Shedding Old Rules

Two quotes to set the stage for strategic thinking for 2007.

The first quote on the difficulty in letting go from The Accelerating Organization: Embracing the Human Face of Change by Arun Maira and Peter Scott-Morgan ...

"At the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico, mathematicians and scientists in physics, chemistry, biology, economics and computer science look at the mechanisms and principles whereby organisms and other complex systems change and learn. One principle of survival they've observed is continuous shedding of operating rules that cease to be relevant because of changing environmental conditions.

They found that complex systems, whether biological organisms or computer systems, can hold only a small number of rules in operation at anytime. So they must have an ability to shed old rules to make room for the new. Shedding becomes more complicated in systems involving human beings, because their sense of self-worth is often attached to many old rules."

The second quote on laying the foundation for new ideas from Where Do New Ideas Come From? Maximize the Differences by Nicholas Negroponte, Director, M.I.T. Media Lab ...

"The best way to guarantee a steady stream of new ideas is to make sure that each person in your organization is as different as possible from the others. Under these conditions, and only under these conditions, will people maintain varied perspectives and demonstrate their knowledge in different ways. There will be a lot of misunderstanding – which is frequently not misunderstanding at all, but the root of a new idea."

Wishing you a Happy New Year!

Why Strategic Plan Implementation Fails

There are several reasons why implementation of strategic plans fails. I’ve listed 4 here. In each case the problem is addressed by designing and facilitating the process in such a way that the issue doesn’t arise during the implementation phase.

1. Lack of board, staff, volunteer, member, partner and stakeholder commitment to the strategic plan. One of the hallmarks of a successful strategic planning process is high levels of understanding, enthusiasm and support of the resulting plan among the aforementioned constituents. The most effective way to achieve this is to build into the process a variety of engagement opportunities: participation on the strategic planning committee, involvement in information and data gathering and analysis, service on other planning committees and workgroups, focus groups, community partner dialogs, and others. Sometimes, involvement of many in the planning process is avoided for fear that large numbers are unmanageable. If clear roles and responsibilities are communicated and if meetings and tasks are carefully structured, large numbers of involved and engaged people contribute to a successful process. For one thing, it ensures a broad range of perspectives on critical issues, absolutely essential to innovative thinking. As a practical matter, we want and need large numbers of people at all levels of the organization and community who are committed to achieving the vision and strategic goals outlined in the plan. In a thoughtful planning process, the strategic planning committee will assess the most effective ways to involve all internal and external stakeholders.

2. Lack of alignment between governance structures (especially committee and workgroup structure) and the strategic plan. In nonprofit organizations, implementation depends on the support and involvement of professional staff, board leadership, other volunteers, members, and community supporters. Organizational structures that align with the strategic plan ensure that all of these individuals can be effectively organized to carry out their work and that they will be moving in the direction of the strategic vision. To the degree that the resulting strategic plan represents a new direction -- in some cases, a radical departure from old ways of doing business -- organizations will discover that many former governance structures constitute unintended barriers to implementation. New structures need to be created if implementation is to succeed. To assure effective implementation, current board committee and workgroup structure, therefore, will need to be reviewed in light of requirements of the strategic plan.

3. The design and format of the earlier strategic planning process does not easily translate to action planning and implementation. One of the greatest frustrations in strategic planning is the failure to complete the transition from the “visionary blueprint” (mission, vision, goals, and strategies) to the concrete plans of action (objectives: who accomplishes what, by when, at what cost, to be measured by what indicators). In order to avoid this disconnect, I have found it useful to do the following: From the beginning, it’s important to describe the strategic planning model in sufficient detail that it is clear to all how and when the transition to concrete plans of action occurs. Begin the conversation about performance indicators earlier in the strategic planning process. The identification of key performance indicators sets the stage for developing objectives that are concrete, measurable and tied in directly to the mission, vision and strategic priorities.

4. Related to the third hurdle is lack of an effective framework for ongoing monitoring of implementation. The strategic planning process presents an opportunity for the organization to develop an important tool for ongoing monitoring of the strategic plan implementation. It’s called the organizational dashboard (also referred to as scorecard). Using the metaphor of the dashboard in a car, this tool is based on selection of key performance indicators that need to be tracked on a regular basis by the Board of Directors. An effective implementation process will link the dashboard monitoring tool directly to the strategic plan, thus providing important support for implementation.

Two Excellent Trend Documents

I've come across two excellent trend documents recently. While the publications will be of special interest to nonprofits focusing on education, both resources will be useful to a broader audience of nonprofit leaders engaged in strategic thinking and planning. The resources are noteworthy because of the content they offer; they are also noteworthy because of the formats used to make the information more accessible and usable. These formats can be used to better organize trend data that you are gathering for your own strategic planning efforts.

The first resource is the book Sixteen Trends, Their Profound Impact on Our Future by Gary Marx. The author highlights a number of key trends, and then shows how each will influence educational policy in the future. Each chapter focuses on one major trend: there is a summary of the trend, implications for society as a whole and education in particular, and then a listing of questions and activities to stimulate further thought discussion and action.

The second resource is the Education Map of the Decade, created by the KnowledgeWorks Foundation to examine the forces affecting education and the economy. The map includes three key elements: trends, which represent major shifts, new developments and concepts and the driving forces that will shape the future of education; hot spots -- trends that the KnowledgeWorks Foundation thinks will have broad impact on education, and dilemmas -- problems that can't be solved and won't go away which require new thinking and new solutions. This map is more than a trend document -- it has to be experienced online. You'll find tutorials on the use of the map, discussion boards, links to additional resources and much more. This interactive website is a powerful example of how good information -- an essential ingredient of effective strategic planning -- can be gathered, organized and presented in user friendly ways.

Newsletters for Strategic Thinkers

There are several newsletters that provide information, and resources that will support strategic thinking and planning efforts. You can subscribe to these newsletters at no charge although some newsletters are also published in a “premium” version available for a fee.

Here is a newsletter listing with reference to recent articles relating in some way to strategic planning:

The McKinsey Quarterly published by McKinsey and Co. Go to: http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/. Free registration required. Recent article of interest to strategic thinkers: “Improving Strategic Planning: A McKinsey Survey.”

HBS Working Knowledge published by the Harvard Business School. Go to: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/forms/newsletter.html. Free registration required. Recent article of interest to strategic thinkers: “Failing to Learn and Learning to Fail (Intelligently)”

Nonprofit Online News published by the Gilbert Center. Go to: http://news.gilbert.org/. Free registration required. Recent article of interest to strategic thinkers: “The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct Them”

Fast Company Today published by Fast Company Magazine. Go to: http://www.fastcompany.com/homepage/index.html. Free registration required. Recent article of interest to strategic thinkers: “Demographics: The Population Hourglass.”

I’ll add more newsletters in the future. In the meantime, send your newsletter suggestions to frankwill@aol.com or post them to this blog.

Incorporating Strategic Thinking into Board and Staff Meetings

Recently I conducted a webinar entitled How to Incorporate Strategic Thinking into Board and Staff Meetings. The message: it’s not enough only to think strategically during a formal planning process. While it is important to periodically engage in a formal strategic planning process, there are many other ongoing opportunities for strategic thinking and planning in nonprofits. What are they, how can we use these opportunities, and how can we create other opportunities for strategic thinking? The webinar topics included: How to use your strategic plan to foster strategic thinking by board and staff; Sample agendas and facilitation designs that can be incorporated into shorter meetings; Techniques for information gathering and analysis to support strategic thinking and planning. For a copy of the session materials, email me at frankwill@aol.com

For a good discussion on the subject of the differences and relationships between strategic planning and strategic thinking, see Strategic Thinking: A Discussion Paper by Eton Lawrence of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

The Fierce Conversations in Strategic Planning

In the last several years, a number of books have appeared on the subject of how to talk through difficult issues with others. The titles say it all: Fierce Conversations: Achieving Success at Work and in Life One Conversation at a Time by Susan Scott; Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss what Matters Most by Douglas Stone; and Crucial Confrontations by Kerry Patterson. The focus of these books is, for the most part, on interpersonal communication with friends, family members and co-workers. But these book titles capture an important quality of effective strategic planning practice. The planning process needs to be designed and conducted in such a way that leaders are able to articulate the most critical issues, choices and challenges facing their organizations, then engage in the “fierce conversations”, “difficult conversations” and “crucial confrontations” to thoroughly discuss these critical issues, choices and challenges and finally come to agreement on how the organization will respond to them.

In an issues based approach to strategic planning, the selection of issues is very important because it determines the range of decisions and choices the nonprofit will consider in the future. In some instances, leaders are already aware of some of the critical issues that the strategic planning process must help them address. In most situations, the planning process participants discern critical strategic issues as they examine the data gathered through external, market and internal assessment conducted earlier in the planning process. I like to challenge people to express their critical issues in the form of questions. The rest of the planning process then constitutes the work of constructing the big answers to these big questions. Identifying the critical issues and choices then becomes the watershed event in the planning process. If we have correctly identified the real issues, we know what we need to have the fierce conversations about. The resulting strategic plan will be relevant. If we fail to identify the real issues, the resulting plan will be useless – answers that may look good but answers to the wrong questions.

Accidental Innovation

In an earlier post, (Wednesday, April 05, 2006, Strategic Thinking Starts Wednesday at 8:30 AM), I talked about the expectation that our strategic planning efforts foster innovation and the reality that innovative ideas often come to us outside of the structured planning sessions. This is explored in a recent Harvard Business School Working Knowledge Newsletter interview by Sarah Jane Gilbert. In the interview, Professor Robert D. Austin discusses his research and practical implications of the concept of accidental innovation. He notes that many important innovations are the byproduct of accidents and that the key is to be prepared for the unexpected. Austin’s key concepts include: “Innovation can't always be planned—accidents happen. Be prepared to recognize serendipitous opportunity, and, Understand the nature of breakthrough inventions in your industry and plan accordingly.”

To access the full interview, go to: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5441.html.

The Difference Between Mission, Vision and Values

So what is the difference between mission, vision and values? The article The Value of Vision appearing at the ManyWorlds website answers this and other questions including:
· Why engage in visioning?
· What are the hallmarks of an effective vision, and how do you go about creating one?
· What are the sources of problems in the vision process?
· How should you implement the vision?
· How does vision relate to mission and to values?
· At what point in the process of strategizing do you engage in envisioning?

The site includes a number of other good articles on the subject of organizational vision (Envisioning Growth, Focusing on A Vision, Lofty Missions, Down-to-Earth Plans, The Vision Thing: Without It You'll Never Be a World-Class Organization, Walking the Talk (really!): Why Visions Fail, Why Vision Matters More Than Ever, and more)

If you’re not familiar with ManyWorlds, you have to check it out. The site bills itself as "the Knowledge Network for Business Thought Leaders". You can create a personal knowledge network based on your interests. When you log in, the site displays updates in the topical areas you have previously selected. You can change your preferences whenever you want to. Manyworlds also automatically generates a set of recommendations for new resources that are judged to be useful to you based on your use of the website and your identified interests. This list of recommendations is updated weekly. Go to: http://www.manyworlds.com/

New Ideas for Strategic Thinking

Business Week has just launched a design and innovation quarterly called IN (Inside Innovation). In the latest issue, three blogs were highlighted as good sources for new ideas:

Springwise. This blog bills itself as a “global network of 8,000 spotters that scan the globe for smart new business ideas…” In the site’s Idea Database, there is a section on nonprofits and social cause ideas with some very interesting ideas.

Headrush.typepad.com. Business Week describes it as “A must-read guide for CEOs, brand managers, and anyone trying to create passion in their customers.”

Edgeperspectives.typepad.com. This blog is published by John Hagel. At first glance, it may not appear as relevant for nonprofits but remember – we need to look in unfamiliar places for the new ideas.

Blogs are just one element of Web 2.0, a more interactive web experience with a number of new tools that support and encourage collaboration. For a good introduction to what going on, go to http://www.businessweek.com/technology/ceo_guide/index.html.

Strategic Planning – It Works!

In a previous post (April 28, 2006 - Elements of Effective Strategic Planning Practice), I described some of the ingredients and qualities of effective strategic planning practice. I just concluded a strategic planning project with a nonprofit that emphasized for me the importance of these factors. They did it right and they now have a strategic plan that inspires them and will challenge them. Most importantly board and staff leadership as well as key community partners are really committed to the plan– which, of course, is the point.

How did this happen? Not by magic (well maybe a little). They did a number of things to lay the groundwork for a successful planning process. First the board established a strategic planning committee. It was led by a talented board leader who is in line to become president of the board in the near future. The planning committee also included a number of board and staff leadership including the executive director and the current board president.

The planning committee took the time to thoroughly orient itself to strategic planning and then agreed on clear outcomes for the process. They also created many opportunities for other board, staff, customers, volunteers, and other community stakeholders to be involved in the strategic planning and thinking process in meaningful ways.

They set aside time outside of the formal planning sessions to talk informally about the emerging critical issues. A number of important insights arose as a result. (Previous post: April 5, 2006 - Strategic Thinking Starts Wednesday at 8:30 AM)

They also made sure that the strategic framework – mission, vision, goals and strategies – was translated into a concrete implementation plan with defined measures of success. In addition, the board aligned its committee structure with the new strategic plan.

All of this in about five month’s time. They did it right and it worked!

Future Trends Resource for Strategic Planning

The study, Future Trends Affecting Education, published by the Education Commission of the States, examines ongoing and emerging trends and explores how these trends may affect education in the United States over the next 20-30 years. Trends are grouped into the following areas: education, demographic, technological, economic, political and social. Though the study was published in 1999, the findings remain very relevant with one possible exception (“Trend 15: Term limits on governors and state legislators are growing more common”). While the focus is on education, the study provides an excellent trends summary that will be useful for a broad range of nonprofits. Go to: http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/13/27/1327.htm.

Tools for Strategic Thinking

Recently, I've come across two websites that have great collections of tools that support strategic thinking and innovation. Both are free sites. The first is Businessballs, a free learning and development resource for people and organizations, run by Alan Chapman, in Leicester, England. The website's aims are to provide free and helpful resources for personal and organizational development. The site includes an excellent selection of hundreds of worksheets, games, exercises, tools and diagrams. Go to: www.businessballs.com. The second website is Manyworlds at http://www.manyworlds.com/. The site bills itself as "the Knowledge Network for Business Thought Leaders". You can create a personal knowledge network based on your interests. When you log in, the site displays updates in the topical areas you have previously selected. You can change your preferences whenever you want to. Manyworlds also automatically generates a set of recommendations for new resources that are judged to be useful to you based on your use of the website and your identified interests. This list of recommendations is updated weekly.

Effective Strategic Planning Practice

Strategic planning in nonprofits is most effective when the following elements are present:

First, establishment of a strategic planning committee. If the nonprofit board is serious about strategic planning (and it needs to be!), it will establish a strategic planning committee.

Second, there needs to be a thorough and shared understanding of strategic planning. The term “strategic planning” is sometimes used to describe a range of planning activities. It is important that the process is looked upon in the same way by board, staff and other participants in the strategic planning process.

There also needs to be agreement on outcomes. While it is true that the expected outcome of most strategic planning processes is a strategic plan document, it is also important to discuss and eventually agree upon other expected outcomes. For example there may be a specific critical issue that the board wants to focus on by means of strategic planning. Typically, planning outcomes will include some or all of the following:
· Board leadership and management staff will have a thorough understanding of the critical issues and choices facing the organization over the next 5 years.
· A strategic plan document including a mission statement, strategic vision statement, goals and strategies will be produced. The plan will give special attention to organizational structures that will best support the overall strategic plan.
· The strategic plan will have a day-to-day relevance on management and governance; and
· There will be enthusiasm and support for the strategic plan at all levels of the organization.

There needs to be real commitment to the process on the part of leadership. While there is no one right way to do strategic planning, whatever approach the board chooses will involve time, energy and careful thinking. People will not commit these personal and organizational resources if they are not convinced that the planning process is worth the effort. Sometimes the start of strategic planning process may need to be postponed until leadership within the board and staff have become convinced of the importance of the process.

There also needs to be involvement of many. In order to be effective, strategic planning must involve individuals representing all constituencies of the nonprofit: staff, constituents, funders and donors, as well as other key community supporters.

Finally, the strategic plan needs to be translated into concrete detailed plans of action. Involvement in an isolated strategic planning exercise or a one shot planning retreat is not sufficient. Strategic planning needs to lead to specific objectives which include clear evaluation measures, set on an annual basis by staff, the board of directors and the board’s own committees. This commitment to implementation will also help to ensure that the majority of the board’s time and energy is in alignment with the mission, vision, and goals and strategies contained in the strategic plan.

Strategic Planning: Its Lasting Value

Looking for an inspirational quote to use at the end of a strategic planning session? Here’s one of my favorites: Max DePree ends his book Leadership Jazz with a captivating story about leaders whose actions were inspired by vision. This story demonstrates to us the vital link between strategic planning, vision and the stewardship responsibilities of leadership. It's a lesson for all of us: our strategic plans will touch the lives of individuals and communities far into the future.

In the late fourteenth century, the members of New College at Oxford, moved into their quadrangle, the first structure of its kind, intended to provide for the residents all that they needed. On the north side of the quadrangle sit the chapel and the great hall, beautiful buildings and, as you might imagine, the focus of the life of the college.

In the middle of the nineteenth century, almost five hundred years later, the college hired architect Sir Gilbert Scott to restore the roof of the hall. The roof and the great oak beams that supported it had badly rotted. And so representatives from the college with Sir Gilbert visited Great Hall Woods, in Berkshire, where they expected to find trees for replacement beams. Sure enough, the replacements were standing there, waiting to be hewn out of the living oak trees planted a century before for just that purpose.

An anonymous leader's promise had been fulfilled. The voice and touch of a distant leader had been joined.

Strategic Thinking Starts Wednesday at 8:30 AM

Everyone wants strategic planning to be a creative process that fosters innovation. The problem is that new ideas come to us at the oddest times, without warning when we least expect them – and usually not 20 minutes into the strategic planning session scheduled for next Wednesday at 8:30 AM! What’s a strategic thinker to do?

First acknowledge this dilemma. Agree that we will look for ways to reflect on the critical issues and challenges facing the organization outside of the structured strategic planning process as well. Encourage people to think on their own time about the critical issues that have surfaced in the process and how we could respond to them. Another suggestion: from time to time get together over coffee or a brown bag lunch to discuss a specific issue in an unstructured setting – no agenda, no defined meeting outcome. A facilitator can help with probing questions but again, keep it informal and unstructured. It can also help to invite an outsider or two. Someone should take notes. Any new ideas will find their way in the formal process in the future.

At the risk of contradicting myself, there are also a number of creative thinking tools and structured activities that can foster breakthroughs. I’ll save that for a future post.

Strategic Issue Briefing Papers

Today a major challenge in strategic planning is keeping the number and frequency of planning sessions to the absolute minimum without compromising the integrity and efficacy of the process. People are simply not interested in participating in a process that eats up lots of their time in meetings - even if they see strategic planning as a necessary and worthwhile activity. When people come to a planning retreat for example they want to be prepared and they want to hit the ground running. Here's an activity that can help: the development of critical issue briefing papers.

After data has been gathered and analyzed by the planning team and critical strategic issues have been identified (no more than 5), team members form issue teams around each of the critical issues. Each team is charged with developing a 3-5 page “issue brief”. The brief provides some background for each issue and summarizes creative ways other organizations are responding to similar issues. Developing an issue briefing paper is an opportunity to educate ourselves about an issue – to come to a deeper understanding of the issue, how it is a “most critical issue” for the organization and what’s at stake for the organization especially if we don’t effectively respond to the issue. Developing the issue briefing papers is a warm-up for the decision-making that will follow. It is a way to prepare ourselves for the work ahead – developing the mission, vision, goals, and strategies that are typically the focus of a planning retreat. Preparing and distributing the issues briefs in advance of the retreat saves time at the retreat and helps retreat participants to better prepare. Here is the set of questions I have developed for issues briefs:

· Background: (Why and how this is a critical strategic issue for the organization?)
· Opportunities for the organization related to this issue: (Opportunities for growth, improvement, and/or increased program impact?)
· Threats for the organization related to this issue: (Threats to the organization and/or constituents served — consequences for the organization if nothing is done in response to this issue.)
· How nonprofits and other organizations facing similar issues, opportunities and threats are responding: (What changes, strategies, and shifts in direction are organizations attempting?)
· What major choices, decisions and/or shifts in direction does this issue challenge us to consider? · What other information do we still need in order to develop effective responses to this issue?

This activity can also be an effective way to involve people beyond the planning team itself. If you’d like a guide with sample issue briefing papers, let me know at frankwill@aol.com.

Post 911 Increase in Civic Engagement Among Young People

Another good news trend for nonprofits engaged in strategic planning: An increase in volunteering and civic engagement among young people in the wake of 911. Thomas H. Sander and Robert D. Putnam in an article that appeared in the Washington Post last fall (Sept. 11 as Civics Lesson) note …

"After a quarter-century decline of interest and participation in national politics among young Americans, a host of measures turned upward after 2001. Voting rates among 18- to 24-year-olds increased by 23 percent -- 2 to 12 times faster than those of other age cohorts in the national elections in 2002 and 2004. Since Sept. 11, young adults have expressed heightened interest both in "government and current events" and "social issues," according to surveys of high school seniors. And other long-term national surveys show that college freshmen are increasingly discussing politics -- once again a reversal that dates precisely to the fall of 2001. This politicization is especially pronounced among people ages 18 to 21 on Sept. 11, 2001, with a slightly lesser effect on Americans who were between 22 and 25. There seems to be little or no enduring Sept. 11 effect among older generations."

For links to more data supporting and describing this trend, also see a post by Peter Levine in his civic renewal blog at http://www.peterlevine.ws/mt/archives/000684.html.

Technology: A Critical Strategic Issue

For many nonprofits, technology emerges as a critical strategic issue in their planning efforts. And for some nonprofits, the impact of technology is not on the radar – and it should be. There are a number of resources available to help leaders think through the questions. Here are a few: Charity Channel offers several newsletters including E-Philanthropy & Technology Review (http://www.charitychannel.com/enewsletters/eptr/). For excellent resources and links to many more, check out the Nonprofit Technology Enterprise Network (N-TEN) (http://www.nten.org/ntresources) and TechSoup (http://www.techsoup.org/). Also see the Foundations Center’s links to nonprofit technology resources (http://fdncenter.org/research/npr_links/npr05_tech.html). While you’re at it, check out Networking for Good (http://www.networkforgood.org/Npo/technology/). And for a broader picture of technology and communications related public policy issues, visit the Benton Foundation website and be sure to check out the Library (http://www.benton.org/index.php?q=index).

Boomers: A Strategic Resource for Nonprofits

The aging of the baby boom and its implications for nonprofits is a far-reaching trend that your strategic planning efforts must address. There are lots of great resources available to help you figure things out: A study by the Harvard School of Public Health, Reinventing Aging:Baby Boomers and Civic Engagement (http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/chc/reinventingaging/Report.pdf), identifies baby boomers as a great potential source of volunteers in the future. The authors urge nonprofits to start making their pitch to boomers now. Talking To Baby Boomers about Volunteering - Part 1: Third Quarter of Life Passions (http://charitychannel.com/publish/templates/?a=7284&z=24 ) and Talking to Baby Boomers about Volunteering - Part 2: Volunteering As a Career Transition Strategy (http://charitychannel.com/publish/templates/?a=7534&z=24) will also be helpful in tapping this volunteer resource. Experience at Work: Volunteering and Giving Among Americans 50 and Over (http://www.independentsector.org/programs/research/experience.html) found that nonprofits can expect an increase in the number of high givers from this age group and confirms that more of this population will be available to volunteer more often.

More good news for nonprofits: The MetLife Foundation/Civic Ventures New Face of Work Survey (http://www.civicventures.org/publications/surveys/new-face-of-work.cfm) was the first survey to ask boomers now in their 50s what kind of work they want to do. The result: 58 percent of those in their 50s are interested in taking jobs now and in retirement that help improve the quality of life in their communities. The Boomer’s Guide to Good Work by Ellen Freudenheim (http://www.civicventures.org/publications/booklets/boomers_guide.cfm) also offers useful insights.

(Full disclosure: My name is Frank and I am an aging baby boomer.)

Collaborative Strategic Planning

Nonprofits are showing new interest in collaborative strategic planning efforts in which the focus is on a shared customer/constituent base or pressing community issue rather than development of a strategic plan for their organization alone. Examples include several youth and family serving organizations developing a collaborative strategic plan to offer new services to children with special needs in a region or neighborhood development groups focusing on affordable housing in city neighborhoods.

For many nonprofits – even those who see the importance of planning collaboratively – this will require a commitment to build capacity. Here is an excerpt from our capacity building assessment and benchmarking tool that illustrates what this path to increased collaborative strategic planning capacity would look like over time:

LEVEL ONE: Clear need for increased capacity - Organization does not engage in any collaborative planning on community initiatives with other service providers; sees no value in such efforts.

LEVEL TWO: Basic level of capacity in place - Organization engages in collaborative planning efforts at the request of external stakeholders such as funders; such efforts are isolated and usually short term in nature.

LEVEL THREE: Moderate level of capacity in place - Organization engages in some collaborative planning efforts sometimes at the request of external stakeholders and also because the organization views such efforts as a way to increase its impact; collaborative plans with other partners align with the organization's own strategic plan.

LEVEL FOUR: High level of capacity in place - Organization engages in and often initiates a range of collaborative planning efforts; views such efforts as integral to its success and as a way to extend and solidify partnerships and alliances that increase impact; collaborative plans with other partners contribute to the organization’s strategic plan as well as strategic plans of the broader community.

Strategic Vision versus Status Quo

One of the important and often unexpected discoveries in a strategic planning process is that we are not the organization we will need to become in order to achieve our new vision and implement our strategic plan. Here is an article from the Boston Consulting Group that explores the mismatch between vision and organizational culture. Author Eric E. Olsen begins “Vision creates intent. Culture determines action. Often the two are out of sync. When they are, culture can actually undermine vision and prevent a company from achieving essential business goals.” Olsen offers five principles, most of which are easily transferable to the nonprofit world. For the full article, go to: http://www.bcg.com/publications/publication_view.jsp?pubID=301&language=English

Trend Data that Supports Strategic Planning

Here are a number of trend reports that may be useful in your strategic planning efforts: A report by Lewis A. Friedland and Shauna Morimoto that examines the driving forces behind the rise in youth volunteering at http://www.civicyouth.org/research/areas/comm_partic.htm; the latest edition of the Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Data Book at http://www.aecf.org/kidscount/databook; Drivers of Change in the Governance of Nonprofits, a chapter in Improving Board & Organizational Effectiveness, published by the Southern Rural Development Center at http://srdc.msstate.edu/nonprofit/module01.pdf; an Annie E. Casey Foundation report that examines the tenure and future plans of nonprofit executives at http://www.aecf.org/publications/data/executive_transition_survey_report2004.pdf; a report from PNN Online that examines the state of E-philanthropy at http://www.pnnonline.org/article.php?sid=6104; a study from the Boston College Center on Wealth and Philanthropy on wealth transfer estimates among African American households at http://bc.edu/research/swri/meta-elements/pdf/aawte2.pdf; and a study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project that explores the impact of the Internet on families, communities, work and home, daily life, education, health care, and civic and political life at http://www.pewinternet.org/trends.asp.

For links to other trend data, see our Trend of the Week feature at http://www.createthefuture.com/trend_of_the_week_2006.htm.

Check back in the future for more links to trend data and post others that you have found useful for strategic planning.

Extensive List of Articles on Strategic Planning

The CEO Refresher (http://www.refresher.com/ceo.html) has compiled an excellent list of strategic planning articles and resources. Some that stand out are Business Planning and Strategic Planning Revisited by Herb Rubenstein, The Art of Strategic Conversation by Skip Corsini, Wishes for Strategic Collaboration, by Helene Mazur (all of her articles are very good!), Building Support for the Strategic Plan: Aligning Employees with Strategy by Robert W. Bradford, and Running a Strategic Planning Session by Estelle Métayer, just to mention a few. For the full list with links to each article, go to: http://www.refresher.com/archives29.html.

Strategic Learning

In previous posts, I’ve talked about the important link between strategic planning and organizational learning. An article that sheds light on the connection is Strategic Learning: A Leadership Process for Creating and Implementing Breakthrough Strategies by William G. Petersen. There is a book by the same title. After twenty years as a CEO of multinational businesses, Dr. Pietersen is now a Professor of the Practice of Management at the Columbia Business School in New York. He identifies the need to change as the central challenge facing leaders today. He goes onto say that three approaches have held out the greatest promise of enhancing an organization’s ability to adapt to change: the concept of the learning organization, the “resurgence” of strategic planning and complexity theory. He observes that none of these work on their own. He then identifies five “killer” competencies that organizations must master in order to become an “adaptive enterprise”: Insight, focus, alignment, execution, and renewal. The Strategic Learning model is then presented as a practical leadership process for mobilizing these five competencies. The process has four linked action steps: learn, focus, align and executive which are described in more detail in the article showing the potential for developing “breakthrough strategies”.

At the end of the article, the same four step process is described in terms of the individual learning and leadership development that can occur. The quality of emotional intelligence is also integrated into his model. Petersen’s synthesis of strategic planning, organizational and individual learning and leadership development offers insights that can help us build in new opportunities for learning in our strategic planning and thinking efforts. For a copy of the article, go to: www.williepietersen.com/pdf/Strategic_Learning.pdf

New Tools For Strategic Planning

I’ve come across a number of resources on strategic thinking and planning that are worth a look. I’ll be talking about some of them in coming posts. Here’s the first one: an article that appeared in the August 2005 issue of MIT’s Technology Review. (Go to: http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/05/08/issue/feature_social.asp) It’s entitled Social Machines and provides one of the best – and most exciting – summaries of how the Web is becomes more interactive. In the words of author Wade Roush, “Web 1.0 consisted largely of text files jazzed up with browser-readable HTML instructions on how to display the text and where to find related files. Web 2.0 is more like a collection of programs that talk to one another.”

The article is an introduction to this “collection of programs”. You know what a Blog is – you’re reading one. Do you know what RSS, wikis, and podcasts are? Maybe like you, I had heard of them but not really understood what they represent and what they are pointing to. Have you heard of web-based services like Flickr, Delicious, Socialtext, and Plazes? Me neither. We’ve all seen the Web as this powerful new way to work, communicate and collaborate. But really we haven’t seen anything yet! What does this have to do with Strategic Thinking and Planning? Lots. RSS feeds, wikis and podcasts are some of the new ways people and organizations engaged in strategic planning will do research, gather and share information, create new knowledge – some of the activities that are critical to strategic thinking. Will these new tools and services replace good old-fashioned face to face? Maybe some day. In the meantime, they are powerful tools that will dramatically increase the impact of face to face meetings and contribute to more effective strategic planning and thinking efforts.

A Temporary Detour

I’m in the habit of saying that strategic planning is not a conflict resolution process and that if there are internal conflicts in an organization, depending on the nature of the conflict, it may not be the right time to launch a strategic planning process. An example: if the Board of Directors is so weak and dysfunctional that it would be impossible for the board to engage in strategic planning in meaningful ways, first you need to put effort into board development.

But sometimes, the internal issues come to the surface after the strategic planning process has begun. In fact, given the comprehensive nature of strategic planning, a good process is going to surface some of those issues during the early information gathering and analysis phase. Some of these issues will eventually lead to goals, strategies and action plans.

But sometimes, there are issues that arise that simply can’t wait for implementation of the strategic plan at some future point. Some issues have to be addressed now – not later. In situations where an internal issue will make it difficult if not impossible to finish the planning process, it may be necessary to stop, deal with the issue at hand, and then resume the planning process. Recently, in one strategic planning project, it became very clear that tensions between the executive director and board leadership were getting in the way. After discussion with the executive director and board leaders, we agreed to hold a special working session to tackle a number of board/staff role questions and related communication problems. The session provided the needed opportunity to deal with the issues at hand and the planning process has resumed. As a result the executive director and the board leaders are even more enthusiastic about the future of the organization.

Aligning Boards and Management on Strategy

A recent article appearing in the Leader to Leader Institute quarterly journal entitled Aligning Boards and Management on Strategy by Ram Charan provides good advice on how to engage board and management in an in-depth discussion of strategy. According to the author, “Boards need to understand strategy, but it's not their job to create it. …The board's real value comes by helping management test whether the strategy is grounded in reality. They do that by insisting that management answer fundamental questions. …The value is in raising strategic issues, especially those that are uncomfortable. Then boards can dig even deeper.” Charan recommends a “strategy immersion session” as a way to achieve deeper board understanding and support of strategy. He also recommends that the strategy immersion session should be designed so that it is “more like a workshop than a stage show … to ensure that ample time is reserved for open discussion and informal interactions”.

The session be designed as a 1 day retreat event or as a 1-2 hour session within a regularly scheduled board meeting. The article includes suggestion on how to design such a session as well as facilitation notes. Go to: http://www.pfdf.org/leaderbooks/L2L/summer2005/charan.html

The Board as Strategic Thinkers

Terrie Temkin, a consultant to nonprofit organizations, has written a series of excellent articles highlighting the role of the board as strategic thinkers. Some of them are listed here:
Adjusting Your Bylaws to Promote a Strategic Thinking Board – www.nonprofitmgtsolutions.com/nbg_2.html. Recruiting Strategic Thinkers - www.nonprofitmgtsolutions.com/nbg_3.html. Orienting Board Members to their Responsibilities as Strategic Thinkers – www.nonprofitmgtsolutions.com/nbg_4.html. Structuring Board Meetings to Maximize Strategic Thinking Boards – www.nonprofitmgtsolutions.com/nbg_5.html. Strategic Plans Aren’t the Answer – http://www.nonprofitmgtsolutions.com/nbg_1.html.

Trend Data You Can Use

Identifying and analyzing trends is a critical part of the environmental scanning described in a previusly post. For links to trend data you can use in your strategic planning efforts, go to our website: http://www.createthefuture.com/trend_of_the_week_2005.htm. Here's a good example of what's available: Gary Hubbell, author of Forces of Change: The Coming Challenges in Hospital Philanthropy, has analyzed the prospective peak giving years by generational cohorts. The peak giving years are ages 55-75:

Silent Generation - Birth Years: 1925-1942. Years of Peak Giving 1980 - 2017

Boom Generation - Birth Years: 1943-1960. Years of Peak Giving: 1998-2035

Generation X- Birth Years: 1961-1981. Years of Peak Giving: 2016-2056

Millennial Generation - Birth Years: 1982-2003(?).Years of Peak Giving: 2037-2078

His conclusions which will be useful for planning by nonprofits in general include the following:
· As we enter the 2010 decade, the last cohort of the silent generation will be reaching the end of their peak giving years.
· Early Boomer cohorts have already entered their peak which will continue for the next twenty years.
· Generation X donors will just begin to enter their peak giving in the middle of the next decade, continuing to the middle of this century.
· At least 30 years from now, Millennials will enter their prime giving years.
· Futurists anticipate longer life spans for each successive generation so peak giving years may represent spans that start later in life and/or last longer than what is known today.

A Good Resource for Environmental Scanning

An important activity in strategic planning is gathering and analyzing information. This activity typically consists of three components: an external assessment, a market or constituent assessment and an internal assessment.

The purpose of the external assessment is to identify and assess changes and trends in the world around the nonprofit likely to have a significant impact on it over the next 5-10 years. We'll look at political, economic, technological, social, lifestyle, demographic, competitive, regulatory and broad philanthropic trends. We then determine which changes are opportunities for us (for example, opportunities to grow) and which could be threats to us in some way (trends that can keep us from being successful). Finally we identify implications for selected changes and trends -- ways the nonprofit might respond to the opportunities and threats we identify. At this early stage of the planning process, saying that something is an implication does not require the nonprofit to adopt that course of action. The external assessment is sometimes referred to as the “environmental scan.”

I recently came across a good resource for environmental scanning. It’s entitled “Scanning the Landscape: Finding Out What’s Going on in Your Field”. It’s published by GrantCraft, a program of the Ford Foundation. While this guide is written for the grantmaking community, the general guidance and the description of approaches for gathering and analyzing information are excellent and applicable to most strategic planning and thinking efforts. Go to: http://www.grantcraft.org/catalog/guides/scanning/index.html.

Two Strategic Planning Resources

Much has been published on the subject of strategic planning. Here are two of the best resources: Strategic Planning Workbook for Nonprofit Organizations, Revised and Updated by Bryan Barry. There are a number of good publications on strategic planning in nonprofit organizations. If I had to pick just one to recommend, it would have to be Strategic Planning Workbook for Nonprofit Organizations by Bryan Barry. First published in 1997 by the Amherst Wilder Foundation, the workbook combines a clear and thorough explanation of the strategic planning process, with examples and detailed worksheets for each step of the process. Highlights include guidance on preparing to plan, benefits and limitations of planning, strategic planning with multiple organizations and communities, a bibliography of other resources and publications, and more.

Strategic Planning for Nonprofit Organizations, Second Edition by Michael Allison and Jude Kaye. This thoroughly revised, updated, and expanded edition provides expert knowledge and tools needed to develop and implement strategic plans. It including worksheets, checklists, and tables—in print and on the companion CD-ROM—along with a book-length case study that lets you observe strategic planning in action. Topics covered include: developing a clear mission, vision, and set of values, conducting SWOT analyses and program evaluations, assessing client needs and determine stakeholder concerns, setting priorities and develop core strategies, goals, and objectives, etc.

Strategic Thinking and Planning: A Team Sport

In her book The Nimble Collaboration, author Karen Ray identifies a number of emerging best practices. One of them is” modify partner agencies’ mission statements”. She describes the practice: “Chapter 1 (in The Nimble Collaboration) spoke of the collaboration’s mission statement as a placeholder, making room for each partner agency’s mission statement. But at the large end of the collaboration scale, partner agencies are turning this practice on its head: they are changing their individual mission statements to reflect the mission of the collaboration. Such changes show the depth of the partner agencies’ commitment to the goal of collaboration. They also ensure that the work of the collaboration is continued beyond the tenure of the agency representative, and even beyond the membership of the organization in the collaboration, because the agency itself has changed. For example, a variety of organizations in Ramsey County, Minnesota have decided that violence is a key barrier to their goals. Domestic abuse shelters, teen clubs, and law enforcement agencies have all added a phrase to their individual mission and philosophy statements that emphasizes their commitment to reduce violence as part of their mission."

This practice reflects an exciting trend: numbers of organizations engaging in joint strategic planning efforts. Sometimes the planning focuses on a common issue, for example, developing a collaborative strategic plan to reducing teen pragnancy in Milwaukee. Other times, the common denominator may be geographic proximity of a number of organizations that begin to plan a coordinated regional response to a range of interrelated issues. By the way, The Nimble Collaboration, another fine publication from the Amherst Wilder Foundation, can be purchased at www.wilder.org.

Using the Organizational Dashboard to Monitor the Plan

In the previous post, I mentioned that the strategic planning process presents an opportunity for the organization to develop an important tool for ongoing monitoring of the strategic plan. It’s called the organizational dashboard (sometimes referred to as “scorecard”). Using the metaphor of the dashboard in a car, this tool is based on selection of key performance indicators that need to be tracked on a regular basis by the Board of Directors.

Authors Chait, Holland and Taylor describe this tool in Improving the Performance of Governing Boards. The dashboard incorporates key success indicators of the organization – the most essential areas of performance. “ These are the variables that most determine whether the organization will succeed or fail. Once the critical success indicators have been identified, the board and the executive director (and other key staff) can then propose and consider strategic performance indicators – the qualitative and quantitative data that most accurately measure and convey the critical areas of performance.” These critical success indicators should be linked to the organization’s strategic plan. By focusing on these indicators, the board can position itself to place its focus on the priority areas of governance. Here is a process for developing a dashboard.

Step 1: Begin the strategic planning process. Development of the organizational dashboard begins in the strategic planning process. As part of the strategic planning process, the organization initiates discussion of how strategic plan progress will be measured. This can begin during the formulation of goals and strategies. One approach is to generate an initial list of meaningful ways to measure progress for each goal and associated strategies. We refer to this initial list as success or performance indicators. For example, for a revenue goal such as "expand and diversify the revenue base to support anticipated growth", success indicators would include "expansion of revenue base”,"diversification of revenue base", etc. Under this sample goal, one strategy might read "generate more revenue from program fees". Performance indicators for such a strategy might be "dollar amount of program fees generated "or "percentage increase in dollar amount of program fees generated annually". Another strategy might be "reduce reliance on public funding". The performance indicator for this strategy might be "percentage reduction in public funding". The key performance indicators for goals and associated strategies constitutes the strategic planning evaluation framework.

Step 2: Action planning. The process continues as the goals and strategies are translated into the annual plan of action or annual objectives. For the sample strategy "generate more revenue from program fees", an objective might read "The program services department will generate at least $450,000 from program fees by December 31, 2005". For the sample strategy "reduce reliance on public funding", an objective might read "during the life of the strategic plan the percentage of public funding will decrease from the current seventy percent of budget to no more than forty percent of the total budget".

Step 3: Development of Dashboard. The evaluation framework (key performance indicators for each goal and associated strategies) is reviewed by the Board of Directors. The board can also review other key performance measures that have been used in the past. The board then narrows down the list to include those indicators that best reflect the most essential areas of performance for the organization. These key performance indicators become the basis for the dashboard. The board reviews and approves the dashboard.

Step 4: Implementation of Action Plans. Implementation of the action plan then begins. The dashboard is regularly reviewed by the board to measure progress in achieving key outcomes.

Stumbling Blocks to Implementation

There are several reasons why implementation of strategic plans fails. I’ve listed 4 here. In each case the problem is addressed by designing and facilitating the planning process in such a way that the issue doesn’t arise during the implementation phase.

1. Lack of board, staff, volunteer, member, partner and stakeholder commitment to the strategic plan. One of the hallmarks of a successful strategic planning process is high levels of understanding, enthusiasm and support of the resulting plan among the aforementioned constituents. The most effective way to achieve this is to build into the process a variety of engagement opportunities: participation on the strategic planning committee, involvement in information and data gathering and analysis, service on other planning committees and workgroups, focus groups, community partner dialogs, and others. Sometimes, involvement of many in the planning process is avoided for fear that large numbers are unmanageable. If clear roles and responsibilities are communicated and if meetings and tasks are carefully structured, large numbers of involved and engaged people contribute to a successful process. For one thing, it ensures a broad range of perspectives on critical issues, absolutely essential to innovative thinking. As a practical matter, we want and need large numbers of people at all levels of the organization and community who are committed to achieving the vision and strategic goals outlined in the plan. In designing the planning process, the strategic planning committee needs to assess the most effective ways to involve all internal and external stakeholders.

2. Lack of alignment between governance structures (especially committee and workgroup structure) and the strategic plan. In nonprofit organizations, implementation depends on the support and involvement of professional staff, board leadership, other volunteers, members, and community supporters. Organizational structures that align with the strategic plan ensure that all of these individuals can be effectively organized to carry out their work and that they will be moving in the direction of the strategic vision. To the degree that the resulting strategic plan represents a new direction -- in some cases, a radical departure from old ways of doing business -- organizations will discover that many former governance structures constitute unintended barriers to implementation. New structures need to be created if implementation is to succeed. Current board committee and workgroup structures will need to be reviewed in light of requirements of the strategic plan.

3. The design and format of the earlier strategic planning process does not easily translate to action planning and implementation. One of the greatest frustrations in strategic planning is the failure to complete the transition from the “visionary blueprint” (mission, vision, goals, and strategies) to the concrete plans of action (objectives: who accomplishes what, by when, at what cost, to be measured by what indicators). In order to avoid this disconnect, I have found it useful to do the following: From the beginning, it’s important to describe the strategic planning model in sufficient detail that it is clear to all how and when the transition to concrete plans of action occurs. Begin the conversation about performance indicators earlier in the strategic planning process. The identification of key performance indicators sets the stage for developing objectives that are concrete, measurable and tied in directly to the mission, vision and strategic priorities.

4. Related to the third hurdle is lack of an effective framework for ongoing monitoring of implementation. The strategic planning process presents an opportunity for the organization to develop an important tool for ongoing monitoring of the strategic plan implementation. It’s called the organizational dashboard (also referred to as a scorecard). Using the metaphor of the dashboard in a car, this tool is based on selection of key performance indicators that need to be tracked on a regular basis by the Board of Directors. In a future post, I will outline a process for developing a dashboard. Using this process will link the dashboard monitoring tool directly to the strategic plan, thus providing important support for implementation.

Scenarios and Theory of Change

Sometimes you can stimulate strategic thinking by combining use of various tools and techniques. Here’s an example: using scenario planning in tandem with theory of change.

Let’s start by defining each one. And then we can talk about how the two tools can work together. First scenario planning. According to What If? The Art of Scenario Thinking for Nonprofits (July 2004), published by the Global Business Network, “scenario thinking is a tool for motivating people to challenge the status quo, or get better at doing so, by asking "What if?" Asking "What if?" in a disciplined way allows you to rehearse the possibilities of tomorrow, and then to take action today empowered by those provocations and insights. What if we are about to experience a revolutionary change that will bring new challenges for nonprofits? Or enter a risk-averse world of few gains, yet few losses? What if we experience a renaissance of social innovation? And, importantly, what if the future brings new and unforeseen opportunities or challenges for your organization? Will you be ready to act?" (For a downloadable copy of What If? The Art of Scenario Thinking for Nonprofits, go to: http://www.gbn.com/ArticleDisplayServlet.srv?aid=32655)

Now for theory of change. For our definition we go to the website of Theory of Change. This site is a joint-effort of ActKnowledge and the Aspen Institute. The site defines a theory of change as: “an innovative tool to design and evaluate social change initiatives. By creating a blueprint of the building blocks required to achieve a social change initiative’s long-term goal, such as improving a neighborhood’s literacy levels or academic achievement, a theory of change offers a clear roadmap to achieve your results, identifying the preconditions, pathways, and interventions necessary for an initiative’s success.”

Now let’s talk about how the two can work together. We can start by posing the following questions: “Does your organization base its work on a coherent theory of change? What is it?” Use scenario planning to develop alternative pictures of how the future will play out for your organization, your customers, your issue or field of work – your “part of the world”. Then pose the question “How does our theory of change fit in each of those alternative futures? Will the theory of change work? How do the alternative scenarios challenge assumptions on which you base your theory of change? How does that theory of change stand up to the future? Do you need to modify your theory of change to fit with emerging realities?”

For more information about theory of change, go to: http://www.theoryofchange.org/index.html. The site introduces a process for developing a theory of change, gives examples of this process, and tackles several interesting advanced topics on putting the process into practice.

Further thoughts on fads and trends

David Zach the futurist quoted in the previous post had this further comment on fads: "I do want to point out that fads are not all bad. Some fads you shouldn't necessarily resist. Why? Because they're often a fun and necessary part of life. As one friend of mine explained in the way of a question, "Do you have enough fads in your life such that you're not boring?" Too many fads, such as can be ascribed to American culture, can pull an organization (or individual or nation) down. Not enough fads and I think the Soviet Union or the likes of the Taliban are equally doomed. You can resist fads and I mention any fad can be safely ignored. Resist or ignore too many of them and you're probably just dull. Embrace too many of them and you're irrelevant." More about the future at http://www.davidzach.com/

So what's the diference between a fad and a trend?

I just came across a keynote given by David Zach, a futurist based in Milwaukee. He was speaking at the 2003 International Public Works Congress and Exposition. Although Zach starts by admitting that it is impossible to predict the future, he passed on a methodology that can be used as a guide in making certain assumptions, in the form of his personal mantra: “Play with fads, work with trends, live by principles” He went on to say "A fad is something that you can safely ignore," he said. "Fads tend to be pushed-they tend to be top-down, a spice, a flavor. But think about your work. Can you follow fads? You have to resist them. "Trends can be from the ground up," he continued. "They tend to be based upon needs, not wants. And a trend is not something which you can safely ignore. You may not agree with it, you may want to fight against it; you may support it, you may want to work for it; but you have to think about it, you have to respond to it." Continuing with the final element of his mantra, Zach then stressed that a principle is "something that doesn't change-'We hold these truths to be self-evident' kind of a thing. The stuff you can stand on. Because in an age of constant change where everything is uncertain, decisions become easy when you know your values. You have to know what you believe, you have to know what doesn't change. You have to have a place to stand, because that's what the future is all about."

Strategic Planning? ... Again?

Ellen Shapiro, author of Fad Surfing in the Boardroom: Managing in the Age of Instant Answers, has compiled a fad surfer’s dictionary. Here is her definition of “strategic plan” – 1. a set of analyses, packaged in accordance with corporate requirements, that is undertaken in order to justify a campaign already underway or a budget about to be submitted; 2. A set of analyses, packaged in accordance with corporate requirements, that nonetheless bears little or no resemblance to the real strategy being followed (but that, once printed and bound, can, in a pinch, be used as a doorstop or a book end).

Most people have all had experiences with strategic planning—good, bad or indifferent. It’s understandable that there will be some resistance when “it’s time to do strategic planning again” because of past disappointments and frustration with the process. In order to be successful, future planning efforts must somehow provide reasonable assurances that the time and energy people invest in the process result in changes and improvements that are implemented and supported by leadership. And then we have to deliver on the promise!

Is there a difference between strategic thinking and strategic planning?

Is there a difference between strategic thinking and strategic planning? And if there is, what is the difference? I found an article that does an excellent job of exploring the question. The article is entitled “Strategic Thinking: A Discussion Paper” by Eton Lawrence of the Public Service Commission of Canada. The answer to the question – there is a difference and at the same time, the two processes are closely connected. You have to read this article because it is so good! It brings into this discussion of strategic thinking and planning, related themes of systems thinking, organizational learning and strategy development. According to the article, the purpose of strategic thinking is to discover novel, imaginative strategies which can rewrite the rules of the competitive game and to envision potential futures significantly different from the present. The purpose of strategic planning is to operationalize the strategies developed through strategic thinking and to support the strategic planning process. Strategic thinking and planning are then two sides of the strategic management coin.

The article also challenges some of the traditional notions of strategic planning. For example, organizations are usually counseled to find a fit between their mission, external opportunities and their core competencies. This advice makes usually makes great sense. However, there is a danger: we can run the risk of doing strategic planning that is not really "strategic". The traditional advice can result in the organization missing or passing up innovative courses of action. This appraoch can result in the decision to essentially remain the same organization doing a few new things or doing the same things a little differently. The article suggests that strategic thinking can sometimes (and should) disrupt alignment, leading to a vision or preferred future that is not a match for the organization’s current core competencies and yet it’s the compelling vision that the organization will choose to pursue. Strategic planning can then recreate a new alignment by helping the organization figure out how to build the required new core competencies or finding new partners that already possess them. Quoting from Hamel and Prahalad, Lawrence States “whereas the traditional view of strategy focuses on the degree of fit between existing resources and current opportunities, strategic intent (strategic thinking) creates an extreme misfit between resources and ambitions.” The article also provides important insights about why it is vital to involve lots of people in the strategic thinking and planning process. Finally, the article challenges organizations to understand their work as occurring within larger systems. For example a nonprofit working on job creation for residents of a low income urban neighborhood would need to consider ways to link their efforts to regional economic development efforts.

The Link Between Board Development and Strategic Planning

The link between board development and strategic planning; it's a theme that I will return to again and again. Effective strategic planning requires the engagement and leadership of the board of directors; involvement of the board in strategic planning is one of the most effective ways - probably the most effective way - to strengthen the board. Today, I came across an excellent resource for understaning this connection between board development and strategic planning: The Dynamic Board: Lessons from High-Performing Nonprofits from McKinsey & Company. The report summarizes the best practices identified through McKinsey’s interviews with the directors or board chairs of 32 highly-regarded nonprofits. Included with the report is a self-assessment tool for nonprofit boards. This is one of the best board assessment tools available and comes in 5, 15 and 30 minute completion time versions. You'll need to register to access the report and the three assessment versions. Go to: http://www.mckinsey.com/practices/nonprofit/ourknowledge/dynamicboards.asp. The report and the assessment make constant links between strategic thinking and planning and board effectiveness. Very well done!