History in Scenario Thinking - Augmenting Causal Analysis within the Intuitive Logics Scenario Development Methodology

Aug 31, 2026

Upload by Cart

History plays a decisive role in scenario thinking by shaping how causal mechanisms are interpreted when exploring uncertain futures. The paper contrasts the benefits and risks of using past experience as guidance, noting that lessons from history are often ignored while an overreliance on historical precedent can obscure genuine novelty. It argues for stronger emphasis on historical analysis within scenario planning, adapting the Intuitive Logics approach to make learning from history a central process element. This enhancement improves examination of how future change may differ from past patterns.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryPaper Templates

FormatDOCX

Pages14

Reading Time5 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Quotes and common claims about history

Risks of both ignoring and overusing the past

Objective of this paper

Scenario planning vs. projection forecasting

Balancing past-informed similarity with future difference

The Critical Role of History in Scenario Thinking: Augmenting Causal Analysis within the Intuitive Logics Scenario Development Methodology Abstract The historian Eric Hobsbawm stated that ‘The safest empirical generalization about history is still that nobody heeds its obvious lessons much’. Whether at a macroeconomic level or within individual organisations there are numerous examples of this, such as the economic crash of 2008, the causes of which had many parallels with those that caused the great depression 80 years previously. On the other hand however, overly-relying on the past as a guide to the future has its own obvious dangers – not least that important future events may have no past precedent. As such, the present paper firstly provides a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of using the past as a guide to the future. It then examines the role of history in scenario work, arguing that history should receive greater emphasis as part of the scenario planning process. We suggest changes to the standard Intuitive Logics (IL) approach to scenario planning which would render learning from history a more central component of the scenario process, in contrast to its current peripheral role. Rather than diminishing scenario planning’s ability to facilitate a consideration of how the future may differ from the past, we show how a greater emphasis on history can enhance consideration of the causality of future change. An adapted IL that has more emphasis on historical analysis can augment scenario planning’s effectiveness as a tool for consideration of the future. Keywords: scenario planning; history; causation; learning 1 Introduction A frequently quoted saying about history, attributed to the philosopher George Santayana, is that ‘those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it’. Similarly, Mintzberg (2002, p76) states that ‘... if you want the imagination to see the future, then you better have the wisdom to appreciate the past. An obsession with the present - with what's ’hot‘, and what's ’in‘- may be dazzling, but all that does is blind to the reality’. Building on this, Fawcett (2013) states that all of the issues and concerns we face today have ‘echoes and precedents’ throughout history, and as an example of the failure to learn from history, cites speculation bubbles such as the ‘tulipomania’ bubble (1634-1637) in Holland in which bulb prices exceeded the cost of a house in Amsterdam. As Fawcett (2013) shows, since then there have been many similar ‘bubbles’ including the South Sea Bubble (1716-1720), the British Railway Mania Bubble (1840s), the Stock Market crashes (1929 and 1987), the ‘Dot-com’ Bubble in the 1990s, and more recently, the Mortgage Securities Bubble in 2008. In all of these cases a central cause of the bubble was, in essence, avarice - exaggerated expectations of future growth and price appreciation - leading to excessive speculative risk-taking pushing up prices until the bubbles burst. That bubbles continue to form and burst for the same or similar reasons over-and-over again illustrates our continued failure to learn from the past. We apparently have learnt nothing from history and this tendency to neglect the lessons of history is itself nothing new. One of the 20th century’s most eminent historians, Eric Hobsbawm (1999), commented some decades ago that ‘The safest empirical generalization about history is still that nobody heeds its obvious lessons much’ (p54). The problem presented by history, then, is not merely one of remembering it, but learning from it, and the two are not the same thing. Finkelstein (2006, p153), for example, states that while individuals who lead organizations are heavily influenced by history, they often ‘heed the wrong lessons from history’ (p169), and he provides examples from four different companies which were ‘constrained by history and key leaders each took lessons from that history that were wrong’ (p154). However, what this overlooks is tha

FAQs

Why does the paper argue that history is important for scenario thinking?

It argues that history strengthens causal analysis of the future and helps scenarios consider how future change may be rooted in past patterns while still allowing for meaningful differences.

What are the main advantages and disadvantages of using the past to guide the future?

The paper highlights that history can offer useful lessons, but relying on it too heavily can be dangerous because some future events may have no direct past precedent.

How does the paper propose to adjust the Intuitive Logics approach?

It suggests changes to make learning from history a more central component of the scenario process, giving greater emphasis to historical analysis than the approach currently does.

Aug 31, 2026

Upload by Cart