|Up a level|
Is a well-accepted method widely used by practitioners unproblematic? We here suggest that this is not the case. The 2x2 matrix approach has been stated by researchers to be the ‘standard’ approach in scenario planning. However, as we show in this paper, interpretations of this method vary significantly, even within the same ‘scenario school’ – in this case, the intuitive logics - plausibility based scenario tradition. We explore both the highly attractive, apparent simplicity of the method; and its more problematic aspects by contrasting two distinct interpretations used by scenario planners. We articulate the advantages and drawbacks of the 2x2 matrix method according to these two different interpretations. The paper makes two contributions. First, in rendering methodological conundrums explicit, it clarifies choices scenario planners can now explicitly make when choosing a scenario building method. Secondly, by clarifying the choices that the method offers, we contribute to make it more rigorous, debunking some of the purported ease it advertises for the unwary.