Trends in Strategy

A recent report by Jennifer Stephens, appearing in the July-September 2017 issue of Planning for Higher Education Journal, describes eight themes from a year-long study of how strategic planning practice is changing in American colleges and universities. We see very close parallels between what Stephens documents in higher education and what we see in our strategy practice with independent and international schools.

1. Shorter time spans. Since 2008-09, we have noticed fewer schools doing 5 or 7-year plans and more doing “evergreen” plans that cover shorter time horizons and are more readily refreshed. This is a very positive turn of events! Too many 7 and 10-year plans eventually fell by the wayside as circumstances changed and forced newer and more relevant goals.
2. Broad brush strokes. Strategic plans used to be massive documents, sometimes containing 20 or more pages and dozens of goals and strategies. Most plans now are shorter, often just the front and back of a single page. With four to six strategic directions, school leaders point to the destinations necessary for success but leave almost all of the tactical steps to later conversations within management, where they properly belong.
3. Heightened focus on communications. As the SCUP article notes, “Many organizations had multiple communication channels focused on the plan, for example, blogs, speeches, talking points, videos, websites, and emails. Organizations and their leaders tried to get the word out in every way possible that the plan was in the process of being developed, explaining to stakeholders why it mattered and how they could get involved.” Ultimately, “An organization should be able to clearly tweet its strategic plan.”
4. Simplicity rules. Simple explanations of even the most complex changes go a long way toward reducing confusion among stakeholders. School leaders can prepare any number of dense, jargon-filled documents they might need for internal use, but we are seeing the external-facing documents become models of simplicity and brevity.
5. Use of data. This trend took off after 2008-09 and is still accelerating. Most schools now anchor their strategies in a wealth of qualitative and quantitative data and trend lines. The use of data as a basis for strategy has shifted the conversation from “what do we want to look like in 10 or 20 years,” to “what matters most for our success at mission and sustainability as a business.”
6. Competitive edge. We see more schools trying to differentiate themselves in the marketplace. To be sure, for some this is more about messaging and spin than substance, but for a growing number of schools, it is about developing signature programs and qualities that aren’t replicated all across town.
7. Organizational alignment. Many older plans failed because the school wasn’t aligned along strategic lines; that is, there was a disconnect between the strategic framework and functional silos within the administration and faculty. With broad brushstrokes, simplicity, and brevity, it becomes easier to use the strategic plan as an organizing rubric for governance, management and program delivery.
8. Leadership makes a difference. Engagement by board and senior administrators is essential all throughout the strategy making process, including post hoc, when these individuals become the drivers of alignment and follow-through.

Worth keeping these themes in mind as you embark on your next round of strategic planning. We would love to hear how it goes and please let us know if we can help.