Strategic
Planning: A Process for Success
The benefits of
strategic planning for a non-profit organization are manifold. A strategic plan is paramount if an
organization wants to avoid failure, stanch financial loss and retain its
stakeholders. A plan is strategic when
organizational decision making is aligned with the realities of its external and
internal environments. It comprises six
elements: a vision evaluation, a SWOT analysis, a current and future issues breakdown,
plan development, plan implementation, and last an evaluation design.
First,
a vision should encompass what success will look like for an organization. From it flows a mission that states what an
organization is committed to in order to achieve its vision. A mission statement should clarify its public
value and serve as a framework for its distinct identity and unique purpose. It requires consensus not only within the
organization but by stakeholders who critically influence its
sustainability. Without organizational
loyalty to its tenets, missions are subject to competing objectives externally
and to disagreement on direction and emphasis internally. If mission revision is necessary,
organizational restructuring that adheres to the mission is the first strategic
step.
Second,
a SWOT analysis of an organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats examines the external and internal environmental trends that impact its
relevance and continuity. External
trends involve the networks, relationships and political surroundings that
define an organization’s context. An
organization must identify and respond to external threats such as competition,
as well as detect and take advantage of opportunities such as considering
partnerships.
Third,
a statement of strategic issues should include a succinct description of each
issue and a list of factors that explain why each is consequential. A statement should follow that outlines the
gravity of underestimating untoward future developments. Two group participation methods can be used
to galvanize organizational issues examination: the Implication Wheel and the
Nominal Group Technique. Both methods
start with a center; one on the implications
of not planning, the other on the benefits
of planning. Both techniques are used to
engage and encourage staff and management to articulate problems that stem
outward from the center.
Fourth
and fifth, after recognizing stakeholder expectations and external market
opportunities and challenges, the process of strategy formation and
implementation follow. In the planning stages, interviews, focus groups and conversations
about purpose guide the creation of goals to move an organization forward. In his essay on the challenges of strategic
management, Tregoe tells us that having a strategy is not enough, that
separation between the role of planning to set strategy and the role of
management to implement strategy must be understood.[1] That is, strategic planning analyzes
environmental conditions and develops goals accordingly. Conversely, strategic management ensures
cohesiveness by aligning inputs (resources), processes (present strategy) and
outputs (performance) with internal and external environments.[2] Kaplan and Norton caution about awareness of
moving targets for gauging progress, because external conditions and targets
for success keep changing. [3] Planning and implementation, therefore, call
for preparation for continual improvements in operating efficiencies to produce
desired outcomes. For example, strategy
formation and implementation should include fail safe communication channels
that cycle throughout an organization enabling timely responsiveness between
staff, field offices/field workers and clients, staff to management, management
to stakeholders, and management to board members.
Sixth is evaluation,
the desired outcomes and how to measure them.
In developing performance measures and timelines, room should be left
for innovation in order to adapt, if necessary, to changing environments. In their discussion of the balanced
scorecard, Kaplan and Norton advise that organizations “articulate goals for
time, quality, performance and service and then translate these goals into
specific measures.”[4] Articulate
is the operative word here. What is it
that we are measuring? Will these
measures be valid representations of goal attainment? They stress the importance of gauging
accomplishment through the eyes of the customer/client. I would add stakeholders as well.
In tracking progress, it
is crucial to distinguish between process objectives, i.e., inputs, outcome
objectives, and the measurable differences before and after an intervention or
service provision. Therefore, strategy
should include midcourse evaluations and corrective procedures to allow necessary
adjustments. In this way, organizational
learning is enhanced and strengthened.
[1]
Tregoe, B., “The Challenges of Strategic Management,” Ch. 6, p. 106.
[2]
Bryson, J.M., “Strategic Planning and the Strategy Change Cycle,” The Jossey-Bass
Handbook of Nonprofit Leadership and Management, Third Edition, p. 240.
[3]
Kaplan, R. S., and Norton, D. P., “The Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive
Performance,” The Harvard Business Review, January-February 1992, p. 75.
[4] Ibid.
