Reflective Essay on Theme I, Issue No. 6: Strategic
Planning Progress
In fall 2002, the University's Long Range Planning Council
carried out a five-year retrospective review of campus progress
in implementing initiatives and achieving tangible results
with our Strategic Plan. From the many, many activities
and accomplishments reported by the divisions, departments
and offices, it was clear that the goals of the plan are
well-understood by the campus community, almost all parts
of the university are engaged in meaningful projects to
carry out activities and reach objectives appropriate to
their area, and tangible results are beginning to show return
on the investment of time and effort. (See the Planning
Council's Assessment of Strategic Plan at: http://thewasc.csusb.edu/edueffrev/thm1/appendix/i6/CommStratPlan.pdf )
A summary of the most important accomplishment for each
goal may be found in a report prepared by the Theme I subcommittee
at: http://thewasc.csusb.edu/edueffrev/thm1/appendix/i6/RepStrategPlanAcc.doc
The full 150-page Progress Report can be seen at: (http://thewasc.csusb.edu/repository/StratPlanProgRep.pdf )
One of the crucial questions raised by our self-study was
"How well aligned to the Strategic Plan goals are administrative
support structures and incentive?" It seems apparent
that the ongoing operations of the university are congruent
with the plan though there is no direct relationship between
the administrative hierarchy and the overarching and cross-divisional
objectives and goals of the plan. While some divisions are
more directly related to one goal than another, the progress
report revealed there is broad participation and involvement
across the campus with each goal. For example, several areas
of the university beside Academic Affairs division were
engaged in initiatives to realize the aspirations of Goal
I to encourage teaching and learning. The Long-range Planning
Council recognized this widespread involvement early on
by assigning primary responsibility for each objective in
the plan to a particular division, which would take the
lead role.
One of the ways the on-going university structure is tied
to the Strategic Plan is by the setting of annual goals
and objectives of each administrator under the management
personnel plan, which are directly tied and linked to specific
strategic objectives. (For examples see: http://thewasc.csusb.edu/repository/MPP_Obj.pdf ) Likewise, annual performance evaluations and salary increases
for managers are based largely on meeting these assigned
strategic objectives. The yearly and long-term objectives
of academic departments and individual faculty members,
however, are not directly tied to the plan, however, though
some College Dean's require department chairs and programs
to provide annual plans and evaluation reports.
Conclusions
The Long-range Planning Council made a number of recommendations
for revision of the plan, ensuring better reporting on accomplishments,
and getting better understanding of the objectives. The
Planning Council's assessment of our progress in reaching
the goals and objectives of the strategic plan made several
crucial points that warrant reinforcement here:
-
The overall number, range, and kinds of
initiatives undertaken in the past five years is impressive.
The success of these activities needs to be widely shared,
understood, and discussed on-campus with various groups.
The results of our initiatives and the success of our
most significant projects need to be summarized and conveyed
to all our constituencies and on and off-campus stakeholders.
-
The progress report should be the basis
for financial discussions and inform the decisions of
the University Budget Council.
-
Some prioritization objectives and reduction
initiatives to focus on more tangible results is recommended.
The number of initiatives is almost too large to track.
It is suggested that each objective be assigned only one
or two clear and measurable results or expected outcomes
that may be tracked.
-
Some of the objectives need to be restated
to include more specific criteria for evaluating the degree
of success and for knowing when the expected outcome has
been reached. Many of the objectives are long-term ones
and likely ongoing but some of them need focus less on
process and more on tangible results and activities that
have a point of closure and definite completion.
-
We need to develop a better way of capturing
and reporting information from all parts of the university
from normal, everyday activities that support the plans
objectives. There is a need to involve all divisions and
departments more closely in the plan. Many areas of the
university are not mentioned in the progress report and
it appears that much meaningful and praiseworthy activity
and accomplishment may go unreported.
While the Planning Council noted that many objectives were
only partially met or were still in progress, there is every
reason to be proud of the many efforts underway and the
tangible results that have already been accomplished.
