بررسی مطالعات سناریوی مبتنی بر دلفی : ملاحظات کیفیت و طراحی

For meaningful scenarios, creative input concerning possible future trends is crucial. Herman Kahn, the father of modern scenario planning, underlined the importance of “thinking the unthinkable” in a significant scenario study. “Blessed with high intelligence, an assertive personality and the research capabilities of the RAND Corporation,” he could rely on genius forecasting. But how can this foresight be creative as well as simultaneously credible and objective if one does not possess Kahn's genius? In this article, we assess the incorporation of expert knowledge via the Delphi technique into scenario planning as a promising option. We discuss possible combinations and identify the span of design alternatives in the existing body of Delphi-based scenario studies through a systematic research review and provide recommendations on how a Delphi-based scenario study should be designed to ensure quality. We recommend focusing on the integration of the Delphi technique only in one phase of the scenario approach. In this way, the design options can be intentionally adjusted to the particular function. We further offer recommendations on how to accomplish this.

In order to develop meaningful scenarios, creative input concerning possible future trends and developments is crucial. Herman Kahn, the father of modern scenario planning, underlined the importance of “thinking the unthinkable” in a significant scenario study. “Blessed with high intelligence, an assertive personality and the research capabilities of the RAND Corporation,” he could rely on genius forecasting [1]. But how can this foresight process be creative, credible and objective if one does not possess Kahn's genius and resources? As MacKay and McKiernan [2] confirm, “For most participants, these activities demand that they activate and utilize those artistic parts of the brain that normally lie dormant for long periods while they carry their daily routines…” The Delphi technique itself is supposed to enhance creative thinking. According to Gupta and Clarke [3], it is “one of the best known methods for dealing with open-ended and creative aspects of a problem because it motivates independent thought and gradual formation of group solutions.” In this article, we assess the incorporation of expert knowledge via the Delphi technique into scenario planning as a promising option. We do this to give recommendations on how a Delphi-based scenario study should be designed to ensure the highest possible degree of quality. Therefore we address two research questions: 1.How can the Delphi technique enhance the quality of a scenario study? The purpose here is to evaluate if a combination of the two methods is reasonable and contributes to a more effective scenario study. 2.What is the span of possible design options in the existing body of Delphi-based scenario studies? Developed for military purposes by the RAND Corporation in the U.S. during the Cold War, both methods date back more than 50 years. Since then, several researchers have combined the two methods in very different ways. Therefore, a systematic research review that reflects the span of possible design options is needed. While the Delphi technique, in general, has been subject to several prior reviews [3], [4], [5], [6] and [7] as well as scenario planning [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] and [13], no review on the combination of the two methods has been conducted.

Based on the findings of the methodological literature as well as the findings of the integrated results and discussion chapter, we will now conclude how quality in terms of creativity, credibility and objectivity in future Delphi-based scenario studies can be ensured. Scenario planners need to be aware of the goal of their scenario study, whether they want to identify possible challenges and drivers in explorative scenario studies or whether they want to specify the impacts of already known drivers in predictive scenario studies. In explorative scenario studies, we see the added value in the ability of the Delphi technique to capture creative input, identifying future challenges or adaptation options in the scanning or visioning phase of the scenario approach. In predictive scenario studies, the focus should be on the judgment function of the Delphi technique, which is primarily useful in the visioning phase, whereas the integration of the Delphi technique within the forecasting phase should be considered carefully. In order not to overcharge the experts, the identification of the key drivers should be delegated to a panel. The quality in terms of creativity of Delphi-based scenarios studies can be ensured by integrating the idea-generation function of the Delphi technique into the scanning phase. If disturbing effects, such as the Bandwagon effect, are obstacles to an effective group communication, we recommend attaching importance to anonymity. Creativity profits as well in the visioning phase (if adaptation options are to be identified) especially by the larger reservoir of ideas generated by the integration of the experts. Especially promising is the identification of weak signals. One researcher on his own might be overstrained, but by having a considerably larger reservoir of ideas, weak signals might be identified that otherwise would have gone unnoticed. If creative input is needed, some design options need to be especially aligned for capturing the ideas of the experts. The process should be as open as possible. Open-ended questions give the experts the possibility to develop ideas, to have a sufficiently high number of Delphi-rounds and to provide feedback that allows the experts to better understand the thoughts and ideas of the other experts as necessary. If experts have the possibility to comment then the responsible facilitator must ensure that these comments are incorporated into the next Delphi round. Expert interviews and, in later rounds, workshops can serve as a complementing feature. The use of the most probable scenario should be avoided because it might limit the decision-maker from capturing the full creative input of the scenarios. The integration of the Delphi technique in the three scenario phases increases objectivity because the responsibility of the researcher is distributed among the experts. Therefore, the expert selection must not be biased. Biases in the questionnaire design can lead to results that depend on the researcher rather than on the opinion of the experts. Therefore, we recommend using a neutral framework for the questionnaire design and selecting the experts carefully. For idea-generation, the PESTEL framework is a good starting point. The credibility of scenarios benefits from the integration of the Delphi technique because experts ameliorate the completeness of scenarios in the scanning and visioning phases. Therefore, the role of weak signals and discontinuities has to be explicitly determined. Possible biases mentioned earlier also affect the credibility. In general, triangulation should be considered in each design decision of a Delphi-based scenario study. The design decisions have to be well justified and explained and should be documented in such a way that the study is replicable. In general, we recommend integrating the Delphi technique within a scenario study. In view of the complexity of foresight studies, we strongly recommend focusing on the integration of the Delphi technique in only one phase of the scenario approach. In this way, the design options can be intentionally adjusted to the particular function.