There is no route to excellence from mediocrity except through the steadfast, determined, and disciplined execution of a compelling strategic plan that the entire organization has bought into. This requires a plan that includes the following five components.

1. First, the overarching university plan must be articulated with the strategic plans of other colleges and units across campus and among the branch campuses. All departmental plans and activities need to be developed with an eye to their connectedness to the university plan. This is the first step in creating a new planning culture for the campus.
2. Second, the plan must incorporate the thinking of all constituencies, during the development phase and beyond. A valid and acceptable plan must incorporate the voices of faculty, students, staff, administrators, researchers, the community-at-large, branch campuses, and policy makers according to their missions, duties and responsibilities.
3. Third, evaluation must be an integral component of the university plan. Without evaluation as part of the ongoing plan implementation, the plan will fall victim to the same fate as past plans and will simply sit on the shelf unread and unused. Regular evaluations and adjustments as a result of evaluation will ensure the plan remains on target, flexible, and dynamic.
4. Fourth, UNM's strategic resources must drive the plan. By taking these resources – New Mexico’s diversity, nearness to an international border, proximity to world-class scientific communities, location in the midst of a world-class arts center, New Mexico’s natural features which provide a unique laboratory to study and learn, and the appeal of New Mexico’s rich cultural heritage, spectacular landscape and climate as a desirable place to live and work – all play an important part in UNM’s past sustainable successes and are necessary to focus on for future growth and development of our preeminence as an institution. A culture of planning requires connection to resources that are likely to endure throughout the lifetime of the institution. A plan that hinges on the existence of anything less will require overhaul once that resource no longer exists.
5. Fifth, the financial resources available to the university now and in the future, must be tied to the plan and a mechanism for connecting allocations with plan objectives and tactics needs to be developed.

Since the early 1990’s management of many companies and organizations within the United States have undertaken a substantial strategic planning task. This process, which starts with a mission statement and a compelling vision for the future of the organization, should lead to a systematic set of milestones and goals with a gap analysis to determine what must be done to overcome the barriers to the organization in its quest to achieve its strategic vision.

In reality, however, this process almost always fails. This failure of most strategic planning processes usually results from one of three distinct causes. First, management often considers the urgency of responding to short-term opportunities and emergencies to be a much higher priority than the steadfast pursuit of their long-term goals. Management will often say that they "can’t be bound up by such a plan, since they must respond with agility to their rapidly changing markets", or something to this effect. This excuse for abandoning their strategic plan reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the difference between the strategic plan and the operational plan for their organization, as described at more length below. Secondly, many organizations enter into the strategic planning process merely out of fashion, and without the passionate commitment of their leadership to use the strategic plan as a tool to achieve their collective vision. In this case, the strategic plan is often abandoned in favor of the next new management fad that hits the streets, and the process of strategic planning hides the exceptional benefit that may be achieved if the plan truly becomes a substantial, living document. Finally, many organizations, just like many people, lack the fundamental self-discipline that is necessary to forfeit immediate gratification in favor of the benefits of a much more substantial return on the long-term, well thought-out investment of their efforts. This final reason for strategic failure results primarily from the lack of a vision that is compelling enough to motivate the collective efforts of the organization toward the long-term goal. While possibly trite, the saying that "no organization plans to fail, however many organizations fail to plan" is profoundly true.

While there are many good reasons never to take on the high-risk of strategic planning, there is only one exceptionally compelling reason to do so: There is no route to excellence from mediocrity except through the steadfast, determined, and disciplined execution of a compelling strategic plan that the entire organization has bought into. Excellence never happens accidentally, and it is only achieved by the dedication of passionate individuals who are ready to sacrifice short-term rewards for long-term excellence. The process is not for wimps. It is not for those who are easily disenchanted from their efforts by the inevitable adversity that they encounter along the way. Such planning will require passion and determination that will push those involved to new limits of mental toughness. The price is extreme, but excellence – the attaining of superiority over one’s peer organizations – is never won without such a dedicated push. It is of paramount importance to have this level of personal commitment from the executive management of UNM before we attempt such a bold undertaking.

Only executive leadership can insist that all operational plans, from all organizations, are consistent with the strategic plan. Only the executive management can insist that UNM’s limited resources are applied in a manner that is consistent with the strategic plan. In effect, the strategic plan becomes the modality through which the executive management conveys our common vision, and keeps our organization on track to achieve excellence.

The University of New Mexico has a history of strategic planning. Not unlike many institutions this history has mixed reviews. When embarking on this latest strategic planning process, it has became abundantly clear early on that this process must be different from past processes if it is to be acceptable to the campus community. Ensuring the functionality of the final plan is of utmost importance. The climate tells us that if this process does not successfully satisfy the campus and move the institution into real long-term planning then we are doomed to a future of disillusioned faculty, students, and staff working for an institution incapable of living up to its potential. There is a looming sense that this is the last time the campus will tolerate a "planning process." Cynicism is high. For this reason it is imperative that the plan that emerges from the process state, at its core, that planning will become a permanent practice embraced by the institutional leadership and utilized in its decision-making. If the campus understands why certain decisions are made – based on the plan – then acceptance is not only possible but also inevitable.

It is clear that the campus community is now in a place where it is looking for a guiding set of principles and themes that will lead the institution into the future in a cohesive and targeted manner. There is recognition that with limited resources, a campus cannot thrive without a coherent set of strategic directions, objectives and tactics. The importance of this cannot be overstated. UNM must come through this process with a plan that can be universally accepted. A plan that will guide decisions at all levels, so that they are made with a common "line of sight" in mind. It is also recognized that with a strong and living plan, the university will be able to draw on its unique strategic resources, lowering the barriers to success that now exist. A workable plan will enable limited resources to be utilized effectively, efficiently and prosperously. It is reasonable to expect that opportunities -- for cross disciplinary collaboration, research, and teaching -- will arise with the implementation of a clear strategic plan that would otherwise not present themselves.

There have been a number of attempts at planning undertaken at UNM over the past twenty years. While these efforts were all real attempts at meeting the overall institution’s needs for strategic planning, each lacked key factors in ensuring success – widespread campus participation and buy-in, implementation strategies and tactics, evaluation, and plan updates.

The most recent plan, UNM 2000, was an important document for the university. It talked about goals for the university and encouraged UNM to think of itself in a new and important way. UNM 2000 was developed at a time when the institution viewed itself (right or wrong) for the most part as a flag-ship university in a somewhat insignificant state. However, the plan had a positive and transforming influence on the institution. UNM 2000 opened the door for the institution to think about itself in ways it never had before. During this time in UNM’s history, high quality research became a significant and important function of the institution, not only in terms of revenue but in national and international preeminence. It is hard now to think of UNM without considering its prominence in certain research areas, yet this is a relatively new identity embraced by the campus community and the legislature. For the first time, as a result of UNM 2000, UNM gave itself permission to think beyond its role as an important flag-ship institution and begin to look at itself as an important regional and even national player in higher education.

These changes came about because of UNM’s historical entrepreneurial spirit and its faculty, staff, and administrators who thoughtfully relied on and strategically used resources unique to UNM. We have learned much from these successes. And while UNM 2000 was a catalyst to a new way of thinking, it did not provide a plan for implementing change or reaching its lofty "visions." Nor could we say that anyone on campus even believed that UNM 2000 was actually implemented or guided anything we did on campus. As a result, there is a sense that the successes that did come about happened randomly and without any relationship to the plan.

During the open forums held between December 2000 and January 2001 it became clear that the errors made in the most recent planning process need to be avoided in the current development of a campus strategic plan. In a sense the creation of the strategic direction committee on planning is a direct result of the feedback the campus community provided at the forums. Five main themes resonated with most of the participants, and with this committee.

1. First, the overarching university plan must be articulated with the strategic plans of other colleges and units across campus and among the branch campuses. All departmental plans and activities need to be developed with an eye to their connectedness to the university plan. This is the first step in creating a new planning culture for the campus.
2. Second, the plan must incorporate the thinking of all constituencies, during the development phase and beyond. A valid and acceptable plan must incorporate the voices of faculty, students, staff, administrators, researchers, the community-at-large, branch campuses, and policy makers according to their missions, duties and responsibilities.
3. Third, evaluation must be an integral component of the university plan. Without evaluation as part of the ongoing plan implementation, the plan will fall victim to the same fate as past plans and will simply sit on the shelf unread and unused. Regular evaluations and adjustments as a result of evaluation will ensure the plan remains on target, flexible, and dynamic.
4. Fourth, UNM's strategic resources must drive the plan. By taking these resources – New Mexico’s diversity, nearness to an international border, proximity to world-class scientific communities, location in the midst of a world-class arts center, New Mexico’s natural features which provide a unique laboratory to study and learn, and the appeal of New Mexico’s rich cultural heritage, spectacular landscape and climate as a desirable place to live and work – all play an important part in UNM’s past sustainable successes and are necessary to focus on for future growth and development of our preeminence as an institution. A culture of planning requires connection to resources that are likely to endure throughout the lifetime of the institution. A plan that hinges on the existence of anything less will require overhaul once that resource no longer exists.
5. Fifth, the financial resources available to the university now and in the future, must be tied to the plan and a mechanism for connecting allocations with plan objectives and tactics needs to be developed.

Many people confuse the strategic plan, which is designed to be a method of focusing an organization on its ultimate goals, with operational planning, which is designed to allocate and manage resources, plan events, and make short-term investments in the day-by-day operation of the organization. Clearly the operational plan must be consistent with the strategic plan, and the executive management of UNM must accept paramount responsibility to assure that only operational plans that are consistent with the strategic plan are permitted to go forward.

The strategic plan is a composite of many well-identified opportunities tied together with a clear vision of how the University should attempt to continuously improve. The over-arching aspect of the strategic plan is the mission statement, which all strategic directions must support. While the opportunities within the strategic plan may be prioritized at the executive level, they must never be decided at this level. Clearly, the power of UNM, and in fact of any university, rests in the creative talents and exceptional abilities of its people and their related missions and responsibilities.

As in any successful academic environment it is essential to have a support program that will deal with the various needs of students. The faculty will lead the charge for excellence in education and student support programs will provide services to assist student success. The total education of a student is a team effort and needs to be addressed from all levels. There are a variety of areas where administrators and staff play a vital role in the overall success of a university. These individuals need to be focused along with the faculty as to the mission and desired outcomes of the university. All departments, programs, and individuals should be woven into the overall plan of the university and crafted in such as way that all programs are linked by supporting the same goals and working together.

Once this process is complete, the UNM Strategic Plan will mature. This plan should never be considered complete, since it must be updated and revised, at least semi-annually, through the same process of feed-forward information to the Provost’s Office, and feed-back information to the colleges and departments affected. Each unit must keep their aspect of the University vision and strategic decisions in clear focus within their strategic plans.

The strategic plan should not directly concern itself with the short-term operational planning, however the President and Provost of UNM must actively assure that only the operational plans that are consistent with the strategic plan are permitted to go forward. If followed with consistence, this attitude will quickly be emulated by all other management structures within the organization.

At present, the make-up of the Strategic Planning Task Force is representative of many constituencies across campus and each member was charged to participate as a member of the larger university community rather than as a representative for their particular unit or program.

Each step of the planning process to date has made a point of including as wide an audience as is possible given the task at hand. For instance the first set of nineteen committees had broad campus representation with over two hundred individuals participating in the thinking that went into the reports generated from the committees. Open forums were held where the campus- and community-at-large could participate in the dialog and make recommendations and suggestions.

Regardless of how careful the Task Force has been to be inclusive there are still some that view this process as inaccessible and closed door. There need not be this perception. We must recognize this cynicism if we are to change the culture from one of lack of coordination and suspicion toward "reallocation" to one of ongoing meaningful strategic planning. While the efforts to date have attempted to be open and inclusive, it is imperative that the remainder of the process be even more inclusive. This is important for the legitimacy of the plan, its implementation, evaluation, and longevity.

Therefore it is incumbent upon the Task Force to recognize the existence of a considerable amount of expertise to be found in the university's existing representative bodies such as the Faculty Senate and its committees, the Staff Council, the council for branch campuses, and the student representative organizations. There must be a way to incorporate this expertise in the formulation, revision, and review of the plan. To circumvent existing institutions and bodies will only increase cynicism, suspicion, and recalcitrance.

Evaluation of what the strategic plan is trying to accomplish is critical to the overall success of the plan. It will provide the necessary checks and balances needed to stay on track. A no nonsense approach to evaluating what the university is accomplishing and how effective we are in utilizing our resources to reach our objectives and tactics needs to be incorporated into the plan itself.

To accomplish the task of plan implementation and evaluation oversight it is recommended that any type of committee formed to oversee the plan tap into the expertise, creativity and imagination available on UNM's campuses.

While it is recognized that a Planning Council exists on campus, there is a need to reconstitute the committee to reflect the new culture of planning and to incorporate a diverse representation of ideas. The new Planning Council must be an inclusive body of campus representatives from all levels of the institution. It should be made clear to everyone on campus how representatives are selected, the length of service on the committee, and the specific charge of the committee. However, it is important that we have continuity in this process and that some members of the current Task Force participate on the new Planning Council.

Specifically, an improved and modified Planning Council should be charged with developing the evaluation process. A thorough and complete evaluation, not unlike the current planning process underway, should take place at least every two years. For this to be possible, objectives and tactics will need to be clear, and if possible have a baseline established from which to measure outcomes.

The information gathered during the evaluation process will be important in updating and improving the overall plan. The goal and purpose of the evaluation is to keep the plan moving forward, to learn from experience, and to make adjustments over time.

Intermediate evaluation steps should also be taken to keep the process front and center with departments, units, and colleges. This loops back to the articulation and linkage of all campus plans. It is suggested that a simple red light/green light or scorecard strategy to evaluate plan process be designed and completed on a quarterly basis. The point of this snapshot approach is to provide ongoing implementation status to the Planning Council. It is important that whatever is developed is simple, meaningful and does not add an inordinate extra burden on already overworked program managers and administrators

UNM is an organization with exceptionally rich opportunity, but with comparatively little world-class achievement to date. We have extensive cultural diversity in a climate with relatively little tension between different ethnic groups. The possibility of ethnic and gender diversity within UNM’s management and many of UNM’s operational units is also very good. This ethnic and gender richness is possibly our strongest asset, and one that will facilitate our success as we relentlessly pursue our strategic plan. In addition, UNM has local access to three major national laboratories that collectively represent a $3.3 billion per year investment, primarily in science and technology. We are also rooted in one of the most active and productive artistic communities within North America. Our natural resources, and the beauty of our State, are among the best in the Nation. UNM is currently one of only six Carnegie Research-Extensive Universities within the United States that is also primarily a minority institution. We have every reason to excel, and claim our due position as one of the top five State funded universities in the United States.

The University of New Mexico, simply put, is much more of a loose confederation of scholars than it is a coordinated research organization. This is a very good thing in that it supports a high level of intellectual diversity and academic freedom, both of which are critical to any university’s success. This loose confederacy structure is a concern, however, since it limits our ability to effectively plan for a much better future, and to work in a coordinated way to achieve this end-goal. To excel, UNM must develop a much closer trust between the faculty and administration, so that these methods of collaboration, which are so critical to the achievement of a strategic plan, develop naturally through professional collaborations, and not through a rigid "chain of command" architecture. This closer cooperation and trust will foster true full-duplex communications between departments, colleges, and the central administration that will permit a contagious, single-mindedness when it comes to new initiatives to promote UNM. Dr. Arlo Penzius, Executive Vice President for Research at AT&T, once commented that his job was not to come up with great ideas, but rather to recognize and promote excellent ideas from within AT&T when they arise. This very pro-active management approach was held dear by Dr. Penzius, himself a Physics Nobel Laureate, since it provided objectively wonderful results. In a similar way, UNM’s executive management should never be expected to come up with the brilliant ideas, but rather they should be exceptionally aware, and hence ready to facilitate wonderful ideas as they arise, provided that these ideas are consistent with the UNM strategic plan. Excellent executive management should never be gauged by the ability of the executive managers to provide great ideas, but rather by their ability not to ignore truly rare and wonderful opportunity when it presents itself.

We know that the state of New Mexico has limited resources. It is therefore imperative that in a world where the faculty, staff, branch campuses, students, administrators, and planners are continuously told that UNM has very limited resources, any expansion of the UNM's commitment, whether it is creation of new administrative positions, new institutes, projects or

plans, will continue to be looked upon with suspicion, frustration, and cries from different quarters of the university which feel that they are under funded, unappreciated and not rewarded, unless the new plan includes a mechanism for resource allocation that is tied to the plan.

The University of New Mexico over the last decade has committed substantial resources to a number of special, sometime duplicative, projects without clear statements of purpose, goals, and consultation with the numerous constituencies that this current planning process wishes to consider.  The net results, at the moment, are a number of projects to which UNM is still committing valuable and scarce resources, coupled with a lack of understanding as to why the resources were allocated in the first place.  Under the new plan, it is suggested that these current and all future projects be evaluated according to the criteria laid out in the above document.

The distribution of resources is a contentious process and if UNM is to have a culture of planning then it must include better communication to all units on campus and evaluation in some objective fashion as to what resources are available and how the use of the resources contribute to the university's mission.