Developing and Administering Strategic Plans - bu. Public 70,400/56,600 Research Universities (very

download Developing and Administering Strategic Plans - bu. Public 70,400/56,600 Research Universities (very

of 19

  • date post

    19-Oct-2019
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    0
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Developing and Administering Strategic Plans - bu. Public 70,400/56,600 Research Universities (very

  • UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL

    Developing and Administering Strategic

    Plans Custom Research Brief

    I. Research Methodology

    II. Executive Overview

    III. Overview Table

    IV. Administrative Structures and Strategic Planning Leadership

    V. Engaging Institution Stakeholders

    VI. Implementing a Strategic Plan

    TABLE OF CONTENTS RESEARCH

    ASSOCIATE Laura Nickelhoff

    RESEARCH

    MANAGER Ehui Nyatepe-Coo

    THE ADVISORY BOARD COMPANY WASHINGTON, D.C.

  • II. EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

    2

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

    Project Challenge

    Leadership at a member institution approached the Council with the following questions:

    Project Sources

     Education Advisory Board’s internal and online (www.educationadvisoryboard.com) research libraries

     National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] (http://nces.ed.gov/)

     What organizational structures do other institutions use to develop and maintain strategic plans?

     Which administrators lead the strategic planning process at other institutions?

     How do other institutions effectively engage campus and external stakeholders such as faculty, staff, and students in the planning process?

     Do other institutions align the reaccreditation and strategic planning processes?

     Who is responsible for implementing and maintaining strategic plans once they are created,

    and how do other institutions measure the progress of the plan’s initiatives?

    http://www.educationadvisoryboard.com/ http://nces.ed.gov/

  • II. EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

    3

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

    Research Parameters

    The Council targeted its outreach to administrators responsible for strategic planning at large research

    universities across the United States.

    A Guide to the Institutions Profiled in this Brief

    Institution Location Type

    Approximate

    Enrollment

    (total/undergraduate)

    Classification

    University A West 4-year,

    Public 70,400/56,600

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University B Northeast 4-year,

    Private 20,900/13,900

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University C South 4-year,

    Private 13,400/7,200

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University D Midwest 4-year,

    Public 21,100/18,300

    Doctoral/Research

    Universities

    University E Midwest 4-year,

    Public 42,500/32,400

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University F Midwest 4-year,

    Private 20,500/9,500

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University G Midwest 4-year,

    Public 29,500/21,200

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University H South 4-year,

    Public 24,400/15,600

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    University I Midwest 4-year,

    Public 42,200/30,200

    Research Universities

    (very high research

    activity)

    Source: National Center for Education Statistics

  • II. EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

    4

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

    Key Observations

     Contacts recommend that senior administrators lead the strategic planning process to promote engagement in the process across the campus community. Senior leadership’s management of the

    strategic plan typically signifies that the finalized plan will truly impact institutional goals and

    priorities. Faculty, staff, and students are more likely to participate in a planning process if they know

    that initiatives proposed in the plan will ultimately be funded and implemented.

     Although administrators in charge of academic affairs typically play a central role in the planning process, several institutions also include finance or budget administrators in the

    planning process. Contacts emphasize that streamlining academic and financial planning is

    important because it ensures that adequate financial resources will be available to enact the priorities

    of the strategic plan. Contacts suggest that incorporating fundraising initiatives in the strategic plan

    helps to provide adequate financial resources to implement the plan.

     Institution-specific characteristics and history inform the scope of the strategic planning process. At institutions that use a responsibility centered management fiscal system where

    departments and colleges have financial autonomy, the lack of centrally managed financial

    resources makes it difficult to implement the initiatives of an institution-wide strategic plan.

    Although reaccreditation and strategic planning processes typically occur independently,

    contacts recommend coordinating the two processes. Contacts report that reaccreditation is

    typically a natural precursor to strategic planning and offers administrators an opportunity for

    institutional self-study.

     Contacts emphasize the importance of creating a transparent strategic planning process by providing all campus stakeholders with opportunities to view and comment on drafts of the

    plan. Contacts report that faculty, staff, and students are more accepting of a strategic plan when they

    are involved in its creation. Contact institutions engage campus stakeholders through inclusion on

    committees, live and virtual discussion forums, meetings with campus groups, and surveys. Contacts

    stress that administrators’ willingness to publish unrefined drafts of the plan increases the success of

    the process because it engages the public and allows stakeholders to offer insights, comments, and

    constructive criticism.

     Administrators overseeing strategic planning typically invite feedback from the Board of Trustees and other external stakeholders, such as local government agencies, during the

    planning process. Contacts recommend that drafts of the strategic plan be presented to the Board of

    Trustees to ensure that the plan aligns with the vision, goals, and priorities of an institution.

    Administrators at several contact institutions hold formal discussions with board members to facilitate

    a detailed and thoughtful discussion about the strategic plan. Additionally, planning leaders at contact

    institutions also hold meetings with city and county government officials to incorporate external

    perspectives into the strategic plan.

     Contact institutions use a variety of methods to oversee and implement the initiatives proposed in a strategic plan. Administrators of strategic plans typically delegate responsibility for plan

    maintenance to academic affairs administrators, although at some institutions, members of the

    strategic planning steering committee or the finance and budget office implement the initiatives of the

    plan.

  • II. EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

    5

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

     Contacts report that though college- and department-level academic plans do not formally align with an institution’s central strategic plan, strategic planning at the institution level provides a

    loose framework for academic planning within colleges. Contacts note that the annual budgeting

    process also streamlines institution-wide and department-level planning by allocating additional funds

    to department-level efforts that promote institutional priorities such as globalization or

    interdisciplinary work.

  • III. SUMMARY TABLE

    6

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

    F: Office or constituent group is formally engaged in the strategic planning process by assuming leadership positions, serving on committees, etc.

    I: Office or constituent group is informally engaged in the strategic planning process and may provide input during the drafting state of a strategic

    plan.

    Y: Accreditation is formally aligned with the strategic planning process through intended coordination of the two processes.

    X: Accreditation and strategic planning operate simultaneously although the two processes are not formally aligned.

    Institution Charge Provost Finance/

    Budget

    Institutional

    Research

    Student

    Affairs

    University

    Advance-

    ment

    Health

    Affairs Faculty Staff Students Alumni

    Accredi

    tation

    University A President F F

    University B Provost F F

    University C Provost F F F I I I

    University D President F F F F F I I I

    University E

    No

    Centralized

    Plan

    University F Provost F I F F F X

    University G President F F F F

    University H President F F F I I I

    University I Provost F I I I F I I I Y

  • IV. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURES AND PLANNING

    LEADERSHIP

    7

    © 2011 The Advisory Board Company

    Administrative Leadership of Strategic Pl