Make your own free website on Tripod.com

Dunamis Degrees Accreditation Association

Research and Partners Newsletter

Home | Our Purpose | Becoming a Free Member and Types of Accreditation | Contact Us | Calendar of Events | Members Page | Research and Partners Newsletter | Links | Application Forms for Membership and Accreditation

This page will have a copy of our latest research and sometimes our organization newsletter. We will update the page each second month.

 

Research Request by Prof. Godwin Booysen, Founder of Dunamis Consultants 2006

Compiled by Prof. Louis Mathys De Bruin Dunamis Degree Accreditation Association (DDAA) and New World Mission Dunamis International University (NWMDIU) and Partners.


STRATEGIC PLANNING

EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT


A Strategic Planning Primer for Education in South Africa and the rest of the educational world for 2006 to 2010.


This article provides an overview of the strategic planning process. It is intended to help

you understand the concept of strategic planning, the need for strategy in South African and International education, and

the dynamics of the university-based strategic planning. It includes a brief history of strategic

planning, emerging challenges in education, basic models and steps of a strategic

planning process, adapting strategic planning to unique needs of education as well as higher education, and a look

into the strategic planning at the California State University , Universities and Schools within the United Kingdom as well as a few successful Schools within South African educational systems as Super model for the Southern African situation . A glossary of terms and an

annotated bibliography are included.

By Prof. Louis M. De Bruin for Dunamis Consultants based in South Africa.2006.


Introduction:

To find the Strategy to fit the African “Business Plan for Educational Planning” is not an easy task.

To aim our focus on the super models around the developed countries only will not be effective strategic planning for Africa.. We need to return to the basics. From time to time we have to strengthen the roots of a young, growing, tree by cutting dead branches, trimming even some who might be alive, watering the tree, right at the roots, protect the tree from frost, parasites and violent “animals”.

Educational Development began right at the beginning of the Creation of this world -”as we know it”- from Historic Writings , Teachings and Discoveries. Our main source to explore and to find satisfying answers for our quest and purpose- to improve education for Africa is found in:- Excavations, The Bible, Reality- Science, manuscripts, art, traditions and cultures yesterday and today with our eyes open for future breakthroughs, opportunism, empowerment and recognitions of leadership within Africa who already make a difference but have more potential for development and as participants for strategic planning reach the ultimate goal of Global Educational competencies.

A Strategic Planning Primer for Higher Education

Economic projections available around the world offer an invaluable source of information for

university-based strategic planning. To provide data for studying changes in the external

environment, setting empirically based goals related to the labor market, and examining an

individual campus’s position in relation to entire higher education sector in the state.

You may search for articles on the Internet about- the following:

Why Higher Education Needs Strategic Planning

Brief History of Strategic Planning

Steps in a Strategic Planning Process and a Strategic Planning Process Model

Unique Aspects of Strategic Planning in Higher Education

Strategic Planning at CSU

Limitations

Glossary of Terms

Basic Models

Annotated Bibliography

References

You may click here for NWMDIU Strategic Planning website at: http://www.university.zoomshare.com/ and follow the LINKS


Why Higher Education Needs Strategic Planning

Why- the concept of strategic planning, the need for strategy in higher education, and

the dynamics of the university-based strategic planning?. It includes a brief history of strategic

planning, emerging challenges in higher education, basic models and steps of a strategic

planning process, adapting strategic planning to unique needs of higher education, and a look

into the strategic planning at the California State University system. A glossary of terms and an

annotated bibliography are included.

By Alexandra L. Lerner, Research Associate. College of Business Administration and

Economics, California State University, Northridge. July 1999.


Universities are driven to engage in a strategic planning process by a variety of forces. These

include: increasing demand for higher education concurrent with a decline in government

funding, changing student demographics, and a need to compete with the emerging models of

higher education while keeping the essence of a traditional comprehensive university. A

strategic planning process can help prepare a university to face these emerging challenges.

According to Benjamin & Carroll (1998, p.3), “if current trends continue, more than onethird

of the Californians seeking to enroll in ”a state university “will be unable to do so by the

year 2015.” Consequently, to avoid such outcomes, universities need to “make major structural

changes in their decision-making systems … and reallocate scarce resources” (Benjamin &

Carroll, 1998, p.21). Universities should also “pursue greater mission differentiation to

streamline their services and better respond to the changing needs of their constituencies”

(Benjamin & Carroll, 1998, p. 22-23). Strategic planning can aid the university in accomplishing

these tasks.

CHALLENGES FACING CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION

Recent years have brought many changes to the landscape of California’s higher education.

Following is a brief description of these challenges.

Decrease in state government funding

Public universities’ share of the state budget is plummeting; according to David Breneman, it

will decline to 1% in 2002 (from 12% in 1994). At the same time, according to Benjamin &

Carroll (1998) the operating costs per student in higher education are rising.

Increase in demand for higher education

Demand for higher education is expected to increase sharply in the next decade. According

to former CSU chancellor Barry Munitz, university enrollment in California will increase to 2.7

million in 2010, a 50% increase over 1.8 million in 1994. For CSU, this translates into an

additional 100,000 full-time equivalent students (FTE) annually by 2010 (Cornerstones,

appendix, p.2). In addition to the expected population growth, the proportion of the population

that will attend universities will increase. According to Benjamin & Carroll (1998, p. 9), “only

college graduates will be able to hold their own economically” by 2015. As more and more

people recognize that a college degree is essential to their economic well being, demand for

higher education will increase.

Changing demographics

Students’ demographic makeup is changing. As the number of Latino and Asian students

increases over the next decade, the universities will not have a single racial “majority” group. By

2005 about half of the entering class of students will come from non-“Anglo-white” families. In

addition, the average age of the student population will increase, as more “older” students return

to universities to get undergraduate degrees. Seeking “the best conditions for success of all its

diverse students,” universities need to provide education that will allow graduates to “fully

participate in a diverse society committed to democratic values” (Cornerstones, appendix, p 3).

New models of higher education

New models of providing higher education have emerged in recent years. According to some

researchers, a gap between what the public wants and what traditional universities provide is

growing (Rowley, Lujan, & Dolence, 1997). Changes in the educational needs (i.e. a need for

more specific, applied education), unmet by the existing system of higher education, have

prompted emergence of for-profit, “convenience” universities, such as the University of Phoenix

and National University. Adapting to the needs of the consumer-driven market (Traub, 1997),

they view the student as a customer, target specific functions (based on the market need), and

offer schedules convenient for students. Thus “traditional” universities must find ways to deal

with this new competition.

Keeping elements of a “traditional” model

Universities can’t move completely away from a provider-driven model to a consumerdriven

form of higher education. … The quest for new knowledge, the analysis of theories and

practices, and the free exchange of ideas would suffer if colleges and universities only offered

what was popular” (Rowley, Lujan, & Dolence, 1997, p. 54). Eliminating disciplines because

they are currently not in demand is contrary to the mission of a comprehensive university. Yet to

some degree all campuses must consider student preferences for applied education and the larger

labor market.

Lack of consensus in state government

The government is debating the purposes of higher education and who should have access to

it. At the same time, universities, and particularly the CSU, are challenged to meet their mission

to provide access and affordability, ensure quality through maximum attention to the teaching

and learning process, and provide evidence for their results (Cornerstones, appendix, p. 3-4).

Economic transformation

California’s economy has undergone a profound transformation in the last two decades.”

The major economic growth areas, high-tech and high-tech based industries, will employ welleducated

individuals, able to move easily among careers and employers. Californians, who lack

adequate education and competencies useful across career lines, especially those without at least

a college degree, will be at a disadvantage, in terms of employment opportunities, earning

capacity, and higher unemployment rates (Cornerstones, appendix, p. 2).

Click here for Cornerstones Report, Appendix

NEED FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Strategic planning is one of the major steps the universities can take to address these

challenges. Strategy is a tool for the university to find its competitive advantage and place

within the environment.

California’s universities must bring about the needed institutional redesign and devise an

effective strategic plan for developing California’s human resources. By pursuing a greater

mission differentiation and reallocation of resources they will better respond to the changing

needs of their constituencies (Benjamin & Carroll, 1998).

The present lack of effective strategic planning has lead to dire predictions from many

observers. According to Benjamin & Carroll (1998, p.1), “the present course of higher

education in the state – in which student demand, tuition, and costs are rising much faster than

public funding - is unsustainable. Unless significant steps are taken to address the situation,

hundreds of thousands of Californians will be denied access to higher education within the next

20 years.” “That is a serious, sobering, economic, political, and social catastrophe, and there is

nothing in the framework of a current situation that is likely to prevent that from occurring”

(Breneman, 1995).

Institutions of higher education that do not rethink their roles, responsibilities, and structures

can expect a very difficult time in the next decade and the next generation. Some will not

survive. Most will be expected to do much more with far less” (Glassman & Rossy, n.d.).

BENEFITS OF STRATEGIC PLANNING

Engaging in a strategic planning process benefits universities in a variety of ways.

Strategic planning:

Creates a framework for determining the direction a university should take to achieve its

desired future,

Provides a framework for achieving competitive advantage,

Allows all university constituencies to participate and work together towards accomplishing

goals,

“Raises the vision of all key participants, encouraging them to reflect creatively on the

strategic direction” of the university (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p. 32),

Allows the dialogue between the participants improving understanding of the organization’s

vision, and fostering a sense of ownership of the strategic plan, and belonging to the

organization,

Aims to align the university with its environment,

Allows the university to set priorities.

Please click here for a complete list of References

Brief History of Strategic Planning

MILITARY ROOTS

The history of strategic planning begins in the military. According to Webster’s New World

Dictionary, strategy is “the science of planning and directing large-scale military operations, of

maneuvering forces into the most advantageous position prior to actual engagement with the

enemy” (Guralnic, 1986). Although our understanding of strategy as applied in management has

been transformed, one element remains key: aim to achieve competitive advantage.

Taking its name and roots from the military model, early models of formal strategic planning

reflected the hierarchical values and linear systems of traditional organizations. Undertaken by

elite planning function at the top of the organization, its structure was highly vertical and timebound.

A certain period would be set aside to analyze the situation and decide on a course of

action. This would result in a formal document. Once this was done, the actual work of

implementation - which was considered a separate, discrete process - could begin” (Wall & Wall,

1995).

Although individual definitions of strategy vary between authors, traditionally, theorists have

considered planning an essential part of organizational strategy. For a comprehensive definition

of strategy, please refer to the Glossary of Terms.

BUSINESS

Strategic planning in organizations originated in the 1950s and was very popular and

widespread between mid-1960s to mid-1970s, when then people believed it was the answer for

all problems, and corporate America was “obsessed” with strategic planning. Following that

boom” strategic planning was cast aside and abandoned for over a decade. The 1990s brought

the revival of strategic planning as a “process with particular benefits in particular contexts”

(Mintzberg, 1994).

Here is a brief account of several generations of strategic planning. SWOT analysis model

dominated strategic planning of the 1950s. “The 1960s brought qualitative and quantitative

models of strategy. During the early 1980s, the shareholder value model and the Porter model

became the standard. The rest of the 1980s was dictated by strategic intent and core

competencies, and market-focused organizations. Finally, business transformation became de

rigueur in the 1990s” (Gouillart, 1995).

Subsequent newer models of strategic planning were focused on adaptability to change,

flexibility, and importance of strategic thinking and organizational learning. “Strategic agility”

is becoming more important that the strategy itself, because the organization’s ability to succeed

has more to do with its ability to transform itself, continuously, than whether it has the right

strategy. Being strategically agile enables organizations to transform their strategy depending on

the changes in their environment” (Gouillart, 1995).

HIGHER EDUCATION

During the past decade institutions of higher education had to confront numerous changes in

their external and internal environment, and respond to emerging challenges, such as decreasing

financial support, rapid technological advances, changing demographics, and outdated academic

programs. As a result, many universities engaged in strategic planning as means to “make

beneficial, strategic changes … to adapt to the rapidly shifting environment” (Rowley, Lujan, &

Dolence, 1997).

Overall, strategic planning at universities has been only moderately successful, as only few

were able to achieve significantly successful results and “transformed themselves dramatically.

Others have been able to make important changes in parts of their operations. … But many

institutions have stumbled, dissolved into controversy, or lost their nerve” (Rowley, Lujan, &

Dolence, 1997). Although several authors have endeavored to explain successes and failures of

strategic planning in higher education, scholars differ in their opinions. As a result, there is no

consensus (or clarity) on major determinants of strategic planning’s success in universities.

Please click here for a complete list of References

Steps in a Strategic Planning Process

Although every strategic planning process is uniquely designed to fit the specific needs of a

particular university, every successful “model” includes most of these steps.

The university begins by identifying its vision and mission. Once these are clearly defined, it

moves on to a series of analyses, including external, internal, gap, and benchmarking, which

provide a context for developing organization’s strategic issues. Strategic programming follows

and the organization develops specific strategies including strategic goals, action plans, and

tactics. Emergent strategies evolve, challenging the intended tactics, and altering the realized

strategy. Periodically, the organization evaluates its strategies and reviews its strategic plan,

considering emergent strategies and evolving changes. It usually takes several years before

strategic planning becomes institutionalized and organizations learn to think strategically. The

Strategic Planning Process graph at the end of this section provides a graphical representation

of these steps.

Note: Here we briefly review steps essential to success of any strategic planning process. For

a more detailed description of strategic planning terminology, please refer to the Glossary

of Terms.

VISION AND MISSION

Identification of the organization’s vision and mission is the first step of any strategic

planning process. The university’s vision sets out the reasons for organization’s existence and

the “ideal” state that the organization aims to achieve; the mission identifies major goals and

performance objectives. Both are defined within the framework of the university’s philosophy,

and are used as a context for development and evaluation of intended and emergent strategies.

One can not overemphasize the importance of a clear vision and mission; none of the subsequent

steps will matter if the organization is not certain where it is headed.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN

Once the vision and mission are clearly identified, the university must analyze its external

and internal environment. The environmental scan, performed within the frameworks of the Five

Forces Model and SWOT, analyzes information about organization’s external environment

(economic, social, demographic, political, legal, technological, and international factors), the

industry, and internal organizational factors. The labor market projections provided on this site

are most valuable for the environmental scan. Please refer to the brief description of the Basic

Models for more information.

GAP ANALYSIS

Organizations evaluate the difference between their current position and desired future

through gap analysis. As a result, a university can develop specific strategies and allocate

resources to close the gap (CSUN strategic planning leadership retreat, April 1997), and achieve

its desired state.

BENCHMARKING

Measuring and comparing the university’s operations, practices, and performance against

others is useful for identifying "best" practices. Through an ongoing systematic benchmarking

process campuses find a reference point for setting their own goals and targets.

STRATEGIC ISSUES

University determines its strategic issues based on (and consistent with) its vision and

mission, within the framework of environmental and other analyses. Strategic issues are the

fundamental issues the organization has to address to achieve its mission and move towards its

desired future.

STRATEGIC PROGRAMMING

To address strategic issues and develop deliberate strategies for achieving their mission,

universities set strategic goals, action plans, and tactics during the strategic programming stage.

Strategic goals are the milestones the campus aims to achieve that evolve from the strategic

issues. The SMART goals model is essential to setting meaningful goals. Smart goals are

specific, measurable, agreed upon, realistic, and time/cost bound.

Action plans … define how we get to where we want to go,” the steps required to reach our

strategic goals.

Tactics are specific actions used to achieve the strategic goals and implement the strategic

plans.

EMERGENT STRATEGIES

Unpredicted and unintended events frequently occur that differ from the university’s

intended strategies, and the university must respond. Emergent strategy is “a pattern, a

consistency of behavior over time,” “a realized pattern [that] was not expressly intended” in the

original planning of strategy. It results from a series of actions converging into a consistent

pattern (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 23-25). Please refer to the Glossary of Terms for a more complete

definition of emergent strategies.

EVALUATION OF STRATEGY

Periodic evaluations of strategies, tactics, and action programs are essential to assessing

success of the strategic planning process. It is important to measure performance at least

annually (but preferably more often), to evaluate the effect of specific actions on long-term

results and on the organization’s vision and mission (Rowley, Lujan, & Dolence, 1997). The

organization should measure current performance against previously set expectations, and

consider any changes or events that may have impacted the desired course of actions.

REVIEW OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN

After assessing the progress of the strategic planning process, the university needs to review

the strategic plan, make necessary changes, and adjust its course based on these evaluations. The

revised plan must take into consideration emergent strategies, and changes affecting the

organization’s intended course.

STRATEGIC THINKING

With time, people in the university routinely make their decisions within the framework of

the organization’s strategic vision and mission. Strategic planning becomes an organizational

norm, deeply embedded within the organization’s decision-making process, and participants

learn to think strategically as part of their regular daily activities (Lerner, 1999). Strategic

thinking involves “arraying options through a process of opening up institutional thinking to a

range of alternatives and decisions that identify the best fit between the institution, its resources,

and the environment” (Rowley, Lujan, & Dolence, 1997, p. 15). See Glossary of Terms for

more about strategic thinking.

Please click here for a complete list of References

Unique Aspects of Strategic Planning in Higher Education

The following section discusses unique aspects of strategic planning at universities.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A BUSINESS MODEL AND A UNIVERSITY MODEL

To ensure success of the strategic planning effort, universities need to adjust the “business

strategy model” to higher education. As discussed below, university-based strategic planning

differs from the business model in several specific ways. By recognizing these differences and

changing the traditional model accordingly, universities can increase understanding of, and

participation in the strategy process throughout its constituencies.

Time frame

In the “business world,” strategic planning model timeframe is 2 to 3 years; at universities, it

usually takes 5 or more years.

Consensus

The business model is generally top down, although it is still necessary to get the support and

involvement of people in the company. Because of the importance of shared governance in

university management, faculty’s involvement is key, and building consensus right from the

beginning becomes essential for university – based strategic planning. University faculty can’t be

directed” (i.e., command authority) in the same way as employees in a company, because

centralized power” at universities is not very strong.

Value system

Universities’ guiding principle - long-term investment in educating people - is different from

business’ bottom line approach. Differences in the value system require a different approach to

strategic planning at universities.

Customers

Universities do not have a clearly defined customer; students, employers, and the community

may all be considered “customers.” As a result, defining goals and measuring effectiveness

consistently with the university’s mission is problematic.

Context

Change is especially difficult to accept at the universities, because by nature universities are

about preservation.

THE PROCESS OF STRATEGIC PLANNING

The process itself is important to opening the lines of communications, and engaging faculty

and staff in the dialogue. The fact that we engage in “strategic thinking” is more important than

the final product – the plan. The decision-makers can make choices in the context of their

understanding of the faculty’s dialogue, different vantage points, and university’s overall

mission. It is similar to the empowerment in the corporate model. If participants understand the

thinking around issues, then management can empower them to make decisions, because

employees’ decisions will reflect the overall context.

According to Barry Munitz, former CSU chancellor, universities need to establish where

their strategic competitive advantage is. “As you begin your own strategic planning effort, be

thoughtful and concise and specific about where you want to make this campus’s mark. What

do you do well, what do you do differently, what do you do better than most others. Those things

that you care less about and you do less well should disappear” (Munitz, speech at CSUN, 1995).

Reward system

University’s faculty are rewarded mainly based on research and teaching. For strategic

planning to succeed, faculty should be rewarded for a broader range of things (i.e. initiatives

related to strategic planning), while the essence of the university - teaching and research - is

preserved. People participate in activities that get rewarded, so universities have to be willing to

shift resources and allocate funds for strategic priorities. In essence, strategic planning goals and

objectives should be linked to the reward system.

Commitment at the top

Commitment at the top is essential for success. The university president has to be willing to

push and support strategic planning activities, and never loose focus on that. Similarly, highlevel

executives must be truly committed to and involved in it.

Loosely coupled system”

The university is “a loosely coupled system of units that need to work together for a mutually

beneficial future, but understand that their differences would often create tension. These units

simultaneously seek autonomous distinctiveness and interdependence. The continued attention

to the balancing of these two dimensions became the glue that held the strategic planning process

together and provided the context for implementation” (Glassman & Rossy, n.d.). Designing a

loosely coupled process recognizes uniqueness of each part of the university.

Participatory planning

The need for participatory planning stems from the universities’ “shared governance” model.

Within colleges and universities, the major means of production (teaching and research) are …

the exclusive rights of the faculty, and …top-level strategic decision making cannot be

adequately accomplished without the advice and consent of professoriate… The faculty … can

exercise significant veto power over the options available to university administrative

leadership” (Rowley, Lujan, & Dolence, 1997).

Finding a mechanism to get faculty involvement at every stage, and particularly at the

implementation stage, becomes essential to success; faculty can’t be “commanded,” but have to

be willing to voluntarily participate.

Alignment

While allowing for flexibility, alignment means that universities within the system support

strategic goals of the larger system, and that the units within the university support campus goals.

Colleges and deans could define their own ways to establish goals, and choose what is important

to them within the framework of the university-wide strategic planning process. This fosters a

feeling of ownership of the process, and personal contribution to it.

Allow for differences

Design of strategic planning differs between the university level, the college level, and the

department level. The process for each college needs to be customized to that college’s unique

environment, keeping in mind the high degree of heterogeneity of the population within the

university. For example, CSUN, is not one homogenous university, but 9 colleges living on the

same geographical turf.

Please click here for a complete list of References

Strategic Planning Process Model

MISSION / VISION

defined within the framework

of organization’s philosophy

Environmental

Scan and SWOT

Gap analysis

Benchmarking

EMERGENT

STRATEGIES

unintended strategies

due to a learned

pattern of behavior or

unforeseen events

STRATEGIC LEARNING

and

STRATEGIC THINKING

STRATEGIC ISSUES

ONGOING

STRATEGIC PROGRAMMING

Strategic Goals

Action Plans

Tactics

DELIBERATE / INTENDED

STRATEGIES

Strategic Planning at CSU

For several years, CSU has been engaged in a strategic planning effort, documented in the

Cornerstones Report. Cornerstones is an “umbrella effort” “designed to complement and support

strategic planning activities that are ongoing on the CSU campuses” (Cornerstones, preface).

One of CSU’s major challenges is to “secure adequate state resources for all Californians who

desire a college education” (Cornerstones, appendix, p. 3). Within this framework, CSU aims to

preserve the shared governance, support individual campuses in serving different communities

with unique needs, and protect and regenerate superior faculty.

THE CORNERSTONES REPORT

The CSU’s Cornerstones project identified four policy goals for the California State

University campuses, which include (1) educational results; (2) access to higher education; (3)

financial stability; and (4) university accountability. Aligning strategic planning efforts at

individual CSU campuses with these policy goals will allow each university to “contribute to a

larger statewide public and policy audience” (Cornerstones Report, Preface), advancing the

overall, comprehensive effort of California’s higher education system to respond to emerging

challenges.

Educational results

The CSU seeks to ensure that each graduate of the university meets high expectations

regarding what graduates should know and do, and … will be held accountable to achieve these

expectations.” CSU will provide educational excellence, while responding to the needs of

Californians, both young, and older and working adults. These will be accomplished through

innovation in the use of its facilities, the methods of teaching and learning, the development of

flexible academic schedules, the nature and duration of programs, the locations where education

takes place, and the ease with which students get services” (Cornerstones Report, Educational

Results).

Access to higher education

The very structure of public higher education is predicated on the idea that every resident

competent to benefit from instruction has some place to learn.” CSU’s role is key in meeting this

commitment. This will be accomplished through outreach programs, retention efforts, support of

K-12 efforts, strengthening relationship with community colleges, providing education beyond

baccalaureate, including career transition education and lifelong learning (Cornerstones Report,

Access to Higher Education).

Financial stability

CSU aims to provide an “environment where resources are stable enough that campuses can

make plans, determine priorities, and successfully implement them.” It is essential for students to

be able to count on predictable fees and adequate aid in planning completion of their education.

While State of California’s commitment to provide CSU with necessary funding is essential, “it

must be matched by our own efforts to produce excellence. Financial stability will only be

achieved through a combination of increased revenues and increased productivity and savings”

(Cornerstones Report, Financial Stability).

University accountability

CSU has moved to become “a community of distinct and diverse campuses,” “ in a context of

shared goals and broad commitments to the people of California,” allowing campuses a “greater

flexibility and autonomy.” CSU will account for its performance through “assessment of student

achievement, and … reports [of CSU’s performance] to the public.” The reporting system will

focus on achievements of each university based on the diverse nature of each campus and its

students” (Cornerstones Report, University Accountability).

Implementation plan

In an effort to “create a truly student-centered university, in which every member of the

University community – faculty, staff, and administration – has a responsibility for contributing

to student success,” the Cornerstones implementation plan “addresses the [following] key issues

of system-wide concern.” Each initiative suggests several proposed implementation steps,

available in the detailed text of the implementation plan draft on the Cornerstones web site.

1. “Each university will strengthen baccalaureate education through student learning outcomes

and assessment.

2. Each university will assure the quality of the baccalaureate experience and process.

3. Each university will examine its programs to ensure that current programs are needed,

effective, and have appropriate and understandable requirements.

4. Universities will make their service more accessible in time and place, by removing, to the

extent possible, constraints on teaching and learning caused by time or location.

5. The CSU will support system and university-wide efforts to increase the number and

proportions of high-school students who are prepared for college-level study upon entry, and

in the process, reduce the percentages of students needing remedial education.

6. The CSU will increase access to education beyond the baccalaureate, including degree and

certificate programs as well as other forms of continuing and professional education.

7. The CSU and each university will make systematic progress toward achieving the conditions

that will allow faculty to play their integral role in implementing the plan” (Draft

Cornerstones Implementation Plan).

RESOURCE GAPS

CSU anticipates several gaps between expected need and available resources. By year 2005

CSU’s deficit resulting from insufficient revenues to meet enrollments needs is projected to be

between $58 to $240 million. An estimated need for necessary technology, replacement of

obsolete equipment, maintenance of laboratories, library acquisitions, mandatory price increases,

and maintenance for new space is about $680 million. Additional resources are necessary to

accommodate a 26% projected increase in enrollments. Funds available to students in need of

financial aid are declining, while the number of such students is expected to increase to about

60% of total enrollments by 2005 (Cornerstones Report, Appendix, p. 6).

Please click here for a complete list of References

Limitations

Universities may encounter a multitude of problems as they go forward with their strategic

planning process. This section discusses several of these difficulties and offers ways to minimize

or avoid them.

POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

Strategic planning is an involved, intricate, and complex process that takes an organization

into the uncharted territory. It does not provide a ready to use prescription for success; instead, it

takes the organization through a journey and helps develop a framework and context within

which the answers will emerge. Literature and research has documented extensively the possible

problems that may arise during the process. Being aware of these issues and prepared to address

them is essential to success: organization’s strategic planning effort may fail if these potential

pitfalls are ignored. To increase universities’ awareness, this section reviews some of these

limitations.

Commitment

One of the major challenges of strategic planning is ensuring commitment at the top, because

in some ways, strategic planning reduces executive decision-making power. It encourages

involvement throughout the organization, and “empowers” people to make decisions within the

framework defined by the strategic planning process. As a result, this shifts some of the decision

making from the executive office to the participants.

Commitment of the people throughout the university “grows out of a sense of ownership of

the project” (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 172). Such commitment is essential to success. Strategic

planning implies organization-wide participation, which can only be achieved if people believe

that their involvement counts, and that they will benefit from the process.

Inflexibility of plans and planning

Strategic planning might inhibit changes, and discourage the organization from considering

disruptive alternatives (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 178). Planning might inhibit creativity, and “does not

easily handle truly creative ideas” (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 180). A conflict lies with a desire to

retain the stability that planning brings to an organization … while enabling it to respond

quickly to external changes in the environment” (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 184).

Control

Strategic planning, if misused, might become a tool for gaining control over decisions,

strategies, present, future, actions, management, employees, markets, and customers (Mintzberg,

1994, pp. 201-202), rather than a comprehensive and integrated instrument for bringing the

organization to its desired future.

Public relations

Strategic planning may be used as a tool to “impress” “influential outsiders” (Mintzberg,

1994, p. 214), or to comply with requirements for strategic planning imposed from the outside,

such as accreditation requirements.

Objectivity

Strategic planning dismisses intuition and favors readily available, interpretable “hard” data

(Mintzberg, 1994, p. 191), and assumes that all goals are “reconcilable in a single statement of

objectives” (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 193).

Politics

Strategic planning might increase “political activity among participants” (i.e. faculty and

administration, or individual participants), by increasing conflict within the organization,

reinforcing a notion of centralized hierarchy, and challenging formal channels of authority

(Mintzberg, 1994, pp.197, 200).

AVOIDING LIMITATIONS

Opportunistic planning”

Opportunistic planning allows organizations to be flexible and open to making changes to the

strategic planning process, if it becomes necessary in the face of unexpected events and changes

in the initial assumptions. “Organizations need a good combination of formal and opportunistic

planning. “Organizations that rely exclusively on formal planning could trap themselves in

unbearable rigidities.” Those who’s decision-making capability is entirely opportunistic will be

constantly reacting to external forces, without a clear sense of direction” (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p.

35-36).

Planners as facilitators

Planners should not plan, but serve as” facilitators, “catalysts, inquirers, educators, and

synthesizers to guide the planning process effectively” (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p. 34).

Participation

Organizations should encourage active participation of as many people as possible, including

the faculty, administration, students, and alumni), engaging them in the ongoing dialogue, and

involving them in the strategic planning process, to generate a feeling of ownership of the

process and the outcomes throughout the organization.

Creativity

Using “a series of incremental steps that build strategies” and integrating them into the entire

organization will help to adjusting the course of action of strategic planning with overall

organizational vision and strategic issues, while allowing for creativity and flexibility for change

(Hax & Majluf, 1996, p. 35).

Flexibility

Strategic tasks should be interpreted “not as rigid hierarchical sequences of actions, but as a

useful conceptual framework” for addressing issues essential to the successful operation of the

organization (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p. 36).

Please click here for a complete list of References

Glossary of Terms

Here are some important terms for understanding the strategic planning process, its purpose,

functions, and practices. This list begins by defining strategic planning as it applies to any

organization (business or educational), moves on to define strategic planning as applied

specifically to higher education, and concludes with an overview of building blocks common to

any successful strategic planning effort.

PLANNING, STRATEGY, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING

Definitions of planning

Planning is a formalized procedure to produce an articulated result, in the form of an

integrated system of decisions.” Thinking about and attempting to control the future are

important components of planning (Mintzberg, 1994 p.12). “Planning is required when the

future state we desire involves a set of interdependent decisions; that is a system of decisions

(Ackoff, 1970 in Mintzberg, 1994, p. 11).

Definitions of strategy

Arnoldo C. Hax and Nicolas S. Majluf (1996, p. 14) provide one of the most comprehensive

definitions of strategy available:

Strategy

1. determines and reveals the organizational purpose in terms of long-term objectives,

action programs, and resource allocation priorities;

2. selects the businesses the organization is in, or is to be in;

3. attempts to achieve a long-term sustainable advantage in each of its businesses by

responding appropriately to the opportunities and threats in the firm’s environment, and

the strengths and weaknesses of the organization;

4. identifies the distinct managerial tasks at the corporate, business, and functional levels;

5. is a coherent, unifying, and integrative pattern of decisions;

6. defines the nature of the economic and non-economic contributions it intends to make to

its stakeholders;

7. is an expression of the strategic intent of the organization;

8. is aimed at developing and nurturing the core competencies of the firm;

9. is a means for investing selectively in tangible and intangible resources to develop the

capabilities that assure a sustainable competitive advantage.”

Definition of strategic planning

Strategic planning is a complex and ongoing process of organizational change. The following

attributes, when combined, effectively define a successful and comprehensive strategic planning

process.

Strategic planning:

Is oriented towards the future, and focuses on the anticipated future. It looks at how the

world could be different 5-10 years from now. It is aimed at creating the organization’s

future based on what this future is likely to look like.

Is based on thorough analysis of foreseen or predicted trends and scenarios of the

possible alternative futures, as well as the analysis of internal and external data.

Is flexible and oriented towards the big picture. It aligns an organization with its

environment, establishing a context for accomplishing goals, and providing a framework

and direction to achieve organization’s desired future.

Creates a framework for achieving competitive advantage by thoroughly analyzing the

organization, its internal and external environment, and its potential. This enables

organizations to respond to the emerging trends, events, challenges, and opportunities

within the framework of its vision and mission, developed through the strategic planning

process.

Is a qualitative, idea driven process. It integrates “soft” data, not always supported

quantitatively, such as experiences, intuition, and ideas, involves the organization in the

ongoing dialogue, and aims to provide a clear organizational vision and focus.

“Allows organizations to focus, because it is a process of dynamic, continuous activities

of self-analysis” (Doerle, 1991, in Rowley, 1997, p.37).

Is an ongoing, continuous learning process, an organizational dialogue, which extends

beyond attaining a set of predetermined goals. It aims to change the way an organization

thinks and operates, and create a learning organization.

When successful, it influences all areas of operations, becoming a part of the

organization’s philosophy and culture.

Differences between conventional planning and strategic planning

One of the major differences between conventional planning and strategic planning is that

conventional planning tends to be oriented toward looking at problems based on current

understanding, or an inside-out mind set. Strategic planning requires an understanding of the

nature of the issue, and then finding of an appropriate response, or an outside-in mind set”

(Rowley, 1997, p. 36).

Long-range planning is a projection from the present or an extrapolation from the past.

Strategic planning builds on anticipated future trends, data, and competitive assumptions. Long

range planning tends to be numbers driven. Strategic planning tends to be idea driven, more

qualitative; it seeks to provide a clear organizational vision/focus.” (CSUN strategic planning

retreat booklet, April 1997).

STRATEGIC PLANNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION

Strategic planning is a formal process designed to help a university identify and maintain an

optimal alignment with the most important elements the environment… within which the

university resides.” This environment consists of “the political, social, economic, technological,

and educational ecosystem, both internal and external to the university” (Rowley, Lujan,

Dolence, 1997, p. 14-15).

Learn more about Strategic Planning in Higher Education.

STRATEGIC PLANNING BUILDING BLOCKS

Vision and mission

Organization’s vision sets out the reasons and purpose for organization’s existence and the

ideal” state that the organization aims to achieve; the mission identifies major goals and

performance objectives. Both the vision and mission are defined within the framework of

organization’s philosophy, and are used as a context for development of intended strategies and

criteria for evaluating emergent strategies. The mission includes identification of (a) market (and

other – social, political) needs the organization fulfills, (b) business scope (i.e. products and

markets) required to fulfill organization’s purpose and (c) unique competencies that distinguish

the organization from competitors. The organization’s philosophy consolidates its values,

relationships with stakeholders, policies, culture, and management style (Hax & Majluf, 1996,

p.27; Hax & Majluf, 1991; CSUN strategic planning leadership retreat, April 1997; Hill & Jones,

1992).

Gap analysis

Gap analysis evaluates the difference between the organization’s current position, and its

desired future. Gap analysis results in development of specific strategies and allocation of

resources to close the gap (CSUN strategic planning leadership retreat, April 1997).

As an example, lets consider a completion issue: how long does it take students to complete

their education. A university may aim to graduate 60% of each class’ first time freshmen after 4

years. If the campus is currently at 40% it constitutes a 20% gap between the existing situation

and desired one. Understanding the nature of this gap will allow the university to develop

specific strategies to achieve the desired 60% completion rate.

Benchmarking

Benchmarking is an ongoing systematic process of measuring and comparing organization’s

operations, practices, and performance against the others within and outside of the industry,

including evaluation "the best" practices of other organizations. It is used within the strategic

planning process to guide the management of organization’s human, social, and technical

resources (Lerner, Rolfes, Saad, & Soderlund, 1998); CSUN strategic planning leadership

retreat).

Let’s go back to our completion example. The universities may research and learn what are

the completion rates at other, similar universities. How do our rates compare to those of similar

universities? What are the best completion rates in the universities we evaluated?

A CSU campus may research completion rates at other campuses in the system, and

benchmark (compare) against the best rate among them. Knowing the “best” rate will help the

campus set its own completion goals.

Emergent strategies

Although organizations can, and should, evaluate their environment, no one can foresee the

future. Events occur that challenge our assumptions and contradict our forecasts. Also, bright

ideas often come spontaneously, outside of the formal strategic planning process’s framework,

and between planning events.

Emergent strategy is a set of actions, or behavior, consistent over time, “a realized pattern

[that] was not expressly intended” in the original planning of strategy. When a deliberate strategy

is realized, the result matches the intended course of action. An emergent strategy develops

when an organization takes a series of actions that with time turn into a consistent pattern of

behavior, regardless of specific intentions. “Deliberate strategies provide the organization with a

sense of purposeful direction.” Emergent strategy implies that an organization is learning what

works in practice. Mixing the deliberate and the emergent strategies in some way will help the

organization to control its course while encouraging the learning process. “Organizations

[may] pursue … umbrella strategies: the broad outlines are deliberate while the details are

allowed to emerge within them” (Mintzberg, 1994, p. 23-25; Hax & Majluf, 1996, p. 17).

For example, a university may decide to recruit new students from high schools, which

becomes an intended strategy, and develops certain tactics to achieve this goal. However, during

the course of the recruitment process, it may realize that community colleges are responding

better than high schools to its recruitment efforts. As a result, the university’s recruitment

practices may change to emphasize attracting students from community colleges. This becomes a

university’s emergent strategy, which may later get formalized within the strategic plan.

Organizations must be alert to recognize advantageous emergent strategies, and flexible to

accept them. Otherwise, an ineffective intended strategy may not bring the desired results, and a

beneficial emergent strategy will not be allowed to thrive.

Strategic issues

Strategic issues are the fundamental issues the organization has to address to achieve its

mission and move towards its desired future. They contain “specific and meaningful planning

challenges,” and result from the previous analyses carried out by the organization (Hax &

Majluf, 1991). Examples of strategic issues include “the ubiquitousness and acceleration of

technological change” (Hax & Majluf, 1991), and “professional development of faculty, staff,

and administrators” (CSUN leadership retreat materials, 1997).

Strategic programming

Deliberate strategies for achieving organization’s mission and addressing strategic issues are

developed through strategic programming, which involves developing strategic goals, action

plans, and tactics.

Strategic goals are the milestones the organization aims to achieve that evolve from the

strategic issues. They transform strategic issues into “specific performance targets that impact

the entire” organization. “Goals are stated in terms of measurable and verifiable outcomes,” and

challenge the organization to be more responsive to the environment to achieve its desired future

(CSUN retreat booklet; Rowley p. 106).

Action plans … define how we get to where we want to go,” the steps required to reach our

strategic goals. They identify “who will do what, when and how; how we address current issues

and emerging trends as unforeseen contingencies arise” (CSUN retreat booklet).

Tactics are specific actions and deeds used to achieve the strategic goals and implement the

strategic plans. They are specific and measurable activities that keep the organization moving

toward fulfilling its strategic themes and achieving its desired future (Rowley, p.106).

Strategic thinking

Strategic thinking “is predicated on involvement” of key participants. “To think

strategically, … they must be active, involved, connected, committed, alert, stimulated. It is “the

calculated chaos” of their work that drives their thinking, enabling them to build reflection on

action as an interactive process.” “Such thinking must not only be informed by the moving

details of action, but be driven by the very presence of that action” (Mintzberg, 1994, p.291).

According to Liedtka (1998), following are the major attributes of strategic thinking.

“A systems or holistic view. Strategic thinking is built on the foundation of a systems

perspective.” It includes “a mental model of the complete end-to-end system of value

creation, … and an understanding of the interdependencies it contains.” It involves looking at

each part “not as a sum of its specific tasks, but as a contribution to a larger system that

produces outcomes of value…”

“A focus on intent. Strategic thinking is intent-driven. … Strategic intent provides the focus

that allows individuals within an organization to … leverage their energy, to focus attention,

to resist distraction, and to concentrate for as long as it takes to achieve a goal.”

“Thinking in time. Strategic thinkers link past, present, and future. … The gap between

today’s reality and intent for the future … is critical.”

“Hypothesis-driven. Strategic thinking … deals with hypothesis generating and testing as

central activities… and avoids the analytic-intuitive dichotomy; … it is both creative and

critical in nature.” As such, strategic thinking allows to “pose ever-improving hypotheses

without forfeiting the ability to explore new ideas.”

“Intelligently opportunistic. The dilemma involved in using a well-articulated strategy to

channel organizational efforts effectively and efficiently must always be balanced against the

risks of losing sight of alternative strategies better suited to a changing environment. …

There must be room for intelligent opportunism that not only furthers intended strategy but

that also leaves open the possibility of new strategies emerging.”

Click on these links for more information about the

Steps in a Strategic Planning Process

Brief History of Strategic Planning

Limitations of Strategic Planning

Please click here for complete list of References

Basic Models

The following three models are a foundation upon which the subsequent strategic planning

models were developed. Please refer to the Glossary of Terms for definitions.

These models were created for the business world. However, many universities have found

them to be useful, and were able to adopt them not only to the needs of higher education in

general, but to the special needs of specific universities. One of the most important benefits of

these models is flexibility and adaptability. They can be used in a variety of ways, using

approaches specific to a particular setting, to create a unique picture of the institution’s

distinctive environment.

SWOT

SWOT analysis identifies factors that may affect desired future outcomes of the organization.

The SWOT model is based on identifying the organization’s internal strengths and weaknesses,

and threats and opportunities of the external environment, and consequentially identifying the

company’s distinctive competencies and key success factors. These, along with considerations

of societal and company values, lead to creation, evaluation, and choice of strategy. SWOT’s

objective is to recommend strategies that ensure the best alignment between the external

environment and internal situation (Andrews, 1980, Christensen et al., 1982 in Mintzberg, p. 36-

37; Hax & Majluf, 1996, p.27; CSUN strategic planning leadership retreat, April 1997; Hill &

Jones, 1992, p. 14).

SWOT analysis is usually presented in the following form:

Strengths Opportunities

Weaknesses Threats

ANSOFF

In Igor Ansoff’s model, “strategy … is designed to transform the firm from the present

position to the position described by the objectives, subject to the constraints of the capabilities

and the potential” of the organization. This model specifically stresses two concepts. Gap

analysis is designed to evaluate the “difference (gap) between the current position of the firm

and [its] objectives.” The organization chooses the strategy that “substantially closes the gap.”

Synergy refers to the idea that firms must seek “product-market posture with a combined

performance that is greater than the sum of its parts,” more commonly known as “2+2=5”

formula (Ansoff, 1965, in Mintzberg, p. 43-45).

PORTERS FIVE FORCES MODEL

The five forces model developed by Michael E. Porter guides the analysis of organization’s

environment and the attractiveness of the industry. The five forces include the risk of new

competitors entering the industry, threat of potential substitutes, the bargaining power of buyers,

the bargaining power of suppliers, and degree of rivalry between the existing competitors

(Porter, 1985). Environmental scan identifies external opportunities and threats, evaluates

industry’s overall attractiveness, and identifies factors contributing to, or taking away from, the

industry attractiveness (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p.27). Through organization’s choice of strategy it

can alter the impact of these forces to its advantage.

This is a graphical interpretation of Porter’s five forces model (Porter, 1985, p. 5), including

examples relevant for higher education:

Please click here for a complete list of References

INDUSTRY

COMPETITORS

RIVALRY AMONG

EXISTING FIRMS

Potential

Entrants

SUPPLIERS

BUYERS

SUBSTITUTES

Threat of

new

Entrants

Bargaining

Power of

Buyers

Threat of

Substitutes

Bargaining

Power of

Suppliers

Example:

University

of Phoenix

Example:

Companies doing

in-house training

Example:

Students have

more choices

Example:

Shortage of faculty

in key areas Example:

Other universities

Annotated Bibliography

BENJAMIN, R. & CARROLL, S. J. (1998). BREAKING THE SOCIAL CONTRACT: THE

FISCAL CRISIS IN CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION. RAND: COUNCIL FOR AID TO

EDUCATION. (CAE-01-IP).

This report presents finding of a RAND study of California higher education. It

describes challenges facing California public post-secondary education, including a potential

inability of public universities to meet growing demand.

The authors discuss trends in California and higher education, including increasing need

for higher education, decreasing public funding, and changing demographics, and suggest ways

in which the State of California, together with the institutions of higher education may be able to

correct the problems.

AVAILABLE FROM: RAND Distribution Services, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-

2138. Phone (310) 451-7002 310); Fax (310) 451-6915; www.rand.org.

BRENEMAN, D. (1995, APRIL). A STATE OF EMERGENCY? HIGHER EDUCATION IN

CALIFORNIA. SAN JOSE, CA: CALIFORNIA HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY CENTER.

This report reviews current issues in California higher education, including increased

enrollment demand, budgetary problems and prospects, and resistance to change within the

university community. The author offers suggestions for addressing these challenges, stressing a

need for a strategic perspective in planning the future of higher education in California. The

author also suggests 12 actions for increasing Californians’ opportunities for undergraduate

education.

AVAILABLE FROM: California Higher Education Policy Center, 160 W. Santa Clara St., Suite

704, San Jose, CA 95133. Or ERIC Document Reproduction Service, 7420 Fullerton Road,

Suite 110, Springfield, VA 22153-2852. Phone: (800)-443-3742 or (703)-440-1400; Fax: (703)-

440-1408, http://edrs.com.

HAX, A. C. & MAJLUF, N. S. (1996). THE STRATEGY CONCEPT AND PROCESS, A

PRAGMATIC APPROACH. UPPER SADDLE RIVER, NJ: PRENTICE HALL.

The authors present a clear and comprehensive approach for strategy development at all

business levels and functions, providing step-by-step guidance for engaging in a successful

strategic management process.

The book offers specific methodologies and tools for development of strategy, suggests

tools for effective communication throughout organization, and incorporates the most current

developments and advances in the practice of strategic management through integrating several

frameworks essential for successful strategy formation.

LIEDTKA, J. M. (1998, SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER). LINKING STRATEGIC THINKING WITH

STRATEGIC PLANNING. STRATEGY AND LEADERSHIP, 26, 30-36.

In discussing this complex relationship, the author considers how strategic planning can

be used to further strategic thinking in organizations. The article provides a thorough definition

of strategic thinking, discusses impediments, and examines the differences between the two

models.” The author suggests that integrating the two processes is essential to developing a

successful strategy

MINTZBERG, H. (1994). THE RISE AND FALL OF STRATEGIC PLANNING. NEW YORK,

NY: THE FREE PRESS.

In this book, one of the most prominent authors on strategy provides a comprehensive

and extensive history and evaluation of strategic planning, and research literature related to

strategy.

The book candidly exposes the major problems and limitations of strategic planning, and

provides a framework for successful strategic planning effort in a role of “strategic

programming.”

ROWLEY, D. J., LUJAN, H. D., & DOLENCE, M.G. (1997). STRATEGIC CHANGE IN

COLLEGES AND UNVIVERSITIES. SAN FRANCISCO, CA: JOSSEY-BASS PUBLISHERS.

This book discusses application of strategic planning to institutions of higher education,

providing a detailed, step-by-step description of a strategic planning model suited for an

academic institution. The authors suggest how strategic planning may be used to create a more

effective institution, and discuss the differences in the strategic planning models suitable for

businesses and universities.

TRAIB, J. (1997, OCTOBER 20 & 27). DRIVE-THRU U: HIGHER EDUCATION FOR

PEOPLE WHO MEAN BUSINESS. THE NEW YORKER, 114-123.

The article illustrates a new model of higher education by discussing one of the most

successful for-profit institutions of post-secondary education - University of Phoenix, which

exemplifies new and untraditional competition facing public universities.

Please click here for a complete list of References

References

Prof. Louis M. De Bruin- President of New World Mission Dunamis International University. Community and University Development 1992 to 2006. River and Water Research -unpublished 2006, Theological Research 1984 to 2006, International University research 2004-2006 Religions of the World Research 2002 – 2006 Chairperson Community Development. International Accreditation of Schools and Universities Research 2004-2006 Web site at: http://degreeaccredit.tripod.com Baum, Paul. Professor, Management Science, CSUN. Personal communication. March 18, 1999.

Benjamin, R. & Carroll, S. J. (1998). Breaking the social contract: The fiscal crisis in California

higher education. RAND: Council for Aid to Education. (CAE-01-IP).

Breneman, David. Professor, Harvard University, Graduate School of Education. (March/April

1995). Presentation at CSUN: California Higher Education: A State of Emergency?

Breneman, D. (1995, April). A State of Emergency? Higher Education in California. San Jose,

CA: California Higher Education Policy Center.

Carroll, Edward. Dean, College of Science and Math, CSUN. Personal communication. April

26, 1999.

Cornerstones Implementation Plan, Draft, CSU.

www.calstate.edu/cornerstones/reports/draft_plan.html

Flores, William. Dean, College of Social and Behavioral Science, CSUN. Personal

communication. April 16, 1999.

Glassman, A.M., Rossy, G. & Winfield. J. (n.d.) Toward an Understanding of University-Based

Strategic Planning. Unpublished Manuscript, California State University, Northridge.

Glassman, Alan. Professor of Management, CSUN. Personal communication. April 21, 1999.

Gouillart, F. (1995, May-June). The day the music died. Journal of Business Strategy, 16 – 3, p.

14-20.

Guralnik, D. (Ed.). (1986). Webster’s New World Dictionary (2nd ed.). Cleveland, OH: Prentice

Hall Press.

Hax, A. C. & Majluf, N. S. (1991). The Strategy Concept and Process, A Pragmatic Approach.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hax, A. C. & Majluf, N. S. (1996). The Strategy Concept and Process, A Pragmatic Approach.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Hill, C. W. & Jones, G. R. (1992). Strategic Management: An Integrated Approach. Boston,

MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Kennedy, Louanne. Provost; Vice President of Academic Affairs, CSUN. Personal

communication. April 22, 1999.

Liedtka, J. M. (1998, September-October). Linking strategic thinking with strategic planning.

Strategy and Leadership, 26, 30-36.

Lerner, A. L. (1999). Strategic Planning Essays. Unpublished manuscript. California State

University, Northridge.

Lerner, A. L., Rolfes, K., Saad, M., Soderlund, C. (1998). Evaluation of benchmarking

techniques. Unpublished manuscript. California State University, Northridge.

Mintzberg, H. (1994). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Munitz, Barry. Chancellor, CSU. (February 1, 1995). Presentation at CSUN: Trends in Higher

Education. Northridge, CA.

Nichelson, Pat. Professor, Religious Studies, CSUN. Personal communication. April 12, 1999.

Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance.

New York: The Free Press.

RAND. (May 4, 1995). Presentation at CSUN: Environmental Scan. Northridge, CA.

Rossy, Gerard. Chair, Department of Management, CSUN. Personal communication. April 21,

1999.

Rowley, D. J., Lujan, H. D., & Dolence, M.G. (1997). Strategic Change in Colleges and

Unviversities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Strategic planning leadership retreat materials. (1997). Unpublished manuscript. California

State University, Northridge.

The Cornerstones Report, CSU. www.calstate.edu/cornerstones/reports/cornerstones_report

Traib, J. (1997, October 20 & 27). Drive-Thru U: Higher education for people who mean

business. The New Yorker, 114-123.

Wall, S. J., Wall, S. R. (1995, Autumn). The evolution (not the death) of strategy.

Organizational Dynamics, 24 - 2, p. 6.

Wilson, Blenda. President, CSUN. Personal communication. April 13, 1999.


 
Strategic Planning website


STRATEGIC PLANNING

EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT



Basic Models

     The following three models are a foundation upon which the subsequent strategic planning models were developed. Please refer to the Glossary of Terms.

     These models were created for the business world. However, many universities have found them to be useful, and were able to adopt them not only to the needs of higher education in general, but to the special needs of specific universities. One of the most important benefits of these models is flexibility and adaptability. They can be used in a variety of ways, using approaches specific to a particular setting, to create a unique picture of the institution's distinctive environment.

SWOT

     SWOT analysis identifies factors that may affect desired future outcomes of the organization. The SWOT model is based on identifying the organization's internal strengths and weaknesses, and threats and opportunities of the external environment, and consequentially identifying the company's distinctive competencies and key success factors. These, along with considerations of societal and company values, lead to creation, evaluation, and choice of strategy. SWOT's objective is to recommend strategies that ensure the best alignment between the external environment and internal situation (Andrews, 1980, Christensen et al., 1982 in Mintzberg, p. 36-37; Hax & Majluf, 1996, p.27; CSUN strategic planning leadership retreat, April 1997; Hill & Jones, 1992, p. 14).

SWOT analysis is usually presented in the following form:

Strengths

Opportunities

 

 

 

Weaknesses

Threats

 

 

 

ANSOFF

     In Igor Ansoff's model, "strategy ... is designed to transform the firm from the present position to the position described by the objectives, subject to the constraints of the capabilities and the potential" of the organization. This model specifically stresses two concepts. Gap analysis is designed to evaluate the "difference (gap) between the current position of the firm and [its] objectives." The organization chooses the strategy that "substantially closes the gap." Synergy refers to the idea that firms must seek "product-market posture with a combined performance that is greater than the sum of its parts," more commonly known as "2+2=5" formula (Ansoff, 1965, in Mintzberg, p. 43-45).

PORTER'S FIVE FORCES MODEL

     The five forces model developed by Michael E. Porter guides the analysis of organization's environment and the attractiveness of the industry. The five forces include the risk of new competitors entering the industry, threat of potential substitutes, the bargaining power of buyers, the bargaining power of suppliers, and degree of rivalry between the existing competitors (Porter, 1985). Environmental scan identifies external opportunities and threats, evaluates industry's overall attractiveness, and identifies factors contributing to, or taking away from, the industry attractiveness (Hax & Majluf, 1996, p.27). Through organization's choice of strategy it can alter the impact of these forces to its advantage.

     This is a graphical interpretation of Porter's five forces model (Porter, 1985, p. 5), including examples relevant for higher education:

SUPPLIERS

Example:
University of Phoenix


POTENTIAL
ENTRANTS
 

Bargaining
Power of
Suppliers

Threat of
new
Entrants

INDUSTRY
COMPETITORS

Rivalry among
Existing Firms
 

Bargaining
Power of
Buyers

Example:
Shortage of Faculty
in key areas

BUYERS

Example:
Students have
more choices

Threat of
Substitutes

Example:
Companies doing
in-house training

SUBSTITUTES

 

 


 
 
Winter 2005 Membership Newsletter
and news from partners around the world..

3profs.jpg

As soon as the 2007 issue of our newsletter is complete, it will be added to this section here. Each YEAR the newsletter will include latest news, interesting facts, upcoming events, and member names.

We are always looking for new ideas and topics for the YEARLY newsletter. If you have an idea or would be interested in writing an article, please let us know.
Real
Examples=
 

 NEW WORLD MISSION DUNAMIS INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Special Newsletter for 2005 to January 2007

PROGRAM DIRECTOR: Prof. Godwin Booysen.

THABA NCHU GRADUATION CEREMONY NOVEMBER 2005

ACADEMIC SPEECH BY Prof. Keith C. Harrington.

EDUCATION LIKE NEVER BEFORE.. www.university.zoomshare.com/

Prof. Louis M. De Bruin said: Partnership means better quality education, more doors of opportunity and being equipped by experts in every field of ministry, community and business development.

With the click of the mouse, as fast as lightning -we move from Africa to the USA to the UK And back to Africa, collecting useful information, organizing information and apply it to our own situation or area of study. New UNESCO EOLSS Link now active on our website at http://www.university.zoomshare.com/ click on http://www.eolss.net and register..

The following students and candidates received Diplomas, Degrees and Awards 26 November 2005 at the Thaba Nchu Graduation Ceremony,

Directed by Prof. Godwin Booysen.

13:00 Scripture reading and official opening prayer by Rev. Jacob Kgaile

Musical Item.

                      Conferring of degrees.

                      a)Diplomas:Evangelist Johannes H. Buffel, Ev. Petrus Leeu, School Principal Nthoto Maria Monei,

Dr. Jerry Moitse, Pastor Zella Selele, Past. Halome Seleke, Rev. Thamsanqa Ishmael Macingwane,

Past. Bareng France Mangwegape, Ev. Nosabelo Fukutwa. Past. Geofrey Ditshaba.


b)Associate Degrees: Pastoor Phillip Messelaar, Rev. Benjamin S. Mafa (h.c.)

c)Bachelor: Past. Halome Seleke, Past. Paddy Sepepe Seseng, Rev. Galford M. Qalase.

d)Master:Pastor Jacob Kgaile +(hc) Principal Maria Monei (h.c.) Rev. Norman P. Mothiedie


a) Doctor of Divinity:Dr. Alidi Mpateya, Jerry Moitse (h.c.)

b) Doctor of philosophy: Joseph Modise Abramse (h.c.)

                1. Honorary Professor: Dr. Godwin Booysen

                  Musical Item.

3. Main address by Prof. Keith. C. Harrington


    4. Special Words from Rev. Galford Qalase.

    5. Francina De Bruin

Francina De Bruin and

FINALIST

Mable Brown Katrina survivor who saved 18 family members

2005 was the year of Hurricane Katrina, one of the deadliest natural disasters in U.S. history. More than

1300 people died in the Gulf Coast region, and an estimated 1 million were left homeless. Mable Brown was

one of the latter. Overcoming unimaginable difficulties, this resourceful woman was able to save herself and bring 18 members of her family to safety. With her nomination we honor the thousands of Americans whose

determination and unselfishness enabled them to survive and to rescue others from the devastating effects

of the storm. A single mother, the 27-year-old Brown had recently moved to New Orleans from Atlanta when

the Category 4 hurricane struck in late August. Her sisters, who had long lived in New Orleans, hoped to

ride out the storm, even as waters began to rise precariously up the steps of the family's home. Eventually,

she and her sister started fires on the porch, hoping to attract the attention of rescue helicopters. When

none came, Brown mobilized the family to head out into the murky waters on foot.

Brown, who at 5'6" waded in water up to her chin, pulled her two daughters, 8, and 13, along as they

swam. Her sister and niece could not swim, so Brown convinced her sister's older sons to transport them

on their backs.

At the New Orleans Superdome, Brown quickly discovered that no help awaited them. The family literally

clung to each other to avoid the horrors of separation, rape, and violence that were swirling around them.

They managed to get on a bus to the Houston Astrodome. Again feeling that no one was there to help her,

Brown found her way to a cell phone store where she started making calls.

Via telephone, Brown landed a job as a hotel maid in Atlanta. Through sheer determination, she managed

to arrange to get herself, her three sisters, her mother, and her 12 nieces and nephews to Georgia together.

When they arrived, the entire family was given food, clothing, and shelter through the help of journalist Lisa

Earle McLeod and her church, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Gwinnett. The church, which only

has 120 adult members, formed a 60-person Hurricane Assistance Team that worked with Brown's

extended family and five other families in the aftermath of the disaster.

Brown is now living in a condominium duplex, and McLeod is helping her work toward her goal of getting

an education.

More News from around the World to our Office:

[GFA Urgent Prayer] Pray for Oppressed Pastor, Church
------------------------------------------------------
December 12, 2005
------------------------------------------------------

Dear Dr. De Bruin,

Something very bad has happened to one of our churches in India, and I want to ask you to earnestly pray for this very serious situation.

Not long ago, I wrote you about the 60 new believers in the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh who were threatened with death if they did not return to Hinduism.  And we all thanked God when He answered our prayers and the Christians were spared.

Now, however, the place where that church was meeting has been forcefully taken over by radical Hindus and turned into a temple.  It is the first time in the 26-year history of Gospel for Asia that a place of worship has been taken over and defiled as a temple.

Thank you for standing with our brothers and sisters in Himachal Pradesh, even as the evil one does his worst to try and defeat the strong moving of God.

Yours for the lost of Asia,

K.P. Yohannan
Founder & President
Gospel for Asia
_______________________

NWMDI joined over 175,000 Christians around the world through Gospel for Asia
FROM NIGERIA:-

Dear Dr Louis De Bruin,

 

May God reward you in his infinite mercy in his glories. I am glad to hear from you I have be trying to contact you on the cell number to thank you in person for the good you had offered my church. I will send you the information to be inputed on my website and pictures to make the site real onces again thanks in a million for your kind assistances. I have questions to ask you regarding student recruitment for your university. how do they go about visa procurement to come to your school in south-africa? are they no diplomatic bureaucracy involve? how much is it going to cost a student to travel down to south africa to attend your university? how are you going to help get sponsors for our developmental programmes for 2006? pls clarify on those issues till i hear you soonest.

 

 warmest regards.


Ps Richie Raymonds

News From The UNITED NATIONS


Dr Louis De Bruin <Cell. 072 127 4327
>


TORTURE, THOUGH ON DECLINE, REMAINS WIDESPREAD IN CHINA, UN EXPERT REPORTS
New York, Dec  2 2005 11:00AM
Torture, though on the decline, particularly in urban areas, remains widespread in China, and Government officials have increasingly recognized the problem and undertaken a number of measures to tackle it, the independent United Nations human rights expert on the issue said today.          

In <"a" >http://www.unhchr.ch/huricane/huricane.nsf/view01/677C1943FAA14D67C12570CB0034966D?opendocument">a report on a two-week visit resulting from a request originally made nearly a decade ago, the Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak, made a raft of recommendations ranging from legal reforms to an independent monitoring  system.          

Although he said he could not make a detailed determination as to the current scale of abuses, he confirmed that many of the torture methods alleged to have been practiced on ethnic minorities, particularly Tibetans and Uighurs, political dissidents, human rights defenders, Falun Gong practitioners and
members of house-church groups have been used in China.          

The alleged methods include use of electric shock batons, cigarette burns, guard-instructed beatings by fellow prisoners, submersion in pits of water or sewage, exposure to extreme heat or cold, being forced to maintain uncomfortable positions, deprivation of sleep, food or water, and suspension from overhead fixtures by handcuffs.          

Mr. Nowak, who visited Beijing, Lhasa in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR) and Urumqi in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR), noted that all meetings with detainees were carried out in privacy and in locations he designated, no request for a meeting or interviewing a particular individual was refused and prison staff were generally cooperative.         
Special Rapporteurs are unpaid experts serving in an independent personal capacity who receive their mandate from the UN Human Rights Commission.           
 2005-12-02 00:00:00.000

________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news



NEXT GRADUATION CEREMONY MARCH or April 2008 (D.V.)



We may make past editions of the newsletter available for download.

Quality Development Never Ends