Storytelling and the scenario process: Understanding success and failure Gary Bowman a, ⁎, R. Bradley MacKay b , Swapnesh Masrani c , Peter McKiernan d a University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK b University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK c University of Stirling, Stirling, UK d University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK article info abstract Article history: Received 7 December 2011 Received in revised form 10 April 2012 Accepted 11 April 2012 Available online 8 May 2012 Scenario planning has become a widely used strategic management approach for understanding future environmental uncertainty. Despite its increasing popularity in management practice, the theoretical underpinnings for scenario planning processes remain underdeveloped. Furthermore, there is little analysis on why some scenario methods succeed and others fail. To address this gap, we draw on storytelling theory as a conceptual lens for analyzing our data. This paper uses a longitudinal case study of two successive scenario planning interventions over a nine-year period in an intra-organizational partnership to investigate the efficacy of scenario planning de- velopment processes. Of the two interventions, the first, which followed what we term an ‘inductive’ method, was successful, meeting the objectives set by the organization, while the second approach, which we term ‘deductive’, was deemed a failure. We develop a process model explaining these divergent outcomes based on how meaning was either enabled or inhibited in the two methods through storytelling. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Scenario method Scenario planning Storytelling Strategic management 1. Introduction Academic research has been slow to interrogate and to theorize about the effectiveness of scenario planning methods. This is a puzzle, as it has become a widely adopted strategic planning approach for understanding environmental complexity and uncertainty [1–3] by challenging managerial assumptions and improving long-term strategic thinking about complex futures [4–6]. In particular, scholarly research into the operational process of formulating scenarios remains sparse, with accounts relating mainly to successful interventions [7] with some recent exceptions [8]. Though its subjective and heuristic nature [9] might explain this paucity of academic concern (for exceptions, see [10,11]), there is a need for a more systematic body of research evidence to better understand the effectiveness of different scenario interventions. This paper tries to fill this gap by addressing scenario planning in a large public regional authority in the UK over an nine-year period. More precisely, the aim of the research is to explore and evaluate two different scenario methods (here termed inductive and deductive) that were deployed in the organization during this time. One of these was deemed to be successful and one unsuccessful. 1 To add insight into our evaluation of these different methods, we chose to view the scenario intervention through the lens of ‘storytelling’. We use the terms ‘inductive’ and ‘deductive’ to distinguish between two different approaches in constructing scenarios (see Fig. 1). Where an inductive process begins with the granularity of available data and allows the scenarios to emerge incrementally Technological Forecasting & Social Change 80 (2013) 735–748 ⁎ Corresponding author at: Centre for Risk Studies, University of Cambridge Judge Business School, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1AG, United Kingdom. E-mail address: g.bowman@jbs.cam.ac.uk (G. Bowman). 1 ‘Success’ is another elusive concept in scenario planning literature. We understand success as a client-specific term. In the case we present, the notion of success and failure emerged through interviews with participants. 0040-1625/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2012.04.009 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Technological Forecasting & Social Change