A vital and self-aware organization does not restrict strategic thinking to formal strategic planning processes. Each functional area has an ongoing process for addressing its own strategic issues, which then feed into an institutional strategic, business and/or program planning process at regular intervals. An inter-related cycle of planning across all areas provides a structure for communication, understanding and success.

Strategic Planning

There are many good models for strategic planning. Which approach will work for a specific institution depends upon the nature of the organization (many or few constituencies, and how large, engaged, and dispersed they are; size and nature of staff; role of the governing board), the prior planning experience of staff and governing board, the life-cycle stage of the organization (new, thriving, stalled, troubled), and the nature of the changes it is facing or creating. Synthesis Partnership has designed and facilitated strategic planning processes for educational and cultural institutions, public libraries, religious congregations, and other non-profits. Typical components of a planning process include:

Strategic Analysis

Traditional modes of strategic planning can be invaluable exercises, not only for planning, but also for board and staff development, and for consensus-building. However, when an organization has never tackled a full-blown strategic planning process, we often recommend alternative approaches. Traditional strategic planning requires a major commitment of time and energy; it can be a difficult challenge for an institution that has not yet developed a culture of planning; and it does not naturally encompass expertise-based strategic implementation. If an institution has specific issues to deal with in identity, facilities, business planning, or marketing, it is likely that a traditional strategic planning process will consume all of the available energy of the governing board and management while only getting to the first, vague stage of a solution.

Synthesis Partnership can perform a strategic analysis, followed by highly focused strategic implementation planning. We add value efficiently by guiding management and board through issues of strategic priorities, program planning, business planning, and physical master planning; by tying all of these efforts into organizational mission and identity; and by laying out clear steps for implementation using carefully selected expertise such as fundraising, marketing, architecture and design.

Once this solid foundation has been established (and related execution of a capital campaign and capital project design and construction have been absorbed) future strategic planning can productively assume the traditional mode, with an internally-driven, hands-on approach reinvigorating the organization with board development, self-awareness, energy and commitment.

In each of our assignments we listen carefully to the situation, assess needs, and design a strategic analysis process that suits the specific circumstances. Generally we speak with many constituents who have different stakes in the organization, but we work with our clients to find the most effective and efficient approach to each assignment. We identify key issues and suggest ways to address them. Above all, Synthesis Partnership is a process advisor. We make certain that our clients are asking themselves the right questions to identify their most essential strategic goals and then to use these goals as a guide for all their planning.

Process Transparency

In any organization, effective change requires consensus. With many of our clients–especially those in education and health care, religious congregations, and others with highly empowered stakeholders –consensus within and across diverse constituencies can be especially difficult to achieve. Synthesis Partnership custom designs transparent processes for our clients. These inclusive, strategic exercises make all stakeholders feel involved and valued, and recognize and incorporate their concerns, but avoid the pitfalls of democratic (or veto-based) decision-making.

A truly transparent process can only be designed with an understanding of the organization involved. When developed carefully, it offers many positive qualities:

• A transparent process is inclusive: it implies that the work is done by a wieldy few, but is visible and accessible to all.
  
  
• A transparent process is open: If your work is done with openness, there will be enormous energy and enthusiasm throughout an institution. A broad range of people have good ideas; if all the vision comes from the administration alone, or from the governing board, frustration will likely interfere with success.
  
  
• A transparent process is responsive: It may take a top-down directive to make things happen at your institution. However if you leave latitude for feedback, you will find ways to address peripheral pressing needs with a well-focused primary goal. And just the act of asking for feedback will improve morale. (Note that this also works the other way. If your institution is paralyzed by excess democracy, a well-designed transparent process can separate participation from decision-making.)
  
  
• A transparent process is based in effective communication. (e.g. an economic model that can be read by non-financial board members; or facilities goals that are developed and expressed in strategic, not architectural terms.)
  
  
• A transparent process is replicable by being well-documented; thus it becomes not just a one-time expense but an investment that prepares for future deliberations as well as current decisions.

   

  BACK TO TOP