Toward a (Pragmatic) Science of Strategic Intervention: Design Propositions for Scenario Planning

An enduring problem confronting design science is the question of how to distil design principles and propositions in contexts where only limited evidence has accrued directly in connection with the design problem at hand. This article illustrates how researchers can address this challenge by recourse to well-established bodies of basic theory and research in the wider social and organizational sciences that suggest robust design options. Adopting this approach, we draw upon the insights of social identity theory, self/social categorization theory and the Five Factor Model of human personality from the field of personality and social psychology to distil a series of propositions to inform the design of scenario planning interventions, centred on team composition and the facilitation process. In so doing, our article exemplifies the benefits of adopting a pragmatic science approach to the design of processes that promote organizational change and development, thus adding to the growing design science movement.

[1]  G. V. D. Vegt,et al.  Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification , 2005 .

[2]  R. McCrae Social consequences of experiential openness. , 1996, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  H. Tajfel Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations , 1982 .

[4]  James E. King,et al.  Evolutionary Personality Psychology , 2015, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[5]  P. Costa,et al.  Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. , 1987, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Team learning: collectively connecting the dots. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[7]  J. A. Lepine,et al.  Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[8]  D. Tranfield,et al.  Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review , 2003 .

[9]  Timothy B. Palmer,et al.  Managerial Categorization of Competitors: Using Old Maps to Navigate New Environments , 1996 .

[10]  Joseph T. Banas,et al.  Comparing Alternative Conceptualizations of Functional Diversity in Management Teams: Process and Performance Effects , 2002 .

[11]  Graham H. May The Sixth Sense: Accelerating Organizational Learning with Scenarios , 2003 .

[12]  Pentti Malaska,et al.  Multiple Scenario Approach and Strategic Behaviour in European Companies , 1985 .

[13]  Gill Ringland,et al.  Scenario Planning: Managing for the Future , 1998 .

[14]  G. Hodgkinson,et al.  Troubling futures: Scenarios and scenario planning for organizational decision making , 2008 .

[15]  P. Barr,et al.  Cognitive change, strategic action, and organizational renewal , 1992 .

[16]  R I Benjamin,et al.  Critical IT (information technology) issues: the next ten years. , 1992, Sloan management review.

[17]  Daniel R. Ilgen,et al.  Effects of individual differences on the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams : Much more than g , 1997 .

[18]  L. R. Goldberg THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARKERS FOR THE BIG-FIVE FACTOR STRUCTURE , 1992 .

[19]  Richard A. Guzzo,et al.  Teams in organizations: recent research on performance and effectiveness. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[20]  Pierre Wack,et al.  Scenarios : Uncharted Waters Ahead , 1996 .

[21]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[22]  George Wright,et al.  Confronting Strategic Inertia in a Top Management Team: Learning from Failure , 2002 .

[23]  G. Stewart,et al.  Composition, process, and performance in self-managed groups: the role of personality. , 1997, The Journal of applied psychology.

[24]  Phyllis A. Anastasio,et al.  The Common Ingroup Identity Model: Recategorization and the Reduction of Intergroup Bias , 1993 .

[25]  Gerard P. Hodgkinson,et al.  Development and validation of the Five-factor Model Questionnaire (FFMQ): An adjectival-based personality inventory for use in occupational settings , 2007 .

[26]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. , 1998 .

[27]  S. Gaertner,et al.  Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes: a meta-analytic review. , 2006, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[28]  G. Hodgkinson,et al.  The Role of Strategy Workshops in Strategy Development Processes : Formality, Communication, Co-ordination and Inclusion , 2006 .

[29]  G. Hodgkinson,et al.  Cognitive Inertia in a Turbulent Market: The Case of UK Residential Estate Agents , 1997 .

[30]  W. Mischel Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality. , 1973, Psychological review.

[31]  Connie R. Wanberg,et al.  Predictors and outcomes of openness to changes in a reorganizing workplace. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  K. Eisenhardt,et al.  Exploring the Black Box: An Analysis of Work Group Diversity, Conflict and Performance , 1999 .

[33]  Paula L. Rechner,et al.  Experiential Effects of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy and Consensus Approaches to Strategic Decision Making , 1989 .

[34]  K. Parkes,et al.  The effects of transition stress: A relocation study , 1999 .

[35]  Y. Ono,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Is the Genetic Structure of Human Personality Universal ? A Cross-Cultural Twin Study From North America , Europe , and Asia , 2006 .

[36]  Robert E. Linneman,et al.  The use of multiple scenarios by U.S. industrial companies: A comparison study, 1977–1981☆ , 1983 .

[37]  Ian I. Mitroff,et al.  The Application of Behavioral and Philosophical Technologies to Strategic Planning: A Case Study of a Large Federal Agency , 1977 .

[38]  Jolanda Jetten,et al.  Sticking to our guns : social identity as a basis for the maintenance of commitment to faltering organizational projects , 2006 .

[39]  Michele Williams Building genuine trust through interpersonal emotion management: A threat regulation model of trust and collaboration across boundaries , 2007 .

[40]  Neil Anderson,et al.  The practitioner‐researcher divide in Industrial, Work and Organizational (IWO) psychology: Where are we now, and where do we go from here? , 2001 .

[41]  Katy Moyer,et al.  SCENARIO PLANNING AT BRITISH AIRWAYS: A CASE STUDY , 1996 .

[42]  J. Aken Management Research as a Design Science: Articulating the Research Products of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management , 2005 .

[43]  Robert Fildes Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation , 1998, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[44]  Greg L. Stewart,et al.  AN EXPLORATION OF MEMBER ROLES AS A MULTILEVEL LINKING MECHANISM FOR INDIVIDUAL TRAITS AND TEAM OUTCOMES , 2005 .

[45]  J. K. Murnighan,et al.  Demographic Diversity and Faultlines: The Compositional DYnamics of Organizational Groups , 1998 .

[46]  A. van Knippenberg,et al.  The influence of permeability of group boundaries and stability of group status on strategies of individual mobility and social change. , 1990, The British journal of social psychology.

[47]  Philip N. Johnson-Laird,et al.  Mental Models in Cognitive Science , 1980, Cogn. Sci..

[48]  Murray R. Barrick,et al.  THE BIG FIVE PERSONALITY DIMENSIONS AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A META-ANALYSIS , 1991 .

[49]  A. Georges L. Romme,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: Construction Principles and Design Rules in the Case of Circular Design , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[50]  S. G. Cohen,et al.  What Makes Teams Work: Group Effectiveness Research from the Shop Floor to the Executive Suite , 1997 .

[51]  J. Aken Management Research Based on the Paradigm of the Design Sciences: The Quest for Field-Tested and Grounded Technological Rules , 2004 .

[52]  Kevin R. Murphy,et al.  The Relation Between Personality and Contextual Performance in "Strong" Versus "Weak" Situations , 2001 .

[53]  F. Morgeson,et al.  SELECTING INDIVIDUALS IN TEAM SETTINGS: THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL SKILLS, PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS, AND TEAMWORK KNOWLEDGE , 2005 .

[54]  Kin Fai Ellick Wong,et al.  Understanding the emotional aspects of escalation of commitment: the role of negative affect. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[55]  Danny Miller,et al.  The neurotic organization , 1984 .

[56]  C. Eden,et al.  Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Management , 1998 .

[57]  Roger L. M. Dunbar,et al.  Special Issue: Organizational Design: Learning to Design Organizations and Learning from Designing Them , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[58]  Dawn S. Carlson,et al.  Interactive effects of personality and organizational politics on contextual performance , 2002 .

[59]  Sandra E. Spataro,et al.  Getting to Know You: The Influence of Personality on Impressions and Performance of Demographically Different People in Organizations , 2001 .

[60]  Fred A. Mael,et al.  Social identity theory and the organization , 1989 .

[61]  S. Worchel,et al.  The Social psychology of intergroup relations , 1979 .

[62]  J. M. Digman PERSONALITY STRUCTURE: EMERGENCE OF THE FIVE-FACTOR MODEL , 1990 .

[63]  M. Hogg,et al.  Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. , 1989 .

[64]  E. Schein The clinical perspective in fieldwork , 1987 .

[65]  Matthew J. Hornsey,et al.  Assimilation and Diversity: An Integrative Model of Subgroup Relations , 2000 .

[66]  J. K. Murnighan,et al.  Interactions Within Groups and Subgroups: The Effects of Demographic Faultlines , 2005 .

[67]  Gregory M. Hurtz,et al.  Personality and job performance: the Big Five revisited. , 2000, The Journal of applied psychology.

[68]  Allen C. Amason,et al.  The Effects of Top Management Team Size and interaction Norms on Cognitive and Affective Conflict , 1997 .

[69]  Marta A. Geletkanycz,et al.  Bound by the past? Experience-based effects on commitment to the strategic status quo , 2001 .

[70]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Work group diversity and group performance: an integrative model and research agenda. , 2004, The Journal of applied psychology.

[71]  Gerry Johnson,et al.  Strategy Workshops and “Away Days” as Ritual , 2008 .

[72]  Victor J. Callan,et al.  Employee Adjustment to an Organizational Merger: An Intergroup Perspective , 2001 .

[73]  G. Neuman,et al.  Team effectiveness: beyond skills and cognitive ability. , 1999, The Journal of applied psychology.

[74]  J. Dovidio,et al.  Reducing intergroup bias: elements of intergroup cooperation. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[75]  P H Grinyer,et al.  A cognitive approach to group strategic decision taking: a discussion of evolved practice in the light of received research results , 2000, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[76]  G. Northcraft,et al.  You have printed the following article : Why Differences Make a Difference : A Field Study of Diversity , Conflict , and Performance in Workgroups , 2007 .

[77]  P. Schoemaker MULTIPLE SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT: ITS CONCEPTUAL AND BEHAVIORAL FOUNDATION , 1993 .

[78]  K. Jantke Planning for Learning , 2020, The Power of Assessment for Learning: Twenty Years of Research and Practice in UK and US Classrooms.

[79]  D. Hambrick,et al.  FACTIONAL GROUPS: A NEW VANTAGE ON DEMOGRAPHIC FAULTLINES, CONFLICT, AND DISINTEGRATION IN WORK TEAMS , 2005 .

[80]  R. Evered,et al.  Alternative Perspectives in the Organizational Sciences: “Inquiry from the Inside” and “Inquiry from the Outside” , 1981 .