Strategy Development
Oct 23rd, 2008 by strategicplanning
The input that was provided through the Charting Our Future week dialogues held in September was reviewed and revised statements of Vision, Mission, Values and Goals were developed. This Working Framework reflects the feedback that has been received so far and it will be open to continued revision if additional suggestions emerge.
Now, it is time to develop more specific strategies to achieve the Goals within the current Ohio and BGSU environment. Strategies are distinctive and major approaches to support the accomplishment of Goals. A process for strategy development has been designed in partnership with the Faculty Senate and the Administrative and Classified Staff councils. These constituent groups will join with the members of the Expanded Cabinet to form six small groups of eight people with representation from the partner groups.
In addition, everyone in the BGSU community is invited and encouraged to participate in the development of strategies through this blog. Each of the six goals identified in the Working Framework have blog pages where you can submit your strategy ideas. All strategies must be submitted by February 1, 2009.
Individual submissions, combined with the ideas that come from groups, will result in a rich set of strategies for review. Thank you in advance for your engagement.
This page has the following sub pages.
2:07 pm - 11-7-2008
I’m disappointed that there haven’t been any strategies posted to discuss. When I tried to compose one I ran into a dilemma. Why is it that a proposed strategy should address only one goal? There are six goals and a process or strategy that might provide progress towards Goals 1, 2, 3 and 5 or 2, 4 and 6 or any other combination will have to be classified into one (or all) of the listed goals. This will also be true when the constituent groups are created to discuss strategies. Since each group will be considering only one goal, how can strategies that address multiple goals ever be considered? Is it possible that a strategy to achieve one goal may be detrimental to another? How would that situation be handled?
I suggest that the current structure won’t allow us to determine any coherent strategy that address multiple goals and that such strategies are exactly what we should be looking for. University-level strategies to achieve our goals should provide progress on several fronts at the same time. A proposed strategy must address at least one goal but could conceivably address them all. Each of the entries under Strategy Development should be a thread of discussion about a proposed strategy with a beginning link that shows which goal or goals a proposed strategy might address. From a list of strategies, the working group should parcel out which strategies would be discussed by which group of eight participants instead of having six groups of participants with each assigned to strategies addressing only one goal.
Preferred strategies should be multi-goal oriented. We are using a structure that creates silos as if “Produce high quality scholarship and creative achievements” is completely independent of “Support faculty and staff performance and development” or independent of “Facilitate life-long learning, critical thinking and personal growth”.
3:18 pm - 11-14-2008
Thanks to Joe for his recommendation — a page for ‘multi-goal’ strategies has been added. Also, please note that it is a coincidence that there are six groups (see above) and six goals. In fact, each group of eight individuals will be recommending strategies for all goals. Joe also pointed out that a strategy can provide progress toward multiple goals or that a strategy might support one goal to the detriment of another. In this process, all strategies suggested will be reviewed so that the final set is cohesive and advances BGSU’s Vision, Mission and Goals.