One definition of leaders is that they are the people who guide people toward a goal.  They lead and others follow.

Inherent in this definition is the idea of a goal to be reached.  Leaders need to both have a goal in mind and know how to get there.  That, in short, is a strategic plan.

Leaders can’t lead if they don’t have a plan.  The goal – or vision – is inspiring enough to enroll people, to get them on the bus headed toward the goal.  But if there is no fuel or map, the bus will sit there and eventually people will get off the bus.  A strategic plan is the road map for an organization, and the fuel is the leader’s continuous guidance, coaching, course corrections, and celebration when milestones are reached on the way to the goal.

I love strategic planning, having engaged in more than I can count.  I find it a way to build community as people work together to articulate a shared vision and then decide the best way to achieve that vision from where they as a group are right now.

Organizations need strategic plans at specific junctures in their existence: when they are new, when they are in crisis, and when they are ready to jump to the next level.

The process of creating an organization’s strategic plan can and should have its own goals.  It’s important to plan the planning process.  Among other benefits, the planning process itself can build community, stimulate creativity, enroll new stakeholders, strengthen bonds between stakeholders and the organization, and heighten an organization’s visibility.

While the elements of a strategic planning process are simple, an organization’s specific process will reflect its culture and resources.  The amount of time needed to complete a strategic plan depends on the availability and commitment of key players.  Typically, a planning process takes six to nine months.  Leading a strategic plan takes a lot of time, and it is primarily the Executive Director’s responsibility.

Elements of the Plan

Define the Current Situation.

Using a SWOT analysis, identify the organization’s Strengths and Weaknesses, and the Opportunities and Threats the group is facing. SW are generally internal, while OT are generally external. W are things you want to minimize.  S are things you can build upon. O are things that could strengthen and grow the program, make it better. T are things that could bring about its demise.

Generally, the SWOT analysis is done by the internal team of staff and volunteers, Board members and key stakeholders (e.g. funding sources, sponsors, key partners).  A group exercise can be very effective as a way to involve a broad group of people, surface all issues, and then prioritize them.  Dots. Paper. Ranking. Discussion.

Identify the environment in which the organization operates.

A useful framework is the PEST analysis: what are the Political, Economic, Social, and Technological conditions and trends affecting the organization now and in the future? It is not enough to name a broad trend.  The strength of the analysis lies in ascertaining the impact such a trend could or will have on the organization, its operations, operating environment, and future options. FACTS, not just perception.

This step generally involves significant research, including in-person interviews and internet searches, as well as an assessment of the funding and competitive landscape.  Interns can be quite useful as researchers as long as staff process and then present the findings to the Board and planning group.

Affirm or alter the organization’s mission.

Missions are essentially timeless and define the reason the organization exists, or its purpose.  The prior findings may affect the organization’s mission.  For example, God’s Love We Deliver changed its mission to feeding people with life-threatening, chronic illness after its original purpose – to feed people living with HIV/AIDS – became obsolete with the wonderful lessening of the incidence of HIV/AIDS.

The goal is to have a mission that all agree on and all know what it means.  The mission is a guide for program planning and consistency, identity and brand cohesiveness, fundraising, marketing, board development, hiring, and publicity.

A useful mission development process is to get everyone’s read and interpretation of the mission as it now stands, and what it means to them:

• Discuss what words mean to people
• Values
• Areas of similarity, difference o difference – place more conversation is needed
• What motivated people to work there? emotions, values, meaning, impact
• What would the world be like if we didn’t exist? What’s our reason, our purpose? To what group do we make a difference?

A small committee needs to then take all the input and synthesize it into a rough draft of a mission statement.  The Board and key staff then will discuss the draft, do its word-smithing in order to put its stamp on the statement, and coalesce around the mission.

Create a vision of the future impact of the organization.

Visions usually look 3 to 5 years into the future and express the specific results an organization wants to have by the end of that period.  It is a statement of desired impact and the difference an organization will make in its field on its constituency.  A successful vision is one that motivates people, fulfills the mission, promises impact, communicates the meaning for intended constituency, and provides concrete guidance for designing and aligning programming.  Visions are:

• Time-bound
• Measurable
• Achievable

This is a wonderful place to involve a broad group of stakeholders, internal and external.  After a brief orientation and explanation of some of the key findings from the SWOT and PEST analysis, people can be split into smaller groups to answer a few questions aimed at surfacing people’s hopes and dreams for the organization’s role and impact.  These questions have proven helpful in identifying vision:

• In [x period of time], we will be known for:
• In [x period of time], we will be capable of:
• In [x period of time], we will have the following impact:

Staff and a few Board members can take the answers to these questions and other information to craft a draft vision statement.  The vision statement should account for the areas of programming, funding, visibility, infrastructure, and governance.  The Board and key staff will discuss, edit, and adopt a final vision statement.

Craft specific strategies for achieving the vision.

At this point, staff take over the planning process.  With a clear mission and vision, staff can develop the specific strategies and methods for fulfilling the mission and achieving the vision.  After staff have developed a series of strategies, they will present those to the Board for its discussion, understanding, buy-in and hopefully approval.  In a healthy planning process, staff should want and expect the Board to make recommendations and suggest changes in strategy.  It is this interactive and iterative process that ensures the best possible plan, a plan that takes account of details and the broad picture. In addition, engaged Board members will be more effective fundraisers and “evangelists” for the organization.

Develop objectives and strategic outcomes that are measurable and time-specific.

In this stage, staff outline specific measurable targets and benchmarks to be achieved over the 3 to 5 year period of the plan.  These targets serve as the basis for developing the annual plan in each of the 3 to 5 years.  These targets and intermediate goals will be approved by the Board of Directors when it adopts the entire Strategic Plan, usually at its annual meeting. In subsequent years, staff and Board will have the opportunity to tweak and approve these plans during the annual budget and plan process.

Report on progress to date and evaluate success in achieving the plan.

With measurable goals and objectives, it is possible to measure progress toward these goals.  It is also possible to determine whether a strategy is successful, and to change course or shift program emphasis if the data show lack of progress or success.

This phase is increasingly important to funding sources and oversight agencies.  Organizations must have a system for measuring and reporting on their effectiveness to donors and oversight agencies, or they risk losing funding from people who want to know their dollars are actually making a tangible difference and positive impact.