A discussion of the utility and desirability of basing game and research scenarios on solid contextual foundations. Using future problems of NATO-Warsaw Pact relations as a point of orientation, the author defines a context as the overall background or environment in which political-military problems are considered, whereas a scenario describes events leading up to a specific crisis. Earlier methods of scenario construction are discussed, together with factors contributing to the shortcomings of past scenarios. In defense research, the main deficiency was that scenarios were usually written for a specific crisis or war designated by the user. The author recommends that the process of scenario construction commonly in use be reversed: the scenario should emerge from the context, not the context from the scenario. By constructing alternative future contexts, a well-qualified person can write not one scenario — which the reader must accept or reject — but a range of scenarios appropriate to the context.
This report is part of the RAND Corporation paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.