STRATEGYMonths to result

Scenario Planning for Mental Model Surfacing

Use stories of plausible futures to reveal hidden assumptions about the present

Problem it solves

high uncertainty

Best for

Strategic planning teams facing high uncertainty, organizations preparing for multiple possible futures, and groups where entrenched mental models block strategic adaptation.

Not ideal for

Operational planning with short horizons and well-understood variables, or organizations needing to commit immediately to a single course of action.

Overview

Why this framework exists

Scenario Planning as practiced by Royal Dutch/Shell and adapted in the Fieldbook surfaces and tests the mental models driving strategic decisions. Rather than predicting the future, it develops multiple plausible narratives about how the future might unfold. The power lies not in the scenarios but in the conversations they provoke about assumptions underlying current strategy.

Scenarios create safe space for challenging beliefs. When people argue about the present, defensive routines activate. When discussing plausible futures, the same assumptions can be examined without defensiveness because conversation is explicitly hypothetical. Scenarios become shared memories of the future: as people rehearse views of what will happen, they reveal differences in their current worldviews.

The practice has evolved beyond Shell's nonintrospective origins to embrace increasing interpersonal understanding. Adam Kahane's adaptation for South African political leaders demonstrated that even antagonistic participants could safely discuss emotionally charged issues through the lens of plausible futures.

Core principles

4 total
  1. The purpose of scenarios is not to predict the future but to surface and test assumptions driving present decisions.
  2. Scenarios work because discussing hypothetical futures bypasses defensive routines blocking honest discussion of present mental models.
  3. The value lies in conversations produced, not documents generated.
  4. Diverse and antagonistic participants produce better scenarios because different mental models reveal a wider range of plausible futures.

Steps

5 steps
  1. Identify the Focal Question
    Define the strategic question scenarios address. Frame it as a specific decision the organization faces, not an abstract inquiry. The question should have genuine uncertainty and high stakes.
    Pro tipThe best focal questions are ones where reasonable people genuinely disagree about the answer.
  2. Identify Driving Forces and Key Uncertainties
    Research and discuss forces influencing the focal question. Distinguish predetermined elements from critical uncertainties that could go either way and would significantly change outcomes.
    Pro tipInvite participants with radically different mental models. Disagreements about what matters most are the most valuable data.
    WarningAvoid resolving uncertainty prematurely. The point is to hold multiple possibilities open.
  3. Construct Plausible Scenario Narratives
    Build three to four internally consistent stories about different future paths, each organized around different resolutions of critical uncertainties. Give each scenario a memorable name.
    Pro tipScenarios should make participants uncomfortable. If every scenario leads to the same conclusion, they are not challenging enough.
    WarningAvoid constructing one good, one bad, and one middle scenario. That reduces the exercise to optimism versus pessimism.
  4. Test Current Strategy Against All Scenarios
    Evaluate current strategy under each scenario. Identify where it succeeds and fails. Find assumptions it depends on that are true in some scenarios but not others. Identify robust strategies versus those betting on one future.
    Pro tipPay special attention to strategies that fail catastrophically under any single scenario. These represent existential risks.
  5. Surface the Mental Models Revealed
    Discuss explicitly: What assumptions did we discover? Which are shared, which differ? What evidence would signal which scenario is unfolding? How should we adjust strategy to be more robust?
    Pro tipUse scenarios as ongoing reference points. When new information arrives, ask which scenario it makes more likely.

Checklist

Saved in your browser

Examples

2 cases
Shell Oil Price Scenarios

In the 1970s, Shell's scenario team constructed futures where oil prices rose dramatically. Most of the industry assumed stable prices. When OPEC raised prices, Shell was the only major company prepared.

OutcomeShell moved from weakest to strongest major oil company, not because they predicted the rise but because scenarios made their mental models flexible enough to respond quickly.
South Africa Political Scenarios

Adam Kahane brought together antagonistic South African political leaders to construct plausible scenarios together. By discussing hypothetical futures, participants safely explored different political paths without triggering defensive routines.

OutcomeThe scenario process created shared understanding between groups unable to communicate directly, contributing to South Africa's political transition.

Common mistakes

3 traps
Treating Scenarios as Predictions
When people ask which scenario is most likely, the exercise has failed. The purpose is to prepare for multiple futures by understanding assumptions making each plausible.
Building Without Diverse Perspectives
If the team shares the same mental models, scenarios will all reflect the same worldview and fail to surface hidden assumptions.
Producing Scenarios Without Strategic Implications
Scenarios that do not challenge current strategy or surface actionable mental model differences are intellectual entertainment, not strategic tools.

Origin story

How this framework came to be

Scenario planning was pioneered by Pierre Wack at Royal Dutch/Shell in the 1970s when traditional forecasting consistently failed. The Fieldbook team developed their material with Global Business Network, whose members Peter Schwartz, Kees van der Heijden, and Adam Kahane all contributed.

Kahane's subsequent work in South Africa, using scenarios to bridge antagonistic political factions, demonstrated the method's power not just for strategic planning but for transforming relationships between groups with deeply opposed worldviews.

Source

Traced to primary
Source · BOOK
The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook
Peter Senge · 1994
Open source →

Related frameworks

Browse all Strategy →