Inductive Scenarios Module

One Full Day.

“If you read the scenario process literature you’ll find that the only thing that is attributed to Adam Kahane is the use
of the word ‘snippéttes’.” -Adam Kahane

The Inductive Scenarios Module is divided into the following sections:

• Introduce the Scenarios Process
• Co-Create Scenarios Inductively (Note: this section is divided into six (6) steps)
• Questions For Lunch & Paired Walk
• The ‘There’s a lot of shit coming down river and we need some scenarios yesterday’ Sub-
Module.
• Distill Meaning From the Scenarios

Introduce the Scenarios Process

If you are doing scenarios in one day, then you’ll have to push to get them done by the end of the
day. Make an announcement that the day will be packed, and that we must build momentum
early so that there is time the following day to process the scenarios.

Inductive Scenarios move from the minute to the general, from small snippets to large narratives.

Prevention: Let them know that tomorrow we will ask: “What does this mean? What are the
implications? What do we do next?” For now, however, we’ve got to focus on asking “What might
happen?” This prevention may need to be repeated.

Our target output is a set of 2, 3, or 4 useful scenarios. Useful is defined as:

o Relevant to the current situation

o Challenging to current assumptions and ideas
o Plausible, substantial, and realistic
o Clear and distinct from one another

In order to get there, we will follow this progression:

Snippets: Create snippets of logic (cause & effect, cycles, feedback loops etc.)
Themes: Cluster the snippets into candidate scenarios. (Cluster like snippets with like.)
Choices: Choose between 2 and 4 of the most useful scenarios.
Narratives: Develop each one into a full scenario.

The overall structure of the process will look like this:

o Diverging: putting a lot of ideas on the table.
o Emerging: letting it cook
o Converging (day 3): clarification and action
Co-create Scenarios Inductively

Tip: This is a creative activity in the most obvious sense. The scenarios are not preconceived in
advance. This will require work. We will create something by the end of the day that did not
previously exist. In the spirit of creativity, it is important that the group is inspired and ready to
get to work. Jeff’s Picasso video module is perfect for this.

The first thing to do is establish a time-frame for the scenarios that looks far enough ahead that
things could change but not so far that it seems irrelevant. For example, if it will take an
estimated 10 years to turn around the climate change issue, then we need to make it concrete:
‘Established scenario target: now until 2020.’ Once this is done, move on to generating the actual
scenarios.

There are 6 small steps to the scenario generation process:

1. Generate snippets (pieces of scenario logic)

2. Cluster snippets into candidates
3. Clarify clusters into candidate scenarios as list of evocative themes, images, phrases
4. Choose the most useful scenarios from these candidates
5. Develop the chosen scenarios into full blown narratives
6. Name and Link the Scenarios

Step 1) Generate Snippets (pieces of scenario logic)

Café seating

The structure of snippets can take many forms. Here are a couple of examples:

A) Cause and effect chains

In the following example, an increase in Variable A leads to a decrease in Variable B, which in

turn leads to a increase in Variable C.
B) Feedback loops

In this example, an increase in Variable A leads to an increase in Variable B which in turn leads
to a further increase in Variable A. This kind of scenario logic is exemplified in the relationship
between carbon emissions and climate change.

In general, snippets should be concerned with cause and effect, so that one variable affects
another, and then that effect affects another.

Prevention: Participants should not create extremely complex systems maps with hundreds of
variables. Creating more simple snippets is more effective than creating fewer complex ones.

Each table should create as many simple snippets as possible and then choose 2 or 3 to share.

In general don’t use language in the snippets such as “increase” or “decrease,” instead use
different vocabulary so that the relationships between aspects of the snippets are reversible.

The opposite could also be true

Step 2) Cluster Snippets (into candidate scenarios)

Theater Seating

Lightly mount 10 flip chart pages to the wall, so that they are easily moveable. The group sits
theater style facing the pages.

Move directly into the exercise by asking each table to have one person present their 2 or 3
snippets and then tape them randomly on the flipchart paper. They will be clustered after the
fact. Let’s hear what each group came up with. We don’t have to agree on them, let’s just present
them and post them on the wall first. Later we’ll cluster them.

Once the snippets have been presented, they are edited and the clustering process begins. Larger
or longer snippets are re-snipped or pre-clustered, according to the coaching of the facilitator.
Snippets are also further edited for logic and vocabulary according to the criteria for snippets (see
above).

Although the facilitator coaches the group to begin the clustering exercise, this does not mean that
the participants don’t cluster the snippets. On the contrary, it is imperative that they do so. The
facilitator, even when coaching, must follow the guidance of the participants. This is a
brainstorming process that is designed to flush/draw out the main themes of the snippets. We are:

o Clarifying
o Interrogating
o Crystallizing

Prevention: This clustering exercise does not involve choosing. We will choose scenarios later,
but for now we’re simply trying to clarify and elaborate so we don’t get confused with too many
ideas. It is also important not to judge. It is OK to interrogate our categories and logics, but we’re
not judging whether we want them and like them or not.

Prevention: We may end up with 10 Candidate Scenarios during this exercise, some of which
will be overlapping. In preparation for the next phase we want to get just clear enough to work in
small groups, so we may be going over the same ground again and again… there is an iterative
process here. Our guiding questions are, “What’s worth talking about? What’s important?”

The groups cluster the snippets on the flipchart paper according to like characteristics and label
each cluster at the top of the page. These will eventually be our Candidate Scenarios. What you
want to end up with at the end of this exercise is one cluster of snippets per flipchart page, clearly
labeled and ready to be clarified into a Candidate Scenario.

Step 3) Clarify Candidate Scenarios.

Café seating, then theater seating

There is one flipchart set up for each table, with one cluster of snippets per group, hanging in a
visible and convenient location. The group returns to café seating, gravitating toward the
candidate scenarios that they identify with.

The only rule is: “Be where you want to be. If you find yourself working on something that is not
interesting to you, then move to another table until you find yourself in the right place.”
Each table is directed to write their candidate scenario into a list of key/driving themes, images,
and phrases.

Somewhere in the room there should be a visible flipchart page with the instructions written
clearly for the participants’ reference. It may help to repeat these instructions:

The end result should be a single flipchart page: “this is a scenario that is characterized by…”

Once these are complete, the group will switch to theater seating, and hang their Candidate
Scenarios with the corresponding clusters of snippets so that both are visible. The Scenarios are
mounted and then assigned letters of the alphabet. For example, if you had 9 candidates, they
would be labeled Candidates ‘A’ through ‘I’. These letters should be written clearly on each
flipchart page, for everyone’s reference. The wall might look something like this:

etc…
Once they are hanging on the wall, a member from each team is chosen to present the candidate
scenarios.

Prevention: Lets just hear what these 9 candidates are. We don’t have to agree on them or judge
them, just hear what they are. Although we may not be clear on the exact form (the events, the
narrative of the scenario), we are very clear about the content, the subject matter of the scenario.

Questions Over Lunch & Paired Walk

Questions Over Lunch

Over lunch, sit with, and talk about this question: “What are the stories that need to be told?”

What is needed of this group of people in this time in this place? What does the region need to
talk about to provoke conversation and action? Inspiring stories? Cautionary tales? Prophetic
warnings? Dangers to be averted? Or even stories to teach? It may be important for them to
understand (as in The Big Lebowski) ‘the ins, the outs, and the what-have-yous’ of the situation.

Paired Walk

See the ‘Paired Walk’ Module, below.

Step 4) Choosing Scenarios

Theater Seating

Sit in groups of three. Partners from the paired walk should not be in the same groups.

There are infinite possible scenarios; infinite possible stories to tell. We are concerned with the
ones that need to be told. The Latin root of the word “decision” is “to cut”. So in this exercise we
will be narrowing our focus to three scenarios, cutting the rest out permanently.

First, groups will use sticky colored dots to ‘vote’ for the scenarios that appear to be the most
useful (see definition). Each group of three is allotted three dots. Together, in your groups, decide
which scenarios you would vote to keep. We will not be using this voting exercise to actually
choose the scenarios, so don’t worry, its not your last chance. Rather we are trying to see where
the energy of the group is headed. Where the group is drawn, where the nuclei of the issues at
hand really lay.

If you think that one of these scenarios has a lot of elements that you want but another is a better
starting place, we can adapt for that, and change the scenarios accordingly. If you think there’s
one that’s not up here that you want to vote for, then you can put it up there now.

Each of the group, come up and put a sticker on the three scenarios that you feel are most
important and tell the group why. This is the most complicated moment in the process because
we’re trying to ask that very complicated question of what’s going on, how are we going to
proceed, so its important that the groups each give their reasons why they are choosing which
scenarios and if they want to combine any scenarios which ones and why. Again this is the most
ambiguous part of the process so we’ll now begin the most complex decision making of the day.

Prevention: Again, there could be 15 stories about each scenario… choose the one that is most
useful; that is the most relevant, challenging to current thinking, plausible and clear. It doesn’t
have to be neutral but don’t let your preferences short circuit your thinking.

The process of ‘voting’ for scenarios (including explanations of why each group is voting as they
are) should begin a dialogic group process that ends in 2-4 distinct and useful sets of themes,
images and phrases that will then be developed in full-blown narratives. It is important to be
creative with this process. Hybridize Candidate Scenarios, try different combinations, generate
new ideas out of old. This is the beginning of the generative phase of the U.

Step 5) Generating The Scenarios

Café Seating

Once the Scenarios have been chosen, instruct the participants to break into groups around their
choices, and begin to flush out the scenarios. Repeat that they should focus on creating the single
most useful scenario. Repeat that a scenario is a story about “What might happen…” and that
a useful scenario is Relevant, Challenging, Plausible and Clear.

During this stage of the process, it will help to show flipchart pages containing this information.
Instruct participants to refer back to these if they begin to get stuck or unsure. These are the
criteria that should guide the process.

Prevention: What you are not doing right now is developing your own action plan or strategy.
There will be plenty of time tomorrow to engage with the implications of the narratives that we
have created. At this time, as much as possible, leave yourselves as actors out of the stories, for
now (repeat this). This will make the exercise much more difficult. But it is important. The stories
are about what might happen in the region until 2020, not about you and what you can do.
Again, there will be plenty of time tomorrow to deal with how these stories may affect you and
how you may best respond to these scenarios given your particular situation and role(s) in the
system.

When writing your scenarios, don’t be restricted by what’s on your paper. It may happen that in
the end you change your mind completely. This is a creative process that leads us to our scenarios.
Be careful not to control the process. Don’t be afraid to be creative, take risks, and be open to the
suggestions of your peers.

During this process (maybe 2/3 of the way through), groups should begin coming up with names
for their scenarios.

Tip: Many participants have no experience creating narratives or stories. As this can be a
daunting task, it may help to ask them to think about the fundamental building blocks of their
stories. For example, you could ask: “Who are the characters in your story? are they institutions?
[pause between each one] social groups? ethnic groups? families? individuals? are they entire
ecosystems or societies? What kinds of transformative events and changes do your 'characters'
undergo? Remember that these stories are about the region or social system, and what might
happen there.”

Step 6) Scenario Presentation

Theater Seating

Once the scenarios have been flushed out into full narratives, switch back to theater seating and
have each group post their scenarios on the wall. Participants should write the letters of the
alphabet that correspond to their scenarios on their flipchart pages. This way, there is continuity
to the process, and a record of the development of the scenarios. Before presenting them, instruct
all participants to look in silence at their scenarios, and just take in what they see.

Prevention: It is important to understand that the Picasso masterpiece isn’t quite finished yet. So
these are a few brush strokes, but we may have fundamental changes to make. Rather than agree
to get everything together before we put pen to paper, this exercise is really about getting
something down so we can take a look at it.

How the scenario presentation goes and the function of the presentation will largely depend on
the scenarios themselves. It may happen that the scenarios are not finished, or are not useful yet.
In this case, presentation will be a process of getting feedback from the rest of the group.

When the time is ripe, have each group present their scenarios, allowing for minor questions and
discussions, but moving through each scenario. This can be done in the following way:

Now look at the scenarios and ask yourselves, “What are we talking about? Where are we going?
What is this starting to look like? What is taking shape? What do you see here?” (then instruct
them to continue looking in silence and speak when ready. This will begin an objective discussion
of these stories, and the usefulness of their interpretations of the present. In the Waterloo-
Wellington Scenarios, this brought about a discussion of the use value of utopian scenarios vs.
warning, or failure scenarios.

Popcorn thoughts and feelings & One word checkout.

The ‘There’s a lot of shit coming down river and we need some scenarios yesterday’
Sub-Module.

A Couple Hours

It is possible that the scenarios initially produced by the participants will not be very useful. This is
especially applicable if the group is moving in different directions, still circling in the bottom of the
collective U. In this case, it may be useful to gather all those focused on scenarios in one group,
while allowing those interested in working on other ideas to go into a breakout room where they
are free to work on whatever is growing for them. In the case of the Waterloo-Wellington
Scenarios, this secondary group broke off with a Reos facilitator to explore action-seeds. Once the
new, focused scenarios group is gathered, hold an open space to see if there is something distinct
and useful growing there.

Creating the scenarios chart

If the smaller scenario group is still stuck, without a natural flow and progression quickly
emerging, it may be up to the facilitator to distill a set of themes from the work that has been done
thus far, that will ultimately constitute the core framework of the final scenarios.
This can be done by making a relatively simple chart on a flipchart or a large piece of butcher
paper:

Economic Social Scenarios Environmental

Scenarios One Two Scenarios Three
+ - + - + -

2009-2012

2013-2016

2017-2020

In the case of the Waterloo-Wellington scenarios, this process generated 3 possible scenarios in
two dimensions and three themes.

The two dimensions were positive and negative so that each scenario had two versions: a utopian
or ideal case scenario, and a disaster or failure scenario. The three themes were Economic
Collapse, Sustainable Immigration, and Natural Resource depletion, coinciding with the
economic, social, and environmental dimensions of social life. These themes could take on other
forms of course, such as political or conflict scenarios etc.

Each scenario should have 6 events that compose them, two events each over three equal periods
of time (this should reflect the timeframe agreed upon at the beginning of the process). In the case
of the Waterloo Wellington Scenarios, the agreed timeframe was 2020. So the chart was divided
into the following sections: 2009-2012, 2013-2016, 2017-2020.

Populating the Chart

Once this chart has been made, the group breaks up into three smaller groups, one for each
theme. These groups each receive stacks of 12 yellow cards (6 for each of their +/- scenarios) on
which they write the 6 events that compose each story. In populating this chart with events, the
most important thing is that each of the columns (themes/scenarios) is relevant, challenging,
plausible, and clear, and that across the chart, they are distinct from one another.
Participants then put their cards on the large chart, and each group in turn presents its stories,
and takes questions, comments, and feedback about the new scenarios. This feedback should
ensure that the scenarios match the criteria for useful scenarios as defined above.

Tip: It is important that participants do not take constructive criticism and feedback personally.
Encourage them to use their time wisely and keep an open mind to the thoughts of others.

Important: Overnight, the facilitation team should create a document based on the scenarios
that have been generated. This should be a concise representation of the thinking and processes
that developed over the course of the previous evening, and a representation of the scenarios
themselves. This provides a material visual aid that participants can reference for the following
day’s exercises. This also is one version of the deliverable. These are the “scenarios” themselves.

Version Control
Version 1 Compiled by Nathan May 2009