Useful and Painless Strategic Planning

"Make a New Plan, Stan"

Mark A. Greene, American Heritage Center, University of Wyoming

Scott Adams's Dilbert, the oracle of all things sarcastic about modern business management, has two particularly pungent attacks on strategic planning. In the first, Dilbert says to his pointy-haired boss: "Our competitors just made our five-year plan moot. While we were strategizing they were doing something I believe they call 'work."' In the second, the pointy-haired boss says to Dilbert: 'I’m pulling you on the strategic planning team. It's like work but without the satisfaction of accomplishing anything.” But more serious business analysts have equally negative evaluations of strategic planning too.

The CEO of General Motors, after three "unsuccessful tries" at establishing a headquarters planning system, was quoted as saying that "we got these great plans together, put them. on the shelf, and marched off to do what we would be doing anyway. It took us a little while to realize that wasn't getting us anywhere."

These wholly negative attitudes about strategic planning were ones I held firmly during the 1990s, while employed at a major state historical society consistently (though it seemed, sometimes, constantly) engaged in strategic planning on orders from the institution's highest authorities. Many of the strategic planning sessions were facilitated by consultants who inevitably knew next to nothing about archives, museums, rare books, or any form of curation. These sessions appeared lo me particularly useless, since I could not fathom how someone who knew so little about what we did, how we did it, and why we did it could possibly compose a report that would sensibly guide our priorities and our changes for the next three to five years. And the futility of strategic planning was clear to many of us because, indeed, the reports inevitably sat on shelves never to be glimpsed again, seemingly even by our top brass. I would argue vehemently, however (to paraphrase F. Gerald Ham), that "One of our most important and intellectually demanding tasks as archivists" is planning, thinking, and acting strategically. So, "why must we do it so badly?” The most general answer, probably, is that it's easier to keep our noses to the grindstone, doing what we've always done, maybe tweaking the processes a bit to feel as if we're making progress. Some would even say that the personality types of archivists incline them as a group to be "protectors" of tradition, including in the way we work Yet another reason for aversion to strategic planning is undoubtedly the poor stereotypes such an activity has garnered over the years, particularly, I think, during the 1990s. At its simplest, strategic planning is activity designed to create "a broadly-defined plan aimed at creating a desired future." Strategic planning is a must. If strategic planning at its worst could be "like work but without the satisfaction of accomplishing anything," continually marching "off to do what we would be doing anyway" is also a recipe for disaster whether your organization is a business, a community agency, or an archives. Why? Because the world around you-even the staff within your unit (as positions are increasingly filled by younger professionals with newer worldviews)-is continuously changing in ways large and small, and without a strategic plan and strategic thinking, new developments are not anticipated before they force their way to the top of the agenda., demanding crisis management and the latest fire-fighting techniques. In this future, issues are usually defined by others whose ·interests do not necessarily include those of the institution or its purpose. Not only are threats from the external environment not anticipated as early as possible; key opportunities will be missed or diminished in value.

This case study draws primarily from my 11 years as director of the American Heritage Center (AHC), University of Wyoming. At the AHC I have led three rounds of strategic planning as part of the university's overall five-year planning cycles.

PLANNING

While strategic planning is essential, so is taking time to plan for strategic planning. There are a number of approaches to successful strategic planning, and it is important to consider which one will most likely work in your particular circumstances.

Strategic Planning

The literature on strategic planning is vast, both in monographs and journal articles, and I recommend doing some reading to get ideas and understand the landscape. To succeed, you must find a strategic planning process that will allow you to

1. Forecast and analyze emerging developments before they become unanticipated crises

2. Determine whether and how those changes may benefit or threaten your organization

3. Plan for addressing those developments

4. Have a set of goals firmly in place-in other words, plan for initiating changes of your own

5. Set concrete, time-delimited objectives for implementing your goals

6. Learn to "think strategically," that is, to consider and flexibly respond to large forces impinging on your unit rather than focusing exclusively on how to implement daily processes or new ways of producing a widget

Strategic thinking is perhaps the most difficult ·of the goals to achieve. It· is a mind-set that should permeate your staff, from director to processors. According to one author, "[S]trategic planning, at its leading edge, is really just an aspect of strategic management. ... In the most effective companies I've observed, strategic planning is no longer an added managerial duty. It is a way of thinking about a business and how to run it.”

C. K. Prahalad and Gary _Hamel have suggested that strategic thinkers do four things: 1. They think about the large-scale competitive environment around them ·

2. They think about the future

3. They engage others in doing the same, resulting in a "deeply shared, well-tested view of the long-term future"

4. They talk about strategy and how even the most well-considered plans may change as circumstances and competitive dynamics change

This last observation is crucial.

Plans should not be straightjackets, rigid formulas relentlessly pursued regardless of changing circumstances. A Wall Street Journal article in 2010 noted that in the face of the worsening recession many companies were modifying their strategic planning more frequently. Spartan Motors' CEO "inaugurated a three-year strategic plan that he and his lieutenants update every month. . . . Companies have long planned for changing circumstances. What's new-and a switch from the distant calendars and rigid forecasts of the past-is the heavy dose of opportunism." Opportunism is not a bad word, nor is it incompatible with planning. There are two aspects to a plan, of course. One is the means and the other is the end. Both may have to change in the face of changing realities, but most often it will be the means. "German Field Marshal Helmuth von Moltke famously said: 'No plan survives contact with the enemy.' Or, as that other great strategist Mike Tyson put it, 'Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face."' 11 Prior to the main strategic planning exercise, it may be desirable to ask participants to refamiliarize themselves with the repository (and larger organizational) mission and vision statements. If you believe those documents may need revision, it is preferable to do so (whether with group participation or more top-down) prior to strategic planning or early during strategic planning-otherwise, the mission becomes the pawn of every set of three-or five-year goals. The vision and mission should help shape the plan, not vice versa. It may also make sense to distribute pre planning readings to introduce participants to the exercise and/or to turn their attention to strategic planning as a tool, perhaps even including some of its potential pitfalls.

You should also ask participants to review the goals and results from the last strategic plan (if there was one), as illustrated in the Results section below. This might legitimately be a topic of conversation during the strategic planning process itself, but even so, it is helpful to have asked participants to think about the past strategic plan in advance. You may find this particularly useful when the time comes to craft the new goals for your plan. The objective of good strategic planning, in the words of one author, is to create goals that are SMART. "SMART is an acronym for specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.” It might help participants to think about creating SMART goals by asking them to assess how the existing goals measure up to these criteria.

To create an effective plan, everyone must first have a comprehensive and common understanding of the organization's current state. A common tool to use to lay the groundwork for strategic planning is SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats). A common application of SWOT is to break the participants into small groups to brainstorm each element, then bring the group back together to assess the aggregated suggestions and rank them. Some of this activity can take place prior to the main strategic planning session, if the repository has the ability to set aside some 60-to 90-minute preplanning sessions.

Another option, recently introduced in the library literature, is an assessment of current and preferred organizational culture, using a questionnaire (see textbox 13.1) and diagram mapping. Originally developed to assess new leaders' perceptions of their organizations, it can easily become a useful strategic planning tool by helping to orient near-term structural changes and necessary innovations. As with SWOT, there is an explicit distinction made between external and internal orientations. These are only two options, with infinite variations on the theme.

Strategic Planning

Another key decision in advance of the planning process is whether that process will be led by the repository head or by a consultant/facilitator. As I've indicated, I am not a fan of consultants. "A consultant is what you hire when you want to spend money making up your own mind." Consultants who are specialists in facilitating strategic planning sessions

Section I. Your library's Culture...

We are interested in learning how you perceive your library's current organizational culture as well as your ideas of a preferred organizational culture for your library. Because it is very unlikely that any organization can be categorized into o single box, the following question allows you to describe the degree to which your organization matches each of the idealized descriptions.

In each of the questions below there are four descriptions of academic libraries. None of the descriptions is any better than the others; they are just different. Please distribute 100 points among the four descriptions A, B, C, and D, giving higher scores to the descriptions that best answer the question.

l. The CURRENT organizational culture (distribute l 00 points):

A. __My current library is a very personal place. It is like an extended family. People seem to share a lot of themselves.

B. __ My current library is a very dynamic and entrepreneurial place. People are willing to stick their necks out and take risks.

C. __ My current library is a very formalized and structured place. Policies and procedures generally govern what people do.

D. __ My current library is a very competitive in orientation. A major concern is with getting the job done, People are very production oriented.

2. Your PREFERRED organizational culture (distribute 100 points):

A _____ My preferred library is a very personal place. It is like an extended family. People seem to share a lot of themselves.

B. _____ My preferred library is a very dynamic and entrepreneurial place. People are willing to stick their necks out and take risks.

C. __ My preferred library is a very formalized and structured place. Policies and procedures generally govern what people do.

D. __ My preferred library is very competitive in orientation. A major concern is with getting the job done. People are very production oriented....

Textbox 13;1. A portion of the survey created by Maloney, Antelman, Arlitsch, and Butler to assess views of organizational culture (and there are many) cannot be expected to know anything about archives or special collections, much less about your particular repository, its constraints, constituent, advantageous attributes, etc. I believe more is lost than gained by using such consultants, not to mention that they are generally fairly expensive. My one exception to this rule is hiring as a consultant an outside archival administrator with significant experience and success in doing strategic planning at his or her own repository.

However, I recommend that the repository head be the leader of the strategic planning process. Why? Because it is an important role for a director or head of archive to be both a leader and a facilitator when it comes to articulating both vision and goals for his or her repository. "Leaders facilitate change and movement into unfamiliar areas,” one author has asserted. Another maintains that "The leader who can take the role of a facilitator blends his or her role of visionary decisive leader with that of listening and empowering leader.” Leading the strategic planning initiative is one-a significant one-of many ways that the head of the archives can demonstrate these leadership qualities. It is crucial, however, that the director remember always that listening and empowering are only part of his or her role, and that "visionary decisive" attributes are just as important. How to blend them properly is part of the business of leadership.

Another essential decision is whether to involve the entire workforce or solely the managers. The answer may be influenced by the size of the staff, of .course, as well as the importance (to the head) of hierarchy. I strongly urge that everyone working full or half time for the repository be included in the strategic planning process.

People "buy in" to a vision if they are part of making it and can see themselves in it. They will be able to tell if the objectives are unobtainable or too ambitious and to work with the manager on goals that are realistic but ambitious. Their involvement involves buy in, but also gives them training in setting goals, both ultimate and short-term-a very important part of staff development.

My own experience-both as a manager and as a staff member-bears this out. It is vital, however, that the staff members already trust the director or else they will be suspicious that strategic planning is merely a method of co-option with no true follow-through.

Planning for strategic planning also involves some mundane logistical matters. One essential prosaic issue is where the main strategic planning tools will be implemented-on site, off site as a retreat, some of both? I have found that doing the work of strategic planning is greatly facilitated by arranging a staff retreat off site, away from the distractions and reminders of daily work. The setting need not be exotic or far from the repository. We have held retreats at a state park's cabin, the main building of a bed and breakfast, a country club, and the "library" of the university's history department-none more than 20 minutes from the archives. All worked well. The few requirements include wall space on which to place the results of any group exercises or information everyone needs to see, and the products of any brainstorming done during the day.

Another requirement is access to modestly priced caterers; I have found that it's helpful to provide coffee (and alternatives) and continental breakfast in the morning, lunch at noon, and dessert (I am partial to brownies) and soft drinks (and alternatives) in the afternoon. Whether on site or off, some strategic planning approaches (including both SWOT and organizational culture assessment) require simple supplies, mainly easels with pads of oversized sticky paper, markers in a variety of colors, blue painter's tape, self-adhesive dots (used in some cases to permit participants to weight potential goals), standard yellow or white paper pads, pencils, and, if there will be any participants from outside the repository, nametags. If the leader of the planning will be using PowerPoint, a computer and LCD projector will also be necessary, of course. These days it is necessary to ensure that smart phones, tablets, and laptops not be on, with the exception of a computer for a note-taker if you use one.

IMPLEMENTATION

In considering how to achieve the best results from your strategic planning session, you have two powerful tools: setting the agenda and setting the tone. Textbox 13.2 represents one version of an agenda for a strategic planning day (whether on site or off). It is, of course, just suggestive; there are many variations possible for the myriad of repository circumstances. This example is based on preplanning that included SWOT through to the weighting of issues; a· culture and management survey completed but not analyzed; mission and vision reviewed but not yet discussed; an advocacy exercise distributed but not yet addressed by small groups.

· Note that the conversation about mission and objectives comes very early in the process, but so too does the contextualization provided by reassessing previous five-year goals and outcomes. After all, some goals from the previous plan that were not met might have to be reintegrated into the new plan, if the decision is that the earlier goal remains relevant and of high importance.

Although our total number of employees is not large-20 individuals including those working part time-I would encourage including in your agenda doing at least some of the day's work in small groups, groups comprised of a mix of departments, ages, and genders. Brainstorming, in particular, seems to proceed with less inhibition in small groups, probably because the director is not "in charge" nor is scrutinizing their discussions. Of course, the small groups must record their ideas, thus the need for large easel pads of paper and plenty of magic markers. (Since the sheets of paper will usually wind up on the walls for everyone else to see, it is helpful to have blue painter's tape handy to rescue sheets that won't stick on the walls of their own accord.) That said, even during small-group brainstorming, my habit is to visit each table randomly, listen to the conversation, and, judiciously, interject if I think the ideas have gone too far off the rails.

Remember that if you are the leader, you are also setting the tone for the session. As much as it is crucial for repository heads to listen and empower, it is equally important for them to be visionary leaders. "Many managers seek consensus, which is a determination of what the group wants.... Leaders, by contrast, do not seek consensus. They build it by persuading others to share their goals and their dreams.” Building consensus encompasses the process of empowerment of others while exercising leadership and vision. It is a delicate balancing act, to be sure. But it mandates certain behaviors by the archives director during strategic planning-listening intently, encouraging others to express their views (their goals as well as their frustrations), but also being a distinct voice within the planning activities, expressing his or her own vision and goals, not as edicts but as thoughtful, refined, and nuanced suggestions and even directions. Directions need not be determinative, such as "we will adopt this as a goal," but rather by way of establishing parameters and informing participants of the immovable objects in the way of certain proposals, such as "that goal requires X dollars more than our budget can sustain" or "I've already spoken to the dean of libraries about that, and it's a no-go."

Given the very real importance of the strategic planning process, it can easily become a tense, humorless, "everybody stay focused" atmosphere, and while a large amount of focus is necessary, it will make the day much less of a "have to" and much more of a "want to" if participants can assume it's all right to not take the situation too seriously. As the leader of the planning activity, you can set a good example by including a joke or two at the beginning-remember Dilbert and Mike Tyson if you cannot find other cartoons or witticisms in your background research. Or consider the advice of one consultant: to begin a strategic planning session wearing Donald Duck glasses, and requiring all the other participants to wear them as well. The idea is to undermine any tendency toward a situation where "Everyone thinks only his or her own ideas are right" and instead assist participants to "communicate well, produce their most innovative ideas, and be flexible and open to new ways of thinking." Humor, deftly used, can help achieve such an outcome.

A strategic planning facilitator must also be wary of the discussion veering into a "bitch session," with complaint following complaint about anything from lack of resources to perceived paucity of cooperation from other units to internal communication failures. While it is of course germane to address some of these complaints (or, more charitably, concerns), they cannot be permitted to dominate the activities or the discussions. Such threads must be diffused or shunted gently but firmly, with the admonition that this process is meant to identify forward-looking accomplishments, not to chew over old grievances or make futile declarations of defiance or quixotic demands. I have yet to lead a strategic planning session where concerns could not be deftly or directly turned to more positive discussions. (If you're in a real jam, it may be time to break out the Donald Duck glasses!23) The vast majority of participants do want to help the repository succeed in defining goals that will help it succeed in the coming three to five years.

RESULTS

If one takes seriously the importance of developing SMART goals (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time bound), assessing the success of strategic planning is relatively straightforward. Your administration may ask for, or you may take the initiative and submit, an assessment of progress toward the goals, which might look something like this, from a 2007 report to our provost about our 2004-2009 strategic plan:

Section 2.b. Implementation of AHC's Own 2004-09 Academic Plan:

1. Create a clear, comprehensive, and sustainable collecting policy [¾ complete]-including clarification of responsibility for the Hebard Collection [complete] and art collections [in process].

2. Eliminate the backlog of manuscript collections that are completely uncatalogued [complete], and reduce the backlog of collections not cataloged on-line to 40% (by volume) by 2009, by increasing the pace of processing, by concerted reappraisal and deaccessioning, and by active solicitation of grant funding.

3. Eliminate leaks_ and improve security in the Centennial Complex. [In process: ½ of security needs addressed; ¼ of leak problems addressed; pending projects should address ½ to¾ of remaining leak problems.]

4. Lead in efforts to digitize primary source materials, particularly in collaborative projects, to increase the amount of scholarly content available worldwide on the Web. [Complete: contributed to new standards for "archival" digitization through Collaborative Digitization Project; participant in collaborative grant to place collection finding aids on the Web; participant in collaborative grant to create standards for and place 200 hours of digitized historical audio on the Web; partner in newly submitted grant to establish standards for digitizing oversized documents.

5. Raise private funds to fully endow sufficient faculty positions to maintain present staffing. [Unsuccessful: One fall-time soft-money position eliminated; two others extended with new grants}.

Note that the assessments are reasonably specific as to percentage of goal achieved to date, as well as to explanations for failure to achieve a particular goal. In the case of unachieved goals, an important conversation during strategic planning is whether to re-adopt those goals (that is, whether circumstances have or are likely to change sufficiently to now make achieving the goals reasonable) or jettison them.

As a matter of course in our strategic planning process, a draft is submitted to the provost to ensure that our unit's goals are in line with the university's much broader strategic plan; the submission must be in time for the administration to send back comments, if they have any, to be incorporated into the final draft of the unit's plan. However, the unit's plan should have been developed against the backdrop of the university or the parent organization's plan; if so, it is unlikely that the administration will find much to critique. In fact, if the repository's goals are well enough in sync with that of the home unit, it is at least possible and perhaps likely that one or more of the archives' planning goals will find a place in the larger strategic plan. And if the plan is developed with participation from all or a significant subgroup of staff, there should be little worry about its acceptance by the archives' employees. We have always made our strategic plans publicly accessible on our website24 and have yet to receive any public or other constituent comments.

LESSONS LEARNED

Our approach to creating a strategic plan has evolved over the course of my tenure as director. The first strategic plan I oversaw was developed in 2003 to begin in 2004; this process began less than a year after my arrival at AHC. That planning process was influenced by the fortunate coincidence of a graduate student in the College of Education wishing to do a survey of center staff to determine their attitudes toward UW administration, AHC management, and AHC culture. The results of the survey were eye-opening for me and defined the parameters of some of our discussions during strategic planning. For example, the survey indicated a deeply ingrained culture of paranoia and defeatism among the staff, so I made all the reasons the center had to be proud and enthusiastic a continuous thread throughout the day of our planning retreat. (As I had occasion to state in another context, "We need to stop focusing on what we do not have and start envisioning and leading toward what we can have for our collections, our institutions, and our profession.”) A SWOT analysis dominated the day, and after prioritizing those results we broke into small groups to evolve the SWOT results into plan priorities, needs, accomplishments, and cuts.

The next strategic planning process, in 2008, shows a slight evolution in our approach. In 2003 we spent four and a half hours on SWOT and two hours on defining goals. We had tackled creating a mission and vision statement during a previous half-day mini-retreat held on the repository premises. For the 2008 retreat, we included an hour for considering revisions to the mission and vision statements, three hours performing SWOT analysis, and two hours establishing goals. Both agendas produced what I most needed: a strong sense of staff perceptions and priorities, a wealth of specific goals (with no prioritization), and a legitimate feeling of buy-in by the employees. As I (and sometimes our management team) massaged this wealth of potential strategic objectives into 8-10 formal targets, I continued to give the staff opportunities for feedback, particularly at subsequent all-staff meetings. When the final plan was circulated, nobody was surprised and almost everybody could see something in the strategy to which they had contributed. We also submitted the first full draft to the provost, for his comments and suggestions, and if we received significant remarks these too (though sometimes as precis rather than the original language) were circulated to the staff for their understanding and consideration. ·

'This year (2013), we followed the agenda shown in textbox 13.2, which was quite different from the previous two iterations. We decided to do much of the SWOT activities during two of our monthly all-staff meetings (90 minutes during the first Monday of each month). Moreover, because of a great deal of discussion during the previous four years about AHC management and culture, I elected to ask the employees to complete-several weeks prior to the retreat-a part of a survey (as shown m textbox 13.1) found in a library management article focused on perceptions of younger employees (but extensible to staff of any age). The survey is used to solicit "preferred leadership style, your values, and your experience in your work environment." The participants also completed an advocacy exercise from the SAA. ('This too aimed to produce concrete conclusions that might find themselves m the strategic plan.) Only time will tell, of course, if this revision of the agenda and the workflow will produce a SMART strategic plan.

CONCLUSION

One measure of success in the manner strategic planning is implemented at our university is for a unit to define in its own strategic plan - one or more goals broadly important enough for the provost to consider including that goal in the parallel university plan. 'This is important not because a failure to succeed in doing so is a failure of the repository's plan, but because success further raises the visibility and significance of the archives within the larger academic community (and beyond, given that the school's plan is distributed far and wide, including to. the late' s legislators and to major donors). Success can also mean university resources are made accessible to the repository. In UW's last strategic plan, the AHC was included as a vital component of the university's commitment to Wyoming and the Rocky Mountain West, and was recognized_ as holding important and irreplaceable source for study of the West, which rationale led to a university-wide goal of finally addressing the center s building leaks-to the tune of $2 million! (That repair is underway as I write this, June 2013.) There are many aphorisms associated with strategic planning with which this case study could conclude:

• Increase your mental flexibility.

• Approach problems with curiosity and open-mindedness.

• Think positively when faced with obstacles.

These could go on ad infinitum.

Strategic Planning

But instead let's focus on more down-to-earth perspectives." Strategic planning and strategic thinking are tools (never ends in themselves) for critically analyzing current environments and the unit's place within them and for thoughtfully assessing the short-term future and how the stasis or evolution of internal resources will intersect with certain-to-change conditions. One can creatively engage this challenge or be paralyzed by it, shoulder the realities or threaten to hold your breath and turn blue unless the parent institution solves all problems with extensive new funding or staff.

I began with two cartoon captions, let me end the same way, though with a more "let's laugh with them rather than at them" slant. One member of a strategic planning breakout group, to the others: "Not to be a wet blanket, but I'm not sure our ... strategy should include 'any plan that's just crazy enough to work"'; boss to consultant hired to lead strategic planning process: "We're looking for a bold and innovative solution, but I'd settle for a way out of this mess.” Strategic plans are a set of flexible parameters rather than a constrictive path; they are pragmatic approaches to clear-headed evaluation of current realities and "likely futures- a way out of and a way to avoid messes. With such a mind-set, challenges can be effectively addressed as a result of effective strategic planning. So there, Scott Adams.