The 7 Principles of Masterful Planning

A sticker saying plan ahead

The Drivers Model is Leadership Strategies’ methodology for strategic planning and the ultimate tool for masterful planning. The Drivers Model process covers seven key principles for masterfully planning any activity. The seven principles are summarized below. Let’s break down each one.

Seven Principles of Masterful Planning
1. Be clear on purpose.
2. Start with an accurate assessment of today.
3. Create a shared vision of success.
4. Identify your critical successful factors and barriers.
5. Define the drivers: your strategies and priorities.
6. Monitor and report results.
7. Have rewards and consequences to build accountability.

1. Be clear on purpose.

With any activity, start with purpose: Why are we doing this? With the house example, our purpose was to find a house that was more suitable to our needs. Purpose always answers the question why.

2. Start with an accurate assessment of where you are today.

You should always start with an accurate assessment of where you are today. Why is that important? Because you may think that you have overcome certain barriers when you really haven’t.
Perhaps an example will illustrate the importance of starting with an accurate picture of today. Let’s say you wanted to drive from Atlanta, in the southeastern United States, to Los Angeles, on the west coast. You would have to drive west to get there. But what if your perception was that you were in Atlanta but, in reality, you were in Seattle also on the west coast. What happens when you drive west? Let’s just say you might end up a little wet, which probably was not part of your vision. So, you may create a compelling vision of where you want to be. However, if you do not clearly define where you are today, you may end up thinking you are outside certain barriers. As a result, you can end up doing the wrong things and not getting the result you want. Therefore, key point number one is that you must start with an accurate assessment of where you are today.

3. Create a shared vision.

Once you have an accurate picture of today, you then create a shared vision. Not just a vision, but a shared vision. You can probably imagine what would have happened if I and my wife had a different vision of the type of home we wanted.

Yes, we would end up getting the house my wife wanted of course! But can you imagine the conflict and struggle along the way? Because we would want different things and would be pulling in different directions, many of the decisions we needed to make along the way would have resulted in a major fight over whose vision would prevail.

By creating a shared vision up front, we have the “fight” only once. Once the vision was created, we would be able to make decisions together in line with achieving that vision.

In many organizations there are entire departments that have different visions of where the organization needs to be. Imagine the chaos when each department goes off in a different direction. And sometimes those different directions are mutually exclusive – if one is successful, the other has to fail. What a waste – all resulting from lack of a shared vision.

4. Identify your critical success factors and barriers.

With that shared vision defined, principle number four is that you then focus on identifying the major barriers to achieving that vision. You ask yourself, “Why haven’t we achieved our vision already? What’s standing in our way? What’s keeping us where we are today?”

Then, you must understand your critical success factors. What’s critical to getting you where you want to be? What are the key conditions which, if you create them, will drive achievement of the vision?

5. Define your drivers.

After identifying your barriers and critical success factors, principle number five is to define your drivers. What are the key strategies that are going to get you to your vision? Remember that the strategies have to address each of the barriers and critical success factors.

6. Monitor.

With principle six, you monitor your progress to keep on track and stay motivated to achieve your vision.

7. Have rewards and consequences to build accountability.

Finally, be sure to have rewards and consequences to build accountability. Even with a monitoring process, if there is no form accountability people quickly learn that it is not essential to perform.

Learn more on strategic planning and the Drivers Model with this helpful tool: A Quick How-To on Strategic Planning

________________________

Certified Master Facilitator Michael Wilkinson is the CEO and Managing Director of Leadership Strategies, Inc., The Facilitation Company and author of the new The Secrets of Facilitation 2nd Edition, The Secrets to Masterful Meetings, and The Executive Guide to Facilitating Strategy. Leadership Strategies is a global leader in facilitation services, providing companies with dynamic professional facilitators who lead executive teams and task forces in areas like strategic planning, issue resolution, process improvement and others. The company is also a leading provider of facilitation training in the United States.

Online Classes for Entrepreneurs

Macbook pro used for online classes

Want to start a small business, but missing some skills? Here’s one option: take some online classes, where you might learn what you need, for a fraction of the time and cost. Improve your business plan AND your business.

There are 100s of web-based business classes, many of them free (open source) or for a small fee. Many are taught through world-class universities, and offer more interactivity than you would get if you attended classes there.

Online Business Classes

Check out a few of them in “What’s Available Online?” Might just be one there for you.

20essentialopencourseinfo

Good luck!

  • Copyright © 2013 Rolfe Larson Associates
  • Social Impact App, find social enterprises nearby and online
  • Venture Forth! endorsed by Paul Newman of Newman’s Own
  • Speaker, Social Enterprise Summit, Minneapolis, May 19-22, 2013

Your Business Plan is About You

Person using a laptop and a note

When considering whether to invest in a company, bankers and venture capitalists look first at the entrepreneur, then at the plan. They invest in people, not plans. It’s not the content of the plan that matters, but rather what it says about the entrepreneur — how she thinks, how she collects confirming and disconfirming data, how she uses it to build a strategy for success, how she builds a team. Continue reading “Your Business Plan is About You”

4 key strategy questions the Drivers Model answers

Drivers model strategy for businesses

As you take on strategy development, a critical step is to ensure that you and your team have a common understanding of the language of strategy and a solid process to carry you through strategy development.

It is important to put the language and process in place early to avoid the confusion, debates and the wasted time that comes from a lack of agreed upon approach and definitions.

The Drivers Model is the tool I have been using for over two decades to provide a robust yet simple method for taking an organization through strategic planning, project planning, program planning and numerous other planning activities.

The Drivers Model is fully scalable and applies to Fortune 500 companies, non-profit organizations and government agencies, as well as an entire enterprise, a business unit, a field office, an individual department, or a work team.

Let’s start with the four key strategy questions the Drivers Model answers.

Question 1: Where are we today?

The Drivers Model focuses on four core strategic questions starting with, “Where are we today?” Start by looking at the current situation’s strengths and weaknesses.

Question 2: Where do we want to be?

After understanding where you are, the next step is to understand where you want to be. In this step, you create your vision of the future.

Question 3: How do we get there?

Once you have created your vision, you are ready to turn to defining your drivers – the actions you will undertake to drive your success. Your drivers have to do two important things. First, the reason you are where you are is because there are certain barriers standing between you and your vision.

Your drivers must break through those barriers. Second, along with overcoming barriers, the drivers must also address the critical success factors (CSFs). The Drivers Model defines CSFs are those key conditions that must be created to achieve the vision.

Question 4: How will we monitor our progress?

Monitoring is critical to ensure that you stay on track. Monitoring also allows you to make adjustments along the way as you learn new information, encounter new barriers or identify other critical success factors. But perhaps most importantly, monitoring keeps you motivated.

Typically, it takes considerable effort to move from where you are today to where you want to be. The monitoring process helps keep your vision in front of you and can give you the continual motivation needed to implement the drivers.

These critical questions provide the foundation of the Drivers Model and guide a group during the strategic planning process. In my book The Executive Guide to Facilitating Strategy, I apply these questions using an example of my wife and me seeking to buy a house. How would you answer these questions if you were considering buying a house?

________________________

Certified Master Facilitator Michael Wilkinson is the CEO and Managing Director of Leadership Strategies, Inc., The Facilitation Company and author of the new The Secrets of Facilitation 2nd Edition, The Secrets to Masterful Meetings, and The Executive Guide to Facilitating Strategy. Leadership Strategies is a global leader in facilitation services, providing companies with dynamic professional facilitators who lead executive teams and task forces in areas like strategic planning, issue resolution, process improvement and others. The company is also a leading provider of facilitation training in the United States.

Issues for a prospective owner director – a dilemma

Businessman burying his face in his palms

Sam is an experienced manager and has worked for over twenty years in his industry. He has also sat on two not for profit boards and enjoys the governance role. Now he has an opportunity to buy an equity stake in a small business that has a product and service for which market demand is growing.

The business has not been growing as quickly as the market and revenue has been pretty flat for the past three years. The current owners are a husband and wife team and are tired; they have run the business for many years and want to retire.

The proposal is that Sam should purchase 40% of the company and take a seat on the board. The existing owners would retain 30% equity each and a shareholders agreement would stipulate that board decisions would require a 70% majority to be agreed. The current board has three members consisting of the owners and an ‘independent’ chairman who is the lawyer and a long-standing friend of the owners. The proposal is that he should remain as “He adds a lot of value and sees things we would miss”.

Sam intends not to work in the company but to be merely a shareholder and director. He has ideas for improving the growth and increasing the value of the company but wants to retain his full time employment in a larger corporation as a security measure. His employer is happy for him to take on a board seat and there is no direct competition between the two companies so Sam would have no conflict of interest; however, Sam’s boss, who is a friend and mentor to Sam, is uneasy and has suggested that Sam could find himself outmanoeuvred in the boardroom and overcharged for his equity. Sam is appreciative of the counsel but believes the shareholder agreement protects his interests. He would like to discuss board dynamics with the current owners but they seem not to be interested as they say the chairman handles all the compliance and they just run the business so there is nothing to worry about.

How should Sam handle this issue?

Many readers of this blog will be familiar with my newsletter The Director’s Dilemma. This newsletter features a real life case study with expert responses containing advice for the protagonist. Many readers of this blog are practicing experts and have valuable advice to offer so, again, we are posting an unpublished case study and inviting YOU to respond.

If you would like to publish your advice on this topic in a global company directors’ newsletter please respond to the dilemma above with approximately 250 words of advice for Peter. Back issues of the newsletter are available at http://www.mclellan.com.au/newsletter.html where you can check out the format and quality.

The newsletters will be compiled into a book. If your advice relates to a legal jurisdiction, the readers will be sophisticated enough to extract the underlying principles and seek detailed legal advice in their own jurisdiction. The first volume of newsletters is published and available at http://www.amazon.com/Dilemmas-Practical-Studies-Company-Directors/dp/1449921965/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1321912637&sr=8-1

What would you advise?

Julie Garland-McLellan has been internationally acclaimed as a leading expert on board governance. See her website atwww.mclellan.com.au or visit her author page athttp://www.amazon.com/Julie-Garland-McLellan/e/B003A3KPUO

There’s a difference: mission v. vision

Man in suit holding a placard of business terms

Two critical components of the Drivers Model are the mission and the vision. When it comes to strategy, do you know the difference between the two? (And, yes, there is a difference!)

Mission

How we at Leadership Strategies define “mission”:

Definition Example (Meeting Planners Association)
Mission A statement of the overall purpose of an organization which describes what you do, for whom you do it and the benefit. To provide a forum for furthering the growth and professionalism of the meetings industry.

A mission statement answers three simple questions:

  1. What do you do?
  2. For whom do you do it?
  3. What is the benefit?

The mission statement above illustrates an excellent example of how a mission statement can answer the three questions in a succinct form.

  1. What do they do? Provide a forum.
  2. What’s the benefit? Furthering growth and professionalism.
  3. Who benefits? The meetings industry.

Vision

Now, let’s contrast the difference between a mission statement and a vision statement.

Definition Example (Meeting Planners Association)
Vision A picture of the “preferred future”; a statement that describes how the future will look if the organization fulfills its mission. To be the place where meeting planners meet.

While a mission explains the overall purpose of the organization – what you do, for whom you do it and the benefit – a vision statement gives the picture of the preferred future. A vision statement answers the question, “If the organization fulfills its mission, what will the future look like?” In other words, the vision is a a statement that describes how the future will look if the organization meets its mission.

So, now that you understand the difference between the mission and the vision, you can appreciate why these two terms are not interchangeable.

________________________

Certified Master Facilitator Michael Wilkinson is the CEO and Managing Director of Leadership Strategies, Inc., The Facilitation Company and author of the new The Secrets of Facilitation 2nd Edition, The Secrets to Masterful Meetings, and The Executive Guide to Facilitating Strategy. Leadership Strategies is a global leader in facilitation services, providing companies with dynamic professional facilitators who lead executive teams and task forces in areas like strategic planning, issue resolution, process improvement and others. The company is also a leading provider of facilitation training in the United States.

51% compliance with the UK Corporate Governance Code

Scrabble tiles spelling the word "rules"

Grant Thornton have issued their annual Corporate Governance Review for 2012; which is a review of the annual reports of the FTSE 350 to analyse their compliance with the UK Corporate Governance Code.

The headline grabbing figure is that full compliance with the Code has hit a plateau, with 51% of the FTSE 350 being in full compliance. However, this initially pessimistic figure hides some very optimistic underlying statistics, including:

  • 44% of those companies that did not comply with the Code are intending to do so next year;
  • 73% of companies provided detailed reasons for their failure to comply (which was up from 69% in 2011);
  • 96% of companies are complying with the new provisions on the annual re-election of directors; and
  • 98% of companies are complying with the provisions relating to triennial external board evaluations.

On the other hand, there is still some considerable room for improvement, including:

  • 25% of chairman gave no information on their board’s governance practises;
  • only 5% of chairman are emphasising how important culture is to an effective governance regime;
  • two thirds of those companies who did not comply with the Code gave the same explanation as the previous year; and
  • nearly 20% of the companies had insufficient NEDs throughout the year.

It is, as always, a very detailed and informative report and I would recommend that anyone with the time, takes the opportunity to read it properly. The full report can be found here.

This article was written by Nick Lindsay of Elemental Cosec, UK process agent and providers ofcompany secretarial services. This article is for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon as specific advice or acted upon without seeking legal advice.

10 Myths About Boards of Directors

Group of businesspeople sitting in a conference room for a board meeting

There are numerous myths that seem to persist about Boards of Directors. Here’s a list of 10 of them.

Myth –The phrase “corporate Boards” conventionally refers to statutory, for-profit Boards. However, statutory nonprofit Boards are Boards of a corporation, too, so they’re both “corporate Boards.”

Myth — A Board of Directors can delegate its fiduciary accountability to another body, for example, to a subcommittee. No, courts have held that the entire Board is always responsible for its fiduciary duties, not a subcommittee.

Myth — The Board Chair is the boss of the Board. No, typically, if a quorum of the Board members wants the Chair gone, then he/she is gone.

Myth — Working Boards are immature Boards. No, many organizations prefer a more hands-on Board. That’s fine, as long as they’re attending to their fiduciary roles, as well.

Myth — To get more engaged Board members, make their experience more pleasurable, e.g., have less Board meetings and bring cookies. No, it’s more effective to continue to expect and demand that members engage.

Myth — All Boards should have term limits. No, in small communities, you’d have to clone people if you have term limits on every Board.

Myth — The Strategic Planning Committee should do all of the planning, too. No, the Committee should be in charge of ensuring a high-quality planning process, but all Board members should be involved in the planning — or in approving the overall Strategy.

Myth — Board members are officially Board members once their names are on the Board minutes or a roster. No, courts discern a person to be a Board member if there’s proof that he/she has been acting like a Board member, e.g., attending meetings and taking part in votes in meetings.

Myth — For-profits Boards and nonprofit Boards are very different. No, most of the nature of their Board operations is the same, other than for-profits attending to shareholders and director compensation (and any rules and regulations for listed/public companies). Nonprofits Boards uniquely attend to volunteers and perhaps fundraising.

Myth — Strategic planning always follows the same process. No, the process should be highly customized to the nature of the organization and to the purpose of the planning.

Also see:

————————————————————————-

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

Different “Schools” of Ethics

Group of hands in a hand-stack in a office

In an earlier life, I taught business ethics. (Most of my undergraduate college credits are in philosophy.) So here’s a very concise overview of the major “school”s of ethics that are often taught in business ethics programs.

Immanuel Kant’s Categorical Imperative (1700s)

Kant asserted that a belief is an ethical principle if, and only if, it applies with everyone all the time everywhere, that is, if the principle should be a universal law. Thus, the Golden Rule might qualify as an ethical principle.

John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism (1800s)

Mill asserted that a belief is an ethical principle if it results in the greatest good for the most people. Thus, some people might belief that an economic strategy to “spread the wealth” is also a highly ethical strategy.

Joseph Fletcher’s Situational Ethics (1900s)

Fletcher also asserted that a moral law depends on the current situation. However, he also asserted a principle should be a moral law only if it contributed to love. Thus, Fletcher’s assertion might have contributed to – or justified – the “free love” movement in the 1960s.

Of course, these descriptions are overly simplistic for the purpose of contrasting the different major “schools” of ethics.

What do you think?

Are there other “schools”?

What beliefs or strategies fall into which school?

———

See the topic Business Ethics in the Free Management Library.

————————————————————————-

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