Volkwein- Penn State

Strategic Planning vs. Conventional Long Range Planning

Strategic Planning External focus Process oriented- a stream of

decisions by the CEO Dynamic and change oriented Innovation and creativity Vision of the future that

guides decision-making

Conventional Planning Internal focus by the CPO Product oriented- e.g, the

approved Master Plan Emphasizes stability Relies on tried and tested Blueprint for the future that is to

be be carried out

(Meredith, Cope, & Lenning, 1987)

04/18/23 p:/Q&P Presentations/Models & Diagrams/Integrating Planning, Assessement 5 Circles.ppt

Volkwein- Penn State

Planning, Assessment, and Improvement: The Penn State Model

•Identify current state through existing data. •Forecast future trends.•Identify stakeholder needs & wants.

Step 1Where are we now?

Step 2

Develop or renew:vision, mission and goals

Where should we be in the future?

Step 3

•Identify performance indicators that align with mission, vision, & goals to

measure outcomes.

How will we know when we get there?

Step 4

•Identify gaps between where we are now and where we want to be.

How far do we have to go?

Step 5

•Target key processes forimprovement.•Develop action plans toclose the gaps.•Implement action plans.

How do we get there?

  2006 Office of Planning and Institutional Assessment, Penn State University.

Volkwein- Penn State

The Heart of Strategic Planning(Dooris, NDIR #123, 2004)

•In the business world, bettering one’s condition includes capturing market share and improving profits. •In higher education, bettering one’s condition includes hiring

better faculty, recruiting stronger students, upgrading facilities, strengthening academic programs and student services, and acquiring the resources needed to

accomplish these things. •Since most institutions of higher education share similar missions and compete for these same objectives, the “strategic” part of strategic planning involves shaping the institution in ways that will ensure mission attainment by capturing and maintaining a market niche in the competition for resources, faculty, and students. •Thus, strategic planning is more focused on the external environment than on the internal organization.

Volkwein- Penn State

Institution Niche Building

Common Strategies for Capturing Market Share:

In BusinessHigh Quality

Low Cost

Convenient

Special Product

In Higher Education

•Medallion/Name Brand

•Best Buy

•Special Opportunity

•User Friendly/Convenient

Volkwein- Penn State

Strategic Niches

Separate Competitive Markets in higher Education:

National (US News)126 Top Tier Universities

122 Other Universities

110 Top Tier Liberal Arts Colleges

104 Other Lib. Arts Coll.

Regional (US News)•North

•Bachelors•Masters

•South•Bachelors•Masters

•Midwest•Bachelors•Masters

•West•Bachelors•Masters

LocalMost Community Colleges

Volkwein- Penn State

Examples from New York & California

Different within-sector Strategies

Albany & Santa BarbaraBinghamton & Santa Cruz

Buffalo & UCLAStony Brook & Berkeley

City University of NY & San Francisco State

SUNY Albany, U.C. Santa Barbara StrategyBalanced, Rounded Image

Examples: Public = University of Virginia, Fla. State Univ.

Private = Harvard, Stanford, & Cornell University

Maintain Balance Across All Areas

Undergraduate & Graduate Education

Faculty Research & Teaching & Public Service

Student Selectivity & Access

Low Cost & High Quality & medium size

Sciences/Social Sciences/Humanities/Prof Schools

The Faculty & Administrative Culture at Albany has maintained this balance.

Every time the institution has started to tilt out of balance on one of these

dimensions, there has been a faculty governance body or Select Committee or

Mission Task Force that brought Albany back into balance.

SUNY Binghamton, U.C. Santa Cruz Strategy

Public Ivy Image

Successful Models: Public = William & Mary

Private = Dartmouth, Princeton, Rice

Invest in Undergraduate Education

Fewer Students = Selective

Higher Quality

SUNY Stony Brook, U.C. Berkeley Strategy

National Research University Image

Public = Michigan, TexasSuccessful Models:

Invest Heavily in Research & Graduate Education

Recruit Faculty Stars

Private = Johns Hopkins

SUNY Buffalo, UCLA Strategy

More Students

More Resources

Flagship Image

Larger Size

Public = Ohio State, Univ. Nebraska, Penn State

Private = NYU, Boston University, U So.Calif.

Successful Models:

CUNY, S.F. State Strategy

Large, Urban Service University Image

Public = Temple, Wayne State, Cleveland State

Private = Boston U, Howard, Miami U

Examples:

Open Access, Local draw

Address Urban Problems

Volkwein- Penn State

Typical Roles for Institutional Research in the Planning Process (Trainer, NDIR #123, 2004)

• Environmental scanning at the beginning,• Feedback at the end,• Benchmarking against peer competitors, • Analyzing the student admissions pool, • Projecting enrollments and revenues, • Studying salaries and turnover, • Assessing student and alumni outcomes, • Gathering demographic and economic forecasts, • Monitoring the use of space and facilities, • Evaluating the impact of programs and policies,• Developing and tracking key performance indicators & targets

Volkwein- Penn State

The Role of Institutional Research in the Strategic Planning Process

External AnalysisDetermining Need

(scanning, monitoring,forecasting)

Internal AnalysisDetermining Quality(assessing strengths

& weaknesses) Evaluation AnalysisDetermining Effectiveness(Documenting the Results, monitoring performance)

Decision AnalysisDetermining Cost

(The consequences of alternative choices)

Volkwein- Penn State

Institutional MissionEducational Philosophy,

Role and Scope,Goals and Objectives

“Matching Process”

External Needs,Opportunities,and Constraints

Internal Strengthsand Capabilities

Decisions on Programs, Priorities,

Policies, Budgets

Strategic Planning Model(Shirley and Volkwein, 1978)

Volkwein- Penn State

Criteria for Evaluation of Existing and Proposed Programs

Program Evaluation Criteria

QUALITYQuality of FacultyQuality of StudentsQuality of Library HoldingsQuality of Facilities & Equipment

NEEDCentrality to Mission Present Student DemandProjected Student DemandDemand for Graduates Locational AdvantageComparative Advantage

COSTCost/Revenue RelationshipOther Costs and Benefits

Rating Categories

Exceptional, Strong, Adequate, WeakHigh, Medium, LowExcellent, Adequate, InsufficientExcellent, Adequate, Insufficient

Yes, NoHigh, Moderate, LowGrowing, Stable, DecliningHigh, Medium, LowYes, NoYes, No

Good, Adequate, Poor(Listing)

Program Clusters

The Programs to be continued at the current level of activity regarding resource allocation, enrollments and number of faculty.

Existing Programs to be continued but at a reduced level of activity and resources.

Existing programs to be continued but at an increased level of activity and resources.

Programs now in existence to be singled out for further development as areas of excellence.

Programs now in existence that are to be phased out.

New programs to be developed.

Evaluationof

Individual Programs

Volkwein- Penn State

Pros and Cons of Selective vs. “Across-the-Board” Program and Budget Actions

Selective VERSUS Across the Board

Pros

Recognizes prioritiesIs more coherentEconomically more efficientProtects strong and essential programs Maximizes resourcesProtects qualityRecognizes dynamic nature of University and the need for new ventures, and accommodates shifting enrollments

Requires little administrative judgmentUsually perceived as fair and even-handedBased on easily measurable or quantitative actions Less disruption because it leaves organization and people intactRecognizes stabilityPolitically safe

Cons

Requires difficult value judgmentsMore costly in time and energyHurts or benefits a few a lotBreaking of a trust Depletes leadership and administrative capitalHarms morale quickly and then dissipatesMay be seen as drastic action

Avoids facing choices and values and prioritiesHurts or benefits everyone a littleSlow erosion of qualityIs less coherentHampers new venturesHarms morale gradually and lingersPrevents organizational adaption to shifting and new enrollmentsWeakens strong and essential programs in order to maintain other less central ones

Volkwein- Penn State

Volkwein Planning Predictions

Enrollment will Grow & become more diversefueled by population, by increased

participation, and by the increasing connection between Educational credentials and the economy.

Accountability and Attention to Educational Outcomes will increase.

Higher Education Policy will become increasingly research based (i.e., decisions

will be increasingly rational and budgets will be increasingly performance driven).

Volkwein- Penn State

Volkwein Planning Predictions

Economies of scale will favor larger institutions, and smaller campuses will struggle. In general, (with some exceptions) larger colleges and universities are more efficient to run (less administrative cost per student). Larger and better supported institutions (in general with some exceptions) have higher salaries for attracting better faculty and more financial aid for attracting better students.

The most successful colleges and universities (of all sizes) will continue to be those that find a special niche --

They achieve a special identity for particular populations of students, particular areas of faculty expertise, or particular

curricula.