Carter McNamara – Page 16 – Management Library

September 3, 2010September 25, 2022

Coaching Your Top Performers

I recently watched a documentary on TV about the finalists in the 2009 international Van Cliburn piano competition held every four years in Fort Worth, Texas. These young virtuosos were incredibly talented, the best pianists in the world from many countries including the U.S., Japan, Russia, China, Italy, South Korea, and Bulgaria. Extraordinarily competitive, hard working, and driven to be the very best, these world class musicians are top performers. And they thrive on performing, practice, coaching and feedback.

We have all known top performers. Some of us have even been top performers at one point or another. Top performers, such as the Van Cliburn pianists, your top salespeople, or a rising star with “hi-potential,” can benefit by coaching as much as anyone. Perhaps even more so if you look at the parallel to the world’s top athletes, e.g. Olympians. Every skier, skater, swimmer and diver that competes in the Olympics has a coach and receives coaching. Although these athletes are the very best in their respective sports, they are driven to stay on top, to enhance their performance, to learn new things, and to stay mentally tough and focused. So they “get” the value of coaching.

In business organizations, Managers are often at a loss as to how to coach these “stars,” especially those that seem arrogant and immune to influence and change. Yet those employees need coaching as much as anyone. The key is to understand them, especially their needs and drives. And apply such principles as:

Communicate and Connect – The only way to know what your top performer needs is to connect with her and open a channel of honest communication between you. Get to know the top performer. Learn about her goals. Ask how you can support her. Build trust.

Ask for their ideas – Top performers get to the top by consistently delivering superior results. They are also constantly improving what they do. Seek their ideas for improvement. When you are faced with a thorny problem that has no obvious solution, ask the top performer for their thoughts.

Utilize their capabilities – If there is one thing that top performers hate, it is to be under-utilized. Challenge them and push them. Keep raising the bar.

Show your appreciation – Do you want to retain your top performer? If so, let them know you appreciate them and the contribution they make to the team and to the organization.

Expose them to new – Top performers love to learn new ways, especially if they sense that the new approach will enable them to stay at the top in their field.

Recently on LinkedIn, someone asked: What do you do if a top performer is resistant to being coached? Should you simply get out of the top performer’s way? Should you “carry water” for them? Cater to them in order to keep them happy and prevent their jumping ship?

There is always a need for coaching, in my mind. But it’s vital to assess what the performer most needs. Without a clear and agreed upon need, this star performer may just get irritated with you. And they may resist your coaching. Ask yourself: Could the behavior that seems to signal “resistance” be something else? Could it be impatience? Could it be arrogance? Maybe the performer is unconvinced that the coach has anything of value to offer.

Coming back to the Van Cliburn winners, the three medalists were selected from 12 finalists. As the documentary unfolded, the filmmakers gave us a profile of each competitor. While nearly all fit the profile outlined above, there were a couple who did not. Yes, they were incredibly talented and Olympian in stature on the world classical music stage. But they were full of themselves. They wouldn’t listen. They were resistant to coaching. And they lost.

For more resources, see the Library topic Personal and Professional Coaching.

August 3, 2010February 22, 2022

Board Leadership, Bold and Brave

This is a guest post from Steven R Roberts

Non-Profit Boards, charities, foundations must fight to establish a brand and a following. Therefore they must be led boldly or their missions will have little chance of being fulfilled. After chairing several non-profit boards, and being on a couple of for-profit boards, in the past twenty-five years, I believe the keys to leading effective non-profit boards are:

First, Board leadership must determine why members have joined the board. I’ve found that BOD members have two reasons for agreeing to be on a board; the first group has some degree of passion for the organization’s Mission and the second group, while willing to participate in board work, is satisfied that membership looks good on their resume and facilitates networking.

In appointing officers and developing committee assignments the chairman is well served to appoint those with a passion to the strategic planning, brand management, finance and goal setting tasks. The second group can be better employed in implementing the fund raising goals, managing event tasks and working on committees.

Secondly, members must be trained to rely on the committee system. By that, I mean the committees are the place for research, benchmarking other’s approaches and idea/program development. Committees must bring the answers and proposed actions to the board, not the questions. The questions existed before and that’s why the committees were created. It is very easy for the board (especially ones with eclectic business backgrounds) to dive into the details of the issue and discuss options other than the ones proposed[J1] . This usually results from a lack of thorough committee work or lack of training of the committee/board roles and leads to the board itself becoming a committee. This is counterproductive and doesn’t give the committee members a chance to grow in work ethic and leadership. Long, circular discussions at the board level by members who haven’t studied the issue are frustrating and the reason some good board members quit. “We talk forever and don’t get anything done” is the common refrain in board member exit interviews.[J2]

Thirdly, leadership must be bold and brave. The group’s brand must be aggressively established (Hey, we exist and here’s the reason.), as a means of increasing the understanding of the importance of the mission to board members as well as outside volunteers and donors. Time should be spent developing a clear Mission statement. The organization, profit or non-profit, needs a clear vision, one understood by board members and other supporters, donors and future board members. Leadership must also establish aggressive fund raising goals. Modest fund raising goals and the resultant modest projects don’t get much notice inside or outside the organization. It may be easier for the board members to each write a check and devote their energies to other pursuits.

Fourthly, once aggressive goals have been set, board leadership must train members to work harder (albeit in between regular work and other activities) than they do for their money earning regular jobs. They need to bring the power of their business training and potential networking opportunities to the effort. Many members will grow if they are given total responsibility for projects. Growing an individual’s skills and leadership capabilities is a gift that can be facilitated by giving them responsibility broader than that they have at work and in some cases letting them fail. This simple concept, which applies to for-profit work as well, is covered well in the book Flight of the Buffalo (1993) by James Belasco and Ralph Stayer, including many examples and ideas on how to successfully empower employees[J3] .

Finally, the fifth key to effective non-profit boards is that funds, especially early funds, must be spent on visible projects, those which will in turn be helpful in establishing the group’s brand and establishing the cycle of raising future funds.
———————————————-
Steve Roberts is a business consultant, board chair for the Dearborn (MI) Public Library Foundation – www.dearbornlibraryfoundation.com, and an author – www.steverroberts.com.

[J1]That is how they add value!

[J2]This is a chairman problem – it has nothing to do with the role of cttees which should be set in the Terms Of Reference or Charter) and everything to do with not making decisions.

[J3]Board members aren’t employees!

June 17, 2010February 18, 2022

Are You Doing Strategic Planning? Probably

Strategic planning leading to growth concept

How One Typical Facilitator (Mistakenly) Concluded the Client Wasn’t Doing Strategic Planning

I got a call last week from a facilitator, asking for advice about an aspect of strategic planning. He kept asserting that his client, a manufacturer of outdoor recreational equipment, wasn’t doing strategic planning. I asked how he came to that conclusion.

He responded that, first, there was no Plan document that the client could show him. Second, they couldn’t answer his questions about what the client would do if there were changes, e.g., politically or economically, that would influence the client’s organization. The client wasn’t able to come up with a strategy. So the facilitator concluded the client was simply not doing strategic planning.

But Wasn’t the Client Doing Strategic Planning? Really?

I began asking questions in order to understand more about the client so I could give good advice to the facilitator about his strategic planning project. From the questions, I learned that the client:

Realized the “baby boomer bubble” was getting older, so he’d need to update his product line accordingly, perhaps to accommodate the “young old” (people from 60-80 years of age).
Wanted to reduce his labor costs, perhaps by outsourcing more work, especially to other countries having cheaper labor costs.
Wanted to position his company to be more competitive in the marketplace where there was increasing competition. The client especially wanted to update his unique value proposition.

I asked the facilitator how the client came to realize those priorities. The facilitator mentioned that, although the client doesn’t do planning, he does seem to stay on top of a lot of the current trends in his industry and society, and does have some ideas.

So then I asked the facilitator if the client really was doing a form of strategic planning — it just wasn’t the best form of comprehensive, explicit, research-based and systematic planning that usually is best for an organization.

Yes, the Client Was Doing Strategic Planning — Just Not the Best Planning

At this point in our conversation, the facilitator realized that he had been to quick to conclude that the client simply was not doing planning. He added that he should even affirm to the client that he had been doing planning, and that the facilitator could help the client to do it even better.

Moral of the Story: Don’t Be So Quick to Proclaim Your Clients Aren’t Planning

It seems increasingly with writers and consultants that, if an organization is not doing their particular preferred form of planning, they conclude the organization is not doing planning. (This is true especially as we’ve put for more emphasis on the need to be “strategic” — a term which has different definitions for different people. )

That conclusion can be damaging to the planners and to the working relationship with the client. Instead, recognize and affirm any planning that the client is doing.

What do you think?

(There’s a massive amount of free resources in the Strategic Planning topic in the Free Management Library.)

———————————————————————————————–
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD – Authenticity Consulting, LLC – 800-971-2250
Read my weekly blogs: Boards, Consulting and OD, Nonprofits and Strategic Planning.

June 17, 2010August 18, 2022

Succession Planning: Is It a Staffing Matter? No

Business executives discussing about succession planning

Succession planning is one of the most important topics in nonprofit capacity building. That wasn’t the case even 10 years ago. Today, there’s more people moving from job to job, and a large number of baby boomers retiring. Effectively filling those open positions is critical to the success of the organization.

Unfortunately, succession planning is still done quite poorly — primarily because it’s too often seen as a matter of replacing a person, rather than organizational performance management. Those two perspectives produce very different ways to do succession planning.

(Unfortunately, performance management is too often viewed only as employee performance management, and not as organizational performance management — but that’s another blog post.)

Succession planning is a management function,
not a staffing crisis.

Establish Board-approved, up-to-date personnel policies

They should include guidelines and procedures about, e.g., staffing analysis, hiring, orienting, training and organizing employees; performance management; and compensation and benefits. Those policies not only ensure fair and equitable treatment of employees — they can minimize chances that you’d lose a lawsuit with an employee.

Here’s more about personnel policies.

Conduct relevant and realistic strategic and departmental planning

The planning clarifies the most appropriate priorities for the position to address. A position, or job role, is really a means to get something done in the organization — it’s means to achieve an overall goal or address an overall priority. Why fill a position that was not designed well in the first place? Only through useful planning will the organization know if the position is designed well.

Here’s more about strategic planning.

Conduct staffing analysis to identify most appropriate roles

Too often, job roles are developed in response to recurring crises in the workplace, to an increasing amount of work that is not getting done. Instead, roles should be identified near the end of strategic planning when clarifying what expertise is needed to achieve goals. The analysis should produce up-to-date, relevant job descriptions. (There are many who assert that job descriptions are no longer a useful management tool — that’s another blog post.)

Here’s more information about staffing analysis.

Use suitable practices of employee performance management

These practices should be done regardless of whether the employee is leaving or not. They include:

Establishing performance goals in reference to the employee’s job description and priorities for the year
Techniques for effective delegation, not just work direction
Getting up-to-date descriptions from the employee about his priorities, issues, plans, etc.
Sharing useful feedback to continue to enhance the employee’s performance
Addressing performance issues when they occur (they might require training, providing more resources, getting more from the employee or firing the employee)

Here’s more about employee performance management.

Making sure all employees go on vacation

That forces the organization to learn about — and be able to do — the jobs when the employees are gone. A supervisor might not really know what his employees are actually doing to get the job done. Ironically, the better the supervisor is at delegating, the less the supervisor might know about the details of his employee’s job.

Succession planning is about developing and implementing a system, a practice of activities on a recurring basis. Then, when an employee leaves, the system almost naturally refills the position with the most suitable candidate.

Here’s more resources about succession planning.

What do you think?

——————

For more resources, see our Library topic Nonprofit Capacity Building.

June 17, 2010August 18, 2022

How “Disconnected Conversations” Can Kill Consulting and Collaboration

A disconnected conversation between two work colleagues

Here’s an Example of a Disconnected Conversation

A couple of weeks ago, a friend of mine and I were talking about a particular consulting project. We just weren’t connecting in our conversation somehow — I kept repeating my points and he kept repeating his. It felt like we were disagreeing somehow, but neither of us were actually saying that we disagreed with the other. Still, we felt increasingly frustrated.

He kept asserting that the client’s CEO needed to show stronger leadership, including by being more participative.

I kept agreeing. I suggested one-on-one with his managers, ensuring time in staff meetings to hear from each manager, and using a technique for consensus when making decisions.

My friend didn’t seem convinced — and seemed even more frustrated. He asserted that the CEO needs to read “Servant Leadership” by Robert Greenleaf. I agreed.

My friend asserted that the CEO needs to do a better job of bringing out the best in his people. I agreed.

Results Versus Methods — We Should Talk About Both

Finally, it hit me — my friend was talking about overall outcomes, and I was talking about activities to achieve those outcomes. Although we both wanted the same thing, we were focusing on different aspects of that result.

I find this type of disconnected conversation occurs more than we realize, especially about grand topics, such as leadership, accountability, transparency and performance.

It’s most powerful and poignant to talk about outcomes. It can be boring and even tedious to talk about methods to achieve those outcomes.

But we owe it to our clients and ourselves to go beyond preaching at them about outcomes. That can get that from reading a book. We owe it to them to produce some relevant and realistic ideas about how to achieve those outcomes.

What do you think?

—————————

For more resources, see the Library topics Consulting and Organizational Development.

June 14, 2010August 18, 2022

Meatloaf or Tartare?

I recently encountered an organization that’s on the cusp of a big change … a change about which its huge constituency is feeling a bit uncertain.

The agency has never had a chief executive, and that’s part of the new picture that has some supporters skeptical. After all, things have gone okay without one, why spend the money on another administrator?

Like the Chinese symbol for “crisis,” this moment of change represents both opportunity and danger.

On the one hand, bringing in a new leader with energy, ideas, expertise, and commitment could take this organization to a new level of efficacy and service.

On the other hand, just bringing someone in for this new position is stretching the comfort zone of many important supporters.

So, what’s a Board to do?

In the lifecycles of a nonprofit organization, it’s critical that the mindset of the board and the chief executive are in sync about where the organization should be heading … and more critically, how fast it should be heading there.

Many board/executive marriages get off to a rocky start when the board looks to engage the type of leader they “think” they want rather than what they REALLY want or are comfortable with.

In other words, a board that is in “maintenance” mode – that is, it is seeking to promote the stability of the organization to a nervous constituency – should recognize that bringing on a passionate innovator at that moment in its organizational development may actually impede the agency’s progress.

The same is true of a nonprofit in which the board is ready to significantly advance the mission, operations, or reach of the organization, but chooses an executive counterpart that is risk- or innovation-averse.

Like the marriage between the big-time biker and America’s sweetheart, at some point, something’s going to give, and it’s the organization, ultimately, that will suffer from the strain.

All ground beef is not created equal. Don’t order steak tartare if what you REALLY want is meatloaf … and vice-versa.

Fare well, and farewell until next week …

——————

For more resources, see our Library topic Nonprofit Capacity Building.

——————

June 10, 2010February 10, 2023

Different Domains of Leadership and Skills Needed in Each

The text "skills" written on a black background

We often generalize leadership and skills to be the same traits needed all the time and everywhere by all leaders. Is leadership really that simple? Let’s look at different domains of leadership and the different skills that are needed in each.

Leading Yourself

To effectively lead yourself, useful skills are, for example:

physical fitness
decision making and problem solving
critical thinking
setting personal goals
prioritizing
time and stress management
self-coaching
emotional intelligence
motivating yourself
work-life balance

Here’s many resources about leading yourself.

Leading Others Individuals

To effectively lead others, you need to effectively lead yourself and have additional skills, for example:

Coaching
Counseling (basic)
Feedback
Listening
Questioning
Understanding body language
Delegating
Directing

Here’s many resources about leading others.

Leading Groups/Teams

To effectively lead groups or teams, you need skills to lead others and have additional skills, for example:

Agenda design
Facilitation
Consensus building
Group decision making and problem solving
Meeting management

Here’s many resources about leading groups and teams.

Leading Organizations

To effectively lead organizations, you need skills to lead yourself, other individuals and teams, along with skills, for example:

Strategic planning
Business planning
Organizational development and change
At least one organizational performance model, for example, Balanced Scorecard or strategic management

Here’s many resources about leading organizations.

So when identifying necessary skills in leadership, it’s not enough to imagine a long list of wondrous traits. Leadership is much more situational than that.

What do you think?

—————————————————————————-
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD – Authenticity Consulting, LLC – 800-971-2250
Read my weekly blogs: Boards, Consulting and OD, Nonprofits and Strategic Planning.

June 10, 2010August 18, 2022

7 Options for “Success” in Consulting Projects

As a consultant, your perception of project “success” is the basis from which your client and you conclude, for example, whether the project is of high quality, that money paid to you was well spent, that you did a good job as a consultant, and whether you might be hired again (if you are an external consultant). Early in the project, it is important for you and your client to discuss how to determine the success of the project.

Unfortunately, determining whether a project was successful or not is not nearly as easy as it might seem because there are numerous perspectives on what is project “success.” Therefore, it is important to consider all of these perspectives, especially about a complex – and usually changing – project

Consider the following possible definitions of what might be considered as “success” in your consulting project, and work with your client to select one or more.

Definition of Success #1: Desired outcomes and results listed in the project agreement are achieved.

Both you and your client should somehow specify the overall results that the project is to achieve. Ideally, the results are described in terms such that you both could readily discern if the results were achieved or not. This outcome is often a measure as to whether the project was successful or not.

Definition of Success #2: The client’s problem is solved.

More times than people realize, the originally specified project results have little to do with actually solving the most important problem in your client’s organization. That occurs because, as you and your client work together to examine and address their overall problem, you both realize that there is a more important problem to address. At that time, it is wise to change your project plans if both of you agree. Discuss the new results that you prefer and how you will know whether or not they are achieved.

Still, later on, your client might believe that any agreed-to results that were achieved from the project were not as important as addressing any current, unsolved problems, so your client might still conclude that the project was not as successful as it should have been. Or, your client might believe that any achieved results were actually more useful than addressing the original problem that you discussed, so your client might still conclude that the project was highly successful.

Definition of Success #3: The project is finished on time and within budget.

Often, your client has limited resources in terms of money and time. Therefore, any project that did not require more time and money than expected might be considered successful. That might be true, especially if your client has the philosophy that there are always problems to be solved in any organization and that the project was done as best as could be done.

Definition of Success #4: You and your client maintain a high-quality, working relationship.

The quality of your relationship with your client is often directly associated with what the client perceives to be the quality of the project. In a highly collaborative approach to consulting, you want your relationship with your client to be as open, honest and trusting as possible. The nature of the relationship supports your client’s strong, ongoing commitment and participation in the project itself, which, in turn, helps to ensure that the project effectively addresses problems in their organization.

Definition of Success #5: Your client learns to address similar problems by themselves in the future.

This outcome should be one of the major goals for any consultant. However, the exact nature of the problem may never arise in the client’s organization again, so it is often difficult to assess if the client has learned to solve that problem. Also, few consultants are willing to scope a project to the time required to assess whether a client really can solve the same type of problem in the future.

Definition of Success #6: Your client says that they would hire you again (if you are an external consultant).

One of the most powerful outcomes is that you both are willing to work with each other again. One of the ethical considerations for any consultant is to avoid creating a dependency of the client on the consultant – where the client cannot capably participate in the organization without the ongoing services of the consultant.

However, it is not uncommon that the client strongly believes that the quality of the relationship with the consultant is as important as the consultant’s expertise. The client might choose to use that consultant wherever and whenever they can in the future.

Definition of Success #7: You get paid in full.

However, you might feel good about the quality and progress of a project only to conclude, later on, if you have not been paid as promised, that the project was not successful.

—————————

For more resources, see the Library topics Consulting and Organizational Development.

(This blog post was adapted from the Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development by Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD, Authenticity Consulting, LLC

What do you think?

———————————————————————————————–
Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD – Authenticity Consulting, LLC – 763-971-8890
Read my weekly blogs: Boards, Consulting and OD, Nonprofits and Strategic Planning.

June 10, 2010February 18, 2022

How to Improve a Board By Understanding the System of a Board

Recent Breakthrough in Development: Systems Thinking

One of the recent breakthroughs in organizational and management development is the ability to understand organizations and each of the various functions in them as a system. Each of the functions, such as Boards, planning, leadership, management, marketing, sales and finances is a system. Each of these functions is also a subsystem in the overall system of the organization.

Our understanding of systems helps us to be much more effective in “diagnosing,” including to identify causes versus symptoms in order to improve the organization or any of its functions.

What is a System (Inputs, Processes, Outputs)?

A system is an ongoing series of activities focused on achieving an overall purpose. It has various subsystems, each of which is connected and aligned to achieve that overall purpose. For example a car is a system, but a pile of sand is not.

Systems have various inputs which are processed to produce various outputs. The inputs usually come from other systems and the outputs usually are input to other systems, as well. Strong alignment of these systems usually optimizes the performance of the system, as well.

What is the System of a Board of Directors?

Let’s look at the system of a Board of Directors.

Inputs

Typical inputs to Board operations include:

Past evaluation results of Board
Annual calendar of Board activities
Strategic plan
Business plans
Stockholders’ expectations
Laws and regulations on governance
Employees
Best practices on Boards

Processes

The typical recurring processes of a Board can be organized into four stages, including planning the Board, developing the Board, operating the Board and evaluating the Board.

Process: Planning the Board

Develop Board policies and procedures
Update Board member job descriptions
Update the Board organization chart
Develop Board Committee work plans

Process: Developing the Board

Form Board Governance Committee
Recruit new Board members
Provide Board Manual to each
Train members about Boards
Orient members about the organization
Organize members into committees

Process: Operating the Board

Attend meetings
Research, discuss and debate issues/topics
Make motions and decisions
Drive strategic planning
Supervise the CEO
Conduct public relations
Review financials
Declare stock equity and dividends (in for-profits)
Drive fundraising (in nonprofits)

Process: Evaluating the Board

Evaluate each meeting
Evaluate quality of attendance, participation, teamwork, strategic decisions
Evaluate Board operations annually
Develop and implement Board Development Plan

Outputs

Examples of typical outputs or results from Boards include:

Board minutes with decisions
Directives to the CEO
Public speeches
Financial reviews
Board Development Plan
Updated Board policies and procedures

Here are several graphical depictions of a system of a Board. These depictions also are called logic models.

So What About “Diagnosing” the System of a Board?

It’s helpful to “diagnose” the performance of a system by working backwards from the quality of the system’s outputs, then examining each of its recurring processes, and then the quality of the inputs to the system (remember that these inputs often are outputs from another system.) A good Board evaluation would examine at least the occurrence and ideally the quality of the outputs, processes and inputs. Here are several Board evaluations.

Too often, we look primarily at the results, or outputs, of Board operations and then we exhort Board members to improve those results. If we also look at the processes then we can also mention those to members as ideas about how they can improve their results.

It’s beyond the scope of this blog post to go into much more detail about this diagnosis and steps for recovery. See the subtopic Free Complete Toolkit for Boards in the Free Management Library.

What do you think?

(This post was adapted from the book Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development by Carter McNamara, Authenticity Consulting, LLC.)

June 10, 2010February 18, 2022

The Organic Model of Strategic Planning

Hands resting on a laptop on a white desk

What Is an Organic Approach?

Organization and management sciences today are placing a great deal of attention to naturalistic approaches to development. One of the most prominent approaches is called “self-organizing” systems. These are systems that develop primarily according to certain values, rather than according to specific procedures.

Biological systems (people, plants, animals, etc.) are fine examples of self-organizing systems. They might grow in any variety of ways – ways which are rarely sequential in nature. However, these biological systems always develop according to certain key principles or values, such as propagation of their species and self-preservation.

Contrast to the Traditional Approach to Strategic Planning

Contrast that naturalistic, unfolding approach with the traditional approach to strategic planning, which is usually linear, or sequential, in nature. In the traditional approach, planners might:

First identify broad mission, vision and/or values statements
Conduct a situational analysis involving external and internal assessments
Establish broad goals in accordance with the mission and results of the assessments
Identify strategies to achieve those goals (small organizations often skip these strategies)
Develop specific action plans (objectives, schedules, responsibilities and resources) to achieve each of the goals.

This linear approach is not well suited to all types of organizations. Some organizations might prefer a more naturalistic planning process that allows all perspectives and activities in an organization to unfold over time. This planning process might be deemed “organic”, that is, it emerges like that in natural systems, such as plants, animals and people. Some might prefer to call it “holistic.”

What is an Organic Approach to Strategic Planning?

This is a rather unconventional approach to planning – certainly, an approach that some might argue is not strategic at all. However, the value of this approach is that it can match the nature of certain types of organizations much more closely than the traditional, linear approaches. It might even be argued that the linear approaches can even hurt these types of organizations as their members struggle to conform to a planning process that is quite contrary to their nature.

Step #1: Clarify stakeholders’ vision and values

In meetings of perhaps half a day, stakeholders clarify their common vision and values. Here are various methods to clarify vision and values. The types of stakeholders depend on the purpose of the planning. For example, neighborhood development planning might include members of the neighborhood, potential funders and community leaders.

Step #2: Each person establishes personal action plan

At tables of 4-6 people each, each person identifies a relevant and realistic action that he/she can take, and by when, in order to work toward the vision and according to the values. Actions might be derived from telling stories about “the best time that we …” or “my wish is that …” This approach is well developed in the emerging field of appreciative inquiry.

Step #3: Each person reports results of actions; all update vision and values

In the next meeting, at each table, each person reports the results of his/her actions, including progress toward the vision and any learnings that he/she gleaned. After each person has reported, a spokesperson for that table shares a summary of the actions and learnings with the entire group.

The group can use the same process used in Step #1 to update the vision and values based on the results of the actions and the associated learnings.

The group repeats steps 2-3 until the group agrees sufficient progress has been made toward the vision.

When Should Organic Strategic Planning Be Considered?

Organic strategic planning might be suited to your planning if one or more of the following is true:

The vision for your organization and its stakeolders applies to a large group of people, and might take a very long time to achieve.
The effort to achieve the vision might involve lots of very diverse people.
The culture of the organization is quite averse to conducting orderly, sequential activities.
The role of vision and values in your organization is extremely important.
The culture of the organization highly values the working from the positive and telling of stories.
If your organization expects funding from investors or donors, it has confidence that it can obtain that funding without presenting a conventional strategic plan document with goals and strategies.

The focus of the process needs to be on the interaction among stakeholders as much, or more, than on achieving certain, specific results.

What do you think?

Here’s many more resources about strategic planning.