A synthesis of the strategic planning process with the principles of andragogy: Learning, leading, and linking

International Journal of Public Administration

Volumn 25, Issue 9-10, 2002, Pages 1199-1220

  Fraser, D Larry ^a   Stupak, Ronald J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84986071344     PISSN: 01900692     EISSN: 15324265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1081/PAD-120006133     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Fortune Magazine(September 7, 1998) reported that strategic planning was then the most popular modern management tool as well as the technique in the private sector with the highest satisfaction level. Strategic planning is also central to many contemporary public management philosophies and objectives such as the Community Policing movement and the Federal Government's Performance and Results Act of 1993
2. This article builds upon the theories of “learning organizations” which maintain that modern organizations should embody characteristics which make them adaptable and able to “learn” by experience and analysis. Senge. P. The Fifth Discipline1994 Paperback Edition; Currency Doubleday: New York; 1990., contains a comprehensive discussion of this philosophy and an elaboration of concepts contained in the “learning organization” theories which are germane to the principles analyzed here e.g. systems theory, team learning, and shared vision
3. Argyris, C., and D, Schon., 1982. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. See
4. Heifetz, R., 1994. Leadership Without Easy Answers Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Kanter, R. M., 1983. The Change Masters New York: Simon and Schuster.
6. Kouzes, J., and Posner, B., 1987. The Leadership Challenge: How to Get Extraordinary Things Done in Organizations Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. etc
7. Stupak, R., 2000. High-Performing Courts Learn Ways to Break Barriers. Court Communiqué,: 2–3. See also
8. For example, the extensive work done at and reported from the Federal Executive Institute on adult education has been extremely visible in academic, practitioner, and training journals during the past decade
9. Stupak, R., 1997. The Federal Executive Institute and Organizational Change: Reflections on Institutional Decay. Public Administration Quarterly,: 337–348.
10. The junior author of this article himself has published more than 20 articles in refereed journals, while also publishing three books on leadership styles, the operational code analysis, and strategic leadership
11. Stupak, R., et al., 1999. Symposium Issue on An Operational Code Approach to W. Edwards Deming: The Man, The Context, The Savant, and The Legacy. Journal of Management History,: 246–540.
12. Stupak, R., 1969. The Shaping of Foreign Policy: The Role of the Secretary of State As Seen By Dean Acheson New York: Bobbs Merrill, Inc, The Odyssey Press.
13. Theories of organizational learning will not be specifically examined, but it will be apparent to the reader that the proposition of applying adult learning principles to the strategic planning process will be in keeping with organizational learning doctrine
14. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 4San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15. Mintzberg, H., 1994. “ Chapter 2 ”. In The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning New York: The Free Press.
16. Mills, D.Q., 2001. e-Leadership: Guiding Your Business Success in the New Economy Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
17. A Systems perception of strategic planning is vital. Although it is modeled and discussed as a linear sequential process, it will seldom be applied that way. Each step may effect any or all other steps, and compel their revision. It must, therefore, be viewed from the outset as the fluid, flexible, adaptive, and iterative process comtemplated by Open Systems doctrine
18. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 22–37. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19. Greisler, D., and Stupak, R., 1996. The Evolution of Planning: Exploring Strategic Linkages and Developing Action Guidelines for Public Administrators. International Journal of Public Administration,: 1687–1718. see also
20. Ziegenfuss, J., 1996. Relearning Strategic Planning: Lessons of Philosophy and Procedure Lawrence, Kansas: Allen Publishing Company.
21. Stakeholders” are defined as “…any person, group, or organization that can place a claim on an organization's attention, resources, or output or is affected by that output.” (Bryson, 1995, p. 27)
22. This initial step provides an example of the iterative nature of the entire SP process as a more explicit stakeholder analysis is included in step 3. New clues about stakeholders are likely to be discovered at any step of the process–necessitating re-examination of some or all the preceding steps
23. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 30San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24. Ansoff, I., 1980. Strategic Issue Management. Strategic Management Journal, 1 (2)
25. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 32San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 32San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. That the analytical processes of SP facilitate the synthesis of organizational vision is central to the theory of the SP process. There is, however, dispute about the proposition of analysis furthering synthesis generally–this is briefly discussed in section II-D of this analysis, addressing the criticisms of SP. The appraisal of this article maintains that analysis can facilitate synthesis if the analysis is conducted in a collaborative iterative manner
28. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 7San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 42San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
30. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning 321New York: The Free Press.
31. Kearns, K., 1996. Managing for Accountability 58–63. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. These criticisms, and others, are well and succinctly addressed by
32. He concludes that intuition need not be inhibited, that the detail of the process assists analysis (particularly for technical support staff), and that the rigorous methodological framework is intended for posing questions, not for formulating strategies
33. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning New York: The Free Press. Mintzberg goes on, later in his book to discuss the reconciliation of analysis and intuition and to suggest that processes may be devised which will allow analysis to assist intuition and vice versa
34. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning 170–173. New York: The Free press. 201–219
35. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning 172–188. New York: The Free press.
36. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning 227–254. New York: The Free press.
37. Praxis is a very important concept to this analysis. It will be discussed further along in this article–in the section reviewing the principles of adult learning
38. Stupak, R., 1996–97. Creating Civilian Leaders: Air Force and Learning Institutions. The Public Manager,: 48–53. See
39. How much collaboration may occur in a large diversified organization is problematic, but it must always be a conscious objective. Plans that bound possibilities rather than dictate them are another objective that will pay dividends in this area
40. Schon, D., 1983. The Reflective Practitioner 243New York: Basic Books. e.g., “…awareness of one's intuitive thinking usually grows out of practice in articulating it to others…
41. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 127San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
42. de Geus, A., 1988. Planning as Learning. Harvard Business Review,: 70–74.
43. Mintzberg, H., 1994. The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning 209–210. New York: The Free Press. 270, 275, 286–287, 360, 364, 372, 388
44. Simons, R., 1990. The Role of Management Control Systems in Creating Competitive Advantage: New Perspectives. Accounting Organizations and Safety, XV: 127–143. 407
45. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 105–106. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 112, 202, 180, 213, 280–282
46. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 38San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
47. Bryson, J., 1995. Strategic Planning for Public and Non-Profit Organizations 137San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48. Porter, M., 1996. What is Strategy?. Harvard Business Review,: 61–78. argues that “Improving operational effectiveness is a necessary part of management, but is notstrategy.” He explains that effectiveness is sought for all aspects of all process while strategy is where trade-offs, unique position definition, and fitting the organization to the situation occurs. This article does not disagree with his premise, but asserts that efficiency and effectiveness, as used here, are broad enough to include the focus of the strategic purpose–that the strategic agenda contributes to overall organizational efficiency and effectiveness
49. Note here that it can be argued that strategic planing is merely a form of strategic change which has become a recognized intervention tactic of the Organizational Development (OD) school. It appears, however, that SP really evolved from the planning school about the same time that OD was evolving from the behavioral science school of management. “Strategy” has now come to be recognized as a principle of both schools and may provide a concept for the consolidation of the change, power, and decision making theories of OD, SP, and Leadership (see Klein, G. Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions; The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1999; Greisler, D.; Stupak, R. The Evolution of Planning; Exploring Strategic Linkages and Developing Action Guidelines for Public Administrators. International Journal of Public Administration 1996, Fall/Winter, 1687–1718; and Handbook of Public Quality Management; Stupak & Leitner, 2001; especially 194–206 and 697–709
50. Highly regarded and prolific authors in the area of adult learning include S. D. Brookfield, G. J. Conti, K. Patricia Cross, R. P. Fairchild, N. Gardner, R. Golembiewski, M. Knowles, R. M. Smith, A. M. Tough, and F. Sherwood. Chris Argyris and Donald Schon are two well known authors who theorize about organizational learning. Peter Senge is an author who has recently brought the concept of organizational learning to popular awareness. He is the founder and director of the Center for Organizational Learning at MIT
51. Knowles, M., 1984. “ Chapter 1 ”. In The Adult Learner: A Neglected Species, 3 Houston: Gulf.
52. Brookfield, S., 1986. “ Chapter 1 ”. In Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. provides extensive discussion and summarization of these principles
53. Knowles, M., 1980. The Modern Practice of Adult Education Cambridge, New York: The Adult Education Co.
54. Knowles, M., 1984. The Adult Learner A Neglected Species, 3 Houston: Gulf. also examines them thoroughly, though he does not condense them into precisely the same denominations
55. Austin, J. R., 1997. A Method for Facilitating Controversial Social Change in Organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 33 (1): 101–118. for a discussion of single-loop and double-loop learning (as well as the introduction of a triple-loop learning hypothesis which contemplates the underlying social values and assumptions)
56. “Praxis” is a term that means somewhat different things in different contexts. Most dictionaries define it as practice (distinguished from theory) and/or established custom. In law it simply means “practice.” In Organizational Theory literature, it is a kind of self-transformational organizational process resulting from the examination and understanding of both objective and subjective realities–a situation of simultaneously concluded and continuing double-loop learning (see: Heydebrand, W. V. Organization and Praxis. In Beyond Method; Morgan, G., Ed.; Sage Publications: Newbury Park, Calif., 1983; 306–319.). The Brookfield definition and the Organizational Theory concept are essentially the same. (For a fuller explanation of our use of praxis, see Stupak, R. Creating Civilian Leaders: Air Force and Learning Institutions. The Public Manager 1996–97, Winter, esp. 48–49.)
57. Brookfield, S., 1986. Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning 10San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
58. Brookfield, S., 1986. Understanding and Facilitating Adult Learning 16San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59. Schon, D., 1983. The Reflective Practitioner 282–283. New York: Basic Books. discussing how a person's “…self-reinforcing system of knowing-in-practice makes itself immune to reflection…” goes on to say that reflective breaking through this system is unlikely “…unless others help him see what he has worked to avoid seeing.” Knowing-in-practice” is comprised of the underlying assumptions or intuitive understandings which often form professional judgments. (For a comprehensive discussion concerning reflective practitioners, praxis, and collaborative learning
60. Leitner, P., and Stupak, R., 2000. Eyewitness to History: Public Servant Perspectives, Methodological Suggestions, and Professional Publications. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior,: 73–114.
61. Other well accepted principles of adult learning are also important but will not be individually discussed in this article because they will likely be intuitively applied, to the extent possible, in the context of SP. These are the principles of: 1. voluntary participationand 2. mutual respectamong participants. The last of six broadly sanctioned precepts of adult learning is the canon of self directionwhich is clearly applicable to training or formal education circumstance but which has only an ancillary relationship in the achievement of quality SP
62. Stupak, R., and Leitner, P., eds. 2000. Handbook of Public Quality Management New York: Marcell Dekker, Inc. esp. chapter 7
63. Schein, E., 1992. Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2 San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
64. Fraser, D., and Stupak, R., 1998. Organizational Culture and Standardized Programs: A Practitioner's Guide to Implementation. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 1 (1): 63–91.
65. This analysis could well have included the “General Change Model” from the Organizational Development (OD) literature. The similarities of technique and purpose between SP and that model are striking–a synthesis of the models could certainly be proposed. On examination of the General Change Model, it is even more readily apparent than with Strategic Planning that it contains processes which foreordain the participants that it contains processes which foreordain the participants to engage in “learning.” The action research concepts that have been adopted there, for instance, were also intended to develop learning while the iterative, evaluative, and collaborative nature of the process of that model also prompts “learning” generally (See Cummings, T.; Worley, C. Organization Development and Change, 5th Ed; West Publishing Company: New York, 1993; a popular OD text)
66. Looking from the other side of the same Organizational Theory structure where the “Learning Organization” concepts abide, one easily recognizes the potential of SP for the development of Learning Organizations. David A. Garvin in a response to several reviews of his article “Building a Learning Organization,” agrees with two of the reviewers “…who urge that effective learning be purposeful and supportive of an organization's mission and goals.” He goes on to state that “[w]ithout clear direction and purpose, learning is seldom very helpful.” Direction and purpose are, of course, the objective and the forte of SP (the article is Gavin, D.A., Building a Learning Organization. Harvard Business Review 1993, Jul/Aug, 78–91. The review is Gavin, D. A., Keep Learning [reviews of the above article, and Gavin's response]. Harvard Business Review 1993, Sep./Oct, 190– 200.). By the way, we are fully convinced that one of the fundamental anchors of adult learning theory, namely, that “unlearning is as important or maybe even more critical than learning” is a missing element in much of the academic discussions of learning organizations. Stupak, R. The Good Teacher. PA Times 2001, October, forthcoming
67. Blunt, R., 2001. Leaders and Stories: Growing the Next Generation. The Public Manager,: 48