replying to ---- Benjamin Compton Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:29:48 -0700
Subject: Scenario Planning LO10486
Hello Rick and the list, I've been away for a while - this is probably a
one off input, and it's a reply to a very old message, but I'm posting it
because I now have the time as well as the interest to pursue the topic,
and because I have some new relevant info for Ben. Anyone else out there
want to join Ben and myself in debate on this topic?
>I've become very interested in Scenario Planning, as opposed to Strategic
>Planning. I'm currently reading "The Art of the Long View," by Peter
>Schwartz.
>I became reacquainted with the subject when I read about the work Pierre
>Wack and Ted Newland did at Shell Oil, described in Art Kliener's book
>"The Age of Heretics."
>
>Right now, Novell is at a pivotal moment in it's history. I believe that
>scenario planning can help ensure we make the best possible decisions.
Ben, I don't believe that. [Remember Kevin Kelly's 'nine laws of god' (if
you don't ask me for details), number 7 says 'pursue no optima'. On a
constantly deforming fitness landscape any successful strategy/decision to
go with that strategy/ is only temporarily successful; you need to scan
not plan.
I've also read 'heretics' and although I am very interested in scenario
planning [SP], I suspect that it is based on a linear view of the world
which is negated both by the pace of change we now face and by complexity
theory concepts. Remember that Wack uses floods in the Ganges as an
example of something that has already happened; what I think you face at
Novell is the entirely new emerging: entirely new types of software and
hardware. It's as if a new river just pops out near the Ganges and
totally redirects its flow. I don't see how SP can deal with that. I've
just gone back to Heretics and reread bits as I write this; my guess is
that Wack n' co. made SP work because of the way they used it within
Shell, within complex interactions with people, not by the method per se.
In other words by the sort of approach/theory that Michael McMaster uses,
not by the SP 'content' of those interactions.
I think there is a lot of value in SP, but only if we can recast it to
interact with our 'post-complexity' world.
There is an interesting article about the failure of SP at Shell [!]
you'll almost certainly want to read; it's in Long Range Planning vol 29
no-6, it's by Elkington and Trisoglio. It looks at Shell's recent
'mishaps' in Nigeria and with the oil platform Brent Spar in the north
Sea. Elkington is an environmental sustainability consultant; Trisoglio
is an academic and consultant who, inter alia, has written an excellent
overview paper on complexity and strategy.
What might help Novell? Well for what it's worth I'd try 'whole-system'
approaches like Future Search or Open Space to get a mass of input from
lots of people inside and outside Novell, to see what visions/attractors
emerge that can help novell get a better feel for what is emerging.
[you'll find lots of this type of stuff on the Web.]
Best wishes
Arthur Battram
--from Arthur Battram, organisational learning adviser, helping local authorities to apply complexity concepts to personal and organisational learning. 'Learning from Complexity' pack available NOW finally, 110 pounds sterling full price, 71.50 to registered charities, 55 -half price- for local authorities in England and Wales who finance LGMB, -credit card payment accepted- for details email me: apb@cityplex.demon.co.uk
***the truth? that would be an ekumenical matter...***
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>