314532096.abstract?rss=1 and will soon be
available in print in the Advances in Developing Human Resources Journal, 2014.

An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning

Similaire à An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning (20)

Plus de Rochell McWhorter

Plus de Rochell McWhorter (18)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

An Initial Conceptualization of Virtual Scenario Planning