## 4 Findings
### Idiosyncrasies and Scenario Development  
The initial data analysis produced an interesting idiosyncrasy that can rarely be found in organizational settings of scenario applications, namely, that exactly the same feature and/or implication of Bitcoin can be perceived as either positive or negative. For example, the perceived anonymity of its transactions is simultaneously evaluated as extremely positive by respondents who value their privacy and negative by those who are afraid of the proliferation of illicit transactions. Another example is the destruction of the current monetary system, which is seen favorably by those who are suspicious of existing practices of central and commercial banking, whereas it is actually feared by those who are in favor of the current status quo. Furthermore, the level of analysis also plays an important role, such that the consequences of a specific factor can be seen as positive or negative on different levels. For example, the (unwanted) disintermediation on an organizational level may lead to cheaper prices at an individual level. The perception of blockchain, therefore, relies heavily on the position of the respective stakeholder and underlying political and economic assumptions. In general, the core ideas of Bitcoin predominantly appeal to Libertarians [32] but might also offer interesting perspectives for socialist or even Marxist thinkers [55]. Contrariwise, Bitcoin is mostly perceived with suspicion by those who are in favor of governmental interventions to prevent or alleviate economic downturns, most notably Keynesians [56]. Another idiosyncrasy emerged during the creation of the scenarios, which is related to underlying misconceptions regarding the basic functionality of Bitcoin. These misconceptions are often perpetuated in the public media, and they can substantially shape public opinion although they are objectively wrong. Examples of such statements include that Bitcoin is anonymous by default (instead of being pseudonymous) (debunked in [57]), that the amount of energy needed for mining new Bitcoin inevitably has to rise and might consume all the \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline
**Category** & **Subcategory** & **Positive Features** & **Negative Features** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Organizational (O)} & \multirow{8}{*}{S3. Value-related} & \multirow{8}{*}{Store of value} & \multirow{8}{*}{Ilicit activities} \\  & & & Source of income \\  & & & Alternative currency \\ \cline{3-3}  & & & Loss of value \\ \cline{3-3}  & \multirow{2}{*}{S1. Transaction-related} & \multirow{2}{*}{Cheap} & \multirow{2}{*}{} \\  & & Fast & \\  & & S2. Security-related & Secure & Unsecure \\ \cline{3-3}  & & & Tamper-proof & \\  & & Privacy/anonymity & Privacy/anonymity \\  & & & Illicit activities \\  & & & Lack of regulation \\  & & & New business models & Disintermediation \\  & & Innovation & \\ \cline{3-3}  & \multirow{2}{*}{S1. Economic structures} & \multirow{2}{*}{Disintermediation} & \multirow{2}{*}{Disintermediation} \\  & & Economic stability & Economic instability \\  & & & Restroying innovation & Destroying industries \\  & & & Illicit activities \\  & & & International unit of account & \\  & & & Uneven distribution \\  & & & Environmental damage \\ \cline{3-3}  & \multirow{2}{*}{Features} & \multirow{2}{*}{Limited supply} & \multirow{2}{*}{Limited supply} \\  & & & Inefficient technology \\ \cline{3-3}  & & & Lack of value (no backing) \\ \cline{3-3}  & & & Manipulability \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._energy in the world [58], that Bitcoin needs to be \"decrypted\" [59], or that Bitcoin does not have any intrinsic value, while fiat currencies do (debunked in [60]). While such misconceptions might not directly contribute to future developments, they can shape individuals' perceptions, which in turn might heavily influence the general adoption of Bitcoin. Under consideration of the aforementioned idiosyncrasies, three scenarios were created.