Purpose of the study

1. System of strategic planning: Analysis of international best practices and their applicability in the Kyrgyz Republic

2. Purpose of the study • Document the strategic planning process in the Kyrgyz Republic in the light of general strategic planning methodological approaches • Identify the strength and weaknesses of the process from methodological point of view, • Identify best practices applied internationally • Compare the practices in the Kyrgyz Republic with these best practices • Establish recommendations to improve the strategic planning process in the Kyrgyz Republic

3. Sources • National Sustainable Development Strategy for the Kyrgyz Republic for the period of 2013-2017 • Law on normative legal acts of the Kyrgyz Republic • Law on state forecasting of socio-economic development of Kyrgyz Republic • Interviews of key actors involved in strategic planning in the Kyrgyz Republic • Government Performance Result Act (United States of America) • E-government master plan 2011-2015 (Singapore) • Strategic economic plan: toward a developed nation (1990-2030) – (Singapore) • Approach to integrated performance strategy (Singapore) • Strategic vision for economic development – Israel 2020 (Israel) • Strategic plan 2011-2013 (Republic of South Africa) • Framework for strategic plans and annual performance plan (Republic of South Africa)

4. Strategic planning in the KyrgyzRepublic

5. Key findingsPolitics • Strategic planning possibly not part of the top priorities of the members of the political life • Strong drivers are missing possibly in the benefits of shorter term and less integrative views

6. Key findingsLegal and institutionalelements • Legal basis for strategic planning is weak • Institutional and methodological weaknesses in the strategic planning process • Institutional roles are unclear • Status of strategic documents is disputed. • Poor coordination that can cause competitions and inefficient spreading of resources

7. Key findingsGeneral methodologicalelements • Lack of methodological standards; methodological inconsistencies • No clear priority settings, monitoring, evaluation and adaptation of plans.

8. Key findingsKey contents (1) • Context analysis: Context analysis and forecasting likely to be positively impacted by the law on state forecasting of socio-economic development of the Kyrgyz Republic • Vision: A vision for the Kyrgyz Republic is defined

9. Key findingsKey contents (2) • Objectives, actions, outcomes • General objectives are defined • Actions necessary to achieve the objectives are not clearly identified • Details of outputs, outcomes, and impacts for stakeholders are not developed • Means • Resources to achieve the objectives are poorly documented • Conditions of success are not defined

10. Key findingsKey contents (3) • Risk management Weakly documented risks and mitigation strategies • Monitoring and evaluation • Monitoring system not specified • Indicators mentioned in terms of outputs but not in terms of outcomes and impacts

11. Key findingsKey contents (4) • Stakeholders • Limited communication and involvement of the population and of the key players (like senior management of state bodies) put the supporting basis at risk • The skepticism expressed about interest of the population toward strategic plans in mirror of the skepticism of the population toward state institutions. Risk of vicious circle of mutual skepticism.

12. International best practices

13. Politics Government • Considered as a service provider to the population • People and organizations are considered as customers of the government Political consensus • All players agree on the main outlines of policy goals and methods De-politicized bureaucracy • Professional, non-partisan bureaucracies craft and implement economic development policies and limit corruption

14. Laws and regulations Require institutions to: • Produce a Strategic Plan, outlining the planned sequencing of projects and program implementation and associated resources • Produce a Performance Plan, with performance targets • Identify indicators • Adopt a reporting system

15. Institutions • Strategic planning is a governmental function • Strategic plan refers to constitutional, legislative and policy mandates

16. Framework documents • Provide guidance on good practice and budget-related information requirements • Provide timeframes • Clarify the relationship between state bodies’ plans, policy developments and budgets • Provide details and definitions of key concepts and information to be reported on in specific sections of the Strategic Plans

17. Key contents of strategic plans (1) • Situation analysis • Vision Inspiring picture of a preferred future • Mission statement • Reason for an institution’s existence based on its legislative mandates, functions and responsibilities : what the institution does, why and for whom • Mission of the state and comprehensive mission statements covering the major functions and operations of the state bodies

18. Key contents of strategic plans (2) • Values • Key values of the state • Values define a citizen-oriented approach for delivering government services • Goals, key activities, outputs, outcomes, impacts • Outcome-related goals for the major operations of the state bodies, aligned with the priorities identified in the government program • Measurable key activities, outputs, and targets, against which the performance of the administration is measured through indicators • Difference is made between activities (what we do), outputs (what we produce or deliver), outcomes (what we wish to achieve) and impacts (what we aim to change)

19. Key contents of strategicplans (3) • Means • Description of how the goals are to be achieved (operational processes, skills and technology, human, capital, information, etc.) • Budget program structures reflecting the main areas of responsibility within institutional mandates • Links • Descriptions of how the performance goals included in the plans are related to the general goals in the strategic plans

20. Key contents of strategicplans (4) • Risk and mitigation • Factors beyond the control of state bodies and that could significantly affect the achievement of the goals are identified • Risks and mitigation strategies are defined • Monitoring and Evaluation • State bodies report on the extent to which they have succeeded in achieving strategic outcome oriented goals • Impacts of plans are measured through “internal indicators”, through population satisfaction surveys, and through international benchmarking • Monitoring and evaluation are conducted by a state body that is independent of Presidency and Ministries involved in the implementation of the plan.

21. Stakeholders • State bodies consults with the parliament, and solicits the views of entities potentially affected by the plan • Citizens are informed and involved • State bodies’ senior management is involved to reinforce its sense of ownership • State bodies consult with key stakeholders to identify and include indicators that they have a direct interest in tracking

22. Recommendations

23. Position of the government and the state bodies as service providers toward the population • Customer orientation to be reinforced at all levels of the state institutions • To be supported by organizational and individual changes • Reduction of the distance between institutions and the population will contribute to reinforce the commitment and the interest of the population for strategic plans • Support basis will be reinforced and positive expectation will reinforce the general willingness to achieve the results

24. Bring strategic planning on top of the political agenda • Increase electoral support for long term development by raising the political education of the population and by informing the population intensively about the nature, the purposes and the importance of longer term strategic projects • Reposition strategic development higher in the political agenda of the entire population through abundant information on projects, on achievements, combined with a participative approach at local level • Political parties should present clear programs and projects that give a priority to long term development and should communicate abundantly about this

25. Create a solid legal ground for strategic planning • Establish by law that strategic planning must be done • Define the roles and accountabilities of the state bodies in the process of establishing and implementing the strategic plan • Reinforce the consistency of the state structure and of the coordination mechanisms through a clarification of all mandates and a clarification of the coordination of mandates • Define strategic planning process and the standards to be applied

26. Create support documents for developers and implementers • Inform the users about the nature, purposes and process of strategic planning • Provide a practical step by step approach of strategic planning

27. Apply standardized and efficient methods • Strategic maps and balanced scorecards adapted to state strategy prove to be very efficient tools to design the strategy, to communicate it, to monitor its implementation and to adapt it to changing environment