Anda di halaman 1dari 37

| 



   


  


  
 
 
  

    
 
  

    
   

  
 


= 
maleki@sharif.edu
 
       

ë |hen a sailor is sailing I n Persian Gulf, he must aware
of the numerous winds, different in dire tion and speed.
He must also be very alert to not lose the wind and also to
another boats.
ë Amazingly there are very few a ident at sea, maybe
very few during the re ent 50 years.
ë The reason for this is the brain¶s extreme apa ity to
interpret huge amounts of information intuitively, to
al ulate the speed and dire tion of other boats, keep
tra k of one¶s own dire tion and the position of
surrounding banks, ro ks and buoys and at the same time
prepare for alternative a tions if an on oming boat
hanges dire tion earlier than expe ted.
ë Through experien e, sailors improve their ability to
interpret external signals.
ë Their brains be ome better and better at generating
µsailing s enarios¶.
ë Just as the football player over time be omes better at
football s enario generation. ½
› enario, Maleki

 
ë or Many years, it was believed obtaining
a urate fore asts lay in the development of
omplex, quantitative models.
ë |ith just a little more time, a few more equations
and a lot more dollars, these models would be
able to provide fore ast.
ë Many users have be ome disillusioned with
fore asting models, attempt to predi t the future
from fan y mathemati al manipulations of
histori al data.
ÿ
› enario, Maleki
  


 

D
› enario, Maleki
 
         
 
 


  
  
       
  

^
› enario, Maleki

   

 



]
› enario, Maleki
|   

ë › enario is not a fore ast, neither a vision
ë It does not seek numeri al pre ision.
It usually provides a more qualitative and
contextual description of how the present will
evolve in to the future.
ë It is not assured.
›cenario analysis usually tries to identify a
set of possible future, each of whose
occurrence is plausible

V
› enario, Maleki
    

ë ëo abulary:
› enario is an outline of a natural or expe ted ourse of events.
ë Kahn and |einer:
A hypotheti al sequen e of events onstru ted for the purpose of
fo using attention.
ë Porter
An internally onsistent view of what the future might turn out to be
ë Ringland:
That part of strategi planning whi h relates to the tools and
te hnologies for managing the un ertainties of the future
ë › hnaars:
Identify plausible future environments that the firm might fa e.

6
› enario, Maleki

   
 

Ú
› enario, Maleki

   
 

  


› enario, Maleki
 
 




› enario, Maleki

 ! "#
 $


› enario, Maleki

 ! "!$

ÿ
› enario, Maleki

       


D
› enario, Maleki
 
  % 
ë ½½ of ³ortune 1000´, were using
s enario analysis in the 1970s
ë 75 of these firms adopted the approa h
after the oil embargo in 1973
ë It is essential to keep the number of fa tors
that are onsidered to a minimum.

^
› enario, Maleki

&
ë › enario analysis has been used primarily in
long-term fore asting.
ë Most firms that used s enario analysis employed
5-year horizon.
ë But in Xerox 15-year
›hell, 15-year at least.
ë The ontent of s enario be omes progressively
more vague as the time horizon lengthens.
ë The ideal time horizon of s enario analysis is
spe ifi to the industry, produ t or market under
onsideration.

]
› enario, Maleki

%
 
ë Herman Kahn: was writing s enarios as far
ba k as the 1950s.
ë ³Thinking the Unthinkable´
ë ›hell in 1970s.
ë ›RI (›tanford Resear h Institute): uture of Ameri an
›o iety until ½000.

V
› enario, Maleki
!

6
› enario, Maleki




› enario, Maleki
'
  
  ( 


ë Ôonsensus is that three s enario are best.


Although two tend to lassified as ³good-
and-bad´, while more than three be ome
unmanageable in the hands of users.

½
› enario, Maleki


  
 
ë › enarios are inevitably arrayed over some ba k-ground
themes.
ë our ba kground themes:
1-avorability to the ›ponsor:
›ele ting an optimisti and then an pessimisti .
³›urprise-free´ or µbaseline´ s enario
½-Probability of O urren e
One of the s enarios is labeled as ³most likely´.
› enarios are possibilities, not probabilities.
3-›ingle, Dominant Issue
›ometimes there is a single dominant fa tor whose out ome is
entral to the item being fore ast. Like e onomy, government
poli y.
4-Themes
In most business appli ations there is more than a single unknown.
There are many issues whi h ompete, ombine and intera t with one
another to hara terize the future. Three s enarios as: E onomi
expansion, Environmental on ern, and Te hnologi al domination.
½
› enario, Maleki
 
 
 

 

   
  

½½
› enario, Maleki
 

 
    

   
   


½ÿ
› enario, Maleki
 
      
  


  
  

½D
› enario, Maleki
   
 
 
 
1-Highly Qualitative Pro edures
½-Pra ti al Pro edures
3-Ôross-Impa t Analysis

½^
› enario, Maleki
  )#



ë Kahn: -A simplisti intuition or an expression of


bias rather than a areful synthesis and
balan ing of the analysis with more
subtle qualitative onsiderations.
-³›urprise-free´ s enario
ë Godet: -´Exploratory Prospe tive Analysis´
-Holisti and integrative analysis
ë Durand: -Intuitive analysis

Ô  
      

    
   

½]
› enario, Maleki
½ #
#



ë More pra ti al means of generating


s enarios in business environment:
-Identifying fa tors are expe ted to affe t
fore asting situation at hand.
-Postulating a set of plausible future values for
ea h of these fa tors.
-›ele ting a few plausible s enarios from a large
number of possible ombinations of the values of
these fa tors.
ë Two Approa hes on sele ting strategies:
-Dedu tive
-Indu tive
½V
› enario, Maleki
ÿ 


  
ë Emerged from early work on the Delphi
Te hnique
ë It¶s Basi philosophy of Ôross-Impa t is that no
development o urs in isolation. Rather, it is
rendered more or likely by the o urren e of
other events.
ë Ôross-Impa t attempts to apture these µ ross-
impa ts¶ from the judgmental estimates of
experts.
ë Data from experts are then input into a omputer
simulation or mathemati al program.
Ô  
        
  

 

½6
› enario, Maleki
    
 
1. The most important part of s enario analysis is to think
about the problem.
½. The most diffi ult in s enario analysis is how to redu e
a large number of potential future out omes to a few
plausible s enarios. The number of possible s enarios
grows qui kly as the number of fa tors in reases.
3. Two methods:
-Indu tive: If the number of fa tors is small (<5),
examine every possible s enarios from this set.
-Dedu tive: |hen many fa tors are onsidered, rather
than examining every possible ombination, set the
tone of s enarios. It means to de ide whether the
s enarios will represent an optimisti and pessimisti
views of the future, or hara terize some dominant
themes.
½Ú
› enario, Maleki
 
  
 *
 ½ ]
ë Three s enarios are written by BMI
(Business Monitor International)
ë Politi al › enario
ë E onomi › enario
ë Business › enario

ÿ
› enario, Maleki
ÿ
› enario, Maleki
ÿ½
› enario, Maleki
ÿÿ
› enario, Maleki
   

ë › enario writing is a planning instrument.
ë It is also an effe tive learning tool.
Thinking in s enarios helps us understand the logi of
developments, larify driving for es, key fa tors, key
players and our potential to exert an influen e.
ë It pro eeds more from the gut than from the
omputer. Although it may in orporate the
results of quantitative models.
ë It shows a slight a ura y omparing with other
models of fore asting. ›pe ially when
un ertainty is high.

ÿD
› enario, Maleki
 
  
 
 

ë   
    › enario thinking
mat hes the way the brain fun tion. Narrative format
(images and stories) makes them easily memorable.
ë [    By for ing
your mind to think about qualitatively different
dire tions, you train your apability to think the
unthinkable.
ë Ô  
  Ôomplex
business or general environments an be redu ed to a
manageable amount of un ertainty.
ë Ô
   › enarios are easy to
ommuni ate and to dis uss.
ÿ^
› enario, Maleki
|   

If scenarios are powerful, why haven¶t they been
more widely used?
ë 
  

 It does not give one single
answer about the future. Therefore it does not provide the se urity
that is often required in de ision making.
ë Ô      
  It does
not a ord with the managerial simpli ity that says that there is one
right answer to every question. › enario planning is a more holisti
or systemi approa h to planning than traditional methods.
ë ›     › enario te hniques are
usually qualitative, the results are often presented in qualitative terms
that fir poorly with traditional numbers-oriented ultures.
ë 
 |orkshop-based methods are time
onsuming in terms of the number of hours and days the parti ipants
need to spend to get thorough results.
ë ›

 Most of › enarios adopted in the ompanies are ar ane
and impra ti al ÿ]
› enario, Maleki
% 
 
ë Kahn, Herman & A. J. |einer,   !London: M Millan,
1967.
ë Makridakis, ›pyros  !The a ura y of extrapolation (time-series)
methods,  " 
 !, 111-153, April-June 198½.
ë › hnaars, ›teven P.; ³How to Develop and Use › enarios´; 
#$%ëol. ½0, No. 1, pp. 105-114, 1987.
ë Ëenter, Rene D.; ³› enarios in fore asting´; Ô 

& % O tober 1975, pp. ½½-34.
ë -Lindgren, Mats, & Hans Bandhold; ›
 $%New York;
Palgrave, ½003.

ÿV
› enario, Maleki