meta-scenario-planning

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Scenario Planning

情景规划

Framework

框架

IRON LAW: Scenarios Are Not Predictions

Scenarios are PLAUSIBLE futures, not forecasts. The goal is NOT to predict
which future will happen, but to prepare strategies that work across
MULTIPLE possible futures. A strategy that only works in one scenario
is fragile.

IRON LAW: Scenarios Are Not Predictions

Scenarios are PLAUSIBLE futures, not forecasts. The goal is NOT to predict
which future will happen, but to prepare strategies that work across
MULTIPLE possible futures. A strategy that only works in one scenario
is fragile.

The 2×2 Scenario Matrix Method

2×2情景矩阵方法

Identify driving forces: What macro-forces will most shape the future? (technology, regulation, economy, demographics, competition)
Select two critical uncertainties: The two most impactful forces with the most uncertain outcomes
Build the 2×2 matrix: Each axis is one uncertainty with two endpoints (e.g., "regulation: strict vs lax")
Name and describe four scenarios: Each quadrant is a distinct plausible future
Test strategies against all four: Which strategies work in most/all scenarios? Which only work in one?

识别驱动因素：哪些宏观力量将对未来产生最大影响？（技术、监管、经济、人口结构、竞争）
选择两个关键不确定性：影响最大且结果最不确定的两个因素
构建2×2矩阵：每个轴代表一个不确定性，两端为两种极端情况（例如，“监管：严格 vs 宽松”）
命名并描述四个情景：每个象限对应一个独特的可能未来
针对所有四个情景测试战略：哪些战略在大多数/所有情景中都有效？哪些仅在一种情景中有效？

Process

流程

Step 1: Driving Forces (brainstorm 10-15)

Political, economic, social, technological, environmental, competitive
Rate each on: Impact (H/M/L) × Uncertainty (H/M/L)
High Impact + High Uncertainty → candidate for axes

Step 2: Select Two Axes

Choose two forces that are both high-impact AND high-uncertainty
They should be independent of each other (not correlated)

Step 3: Build Four Scenarios

Give each scenario a memorable name (not "Scenario 1")
Write a 1-paragraph narrative for each: what does this world look like in 5-10 years?

Step 4: Strategy Testing

For each strategy option, assess: does it work in this scenario? (Yes / Partial / No)
Robust strategies work in 3-4 scenarios. Fragile strategies work in only 1.

步骤1：驱动因素（头脑风暴10-15个）

政治、经济、社会、技术、环境、竞争
对每个因素进行评分：影响（高/中/低）×不确定性（高/中/低）
高影响+高不确定性 → 作为轴的候选因素

步骤2：选择两个轴

选择两个同时具备高影响和高不确定性的因素
它们应相互独立（无相关性）

步骤3：构建四个情景

为每个情景起一个容易记住的名称（不要用“情景1”）
为每个情景撰写一段叙述性文字：5-10年后这个世界会是什么样子？

步骤4：战略测试

针对每个战略选项，评估：它在该情景中是否有效？（是/部分有效/否）
稳健的战略能在3-4个情景中奏效。脆弱的战略仅在1个情景中有效。

Output Format

输出格式

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Scenario Planning: {Context}

情景规划: {Context}

Driving Forces

驱动因素

Force	Impact	Uncertainty	Selected?
{force}	H/M/L	H/M/L	✓/—

因素	影响	不确定性	已选中？
{force}	H/M/L	H/M/L	✓/—

Scenario Matrix

情景矩阵

Axis 1: {Uncertainty A} — {endpoint 1} vs {endpoint 2}
Axis 2: {Uncertainty B} — {endpoint 1} vs {endpoint 2}

	{A: endpoint 1}	{A: endpoint 2}
{B: endpoint 1}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}
{B: endpoint 2}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}

轴1: {Uncertainty A} — {endpoint 1} vs {endpoint 2}
轴2: {Uncertainty B} — {endpoint 1} vs {endpoint 2}

	{A: endpoint 1}	{A: endpoint 2}
{B: endpoint 1}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}
{B: endpoint 2}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}	"{Scenario Name}": {narrative}

Strategy Robustness Test

战略稳健性测试

Strategy	Scenario 1	Scenario 2	Scenario 3	Scenario 4
{strategy A}	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗

战略	情景1	情景2	情景3	情景4
{strategy A}	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗	✓/△/✗

Robust Strategies

稳健战略

{Strategies that work in most scenarios}

{在大多数情景中有效的战略}

Contingency Triggers

应急触发条件

If {early signal}, activate {contingency plan for scenario X}

undefined

如果{早期信号}，启动{针对情景X的应急预案}

undefined

Gotchas

注意事项

Scenarios should be uncomfortable: If all four scenarios are comfortable, you haven't explored enough uncertainty. Include at least one scenario you'd rather not think about.
Avoid "good/bad" framing: Scenarios aren't optimistic vs pessimistic. Each scenario has opportunities AND threats. A "strict regulation" world is bad for some and good for others.
Early warning signals: Identify observable indicators that signal which scenario is unfolding. This converts scenarios into actionable intelligence.
Two axes is a simplification: Reality has many uncertainties. The 2×2 is a tool for clarity, not completeness. Consider additional driving forces as variations within scenarios.

情景应具有挑战性：如果四个情景都让人感觉舒适，说明你还没有充分探索不确定性。至少要包含一个你不愿去想的情景。
避免“好/坏”框架：情景不是乐观 vs 悲观的对立。每个情景都有机遇和威胁。“严格监管”的环境对某些主体不利，但对另一些主体有利。
早期预警信号：识别可观察到的指标，以判断哪种情景正在展开。这将情景转化为可操作的情报。
双轴是简化处理：现实中存在许多不确定性。2×2矩阵是为了清晰起见，而非追求完整性。可将其他驱动因素视为情景内的变体。

References

参考资料

For Shell's original scenario planning methodology, see
```
references/shell-method.md
```

关于壳牌最初的情景规划方法论，可参阅
```
references/shell-method.md
```