Part of the success of projects such as the Good Judgment Project is that the best participants would often hedge their predictions in terms of probabilities.  They wouldn’t say something would definitely happen but rather it would have a reasonable chance of doing so.

While that approach is the right one in terms of effective predictions, it isn’t always effective in terms of convincing others to back you.  That was reaffirmed by a recent study from the London School of Economics, which examined the use of scenarios when pitching new innovations.

The research suggests that the way innovation projects are pitched has a significant impact on the projects that are accepted.  The authors explain that most pitches include financial projections, which may be framed in best-case or worst-case forms.

Framing the idea

Framing an idea or project in terms of scenarios should instinctively be seen as a good thing as it more accurately reflects the risks involved in that project delivering on its expectations.  They could be viewed, however, as a degree of prevarication or uncertainty on behalf of the project team.  It may even be seen as a lack of confidence in the project itself or that the project team lacks the expertise required to make the project fly.

The researchers suggest that the use of scenarios could be more effective for so-called transformational innovations, as such projects will inevitably have more uncertainty attached to them, both due to the more expansive nature of the project and the inevitable lack of experience internally to do something new to the organization.

Transformational projects might also reasonably utilize a wider range of scenarios, again to reflect this inherent uncertainty in the outcome of the project.  Innovators should be nonetheless aware that the use of scenarios could backfire, especially if some of the worst-case scenarios present the possibility of losses, which managers may latch on to and use as an excuse to reject what may already be a difficult sell for them.

As such, the authors broadly advocate the use of scenarios when pitching an innovation, but to use a smaller range of scenarios rather than a larger spread.  This shows that the team has done their homework into the various factors that can affect the success of the project, but doesn’t overwhelm managers with too broad a spread of possibilities.  In other words, a smaller range presents a range of possible problems but also outlines how such problems could be overcome.