Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ---- <br /> e there has been a reawakening of interest on the part of the public sector in <br /> strategic planning. He said that governmental strategic planning should be <br /> judged by different standards than private strategic planning. Additionally, <br /> the strategic planning process must be custom-tailored to each jurisdiction. <br /> The amount of time required to complete the process varies widely; the pro- <br /> cess is often messy, and subject to fits and starts. Dr. Luke said that if <br /> strategic planning is pushed too fast, people are pushed out of the process. <br /> Ms. Hawkins asked how long a period of time a strategic plan was useful. Dr. <br /> Luke responded that it depended on how fast the environment changed; it could <br /> be as little as six months or as long as six years. He recommended that the <br /> planning period be limited to five to ten years. He stressed that the fur- <br /> ther out the planning period extends, the weaker the plan assumptions are. <br /> It was best to revisit the plan every two to three years. Dr. Luke said the <br /> purpose of the process was not to develop a plan but rather to develop stra- <br /> tegic thinking and action. <br /> Dr. Luke said successful completion of the strategic planning process will <br /> require a powerful process sponsor, such as the Mayor and key outside stake- <br /> holders, to provide the plan with political legitimacy. Additionally, there <br /> must be champions of the process on the inside working daily to keep the <br /> process vital and moving ahead. Dr. Luke recommended that there be more than <br /> one process champion. <br /> Dr. Luke said that the process also requires a strategic planning team. He <br /> added that the team should be assembled carefully; members must be good man- <br /> e agers, good thinkers, and good "doers." He said the members of the planning <br /> team are often required to process raw data for consumption by a larger audi- <br /> ence. He indicated that the process champion sits on the team, perhaps as <br /> chair. Dr. Luke stressed that it should be clear to those participating on <br /> the team that they should expect disruptions and delays in the process. The <br /> process is not clean or simple. He said that the participants must also be <br /> willing to be flexible regarding what constitutes a strategic plan, as well <br /> as willing to consider and construct arguments geared to many different cri- <br /> teria. Dr. Luke pointed out that there is a wide variety of stakeholders in <br /> the public sector, each with their own criteria. He said that an open pro- <br /> cess must consider all points of view. <br /> Dr. Luke distributed samples of plans developed by other government entities. <br /> Dr. Luke discussed the differences between strategic and operational plan- <br /> ning. He said that strategic planning has a long time frame and a strong <br /> external focus. The theory behind strategic planning was "doing the right <br /> things," rather than "doing things right," as in operational planning. <br /> Mr. Boles asked Dr. Luke to expand on the difference between assigning prior- <br /> ities and assigning resources, which he maintained were intertwined. Dr. <br /> Luke agreed, but said that one must assign priorities before one assigns <br /> resources to achieve those priorities. He termed it as a "goals versus <br /> means" approach. Mr. Boles asked if priorities were assigned without consid- <br /> eration of resources. Dr. Luke responded that strategic planning tries to <br /> e MINUTES--Strategic Plan Committee November 1, 1990 Page 2 <br />