Strategic Planning Guide For Today's Environment

Recently I was asked to provide some coaching to a small organization relative to strategic thinking and strategic planning. I hesitated but saw the need and importance of the request. It really got me thinking about what my approach had been in the past. Like many, it was very traditional - mission, vision, SWOT analysis and on to goals. Nothing wrong with those concepts and processes. They still work. But I wanted to force myself and the people I was working with to think and act a little differently. This is 2012 for heaven's sake and things have changed a bit. Everything moves faster, people have more information and people's environment is frankly more controlling. That process helped me develop the following outline for a strategic planning process in 2012. I share this short guide here and hope some people can have fun with it.

Where Did We Come From?
A historical perspective needs to be discussed, allowing everyone an opportunity to share their perspectives. This should include a listing of successes, failures and accomplishments recognizing that some parties will view things differently which is the purpose of the discussion. A review of organizational documents should take place to identify operational rules that may need review and clarification. Is everyone on the same page?

Where Are We Right Now?
There needs to be an honest assessment of where the organization, team, unit is right now. Right at this moment. Through honest and open discussion, the group needs to determine the reality of their current operations and environment. This is not the ideal. This is not the vision, hopes and dreams. This is the reality vs the perception. How well are things really working? Items that should be discussed are - communications and interactions among all of the players, technology, functions of units and current identification of projects and goals. This would also include current financial assets and liabilities and sustainability.

Where Do We Want To Be?
This needs to include a discussion of the environmental issues facing the organization - financial, technological, geographic, cultural.  What are people thinking about the goals and development of the organization? Should things stay the same? If not, why not? What would alternate plans or functions look like? Are there organizational rules and operations that would need to change?

That's it. Count on two or three days worth of activity and enjoy!

Depending On Government For Justice

In recent days Governor Andrew Cuomo has proposed  major legislation to protect the most vulnerable citizens in New York State - the elderly, people with disabilities, children and people impacted by substance abuse among others. The protections the Governor seeks are a reaction by the Governor and government to stories of neglect and abuse that appeared over the past year in the New York Times. Now the Governor doesn’t present it that way. He insists that this is his initiative, etc. It’s really here nor there. The stories in the Times were of course disturbing. They identified a culture and a bureaucracy that many working in the field of developmental disabilities have been aware of for a number of years. They were an effort by a responsible journalist to uncover the truth behind allegations that some people brought to his attention. Ultimately, they followed a pattern that occurs when those outside of government or organizations make allegations to the press. As investigative processes unfold, those in responsible positions are not transparent and in the process, make fact finding difficult. Freedom of Information requests have to be filed resulting in redacted information as well as adversarial relationships. As hard as they try not to let this impact them, journalists become frustrated.

The reality is that there were problems with the articles. There were lots of generalizations and in my opinion, not enough emphasis on alternative voices in identifying issues, causes and potential solutions. They did however bring light to a subject that still needs the scrutiny that a shining light brings. They also pointed out that non profit providers of supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, most of whom do great work everyday, are leaderless as a group. They have no real spokesperson and so, they sat and took it. "It" being the generalizations and allegations of rampant mismanagement, out of sight executive compensation and on and on. This at a time when they were being strangled by regulatory oversight and major funding reductions from, guess who, government. It became evident early on that people who should have been speaking out were going to hold their tongue. The arguments were familiar. The Times had an agenda. The reporter was biased. The Governor, the Commissioner, the State would get angry. The Governor has a temper - and oh yes, we do have some skeletons in our closet.

There are many stories that weren’t told due to this lack of direction or leadership. The rich history of the non profit movement in this particular field, the advocacy movement itself, the conflict between state operations and non profit supports, the shifting of costs and revenues by government that have caused real harm to individuals and families, the changes that are necessary and the ones that will hurt people. The list is large.

But that is all water under the bridge as they say and here we are with a Governor’s proposal for justice for vulnerable people. A proposal that no one can be opposed to or even question. That said, no one will probably even read it before it is passed by the legislature. Ultimately government has become the advocate for this vulnerable population. Am I the only one who sees the irony. Government that built the institutions, that created the regulations, that set the rates, that hired the people, that hid the people, that created the culture, that abused and neglected and continues to abuse and neglect has become the advocate. Obviously it’s important for government and government leaders to speak up and try to change their system but let’s remember it is their system.

Lets face some facts. The state of New York, through the Governor, through the Commissioners and through the Legislature is in fact reacting to a scandalous situation. That’s what this is, a reaction by people and entities who were and have been responsible in this area. Personally, I don’t think any of these parties are really aware of the long range consequences of their actions - good or bad. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out but it’s sad that so many people will be impacted in many ways without the dialogue that really needed to take place and without the true advocacy that they need.

Why I Write

Another one of those intriguing questions. I’ve thought about this a lot recently partly because of an article I read where a freelance, award winning journalist was bemoaning the fact that as a career, writing is a poorly paid profession. He was making a number of points but the one that really struck me was his discussion about how we may be turning the profession of writing over to hobbyists as opposed to well seasoned journalists. All of this, he argues, is partly the result of the internet, blogs and bloggers. So this made me realize that I needed to think more about my decision and choice to write and to share my writing with the world so to speak.

It is something all writers think about now and then I’m sure. In the process it really does help to clarify some things. For example, journalists, if they are any good at all, are hard working professionals who immerse themselves in research and fact finding. They dig, they interview, they write and rewrite but most importantly they make sure they have facts and quality sources. All of this slows reporting down which is one of the biggest concerns relative to the internet and its impact on good, professional, quality reporting. Stories get old very quickly these days and reporters, journalists and editors work in an extremely competitive environment. So thinking about all of this, it became pretty clear to me that I’m not a journalist and probably don’t have the wherewithal to be one anytime soon. I want to write and see the results more quickly.

So what about literary writing? Is that my style? Is that what I do? Perhaps a little, but I’m certainly no Hemingway or any other author that I can think of for that matter. But here’s what I know. I have stories and I have a little bit of a sense of how to convey them. I want my stories to be factually accurate but I’m not a fact checker in that very specific sense. What I really want to do is impact people and the way they think, the things they’re thinking about. I want to do it in as truthful a manner as possible,  but if a story I tell requires emotion I want it to be there in all of its glory. I want people to be able to feel and experience the topic or the subject. I want people to share in the journey - mine or others who I write about.  I guess it’s about soul and heart and feelings. All of those things that make us feel strongly about something. Stories do come from someplace we all know. They come from history and experience and many of us share those things in lots of different ways. Family, work, politics, spirituality, all of these are experienced and we have our own part of them. We also learn from them.

My Grandmother came to this country from a small village in Ireland. She traveled across the ocean with her sister and brother. She was 15 years old and the oldest of the three. She was a great storyteller and she never let too many facts get in her way as she told stories about cops in New York City or about cleaning seminarians rooms at Seton Hall or as she spun yarns about a character named Johnny McGlory back in Ireland. Her stories made us mainly laugh and sometimes cry. They made us think about that country far off that she missed so much. They made us understand that life wasn’t easy for everybody and that there were lots of different people in the world. Life lessons I guess. Her facts were in her memory of her experiences and her emotions were on her sleeve.

So perhaps I’m just a storyteller like her. Trying to tell the truth but also sharing emotion and feeling, as well as a few opinions along the way. I guess that’s some of why I write.

The Arts Experience, Geneva, NY

I've written before about The Arts Experience, a festival at Hobart and William Smith Colleges in Geneva, NY. The festival is a joint effort between the Colleges and the Collaborative of the Finger Lakes. The festival kicked off yesterday, April 16th and is already off to what looks like a great start. The festival is a nice example of not only collaborative efforts but more importantly inclusionary practices where people with and without disabilities mix, mingle, learn, teach and experience together.

I have had the pleasure of being involved as a member of the steering committee that has lead the organizing effort. I must say that Mary Kelly from Hobart and William Smith Colleges and Jean Jensen from The Arc of Steuben have done the major work of organizing, communicating and pulling people together and they really do deserve the credit for that. There have been many others, behind the scenes, working hard to make the event both enjoyable and valuable.

For those who aren't aware, The Collaborative of the Finger Lakes is an organization made up of 12 Chapters of NYSARC, Inc., a statewide organization that provides supports to people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities across New York State. The Collaborative represents those Chapters in the Finger Lakes region. They formed a regional organization a number of years ago to explore and identify ways that they, as separate organizations, could share and collaborate on various projects and in various operational areas. Over the years I served on the Collaborative Board as the executive director of one of the participating organizations. This group deserves a lot of credit for their initiative and their efforts toward collaboration. Their success has been limited, in my opinion, but they've certainly put forth the effort and hopefully will continue to explore all of the possibilities of collaboration. The Arts Experience is one of their successes and it is something that could easily be duplicated by other educational institutions and organizations across the country - and it should be.

To watch students, faculty and people with disabilities interact on a campus, helping each other get the most out of a particular event or workshop is something that is pretty significant. It's also very natural. If you're close by, find a time to visit and participate in one of the many events over the next few weeks. There is a link to an article here and a listing of events here. Take a look at these and you'll get a sense of the collaboration and inclusionary aspects of what's going on. And finally, if you can, visit The Arts Experience in person.

More On Collaboration - Part 2

As indicated in the previous post on collaboration, this is a topic that is extremely important in the current political and fiscal environment. Although I still question if a lot of money can be saved through collaboration, I'm convinced that better communication, support to customers and enhanced management practices can all be improved through collaboration. It's also, in my opinion, a necessary aspect and requirement for leaders and managers in any business today. Previously I've written about why collaboration is so hard. This is really a continuation of that discussion and an attempt to focus on the leader's role in collaboration.

I want to start out by saying, that like many others, I was not always a fan of collaboration. Perhaps fan is the wrong word. Like other people in leadership or management positions, I always had lots to do. Lots of fires to put out and lots of internal decisions that had to be made on a daily basis. I felt the pressures of outside sources, customers, funders, regulators as well as internal ups and downs, employee issues, facilities, etc. I also hired good people to deal with many of these issues. I was a product of the very common top down, up/down management styles and practices. I experimented like everyone else with newer methods with some degree of success and a few major failures along the way. But as my own management experiences evolved and as I grew in terms of vision and focus, collaboration began to make more sense.

I also had a number of colleagues and mentors who helped me get to that place where collaboration became such a strong focus. As I share these thoughts it's really important that readers realize that my experiences included successes and failures and that there was a good deal of discomfort along the way. I learned early on in my collaborations that trust was absolutely essential. Now let's be clear, I said trust. I didn't say anything about liking or disliking other parties involved. Obviously liking or disliking a partner or potential partner plays a role and in the end is important but trust is essential.

I've seen people begin the collaborative process and work hard for some time at creating the necessary level of trust among leaders/partners. Sometimes it's harder then other times but I think eventually people usually can get rid of all of the baggage and begin to trust others. It's a big deal when it happens and should be celebrated. Relationships do grow and evolve and as with almost everything we deal with - it's all about relationships.

But that's the first phase and first step of collaboration. Here's where it begins to get harder. Along this journey of trust and collaboration, the leader has naturally become more excited and has stronger beliefs about collaboration and that's a good thing. The trick though is how the leader passes that passion and vision on to the rest of his or her management team. Let's face it, part of why collaborative efforts are difficult is because they require more work, more effort, more meetings, more of everything basically - at least for a time. So you have to be a great leader to convince your team that this is a good thing, right? It's critical and this is where things can sometimes break down. The leader of an organization is convinced collaboration is good and necessary but others wonder and some resist. After all they were hired to do a job and all of this talk about cooperation, collaboration and partnerships just interferes with their real focus - to get that job done.

I've seen a couple of approaches. The one that always fails is the osmosis and delegation theory. Basically people will get it by doing it and since I believe in it, they'll believe in it. In the process, I'll send people to meetings with other partners and everything will be fine. They'll all learn what to do and how to do it.

The other one that has more chances for success but that can also fail is the proactive leadership role and approach. Here, the leader's passion about whatever collaboration is taking place or their vision about collaboration is talked about, discussed and debated at every juncture. Every meeting of the management team reiterates what collaboration is taking place and why it's important. It's always done with a passion. Other leaders are allowed to question and identify problems but no one gets away with not buying into the vision. This is really hard because some people may refuse to come along and they've had value over many years. The reality is that this is a juncture and bridge that will have to be crossed. You may find yourself with at least one less member of your management team if the vision isn't shared. The reality is that one person refusing to participate has the potential of killing all of your collaborative efforts.

The truth is that leaders need to lead in the area of collaboration, not delegate. This means more work for you. You have to attend meetings where teams or new partners are present. You have to help clarify goals and work plans. You have to anticipate and deal with the negative responses and barrier building vs problem solving. A leader with similar vision always needs to be present and participating, mentoring, developing. Peer groups need to be identified but cannot go off on their own without direction. Ultimately it will frustrate them and you. Organizations that succeed at collaborative efforts realize that they need this kind of commitment, that goals need to be set in clear terms and that people need to be supported in their work and in the end there has to be a pay off that's real and measurable.