ATP 2-33.4, page 116

Appendix A A-12 ATP 2-33.4 18 August 2014 A-70. n addition, usage of the Multiple Scenarios Generation technique offers ancillary benefits, such as—  Enabling the analyst to potentially see when and how a specific scenario is coming to fruition.  Aiding in the process of creating key indicator lists so that the command team can set the right conditions to make the most favorable scenarios become reality.  Setting conditions to deny the threat the ability to create those scenarios or circumstances that may give the threat a decisive edge within the analyst’s AO. A-71. Morphological Analysis—  Aids significantly in both generating a laundry list of potential outcomes and enabling the analyst to clearly identify and select those outcomes that are more credible or warrant greater attention.  Focuses both analysts and leaders on those key actions necessary in order to prepare for future events so the right prevention or risk migration orientation is achieved or satisfied.  Broadens the analyst’s view of low probability/high impact developments and, in turn, often forces a more objective viewpoint, thus lessening the chances the analyst dismisses or discounts a scenario or key driver based at face value. A-72. Multiple Scenarios Generation—  Identifies all the possible scenarios and combination of driving forces at play for a given problem. The analyst’s primary objective through application of this technique is to reduce the unforeseen potential regarding the intelligence challenge or issue at hand.  Aids in identifying the extreme cases of interaction between an issue’s drivers.  Is similar to the Alternative Future Analysis technique; however, the significant difference is that Multiple Scenarios Generation involves more than one matrix.  Uses multiple two-by-two matrices and pairs combinations of multiple key drivers. Each two- by-two matrix generates four scenarios, thus multiple matrices provide multiple potential scenarios that may emerge from the focal question.  Reduces the tendency for the analyst to potentially miss an outcome. Once the analyst generates the scenarios in this format, the analyst is able to revisit the issue via quick screen snapshots. This minimizes the potential to labor over a scenario individually looking for more detailed analysis. Additionally, the analyst is more likely to pay attention to driver or indicator impacts on events if or when they are unfolding in a manner not previously anticipated. The Method A-73. Morphological Analysis works through the two principles of decomposition and forced association. Analysts should start by decomposing the problem, defining a set of key parameters or dimensions of the problem, and then breaking down each of those dimensions further into relevant forms or states the dimension can assume. A-74. The principle of forced association then requires every element be paired with and considered in connection with every other element in the morphological space. This serves to narrow the possibilities and allows the analyst to focus on those combinations within the realm of possibility. A-75. When applied using Multiple Scenarios Generation, the process is as follows:  First the analyst should define the issue at hand.  Next the analyst should identify all the key factors, forces, or events influencing the issue; this is referred to as the drivers. The analyst should define the ends of the spectrum for each driver (less versus most extreme circumstances) and pair the drivers in two-by-two matrices.  Once the analyst identifies all the driver variations, the analyst should establish scenarios for each combination; that is, within each quadrant in the matrix.  The analyst then selects those scenarios that portray a compelling or challenging future that has not been considered and develops indicators to track whether one of the scenarios is developing.