Skip to content
Back to skills

Scenario And Foresight

ASecurity

Builds a 2x2 grid of internally consistent future scenarios from the two most critical uncertainties facing a strategy, then stress-tests the strategy against all four to surface no-regret moves and early-warning indicators. Use when a strategy needs to survive more than one plausible future, not just the one everyone is already assuming.

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 6, 2026
ai-agentsrails

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 6, 2026

npx -y skills add Pilot2Service/AI-Business-Designer --skill scenario-and-foresight --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Scenario And Foresight?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Scenario And Foresight
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/pilot2service-scenario-and-foresight/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/pilot2service-scenario-and-foresight)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: scenario-and-foresight
description: "Builds a 2x2 grid of internally consistent future scenarios from the two most critical uncertainties facing a strategy, then stress-tests the strategy against all four to surface no-regret moves and early-warning indicators. Use when a strategy needs to survive more than one plausible future, not just the one everyone is already assuming."
---

# Scenario & Foresight Thinking

## Purpose

Builds alternative future scenarios and stress-tests a strategy against them
— not to predict which future will happen, but to check whether a strategy
survives more than one plausible version of it.

## Anchored in research

- Liedtka (1998) — thinking in time
- Schwartz (1991), *The Art of the Long View* — the classic scenario-planning
  method: identify the driving forces of change, separate the predictable
  ones from the genuinely uncertain ones, and build a small set of
  internally consistent, divergent scenarios around the two most critical
  uncertainties (commonly structured as a 2×2 matrix).

## Method

1. **List the driving forces relevant to the strategic question** — trends,
   technologies, regulatory shifts, competitor moves, customer behavior
   changes.
2. **Separate predetermined elements from critical uncertainties.** Some
   forces are near-certain (demographics, already-committed regulation);
   others are genuinely unknown. Scenario planning is built around the
   uncertain ones — treating a predetermined element as uncertain wastes the
   exercise.
3. **Select the two most impactful, most uncertain forces.** Cross them to
   form a 2×2 grid — this produces four internally consistent, meaningfully
   different scenarios rather than a single "optimistic/pessimistic" spectrum.
4. **Name and flesh out each of the four scenarios** with enough concrete
   detail that someone could recognize which one is unfolding from early
   signals — a scenario that's too abstract to recognize in practice isn't
   doing its job.
5. **Stress-test the strategy against each scenario**, not just the expected
   one. Where does the strategy hold up? Where does it quietly assume a
   single future?
6. **Identify no-regret moves and early-warning indicators** — actions that
   make sense across all four scenarios, and signals worth monitoring that
   would indicate which scenario is actually materializing.

## What this skill does NOT do

- Doesn't make the final decision for you — it produces a structured draft to
  support a human decision.
- Doesn't confirm figures, market data, or competitor data from memory — it
  uses the inputs you provide, or marks an assumption clearly
  (`[assumption — verify]`).
- Doesn't predict the future — it builds plausible alternatives for a stress
  test, not probabilities.

## Refinement notes

Areas to keep deepening with real practice:

- your own rules of thumb and heuristics for this technique
- concrete templates (into [`../../references/`](../../references/))
- reference cases / your own examples
- what this skill deliberately does *not* do (guardrails, common mistakes) —
  add to the list above

This is an internal working note, not a claim about the skill's current
usability. Track depth privately via the `maturity` field in
`skills_index.json` (see
[`../../../meta/maturity_levels.md`](../../../meta/maturity_levels.md)).
**Don't add new fields to the frontmatter** — `name` and `description` are
the only ones allowed (see
[`../../../meta/frontmatter_schema.md`](../../../meta/frontmatter_schema.md)).

## Continue from here

- Next in this pack: [`../strategic-options-evaluation/SKILL.md`](../strategic-options-evaluation/SKILL.md) — Compares strategic options in a structured way (impact/effort, risk, resources) to support a decision.
- A ready-made skill chain for this situation: see [`../../../playbooks/`](../../../playbooks/)
- This pack's shared guardrails: [`../../CLAUDE.md`](../../CLAUDE.md)

## References

- [`../../references/`](../../references/) — the pack's shared background material
- [`../../CLAUDE.md`](../../CLAUDE.md) — the pack's shared guardrails

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.