Practical guide · Scenarios

How to compare strategic scenarios without false precision

Build coherent scenarios, use shared criteria, test sensitive assumptions and document the trade-off without creating false precision.

Key points

What to remember

  • Scenarios that can be understood together
  • The same criteria for every option
  • Explicit weightings
  • Sensitivity analysis before the choice
01

Build genuinely comparable options

A scenario describes a coherent logic: target market, value proposition, committed resources, timetable, constraints and expected results.

Start with a credible continuity scenario. Then add two or three distinct strategic choices. Do not favor an option by giving it more detail or more favorable assumptions.

  • Same time horizon
  • Same indicator definitions
  • Same depth of analysis
  • Attributed assumptions
  • Identical non-negotiable constraints
02

Choose criteria and make weightings visible

Criteria translate the organization’s strategy. A score is useful only when each criterion has a definition, scale and evidence. A weighting should be presented as a governance choice rather than a mathematical truth.

FamilyPossible questionsCaution
ValueRevenue, margin, strategic advantageDo not count the same benefit twice
FeasibilitySkills, capacity, timingSeparate difficulty from impossibility
RiskDependencies, compliance, adoptionAssess impact and exposure
ReversibilityExit cost, commitmentsMake sunk costs visible
LearningInformation produced by the optionValue reversible stages
03

Test sensitivity instead of seeking the perfect figure

Identify the two or three assumptions explaining most of the gap between scenarios. Vary each within a justified range. If a small change reverses the choice, the decision is fragile and needs a learning stage.

Simulations can enrich the comparison, but they cannot compensate for poorly defined distributions or correlations. The method should remain explainable to decision-makers.

  • Central assumption
  • Justified low and high ranges
  • Effect on the ranking
  • Switching threshold
  • Information to collect before committing
04

Move from the matrix to the recommendation

Grid helps structure matrices and portfolio choices. Plot puts options into perspective, tests scenarios and helps prepare the synthesis. The final recommendation should still explain the reasoning in accessible language.

A useful conclusion states which option is recommended, why, under which conditions, which risks to accept and which signal would trigger a review.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

When is a compromise table preferable?

A compromise table is often more faithful when criteria are difficult to combine or when one criterion is disqualifying.

How should a qualitative criterion be handled?

Define an observable scale, give examples for each level and retain the source or judgment supporting the score.

What is a switching threshold?

It is the value of an assumption at which the preferred scenario changes. It shows where research or vigilance should focus.

Take action

Apply the method to
your next strategic decision.