Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book
For organizations, the main rationale for exploring possible future developments is the imperative to sustain achievements and further progress towards organizational objectives. Deep uncertainty about the future, however, means that those hypothetical future developments are products of organizations’ sense-making processes. Much effort in organizational and methodological research is focused on questions that look into the future, to explore the possible future contextual environment for organizations (scenarios) and to draw out implications. However, less attention is often paid to how methodological choices for developing scenarios influence the way organizations make sense of their future.
This chapter presents a research methodology for critically examining organizations’ sense-making processes that also points to a more reflexive way of exploring organizations’ scenarios. Here, the responsibility of both researchers and practitioners is not only to ask how concrete future developments may affect an organization but also to inquire how the notion of a particular possible development made its way into an organizational scenario, how a set of alternative scenarios would look without it and what other possible developments have been excluded. Such critical reflections on the assumptions and practices that have shaped the development of alternative scenarios are common under poststructuralist thinking, which has often been derided as ‘impractical’ in that its critiques exclude actual scenario development processes. However, we argue that investigating organizational futures from a poststructural perspective is of practical relevance: the methodologies that an organization uses to make sense of the future ultimately shape the kinds of scenarios that an organization accepts as plausible and actively prepares for.
To bridge the gap between the worlds of scenario development and poststructural critique, we introduce Cross-Impact Balance Analysis (CIB), a method of inquiry that not only has the potential to operationalize critical, poststructuralist reflections, but is also capable of integrating those reflections back into organizations’ scenario development processes to improve how organizations address the deep uncertainty about their future.
Please log in to get access to this content
To get access to this content you need the following product:
Adam, Barbara. 2004. Memory of Futures. KronoScope 42: 297–315. CrossRef
Ahlqvist, Toni, and Martin Rhisiart. 2015. Emerging Pathways for Critical Futures Research: Changing Contexts and Impacts of Social Theory. Futures 71: 91–104. CrossRef
Amer, Muhammad, Tugrul Daim, and Antonie Jetter. 2013. A Review of Scenario Planning. Futures 46: 23–40. CrossRef
Bachrach, Peter, and Morton S. Baratz. 1962. Two Faces of Power. The American Political Science Review 56 (4): 947–952. CrossRef
Beckert, Jens. 2013. Capitalism as a System of Expectations. Politics & Society 41 (3): 323–350. CrossRef
Bradfield, Ron, George Wright, Georg Burt, George Cairns, and Kees van der Heijden. 2005. The Origins and Evolution of Scenario Techniques in Long Range Business Planning. Futures 37: 795–812. CrossRef
Brown, Nik, Brian Rappert, and Andrew Webster. 2000. Contested Futures. A Sociology of Prospective Techno-science. Burlington: Ashgate.
Calas, M., and L. Smircich. 1999. Past Postmodernism? Reflections and Tentative Directions. Academy of Management Review 24 (4): 649–671. CrossRef
Dahl, Robert. 1957. “The Concept of Power.” Systems Research and Behavioural. Science 2 (3): 201–215.
Ezzamel, Mahmoud, and Hugh Willmott. 2010. Strategy and Strategizing: A Poststructuralist Perspective. In The Globalization of Strategy Research, Advances in Strategic Management, ed. Joel A.C. Baum and Joseph Lampel, 75–109. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. CrossRef
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Truth and Power. In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings (1972–77), ed. C. Gordon. New York: Pantheon.
Grunwald, Armin. 2013. Modes of Orientation Provided by Futures Studies: Making Sense of Diversity and Divergence. European Journal of Futures Research 15 (30): 1–9.
Helmer, Olaf. 1981. Reassessment of Cross-Impact Analysis. Futures 13: 389–400. CrossRef
Hetherington, Stephen. 2001. Good Knowledge, Bad Knowledge. On Two Dogmas of Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef
Hibbard, K.A., et al. 2007. A Strategy for Climate Change Stabilization Experiments. Eos 88 (20): 217–221. CrossRef
Hodgkinson, Gerard, and George Wright. 2002. Confronting Strategic Inertia in a Top Management Team: Learning from Failure. Organization Science 23 (6): 949–977. CrossRef
Inayatullah, Sohail. 1990. Deconstructing and Reconstructing the Future: Predictive, Cultural and Critical Epistemology. Futures 22 (2): 116–141. CrossRef
———. 1998a. Causal Layered Analysis: Poststructuralism as Method. Futures 30 (8): 815–829. CrossRef
———. 1998b. Listening to Non-western Perspectives. In World Yearbook of Education 1998, ed. R. Slaughter and D. Hicks. London: Kogan Page.
Kemp-Benedict, Eric. 2012. Telling Better Stories: Strengthening the Story in Story and Simulation. Environmental Research Letters 7 (4): 1–14. CrossRef
Kilduff, Martin, and Ajay Mehra. 1997. Postmodernism and Organizational Research. Academy of Management Review 22 (2): 453–481. CrossRef
Koch, Jochen, Hannes Krämer, Andreas Reckwitz, and Matthias Wenzel. 2016. Zum Umgang mit Zukunft in Organisationen – eine praxistheoretische Perspektive. Managementforschung 26 (1): 161–184. CrossRef
Kosow, Hannah. 2016. The Best of Both Worlds?: An Exploratory Study on Forms and Effects of New Qualitative-Quantitative Scenario Methodologies. PhD Dissertation, University of Stuttgart.
Lahsen, Myanna. 2005. Seductive Simulations? Uncertainty Distribution Around Climate Models. Social Studies of Science 35 (6): 895–922. CrossRef
Lloyd, Elisabeth A., and Vanessa J. Schweizer. 2014. Objectivity and a Comparison of Methodological Scenario Approaches for Climate Change Research. Synthese 191: 2049–2088. CrossRef
March, J.G. 1995. The Future, Disposable Organizations and the Rigidities of Imagination. Organization 2 (3/4): 427–440. CrossRef
McKinlay, Alan, and Ken Starkey. 1998. Foucault, Management and Organization Theory: From Panopticon to Technologies of Self. London: SAGE Publications.
Morgan, Gareth. 1986. Images of Organization. Beverly Hills: SAGE.
Nakicenovic, Nebojsa, et al. 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Pielke, Roger, Tom Wigley, and Christopher Green. 2008. Dangerous Assumptions. Nature 452 (3): 531–532. CrossRef
Raupach, Michael, Gregg Marland, Philippe Ciais, Corinne Le Quere, Josep Canadell, Gernot Klepper, and Christopher Field. 2007. Global and Regional Drivers of Accelerating CO 2 Emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104: 10288–10293. CrossRef
Rosenau, Pauline. 1992. Postmodernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, Inroads, and Intrusions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rounsevell, Mark, and Marc Metzger. 2010. Developing Qualitative Storylines for Environmental Change Assessment. WIREs Climate Change 1: 606–619. CrossRef
Schweizer, Vanessa J., and Elmar Kriegler. 2012. Improving Environmental Change Research with Systematic Techniques for Qualitative Scenarios. Environmental Research Letters 7: 044011. CrossRef
Schweizer, Vanessa J., and Brian C. O’Neill. 2014. Systematic Construction of Global Socioeconomic Pathways Using Internally Consistent Element Combinations. Climatic Change 122: 431–445. CrossRef
Slaughter, Richard. 2002a. From Forecasting and Scenarios to Social Construction: Changing Methodological Paradigms in Future Studies. Foresight 4 (3): 26–31. CrossRef
———. 2002b. Beyond the Mundane: Reconciling Breadth and Depth in Futures Enquiry. Futures 34: 493–507. CrossRef
Spee, Andreas, and Paula Jarzabkowski. 2009. Strategy Tools as Boundary Objects. Strategic Organization 7 (2): 223–232. CrossRef
Van der Heijden, Kees. 2005. Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation. 2nd ed. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Wack, Pierre. 1985. Scenarios: Shooting the Rapids. Harvard Business Review, November–December.
Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang. 2006. Cross-Impact Balances: A System-Theoretical Approach to Cross-Impact Analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 73 (4): 334–361. CrossRef
Weiss, Richard M. 2000. Taking Science Out of Organization Science: How Would Postmodernism Reconstruct the Analysis of Organizations? Organization Science 11 (6): 709–731. CrossRef
Wright, George, Ron Bradfield, and George Cairns. 2013a. Does the Intuitive Logics Method – And Its Recent Enhancements – Produce “Effective” Scenarios? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 (4): 631–642. CrossRef
Wright, George, George Cairns, and Ron Bradfield. 2013b. Scenario Methodology: New Developments in Theory and Practice. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 80 (4): 561–565. CrossRef
Zwicky, Fritz. 1969. Discovery, Invention, Research Through the Morphological Approach. New York: Macmillan.
- What Scenarios Are You Missing? Poststructuralism for Deconstructing and Reconstructing Organizational Futures
Norman M. Kearney
Jude H. Kurniawan
Vanessa J. Schweizer
- Springer International Publishing
- Sequence number
- Chapter number
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© BBL, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Neuer Inhalt/© hww