Scenario planning has a reputation problem of its own making. The two-by-two matrix, the named futures, the workshop with the good biscuits — and then, somehow, nothing. The quadrants are laminated and the capital allocation proceeds exactly as it would have anyway.
The test of a scenario
A scenario earns its keep only if it changes a present-day decision. The question to put to any named future is simple: what would we do differently this year if we believed it? If the answer is nothing, the scenario is scenery. Most exercises fail here because they stop at description and never reach commitment.
Small bets, named triggers
The version that works is unglamorous. Three scenarios at most. For each, a named early indicator, a threshold, and a pre-agreed response — an option to accelerate, an exit to prepare, a hedge to place now. The output is not a poster. It is a short list of tripwires the board actually reviews.
Written by
Eleanor Hallam
Founding Partner
Eleanor founded Hallam in 2008 after twelve years in corporate strategy. She works mainly with boards on questions of direction, succession, and when not to grow.
