The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 40-56

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 40... ... 40 Scenario Planning Workshop Design The research team conducted six Future Freight Flows Scenario Planning workshops from November 4, 2010 to June 28, 2011. In order to test the validity and the robustness of both the scenarios and the workshop methodology, each workshop was held in a different location and explored a different set of strategic questions. Read the entire page →
From page 41... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 41 seen as important, but additional funding was not seen as being as critical since they have been the focus of investment for a fairly long time. The gateways were the least favored investment class across all the workshops. Read the entire page →
From page 42... ... 42 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment 4.1.1 Engagement with the Planning Organization The project team from the MIT Center for Transportation & Logistics (CTL) started the engagement with each host organization about 8 weeks prior to the workshop. Read the entire page →
From page 43... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 43 4.1.2.1 Scope The selection of the scope should be the first element decided for any workshop. The scope includes the geographic region being considered (state, national, multi-state, etc.) Read the entire page →
From page 44... ... 44 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment Of course, most workshops will combine a mix of these approaches, but, in general, a workshop will lean one way or another. Presenting options in a visioning session can lead to some anchoring of discussion by some participants. Read the entire page →
From page 45... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 45 The participants from varied backgrounds were invited to attend the workshop. While they were categorized slightly differently for each workshop, the participants fell into three large groups: shippers, carriers, and public sector. Read the entire page →
From page 46... ... 46 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment The strategic questions for all of the workshops, except MNDOT, were very similar, differing only in the naming of the options (investment bundles, segments, etc.) and some follow-on questions. Read the entire page →
From page 47... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 47 airports in a category, for example, can be explored during the discussion. Finally, maintenance of the existing infrastructure should not be included as a unique element. Read the entire page →
From page 48... ... 48 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment • Forced Ranking is where each voter places n votes for his or her first choice, n–1 votes for his or her second choice, n–2 votes for his or her third choice, and so on. Each voter is essentially rank ordering the n elements. Read the entire page →
From page 49... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 49 selection of which scenarios to use if the attendance does not justify using all four is arbitrary, but since Global Marketplace is consistently viewed as most like today, we recommend removing this one first. We do recommend, however, that during the debrief session all four scenarios are discussed and presented. Read the entire page →
From page 50... ... 50 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment would be for the host to wring as much insight as possible out of the results. By holding it a few days later, it allows the team to clean up and spend more time with the results of the sessions. Read the entire page →
From page 51... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 51 by the facilities and equipment used for the workshop, folders prepared for individual participants, scenario videos, and the instruments used for voting. 4.2.1.1 Roles The personnel from MIT and the host organization performed eight roles. Read the entire page →
From page 52... ... 52 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment • Cross-Scenario Facilitator: The role of the cross-scenario facilitator was to orchestrate the presentation of results from individual scenarios, engage the participants in comparing the results across scenarios, and to present the cross-scenario analysis. Read the entire page →
From page 53... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 53 "evaluation" forms were presented together according to their modes. The reason for using these forms was to allow the individuals to write their investment decision based only on their own thoughts and insights before participating in a group discussion and voting process. Read the entire page →
From page 54... ... 54 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment • Introduction to Scenario Planning: In all six workshops, the lead facilitator (Dr. Chris Caplice of MIT) Read the entire page →
From page 55... ... Scenario Planning Workshop Design 55 "group voting sheets." The voting exercise took about 20 minutes. The group took a brief break following the voting, during which the scenario facilitator tallied the group's vote. Read the entire page →
From page 56... ... 56 Scenario Planning for Freight transportation infrastructure investment four future scenarios is part of the Scenario Planning Toolkit and is available on the companion DVD package or online at www.trb.org (search for "Scenario Planning for Freight Transportation Infrastructure Investment") Read the entire page →

From page 40...

... 40 Scenario Planning Workshop Design The research team conducted six Future Freight Flows Scenario Planning workshops from November 4, 2010 to June 28, 2011. In order to test the validity and the robustness of both the scenarios and the workshop methodology, each workshop was held in a different location and explored a different set of strategic questions.