The uncertainty in today’s business environment threatens the efficacy of organisational strategies. In a bid to develop resilient strategies, planners require robust methods that address the complexities and complicatedness of long-term planning problems. Overtime, foresight methods such as visioning and exploratory scenario methods have evolved as suitable methods for addressing the complexities in long-term planning. While these methods are widely applied independently or in combined forms in diverse contexts, this research identifies two gaps in the visioning methodology that require attention. First, the research argues for the development of scenario-specific visions by stakeholder groups during visioning exercise as it supports the identification of unique features of stakeholder visions that can inform the strategy development processes. Second, the research argues that visioning can potentially provide useful inputs into optimisation models for the development of quantified visions. These quantified vision also inform strategic decision making. However, in the latter, the difference in the disciplinary foundations of visioning and optimisation creates a challenge for the integration of both methods. Consequently, this research attempts to bridge this gap by developing a multimethod approach that consistently integrates the exploratory scenario, visioning, and optimisation methods for the long-term planning of supply chain distribution networks.
The proposed multimethod was illustrated in the long-term planning for the Nigerian petroleum product distribution network for 2040. Four quantified external scenarios that are likely to occur in the Nigerian PPD network business environment by the 2040 were developed. The scenarios were used during a workshop and interviews to develop four scenario-specific visions for the Nigerian PPD network by 2040. The visioning outputs were translated from their qualitative forms into quantifiable forms, and finally optimised to identify their concrete implications for strategic decision making.
Findings from this research suggest that when a desk design is used for developing external scenarios, the scenarios must be revised with the stakeholders in order to gain a shared understanding of the scenarios prior to the development of visions. Also, the study confirmed that when stakeholder groups are encouraged to develop scenario- specific visions during visioning exercise, each group’s vision is characterised by unique themes that suggest different options for implementation under different external scenarios. These distinct visions create an opportunity for the numerical assessment of the different scenario-specific visions that in turn provide concrete vision inputs into strategic decision making processes. While the risk of misrepresenting the stakeholder envisioned elements when translating visioning outputs into quantifiable elements was identified as a challenge of the OVAF, this limitation can be addressed by involving stakeholders during the framing of the optimisation model. However, users of the OVAF must note that the latter strategy depends on the knowledge of the stakeholders, and the time available for conducting the visioning exercise. Finally, the consistent link between the exploratory scenario, visioning and optimisation methods that led to the development of the OVAF bridges the gap between disciplinary foundations of qualitative and quantitative experts in the long-term planning domain.
