Southern Polytechnic State University

Strategic Planning Task Force – notes from meeting on 11 November 2005

Introduction, review, and context – Dr. Rossbacher

• Why we need a strategic plan
• Background of strategic plans at SPSU
• Expected Task Force outcomes:

- must have a written document

- should be forward-looking (3 years max)

- should be a plan that everyone on the task force supports and advocates

- should be / will be used in the decision-making process, including how we allocate resources

• Task force “rules of engagement”:

- No criticizing or complaining without suggesting a solution

- Everyone must speak up and share ideas

- Do not look at the past at the expense of future progress

- Don’t spend time trying to make everyone happy

• Document should be ready to show campus by mid-February
• Lessons from “The World is Flat” by Thomas L. Friedman:

- Learning how to learn is most important survival skill of the future

- In a “flat world,”, most “left brain stuff”(which makes up most of SPSU’s curriculum) will be outsourced or computerized.

- We must think differently – immediately!

- The urgency for new strategic thinking is not just an academic issue, it is University-wide.

Brainstorming: Organization and subgroups for strategic planning

How do we accomplish our goals?  What are the key issues?  What subgroups need to be formed?

Ideas are listed in the order in which they were suggested during the brainstorming session (with thanks to Becky Rutherfoord for the expert and legible note-taking)

• Identify goals.
• One-sentence definition of what a strategic plan is.
• Short-term vision that includes goals (image of institution).
• Develop a basic outline of what should be included in the plan.
• Where we want to be in a couple of years – know where we are now and how we get to where we want to be.
• Vision linked to new mission statement.
• Short, but inclusive – self contained.
• Look at other institutions for what they have done – use what works for us.
• Strategic plan/academic plan…are they one? If different – how?  If same, how?
•  Goals -> have outcomes that can be measured for progress.
•  Determine strengths of committee members with pieces of plan
•  Student satisfaction data should be used…other data as well.
•  Add students to committee (process),
•  Consider how to “get there.”  Better.
•  Waiting for mission approval from Board.
•  Vision statement first – what is an SPSU graduate 5 years from now.
• What can we do well?  What is it that can make a difference?  What do we have a passion about?
•  Look at competitors?  Who are customers?  What product do we want to produce?

Goals (who we are, where we are going) vs. action plans (carry out)

•  University focused on academics.
•  Strategic plan sets stage for academic and other unit plans.
•  How do we fund what we want to do?
•  Systemic – reproducible [planning] process.
•  Where will these new ideas take us in 3 years.
•  Visibility issues.
•  What are “burning edge” technologies to strive for in the future.
•  We define what cutting edge is and go forward.
• Not have plan sit on the shelf – tied to budget.
•  Responsible and accountable – “who”?
•  Continuous process – timely review.
•  Build a community willing to build and implement the plan.
•  2-3 year plan, yearly updates….
•  How do we engage the rest of campus to “own” the plan.
• Belief in plan – critical, inclusive, important
•  Don’t let competitors define who we are.
•  Customer set(s) – what do we offer each?
•  Good, brief plan can last for some time.
•  Stress “life-long learning” goal.
•  Committee should communicate with rest of campus and have input.
•  Plan should be “ever before us,” not put on a shelf.
•  Have comment area on web for feedback.
• Plan should:

- Be academically focused / driven

- Be as brief and concise as possible

- Have measurable outcomes

- Be written as a continuous process with a review process

- Involve responsibility and accountability; more than just who does what – it should help create an environment in which people WANT to carry it out

- Keep competitiveness in mind; don’t just outline how to get from A to B, but how to do it BETTER

- Start with a vision that sets forth what our graduates look like

- Be kept off the shelf and in action

Action items and next steps

A.  3 subgroups* were established for immediate action:

1. Structure and Process for Strategic Planning – chaired by Becky Rutherfoord

· This subgroup will decide the overall structure of the plan, providing an outline of the various parts of the plan and a process, possibly including a timeline, for implementing as well as reviewing the plan.

2. S.W.O.T (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) – chaired by Barry Birckhead

· This subgroup will review the existing S.W.O.T analysis and make updates as needed.

3. Vision Statement – chaired by Dr. Lisa Rossbacher

· This subgroup will create a vision statement that reflects the University’s mission.

* These groups will convene before the December 2^nd meeting and make a report at that meeting.

B. All Task Force members will review the ideas from the brainstorming session and e-mail Melissa McGarity by November 28^th with their suggestions as to the five most important points to come out of the brainstorming session (i.e. what they believe the five most important subcommittees should be).

C. Notes from the Task Force meetings will be posted on the web and everyone is encouraged to participate in electronic discussions.

The next meeting of the full Strategic Planning Task Force is schedule from 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. on Friday, 2 December 2005, in the Library Rotunda.

Additional notes

The Discussion Board for the strategic planning process can be accessed the following URL:      http://forums.spsu.edu  (will be operational soon).

Notes from the meetings of the Task Force will be posted on the SPSU web site under Administrative Offices > Planning and Assessment > Strategic Planning 2005-06 > Meeting minutes and notes   (will be operational soon).

MMcG/LAR 111405