Open Forum

After serving 8 years on a different accreditation commission, I have come to some very different conclusions about "strategic plans." Based on what I have observed, they seldom function as sold or intended. Given the dynamism (especially now) of our field, I much prefer creating a more fluid and flexible "strategic vision." A specific strategic plan can hold a director or team hostage leaving less room for elasticity, improvisation and/or quickly adjusting to change. An institutionally adopted strategic plan (depending how written) offers comfort to those individuals who need a step by step roadmap. In our roles, step by step leads in many new and unpredicted directions. Those who dare deviate from a lengthy and often expensive strategic plan open themselves up to all kinds of questions and criticism from those who see "strategy" through a black and white lens. A strategic vision provides direction, excitement, visual outcomes and great marketability without checking all the little boxes that supposedly "ensure" ever-changing procedures are being adhered to. I have just seen too many times expensive strategic plans thrown out the window because 2-5 years later......it makes no sense for the organization. Good luck. 

Glenn

I very much agree with Glenn.  Furthermore, I think Interpretation plans and collections plans are of much greater overall value, longer lived and become tools that achieve the backing of ALL employees and supporters.

This week I had the opportunity to participate (via Zoom) as an observer while a group of 4 reviewers discussed the strengths and weaknesses of a recent round of funding applications. The purpose of these grants is that rare animal, General Operating Support. Observers are not privy to the final vote or the ranked scoring, but it's enormously helpful to learn what the decision makers are thinking, all of whom were well experienced with the kind of organizations that were applying.

I've been attending these reviews for the last 5 years. A question about strategic planning is always part of their annual application. Describe your process for strategic planning, where you are in the cycle of your current plan, and the progress you have made toward your current plan goals. The collection of responses below are not all from the same funding, but each one is about a different organization. Each year the reviewers are different, too, but overall there seems to be strong consensus on what they think a strong Strategic Plan looks like.

• Strategic Plan is too ambitious for the resources. Reads more like a work plan. 
• Strategic Plan seems more aspirational than concrete. Not clear what success will look like or the direction needed to get there. 
• Strategic Plan very weak. Capital plan for facility renovations is much better, making the panel wonder: is the cart (the building) leading the horse (the operations)?
• One panelist thought the Strategic Plan was detailed. Another thought it read like a To Do list but agreed that the plan gives a clear sense of strengths and weaknesses, and even had good utility as a "branding" tool for organizational identity. 
• Strategic Plan could be more generous in the information covered, but OK. Would benefit the organization to spend more time on it. Appears appropriate for the organization but not clear how much input comes from the community. Seems aspirational, not measurable.
• It's a good idea to hire a consultant for the next round of planning (not try to do it without external guidance). 
• The Strategic Plan portrays an organization that is openly transparent.