[an error occurred while processing this directive]
UNM UNM Strategic Planning
UNM UNM Strategic Planning

Strategic Planning

Background
Committees
Input & Feedback
Process Overview
Progress & Reports

Business Policies
Campus Directory
Faculty Handbook
NCA Report
Org. Structure
Press Releases
Regents' Policies
Task Force
UNM 2000
UNM Fact Book

UNM Lobo
[an error occurred while processing this directive]

UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO
Strategic Planning Process
2000-2001


Overview
Graphic presentation of the process

I. Preliminaries


II. Foundations

  • Defining the domain of the plan
  • Environmental Scan
  • Review Vision, Mission, Values Statements
  • Background Administrative Support Work

  • III. Working Papers on Activities and Programs

  • Analysis; Appoint and Charge Working Committees

  • IV. The University’s Strategic Directions


    V. Writing the Strategic Plan

    • Notes on the Form of the Plan

    APPENDICES
    Defining the domain: Process Guidelines
    Charge to Environmental Scan Committee
    Current Vision, Mission, and Values Statements
    Charge to Working Committees
    Charge to Strategic Direction Committees

    The Planning Process: Overview

    The Planning Task Force developed the planning process over a period of two months, moving from the very general concepts in the Task Force’s charge to the more detailed series of activities described below. Many members of the University Community, the Regents, and others have been part of these discussions. The process falls into five broad phases, each of which is discussed in detail below.

    Preliminaries. The first phase consisted of the many preliminary tasks such as appointing and charging the Planning Task Force and that group’s discussions on the shape of the process. Although the result of this phase is clearly within the range of what planning at other large universities involves, the Task Force directed considerable attention to the special conditions at UNM.

    Foundations. The second phase, which occupies most of the summer, is foundational. The domain of the plan is defined in a series of group processes that identify the entire range of activities that stakeholders believe the University should undertake. An Environmental Scan Committee examines the environment in which the University will exist over the next five to ten years. Another committee re-examines UNM’s vision, mission, and core values statements. And the results of prior planning exercises, whether called "planning or not" are assembled by support staff. All subsequent working papers and drafts of the plan explicitly are referred back to this entire set of background materials

    Working papers. In the third phase, a number of "sub-domains" are defined such that they span the entire domain of the plan, partitioning it into a set of "natural" activity/program areas. A committee is formed corresponding to each area and charged to prepare a brief—no longer than five pages—working paper that identifies the unique resources, strengths, and competitive advantages that we enjoy at the University of New Mexico as well as our limitations and prospects. Broad public discussion of the working papers will follow their completion.

    Strategic Directions. The fourth phase builds on analysis of the working papers from phase three, the environmental scan, and other earlier materials to identify approximately six strategic directions (i.e., general goals) for the Strategic Plan. A committee is appointed to write a substantial working paper on each strategic direction, identifying and evaluating ideas for major objectives in the area as well as tactical means of reaching the objectives. Again, broad public discussion will follow completion of these papers.

    Writing the plan. The fifth phase is to write the plan based on the Strategic Direction working papers. The penultimate draft will receive broad public discussion, as did earlier sets of working papers. The final version of the plan will be published and disseminated widely. A formal evaluation of progress toward reaching objectives will be done in two years.

    I. Preliminaries

    A. Appoint and Charge Task Force
    In late spring, President Gordon and Provost Foster began discussions about composition of a task force to coordinate development of the new strategic plan. This central planning group was envisioned as a central coordinating and writing group that would build on the work of dozens, even hundreds, of stakeholders in the University. Membership on the task force was conceived not to "cover" the entire range of university constituents, but rather to bring diverse perspectives to thinking about the University’s future. After two months of work, including the first stages of defining the domain of the plan, it became clear that critical perspectives had been omitted, and a small number of new members were added during the summer of 2000. It is anticipated that other adjustments may follow as it becomes clearer what directions the plan will take.

    II. Foundations

    A. Define the domain of the plan
    Nearly everyone believes he or she knows what the University does, or at least what it should do. We all know that the mission of a large public research university is extremely complex, however, and as planning discussions began it became quickly apparent that different people’s views varied greatly. Even defining the range of activities that the University pursues, to say nothing of what it ought to pursue, requires input from many and varied observers and participants. We have come to call this list of what we ought to be doing as "defining the domain of the plan."

    To get a preliminary reading on the domain, we conducted three brainstorming sessions—one with the Deans Council, one with the Task Force, and one with the Provost’s Staff. In each session, we began by giving each person a booklet of post-it notes and asking him or her to write, one per note, everything that the University ought to be doing, ranging from academic programs, support activities, and research to business systems and infrastructure construction and maintenance. Each group was also asked to group the lists into broad categories. Although there was significant overlap in the three groups’ lists, they were very different from one another in flavor. The Deans Council had a particularly productive discussion about devising six broad categories that seemed to capture the range of University activities in an insightful way, and this system has been adopted as a provisional way of organizing our thinking about the domain of the plan.

    The diversity of the three groups’ sessions confirmed our idea that we needed extremely broad participation to define the domain adequately. Much of the rest of the summer is devoted to conducting similar, but professionally facilitated, group processes with approximately fifteen other groups that were identified by the Task Force. In addition, an open invitation will be made to any other group on or off campus who wishes to participate in the process. The University will offer facilitation services where feasible by time and place should the groups desire such assistance. Guidelines for group processes in defining the domain of the plan follow on pages xx to xx.

    B. Conduct an environmental scan
    It is essential that the planning process be informed about the social, economic, political, cultural, technological, and educational environment in which the University will exist over the next five to ten years. Accordingly, an Environmental Scan Committee will write a report analyzing the environment that the University will be in for the next five or ten years. A membership list of this committee along with the committee’s charge follows on page xx.

    C. Review vision, mission, and values statements
    The mission, vision, and values statements are antecedents for the rest of the plan. It is important that they be seriously considered at every step of the planning process—i.e., defining the strategic directions, objectives, and tactics that constitute the substance of the UNM strategic plan. The University has had such statements for some time—most recently with the publication of UNM 2000. It is important they be re-examined periodically and either reaffirmed or revised as seems appropriate. The current vision, mission, and values statements are shown below on page xx.

    D. Background Administrative Work
    As the other summer work proceeds, several administrative support functions will be underway. Most important are the following three activities:

      • A communication plan will be developed to share with all constituents the progress of the process, including full text of the various working papers and drafts of the plan. There are at least three key elements of this plan.
        • All participants in any phase of the plan—e.g., all members of group sessions for defining the domain, those who comment on any working paper or otherwise provide input—will be kept abreast of developments by letter, email, or other medium they indicate.
        • A web site will be maintained with all working papers and draft plans as well as other news of the planning project. It will have a feature that allows direct input on the plan.
        • Periodically news releases and other public communication avenues will be pursued in the general press and in university publications.
      • Staff will collect previous planning reports for the use of the Task Force when reviewing working papers and other documents from the current process.
      • The Office of Institutional Research will compile data resources for the use of the Task Force.


    III. Working Papers on Activities and Programs

    The Task Force will partition the domain into a set of perhaps fifteen categories represent key activities and programs that span the entire domain. For each activity or program area, a committee will be formed to write a brief working paper. The papers will be available for comment on the planning web site, and they will be the subject of a broad based public discussion. Along with the environmental scan, mission statement, and other antecedent materials, they will for the basis for further development of the Plan. The charge for these committees is shown below on page xx.

    IV. The University’s Strategic Directions

    As indicated above, the working papers on activities and programs, along with the public discussion that they generate, will be the basis identifying the University’s strategic directions, the institution’s broadest goals. It is anticipated that there will be no more than six or seven such strategic directions, each of which will be further defined by a number of objectives. The objectives, in turn, will be given operational content by a series of tactics by which the objectives will be achieved. After identifying the strategic directions, the Task Force will appoint a committee to develop a substantial working paper for each one. These papers will provide the substance of the plan. The charge for these committees is shown below on page xx. As with the earlier working papers, the strategic direction papers will be the subject of a broad public discussion.

    V. Writing the Plan

    Finally, it is on the basis of the strategic direction working papers, along with the discussion that they generate, that the plan itself will be written. The task force will the penultimate version of the plan available for broad public discussion, after which the final version will be written, published, and disseminated. Notes on the format of the plan are shown below on pp. xx to xx.

    An important feature of the plan is a detailed provision for evaluating progress toward meeting its objectives. As indicated in the charge to the Task Force, the president and provost strongly recommend that the Planning Council be charged with biennial evaluation and appropriate revision, followed by widespread dissemination and discussion of the results of the evaluation. The evaluation will determine not only whether or to what degree the objectives have been met, but at least as important, will examine whether the tactics are appropriate for achieving the objectives. Only with such evaluation will the plan have real integrity.