ESSENTIALS FOR LEADERS AND THOSE THEY LEAD

The Titanic was deemed ‘unsinkable’ before it hit an iceberg. Technology and forecasting techniques have advanced considerably since that 1912 disaster. Yet leaders still struggle to cope in a world where catastrophes are increasingly more frequent, more severe, and more far-reaching in their impact. While no organization can anticipate all disruptions, the pandemic and its aftershocks have revived the value of scenario planning, a time-honored exercise that now requires a higher degree of senior-leadership involvement than has traditionally been the case. Here are some creative ways to scan the horizon for high-consequence, low-probability events that could seriously damage your organization.

AN IDEA

Look for opportunities amid danger

“Scenario planning is squarely back,” assert McKinsey’s Andrew Grant, Ziad Haider, and Anke Raufuss in their article on how companies should prepare for the so-called black swans, gray rhinos, and other disruptions that characterize geopolitical events today. “The imperative to lift one’s gaze and look around the corner has become key to strategy and performance,” they say, advocating that leaders develop a deeper level of strategic foresight and creative thinking than was necessary in earlier, more stable times. This may involve “reperceiving” events through multiple lenses when scanning for scenarios, as well as looking for “silver linings”—openings amid turmoil that allow organizations to operate safely and potentially gain competitive advantage. “Leaders within multinational corporations also are reflecting on appropriate ways to inform policy in a more polarized geopolitical environment,” the authors add. “An organization should . . . consider how to employ its voice.”

A BIG NUMBER

3

That’s the number of key scenarios we have developed that CEOs and their teams may want to consider for 2023 and beyond, as discussed in this article by McKinsey senior partner Michael Birshan and coauthors. Two scenarios depict a range of possible outcomes and GDP growth rates, while the third offers a more pessimistic outlook reminiscent of the economic conditions of the 1970s. Working with these scenarios can “help executive teams build shared conviction about their operating and competitive environment,” the authors suggest. “Consequently, [they can] act more decisively when it’s time to commit, be bold, and accelerate execution; or hold back, remain agile, and preserve optionality. These scenarios can help provide the foresight that can improve the odds of success.”

A QUOTE

“To embed scenario thinking, organizations must institutionalize new mental habits and ways of working.”

That’s McKinsey partner Bernardo Sichel and colleagues on how to get past the many cognitive biases that can undermine scenario planning. For example, people may base decisions on what they already know (availability bias) or assume that the future will look just like the past (stability bias). With their natural bias toward stability, leaders may tend to outsource scenario creation to junior team members or external vendors—a “problematic” situation, in the authors’ view, “because when senior leaders aren’t part of the process of developing scenarios, they are less likely to make sense of or act on them.” Rather than hanging back, leaders need to be at the forefront of scenario planning, instilling the idea of change, establishing processes to counter bias, and encouraging the habit of thinking the unthinkable.

A SPOTLIGHT INTERVIEW

As geopolitical risks increase, companies are challenged to plan in a continually shifting environment. In an interview with McKinsey, top executives from three global organizations discuss their most pressing concerns, which include discordant relationships among countries, the growing prominence of government affairs, widespread disinformation, and the difficulty of staying ahead of current events. One executive emphasizes “the need to make sure, both in terms of how we run our company and how we sell things, that we really do look to have resiliency and redundancy, whether that’s in manufacturing, whether that’s in supply chain, or whether that’s in R&D.” Another leader fears an inconsistently regulated internet: “One thinks about all the benefits that have been derived from an integrated, free, interoperable internet over the past 15 to 20 years, and now look at this future of one that is a ‘splinter net,’ not an internet,” he says.

— Edited by Rama Ramaswami, senior editor, New York

Share these insights

Did you enjoy this newsletter? Forward it to colleagues and friends so they can subscribe too. Was this issue forwarded to you? Sign up for it and sample our 40+ other free email subscriptions here.