Good planning in Indian contexts includes thinking about what might go wrong and having backup approaches. “What if” thinking—what if this doesn’t work, what if circumstances change, what if assumptions prove wrong—is part of planning competence. Plans without contingency consideration seem incomplete or naive. Having backup plans, alternative paths, and ways to recover from problems demonstrates planning wisdom.
The planner with only one path and no alternatives is vulnerable; the planner with contingencies is prepared. This reflects realistic assessment of uncertainty: things don’t always go as planned, surprises occur. Planning that pretends certainty exists when it doesn’t is naive; planning for uncertainty is realistic.
The extent of contingency planning should match the stakes—high-stakes situations warrant extensive contingencies; routine activities need less. When planning, ask: what could go wrong? What are alternative approaches if the primary path fails? What reserves or buffers should be maintained?
Comments