Liffick, "Scenario Analysis Methodology"

SOURCE FOR THE PROCEDURE

This paper also appeared in the proceedings of ETHICOMP95.

THE PROCEDURE ITSELF

1. List participants and their actions.
   1. List those who have taken specific, obvious actions (primary participants).
   2. List those who have been acted upon or affected by actions of the primary participants (secondary participants).
   3. List those who are not directly identified but may have a stake in the outcome (implied participants).
2. Reduce list through simplifying assumptions.
   1. Eliminate participants whose interests are only minimally involved.
   2. Eliminate actions that are trivial or of no direct ethical concern.
3. List legal considerations.
   1. List laws that cover actions in the action list.
   2. List policies that cover actions in the action list.
4. List the possible options of the participants.
   1. Consider participants who performed some action in the scenario.
   2. List the options that were open to participants before taking this action.
5. List possible justifications for the participants' actions.
   1. List reasons that may justify participants' actions.
   2. Eliminate rationalizations from this list.
6. List key statements.
   1. List any phrase that was used as the basis for previously listed items.
   2. Consider phrases that involve choices, secrecy, responsibility, excuses, and motivation.
7. List questions the scenario raises but does not answer.
8. List other models, related issues.
   1. Identify similar cases (moral analogies).
   2. Do these analogies function as examples or counter-examples?
9. Compare to codes of ethics.
   1. Identify codes that may apply.
   2. Compare the actions of participants to the text of these codes, looking for clauses that apply.
   3. Apply the relevant portions of relevant codes.

WALT'S CHECKLIST

• This method is most useful when the DECISION-MAKER ...
  • can tolerate ambiguity, complexity or conflict [step 7]
  • has plenty of time for investigation and analysis
  • is skilled in case-based, precedent-based or example-based reasoning [step 8]
  • is skilled in causal or consequential reasoning [step 1b]
• This method is most useful in a SITUATION ...
  
  • that will change little over time
• This method is most useful when STAKEHOLDERS ...
  • share ethical codes or policies [steps 3a and 9]
  • share laws and legal precedents [step 3a]

Index