University Planning: Strategic Communication in Times of Change

1. University Planning: Strategic Communication in Times of ChangeCathy A. FleurietAna Lisa GarzaTexas State University-San Marcos Presented at the July 2004 Conference of the Society for College and University Planning.

2. Presentation Goal To highlight components of the collaborative strategic planning process used at Texas State University-San Marcos that led to a “living” plan that drives university goals and initiatives

3. Presentation Objectives • The presentation specifically addresses the following: • The “bottom up, top down” process used to create unit, division, and university plans • Communication strategies implemented to establish buy-in from the university community • Steps taken to create a collaborative working relationship between academic and administrative areas • Methods implemented to reestablish the importance of unit and division plans • The university mission review process that assisted in the collaborative framing of strategic goals.

4. Step 1: Review of Planning Process • Review Committees • Presidential Task Force • Institutional Effectiveness Team • Council of Deans • Council of Chairs • Strategic Planning Review Committee • Committee Members • Recommendations • Academic Planning Steering Committee

5. Academic Planning Calendar • Calendar Development • Frames the planning process • Incorporate recommendations • Includes mandatory feedback loops

6. Step 2: Environmental Scan Process A three part process was developed to thoroughly identify all possible impacts to the university. • Academic department scan and SWOT analysis (“Inside-out”) • A study of external environmental impact factors (demographic information) • External environmental scan (“outside-in”)

7. “Inside-out” Scan Faculty, Chairs, and Deans conducted a scan of their internal and external environment to identify factors that could impact initiatives. • Process promoted input at the academic department level • Promoted synthesis at the college level • Allowed for prioritization at the university level

8. External Environmental Impact • A collection of demographic information obtained from major written reports, electronic media, and major publications • Information categorized by local, regional, state, and national demographics

9. “Outside-in” Scan • A review of numerous external sources including print material, electronic media, and human sources to identify trends across the nation that could provide opportunities or threats for future planning • Traditional STEP research model used. Categories reviewed include: social, technological, economic and political impacts.

10. Step 3: “Bottom up” Process • Preliminary Planning Questions • Provided a planning framework to address new and current initiatives to be considered for implementation • Question Development Process • Planning Categories • Planning Questions • Feedback Loops • Impact on Planning Process

11. Planning Categories • Strategies to accomplish university goals are framed within the five planning categories used by all units: • academic programs • student learning and success • scholarly and creative activity/grant activity • development • diversity

12. Academic Affairs Planning Using the five planning categories to frame strategies, • Departments prioritized maintenance needs and new initiatives; • Deans prioritized college needs based on discussions with chairs; • VPAA prioritized Academic Affairs maintenance and new initiatives based on discussions with deans. • Deans and VPAA present plans in open forums.

13. Step 4: Mission Statement Review Process • Information gathered across campus through this process assisted in framing the university mission statement. • Important components of the mission statement guide Texas State’s direction.

14. Mission Statement Review Process • A campus review of the university mission statement leading to our new mission statement; • A campus review of university goals leading to what will be our focus for the 2004-2009 university plan.

15. University Mission Statement Process • Academic and administrative units respond electronically to mission review questions via the mission review feedback template provided on the planning and assessment website. • Units discuss as a group and come to a general agreement on answers to the discussion questions. • Units provide responses to these questions via the electronic template. • Mission review committee constructs first draft and presents to the university community for review.

16. Mission Review Questions Mission Statement Review Discussion Questions Unit Title______________________________ Number of Persons involved in review _____ 1. What commitments, emphases, directions, or actual statements contained in the current mission statement are critical to our university mission? Please list these. 2. From the list you have created, prioritize your list from most important to least important. 3. What commitments, emphases, and directions should be contained in our mission statement that are not currently there?

17. Mission Review Questions 4. What sets Texas State apart from other universities, whether it is our students we serve, our programs, our location, or some other aspect of the university? 5. Please list any other comment(s) concerning the mission statement review that the unit would like to include.

18. Expansion to University Planning • Steering Committee for University Planning (SCUP!) • Charge • Administrative Division Process • Calendar Additions

19. Step 5: Administrative Division Planning • Administrative staff viewed academic plans. • Administrative plans were developed with academic plans in mind. • Administrative units and divisions used the five planning categories, along with an institutional support category to develop plans. • Administrative divisions used a collaborative process to prioritize initiatives. • Administrative VPs presented plans in open forums.

20. Step 6: Creating a “Living” Plan • Creation of “Read Across” committees • Committees made up of faculty, staff, and students, and stakeholders that “read across” academic plans • Committee charge was to capture and report on important information to be used for planning purposes.

21. “Read Across” Committee Goals • Identifying “opportunities” within the areas reviewed • Aggregating/outlining resources requested • Identifying infrastructure needed to fulfill requests • Reporting on types of support/guidance that can be provided • Making recommendations for additions or deletions in college plans, particularly those that require funding

22. Step 7: Development of University Goals University goals: • Represent the “top-down, bottom-up” planning process; • Reflect information gathered from the original five planning categories; • Emphasize important components of the university mission statement; • Derived from academic goals; • Presented to University community for review and comment

23. University Plan Outcomes • University Goals contain “intended outcomes” that we must achieve in order to meet our goals. • Outcomes were derived from: • Initiatives outlined in college and division plans; • Reports and recommendations from “read across” committees; • Presidential commitments and external expectations.

24. Step 8: Developing Final University Plan: “Embracing Change” • Description of Document • Division Plans • Support Plans • Diversity, Research, Investment, Facilities, Distance Learning • Dissemination to University Community • Board of Regents’ Approval

25. Planning Process Review • Planning Steps • Feedback Loops • Planning Website • President and Associate VP Updates • Planning Calendar Feedback Loops • Open Forums on Planning • Committee Liaisons • Tie to Budget Process • Assessment Plans

26. Conclusion • Perceptions of Revised Planning Process • Lessons Learned • Leadership Support • Keeping the Plan “Alive”

27. Texas State UniversitySan Marcos Honor the Past Claim the Future