1. No category

GETTING THERE:
CREATING A STRATEGIC
ROADMAP TO THE FUTURE
Kansas Health Foundation
Grant Recognition Conference
April 9, 2015
Presented by:
Lynne Brown
VP Strategic Consulting
iBossWell, Inc.
Agenda for the Day
• The philosophy of growth and
•
•
•
•
•
change
An overview of research tools to
inform the planning process
A review of best practices in
nonprofit strategic planning
Defining an effective plan
structure
Writing quality performance
measures
Building a culture of assessment
Why Plan?
“When it comes to the future, there are three kinds of
people: those who let it happen, those who make it happen,
and those who wonder, what happened?”
John M. Richardson, Jr.
SUCCESSFUL PRACTICES
IN STRATEGIC PLANNING
ASP Survey of Successful Strategic Planning Practices
in the Nonprofit Sector
RESEARCH
Successful organizations conduct research prior to the
planning process
Getting Out of Our Own Heads
• Staff
• Board
• Stakeholders
• Funders
• Partners
• Constituents
• Twitter/LinkedIn,
Facebook
• Journals/Conferenc
es
PEST ANALYSIS
Political, Economic, Social and Technological
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
criteria examples
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
home economycriteria examples
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
home economy
economy trends
overseas economies
general taxation
taxation specific to product/services
seasonality issues
market/trade cycles
specific industry factors
market routes trends
distribution trends
customer/end-user drivers
interest/ exchange rates
international trade and monetary issues
ecological/environmental current legislation
future legislation
international legislation
regulatory bodies and processes
government policies
government term and change
trading policies
funding, grants and initiatives
home market pressure- groups
international pressure- groups
wars and conflicts
political
economic
•
•
criteria examples
ecological/environmental current legislation
future legislation
international legislation
regulatory bodies and processes
government policies
government term and change
trading policies
funding, grants and initiatives
home market pressure- groups
international pressure- groups
wars and conflicts
political
economic
•
•
criteria examples
PROGRAM ASSESSMENT
MacMillan Matrix and Matrix Mapping
Program Assessment: Why
Guides organizations in:
• Assessing their programs against trends of increasing
demand for smaller resources
• Gaining greater focus
• Avoiding duplication of services
• Exploring and increasing opportunities for collaboration
• Determining prioritization and divestiture of programs
• Advancing organizational sustainability through
comparative view of mission-impact: financial
sustainability ratio
• Apples-to-apples comparison to guide objective
discussion
Two Approaches
• MacMillan Matrix
• Developed by I.C. MacMillan, “Competitive Strategies for Not-forProfit Agencies, Advances in Strategic Management 1 (London, JAI
Press, Inc., 1983): 61-82
• The Matrix Map
• Developed by: Jeanne Bell, Jan Masaoka, Steve Zimmerman
Nonprofit Sustainability: Making Strategic Decisions for Financial
Viability. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. 2010
MacMillan Matrix
Program Assessment: How
Assess each current or prospective program based upon
four key criteria:
Fit/Alignment with Mission
Fit is the degree to which a program “belongs” or fits within an
organization.
Program Strength – (Competitive Position )
Degree to which program has a strong capability; delivers outcomes
Alternative Provider(s) - (Alternative Coverage)
Number of other organizations attempting to/delivering similar program in
same region to similar constituents
Program Resource Attractiveness
Degree to which program is attractive to the organization from an
economic perspective, as an investment of current/future resources. How
easily it attracts resources.
Based on response of the 4 bottom-line questions for A thru D,
Plot the program on the Matrix
MacMillan Matrix
A. GOOD FIT
With Mission
& Abilities
A. POOR FIT
With Mission
& Abilities
D.HIGH PROGRAM RESOURCE
ATTRACTIVENESS:
“Easy” Program
D.LOW PROGRAM RESOURCE
ATTRACTIVENESS:
“Difficult” Program
C.Alternative
Provider
High
C.Alternative
Provider
High
C.Alternative
Provider
Low
C.Alternative
Provider
Low
B. Strong
Program
Strength
1.
Compete
aggressively
2.
Grow
Aggressively
5.
Support the
Best Competitor
6.
“Soul of the
Organization”
B. Weak
Program
Strength
3.
Divest
aggressively
4.
Build strength
or
Get Out
7.
Divest
Systematically
8.
Work
collaboratively
9. Aggressive
Divestment
10. Orderly
Divestment
11 Aggressive
Divestment
12 Orderly
Divestment
The Matrix Map: Assuring Impact &
Financial Sustainability
Purpose and Structure of the Matrix Map:
•What are our core business lines—the dual bottom line
--How do we determine Profitability
--How do we determine relative Impact
of our programs & efforts
Basic Approach for Matrix Map
1. Identify your "lines of business" or activities, programs,
services
2. Determine profitability
•
Determining Full Costs/Expenses:
• Direct costs
• Share of common or shared costs
• Rent, technology, insurance, supplies, etc.
• Share of full administrative costs
• FTEs
• Some gov. grants limit the overhead
3. Determine types of revenue
• Earned Income
• Contributed Income
4. Assess relative mission Impact
5. Map the results
Mission Impact Criteria
(Rated: 1=low impact – 4=very high impact)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alignment with core mission: How closely does this program align
with our core goals? Some programs may be excellent, but not as
central to our mission.
Excellence in execution: How good are we at delivering this
program? Do we have the skills/resources to implement with
excellence?
Scale: How many people does the program/business line affect?
Depth: How deep an intervention or contact does the program
provide? Can we measure that?
Building community or constituency: How does this program
contribute to building/advancing the greater good? For example,
connection to the Latino community or strengthening a neighborhood
(not just the organization)?
Fills an Important Gap (FIG): If the program were to go away, would
our constituents be able to go across the street to another agency or
would they have nowhere to go?
Leverage: refers to the degree to which the program increases impact
of other programs; e.g. the demand/funding in a field is increasing
rapidly; when audiences of one program carry over to other programs;
or when a program has marquee value by giving the organization
higher visibility and helping with the entire organization’s branding.
Mapping the Matrix
CREATING THE PLAN
Higher performing organizations engage in strategic
planning as a routine, periodic process
It starts with a vision…
• Why do we do what we
do? What’s our cause?
Vision/Mission?
• How do we do that?
Big picture strategies
and intentions.
• What are we going to
do to make it happen?
What tactics will we
employ?
*adapted from Sinek’s Golden Circle
Strategic Planning –
Structure* & Focus
Vision/Mission
Values
1. Strategic Initiative
Focus: Strategic
Environmental/
Needs Assessment
& SWOT to inform
Overarching
KPMs/Outcomes
2. Strategic Initiative
2.1. Goal
2.2. Goal
Goal
3. Strategic Initiative
“KPM” Key
Performance
Measures
/Outcomes
Goal
Focus: Tactical
2.2.1. Objective 2.2.2. Objective
2.2.2.1. Action
Focus: Individual Performance
Individual actions tie to Plan Goals
Individual
Actions
Action
Individual
Actions
Objective
Accountabilities:
Responsible
Party, Dates,
Resources
Action
Individual
Actions
Individual
Actions
*Nomenclature can be customized
Strategic Initiative
Goal
Objective
Action
Example
• Strategic Initiative 1: Programs & Services
Provide high quality services and supports that are
innovative and responsive to changing community needs
and that promote individual choice and an enhanced quality
of life consistent with XYZ values, mission and resources.
• Goal 1.1: Quality Assurance/Outcomes Program:
Quality Assurance/Outcomes Program: Develop,
implement and maintain a quality improvement and
outcomes measurement program and process.
• Objective 1.1.1: Address Service Capacity Issues:
Develop and maintain a process by which we address our
service capacity issues and needs, including attendance,
interest lists, projected capacity.
• Action 1.1.1.1: Measure Service Capacity:
A weekly report will be made to the program management
teams.
Build in Accountability
• Assign Primary &
Secondary Responsible
Parties
• Drive plan implementation to
every level of the organization
• No man, or woman, is an
island.
• Assign Timeframes
• Establish priorities
• Consider additional
resources required
MEASURING SUCCESS
Higher-performing organizations have an explicit focus
on measuring success.
Performance Measurement
• “The board, management, and staff take on the challenge of
collecting and using information, not because it’s a good marketing
tool, and not because a funder said they have to. They believe it is
integral to ensuring material, measurable, and sustainable good for
the people or causes they serve.”
• Management and staff make the collection, analysis, and use of data
part of the organization’s DNA. They ensure that people throughout
the organization understand the key metrics.
• Leaders draw a clear distinction between outputs (e.g., meals
delivered, youth tutored) and outcomes (meaningful changes in
knowledge, skills, behavior, or status)
From the Performance Imperative, A Framework for Social-Sector
Excellence, February 2015
Evidence of Success:
An Important Continuum and Distinction
Activities
onto
Outcomes
on to
Impact
• How do you identify measures of success, while avoiding
analysis paralysis?
• Impact vs Outcomes vs Activities – What’s really important?
• What do your stakeholders care about?
• And what really matters at the end of the day?
Examples for a Local Health Department
Goal: Decrease incidence of diseases preventable through
immunization.
• Activities: Increase in number of immunization clinics
offered monthly.
• Outcomes: Increase by five percent annually the number
of children receiving AAP recommended immunizations.
• Impact: By 2020, no cases of immunization preventable
diseases reported in county.
How to handle all three elements in your plan
• Activities: are the “Action” needed to reach
Outcomes/Impact
• Document in the tactical section of plan (implementation)
• Outcomes: are evidence of success, sometimes the
desired endpoint
• Document in Goal related Key Performance Measure/Success
Measure section of plan
• Impact: highest level of evidence that you are meeting your
Mission/Goal
• Document in Overarching Key Performance Measure or Goal Key
Performance Measure/Success Measure section of plan
THE SECRET TO SUCCESS…
Higher performing organizations are committed to a
regular schedule of plan assessment and reporting
"Vision without execution
is hallucination"
Thomas Edison
The Philosophy of Implementation & Assessment:
Continuous Improvement
Build a Culture of
Implementation
• Make plan assessment
a habit: Establish a
calendar for assessment
• How often to assess?
• Who needs to see results
and when?
• Align board
committees with plan
initiatives
Assessment Practices
• Assess from the bottom,
up
• Clearly define
staff/board roles and
responsibilities in the
assessment process
• Who assesses at what
level?
• Typically:
• Staff/board committees at
Tactical Level
• Staff leadership/board at
Goal/Metric level
• Sharing the reports
• Establish P&Ps on how
plan changes will be
suggested/approved
Plan Assessment & Scorecard
WePlanWell
TM
Honest,
Open,
Thoughtful
and Fair
Discussion
Copyright iBossWell, Inc. 2006
“Greatness is not a function of
circumstance.
Greatness, it turns out, is largely a matter
of conscious choice, and discipline.”
Jim Collins
Good to Great in the Social Sector
For additional information
and/or Copyright Use Permission
Contact:
Lynne Brown
VP Strategic Consulting
iBossWell, Inc.
5600 W. 95th Street, Suite 108
Overland Park, KS 66207
[email protected]
913-642-1416
www.ibosswell.com
This presentation is copyright of iBossWell, Inc. 2015.
All rights reserved.