Question #1
What do you believe have been the most important benefits derived from the strategic planning process? Limitations ?
Thematic analysis of the written responses to Question # 1 on the benefits and limitations of the strategic planning process from the Strategic Planning Retreat, August 17, 2004.
Download a printable version of the responses to question #1
BENEFITS (5 themes) :
Collaboration of people and departments at all levels within university.
-The process has provided an incentive for collaboration among people and departments that don't typically work together.
-Helping to bring about some degree of alignment across Colleges
-Reexamine broad principles and look at the state of the University in a holistic way outside the confines of our narrow disciplines and day-to-day activities.
-Get a large number of University personnel together talking about mutual issues
-Engaging/collaborating with students to help move UW Oshkosh forward, e.g., differential tuition, recreation center
-Commitment to student development and support to students given a high profile and priority has led to improvement of those services, e.g. Women's Center, services funded by differential tuition, counseling services.
-Involving anyone who is interested in the planning process—i.e. classified staff were not as involved in strategic planning in earlier projects
-Getting colleagues to think outside of box and beyond the day-to-day planning
-Students have more opportunities for contact with advisors of various kinds
-University-wide engagement in the planning process cutting across faculty, academic staff, classified staff, external, and student sectors. Each group is an important stake-holder and has been included in the process
-Placement of priority on improving advising for students – an implementing some plans for improvement
-Interactions and sharing of ideas between and among disciplines
-In collaborative efforts of University faculty & staff (internal
-Meet faculty from other disciplines
-The strategic planning process has enabled collaboration not only within the university, but also with Oshkosh as well. This collaboration insures that we are all moving in the right direction.
-Group energy and support – support for plan
-One major benefit is getting focus groups of students. Yet at the same time, focus groups are done w/out enough of the students. Students are one of the key things to making a campus diverse. They need to be the focus and included in everything.
-Bring various constituencies together to discuss issues of importance to UW Oshkosh.
-More involvement across campus; new names and faces on board
-Engaging students and dreams/realizations of learning
-Wide representation involved in the process
- Opportunity to work collaboratively across the curriculum and across auxiliary service units and across constituencies for broadest input.
-Having all parts of the UWO community having an input on the Strategic Planning Process.
-Involvement of all campus groups in a democratic and open process
-Getting everyone to work together and realize how important this is and what all can be accomplished.
-Campus wide unity (staff, students, administration, professors)
-Enhanced participation of all campus groups in the planning process. Greater awareness and involvement.
-Bringing staff of all levels and status together/involvement and buy in.
-Meeting w/staff beyond your unit/cross campus communication.
-Engaging individuals of the organization in the opportunity to be active stakeholders by sharing their input.
-Articulation of a plan by the various constituencies of the University.
-Seeing what others are thinking and planning so that collaborative planning can take place
-Getting all levels of faculty, staff, students involved.
-Purpose—how does what each college does best fit w/what the university aspires for a complement each college?
-Open to all (many constituencies)
-Encouraging people to work together across campus and thus validating and listening to leaders who aren't necessarily positional leaders
-I believe our collaboration with technical schools within Wisconsin is a great benefit, not only to increasing our student enrollment, but also for the individual student. With the collaboration, students have a greater opportunity to transfer credits and further their education. Another important benefit is the increase in educational advisers for students in their specific fields. This gives students an even greater benefit of having a professional adviser that they can ask questions of and get assistance in planning their future.
-Sense of involvement with people from many different “units” on campus; getting to know people I wouldn't ordinarily work with; progress in articulating who we are and what we want to accomplish.
-Bringing people together on a consistent/regular basis
-Cross campus communication
-Sense of involvement in a collective effort to set and achieve goals
-Defining and tangibly supporting joint and interdisciplinary initiatives.
-A strategic plan that is achievable, but will make the university come together to ultimately achieve everything.
-Working to get all 4 colleges involved in aligning their processes.
-Opportunities for input which brought different segments of University together. This face-to-face time brought people closer together personally and has an impact on cooperativeness in many ways.
-Allowed for new relationship building.
-Awareness across campus lines of certain issues.
-We are talking and discussing as a campus
Inclusiveness of process—including community people
-Bringing together of multiple constituencies in community
-Exposing community people in what University is about and where it is going
-Inclusiveness—commitment—motivation among most internal and external stakeholders
-Involving other outside groups in process who were not part of it before – i.e. union!
-Involvement of community members
-A sense of working with the community is being generated
-Grass roots participation – community reps invited and participated. Participation gives positive approach.
-Involving community and internal participants (actively)
-Including the entire University and external community
-Inclusivity
-Coming together as a community to dialogue
-Visibility in the Oshkosh community
-More external involvement, increased partnerships
-Community input
-Involvement of various “stakeholders,” e.g. involvement of city people, students, and various types of staff in process
-We've done well with community outreach and that's probably helped town-gown relations.
-Gaining “buy-in” from internal and external constituencies
-Involved internal and external constituencies (included students)
-Having a “plan” that has been embraced and developed by the entire campus and community. All share with its success.
-Engaging the external community in UW Oshkosh
-More positive interaction with local government and business.
-Building community
-Increasing visibility within the region
-Including faculty, staff and students, along with the City of Oshkosh .
-Bringing of diverse groups together and reaching a consensus.
-Tried to include people at all levels both inside and outside university
-A beginning to be involved in the community and area.
-Looking externally as well as internally.
- Engaged external stakeholders well
- Opportunity to involve community members – improve “town/gown” relationships
-Significant community engagement – buy in – University staff, students, and community leaders.
-Partnering strength – relationships
-Inclusivity – making others feels as if they are truly a part of this campus community
-The inclusion of various and numerous stakeholders.
-The many efforts made to share the “Governing Ideas” on and off campus.
-The opportunity for multiple voices from multiple constituency groups to be a part of the discussions.
-Partnerships formed
-Involvement by diverse internal and external groups.
-Expanded role in community – no longer an image of an island within the City.
Openness to input
-Ability to try new ideas – different ways of “doing business”
-Setting of over reaching goals that are acquirable
Improvements in student recruitment and retention – but it is not clear to me how this came out of the strategic planning process. It may have started here but took on a life of its own
-Important for Chancellor to meet with each college regarding the Strategic Planning process to allow more faculty to ask questions and give concerns.
-Fluid or flexible strategic plan that can adopt to changing political climate
-Support for “alternative” and “creative “ programs
-Points of pride and what we do well was acknowledged
-Open Forums
-Having a strategic plan has given people the opportunity to think big or out of the box
-Strategic planning allows all members of the organization (campus) to give direct input on what they feel is the most/least important operations/projects. This, therefore, creates a dedicated and focused group that is a readily available resource for staff and administration to draw upon in the time of their need.
- Opportunity for input
-Greater open communication and greater trust.
-Having future plans laid out give all part of campus to hold open forums and come together with each other's creativity to improve plans.
-For those who answered the call, and participated, a way for us to truly be involved in where we're going.
-Well thought out plan with input from all areas.
-Listing of new initiative ideas (at least to the College level)
-Meaningful objectives were established, these objectives received a “buy in” from the participants and successful goals are achieved.
-More creative work with budgets and monetary management has eliminated the non-essential spending.
-Gave/giving opportunity for all units to step up.
-Being able to go beyond day-to-day needs.
-Access all input and incorporates into mission and values
-Input from many sources.
-The process identified and prioritized areas to emphasize and develop within the University community.
-Involving newer faculty early in stay at UWO
-Individuals desire to be part of successful positive movement.
-The ongoing attention to the Strategic Planning process.
-The opportunity to revisit and readjust as we move forward – the process is viewed as dynamic not static – work that was previously done is not just shelved.
-It models an active, ongoing assessment process which is helpful to tap info for accreditation issues and needs.
-Process is not rushed.
-Receiving input from students and/or involve group to provide feedback from
Complete and create
-Greater awareness of the importance of student input
-Ability to have a voice.
-Horizontal dialogue and cooperation (not only internal, but also w/external groups
-The Chancellor truly does listen and incorporates a community vision.
-We have really begun to look for new ways to organize/structure and to be responsive
-Increased dialogue – re: mission, values, vision for UW Oshkosh.
-Provide an organizational structure that's allowed us to focus on specific goals, etc.
-Has brought together the three major planning tools – (strategic plan, fiscal plan, facilities plan)
-Opened channels of communication.
-An intense look at our goings on in order to evaluate ourselves and our institution – This can turn up needed changes where they are least expected.
-Everyone is allowed to speak, realizing of course that not all voices are equal.
Clear Sense of Identity for institution
-The development of a more clear and positive sense of identity for the institution.
-Ambitious goals developed
-Established principles to measure results
-All part of campus (staff, faculty and students) knows the future plans of UW-Oshkosh and can work quickly and together.
-Clarification to constituents
-A sense of working together as a campus – more united
- Gets University community looking at big picture: common goals. Sometimes we all get stuck in our own “bubble” whether it be our department or other and neglect to take pride or interest in the success of our University as a whole.
Reformulation of Mission Statement
-Tangible Governing Ideas
-EPA distinction – great focus
-Importance of promoting gender equity (all Deans are males)
-A better understanding of how all the “parts” of UWO fit together
-Gaining a “big picture” of the entire university
-Results oriented
-Get people thinking as a unit – one institution with common goals.
-Measurable outcomes
-Vision
-Maintaining a positive position in regard to budget cuts
- Opportunity to perform self-studies and assessments to benchmark where we are, action steps to get to goals
-Being able to focus resources on identified priorities
-Getting external recognition for moving ahead
-Coherent plan for facilities development (bricks and mortar)
-A focus for university community
-Learning what we are about, what we have accomplished, what we are doing and what needs to be done
-Support for needed academic changes and administration
-Facility master plan
-Recognizing the value of “green” principles, economic as well as quality of campus life.
-In particular, student initiatives have greatly expanded. We have developed and supported outstanding student leaders.
-It has created a system to ensure that the University knows what all of their strategic action initiatives are, along with the associated key operating plans and processes. By documenting this…all decisions made support the overall goals.
-The largest benefit is an overall collaborative goals and sense of direction for the Colleges/staff/students to follow and achieve.
-Helping all groups focus w/similar ideas/goals.
-A better understanding of the role of the university in regard to students, faculty and staff, community, nation.
-Well-defined values are helpful in department and goal setting…knowing a project is “aligned” with institutional values (decreases ambiguity about administration's priorities)
-Clearly articulates administration's vision and goals
-Moving forward on projects that are key to our defined mission despite the budget crunch, projects that increase a sense of pride in and commitment to our community.
-Shared sense of a future vision.
-Giving Colleges a master plan to align with.
-Defining what we do no do – academics, teaching, role of faculty (what we are not rewarded for; are not permitted.)
-Creating a persona/identity for UWO internally and externally.
-Visions actualized generates positive energy forward
-Finally a focus on the hard reality so often neglected by the “ivory tower.” We must market ourselves: “strategic planning” is nothing more than identifying our niche. We are, and always will be, limited by the heartfelt desire to be appreciated, and glorified by the mere fact of our existence
-Common goals and vision to work toward
-The creation of a roadmap/benchmarks that outline the courses of interaction that university needs to follow/uphold and reach its goals
-“Green” campus and energy conservation awareness.
-The mission, vision, goals and objectives of having gone through the process
The greening of UW Oshkosh
Physically displaying and returning back to the Governing Ideas
-We have strategic direction.
-The communication from the Chancellor's office creates a sense that we know what's happening, rumor mill decreasing.
-Energy conservation is a great benefit.
-Identifiable strategic directions toward which we can work.
Others
-Tangible improvement in facilities and overall campus appearance.
-Led to some useful ideas and directions (better advising, green campus, physically attractive campus)
-A better-looking, feeling environment, more inviting
-Statistics indicating that there are results
-Getting folks on the bus
-Because I was not involved in the planning process (this is the first such session I have attended) I cannot answer these questions. My answers would only be guesses. I am one of the “external” stakeholders.
-All areas have been able to identify “areas of improvement”
-“Mis-steps” minimized due to forethought.
-Created energy.
-Going beyond planning process to creating programs, securing, protecting budget.
-Completing the process – i.e. creating the plan and thereby focusing the institution toward goals that make it to be inclusive, transparent, altruistic; a benefit to students and the region. The priorities (?) providing universal guidelines
-Took the time to prepare for the future.
-Long term goals – inclusive – transparent—altruism – adoptive – goal: as fool proof as you get
-Creation of office of International Education – provides a central location for students to obtain knowledge and explore opportunities.
-Improve climate of planning – e.g. facilities master plan, enrollment management, college plans… and emerging alignment of activities of strategic directions.
-Cosmetic benefits
-Promises of some new buildings after a thirty-year hiatus
-UWO has been able to continue to improve in a number of areas, despite the very challenging fiscal climate through adherence to strategic planning initiatives accomplished by very innovative means.
-Problems that existed forever – i.e. parking finally was looked at.
-A renovation of campus bringing out its potential
LIMITATIONS (6 themes):
Faculty Input Ignored
-Lack of input of the majority of faculty
-Led to input from faculty but many faculty feel their ideas were ignored
-I believe the process led to these inequities:
Too much emphasis on strategic initiatives that are practical or application oriented (emphasis on COBA, CON, COEHS)
Not enough emphasis on basic education funds
-Priorities decided by faculty given low rankings – plan reflects administration's decisions (as it should) but why waste my time when my input is devalued?
-”Inclusive Participation” – Short notice for faculty open forums; lack of awareness of faculty calendar/schedules which conveys/implies that faculty input is the least important of all “stakeholders” when it may be one of the most important. Another example – holding this session when faculty are not on campus, for example – most will not even know it has occurred.
-To faculty, still seems to be: The continued administrative pursuit of shared governance.”
Lack of Funding/Resources
-Budget! Money diverted to big business, war, and away from people. Extremely conservative and militaristic—Federal Government
-Increasing of class size will reduce the quality of education
-Budget
-Not enough resources in this economy to fully follow the plan throughout the year in our daily work.
-Budget/funding sources (or the lack thereof) limited some of the ideas an changed the Strategic Plan
-Limitations time and world enough
-Budget constraints
-Money
-The process directed limited resources to accomplish priorities.
-So much to do – so little time/resources
-Funding – state appropriations
-Main limitation – Uncertainty about the future of the UW System.
-Specific limitations: Goldberg Report. Compared with other campuses, UWO ranked last or near last.
Emphasis on horizontal and not on academic departments.
-My perception is that non-academic departments have done more to implement positive change than academic ones – it could just be the nature of the academic “beast” as it were.
-Does the faculty tenure and promotion system as currently structured align with University mission?
-Often “feels” administratively driven.
-Non-College units; individuals –how does a person related day-to-day job to initiatives, vision, etc.
-Process very top heavy with all administrators, program directors, assistants. Very poor faculty involvement – by design I suspect.
Lack of Input
-Lack of “spontaneity” in the process; i.e., in an effort to streamline the drive to “get things done” I don't believe enough people have been invited to participate in the ongoing strategic planning process – as a result fewer ideas are entertained.
-Lack of honest appraisals of our accomplishments and mission in higher education
-A good process leads to good results. So first it seems we should focus on identifying desired goals, and then identify a process designed to accomplish those goals. I don't think we ironed out goals enough first.
-Follow through – all employees have the ability to be involved on committees, etc. – inclusiveness
- Lack of diverse input – especially student input.
-Inclusive participation – diverse students – more faculty in process
-Class sizes can't continue to increase yet provide the same quality.
-Awareness to campus and local community
-Need more diverse student voice
-Communication beyond those immediately involved during process, especially at college level.
-Identifying people in community to bring in who represent all sectors of community and broader service area (not just city of Oshkosh )
-Encouraging others to become more involved in the process.
-Even though there have been many opportunities, it's difficult to know who is really invited to participate.
- Perhaps it was unclear that the “process” was open to all/everyone. If an employee is not part of a college, the invitation may not have been clear. Need to create link between academic and non-academic staff.
Waste of Time
-Too much time and money wasted on meetings and discussions
-Takes too much time and money for too little results other than cosmetic
-The limitation is of course that it adds another step to processes that are already time consuming and drawn out. This could potentially add more delays as all the interests of the many people involved are attempted to be gratified.
-Too much process; too much “edubabble” (e.g. higher ed jargon like “vertically,” etc. )
Other
-Our data suggests that student perceptions of their academic experience remain significantly less positive than their peers at other UW Schools.
-It's difficult for faculty to be involved in Strategic Planning because we're so involved with the daily duties of teaching, working with students, finishing department business. It's difficult to stand back for the “overall view.”
-Disseminating the outcomes of this planning process on a regular basis would be a limitation .
-Lack of involvement at high school level (especially non-public schools) with strategic planning
-Perception that UWO “to close” – not recognized for its quality programs
-Difficult to stay abreast of process due to complexity/breadth of plan
-General education – liberal arts
-Many ideas, but apparent lack of coherent plan for developing an easily recognizable university identify.
-Initiatives not widely disseminated, talked about throughout. I saw them for the first time in the email attachments for this retreat.
-Strategic Planning process focuses more on how we are perceived by others – while it fails to focus on how we are doing internally as a University and community. Internal validation should have more value than external validation. Quality of education received should be addressed rather than statistics of numbers enrolled and degrees conferred.
- More like reports of what's being done after the fact.
-Faculty/staff/student time and energy
- Limited time for meetings to allow people to attend sessions.
-Resistance to change by some senior faculty and administration
-Plan has not made as much change as needed and how to fit into State wide planning for all of education.
-23 initiatives might be too many. It does keep all groups engaged, so that is a benefit.
-The only limitation I see is that there needs to be a greater emphasis on quality of the outcome/results.
-Speed and a time frame for the improvement/results needs to be worked on.
-Re: transparency of process – it would have been helpful to make clear why the focus was on the Colleges to the exclusion of other units and programs such as grad studies, Continuing Ed, Center for New Learning – just to that we all understand the rationale.
-Availability or luxury of time – so much to do, so little time. You won't “witness” success for a while.
-Focus more on number of enrolled students and money spent than quality of education.
-People interpret the strategic directions as fits their perspective and need, diffusing the direction perhaps thinly.