Why the Why?

For departments, colleges, and universities going through a strategic planning process, it is important to make sure that the work we do is more than a document that gathers dust on a shelf (or perhaps, more accurately, languishes in the bowels of a shared drive). If you have taken any leadership courses or if you have ever heard of William Deming, then you know that strategic planning should guide decision making within an organization. It should influence measures of accountability. When multiple requests emerge to do more with fewer resources, a good strategic plan should help teams say no – to set priorities. Particularly in an organization where role ambiguity looms across all units, a robust strategic plan can help individuals discern their professional identities and foci.

With the challenges in higher education today, I believe this work should go even farther. Academic units can create the conditions through which their students are prepared to impact society. In My Pedagogic Creed, Dewey goes so far as to characterize educators as the “prophet of the true God and usherer in the true kingdom of God.” By its very nature, our work within universities is normative. We achieve shared spaces of value and purpose through which we build capacity in others to do the same. This requires us to take time to focus on purpose and then to determine together how we achieve that purpose together. Dewey (1916) explains it this way: “The conception of education as a social process and function has no definite meaning until we define the kind of society we have in mind” (p.97). Without examining purpose, we are merely facilitating transactional being and making ourselves, our students, and those whom they will serve vulnerable to the whims and wishes of others, typically those in positions of power who can dictate the “Why” of one’s work.

Instead, academic units engaging in strategic planning need to work together to collectively achieve shared normative spaces through which they empower their students to transform the lives of others. For this reason, it is important to strategically consider the aims of this work. Dewey (1916) had a lot to say about aims. He notes that they are ordered and deliberate activities that require “imaginative foresight” (p. 102). They provide direction and force us to continually consider the context in which we work – to anticipate and overcome obstacles to succeed. Good aims must be realistic, emerging from current conditions. They begin as tentative sketches, and as such need to be flexible to change according to the conditions that emerge. Most importantly, aims must be achieved through deliberate and thoughtful inquiry. They should not be imposed by others only to be achieved through mechanical compliance. Dewey’s work, even though it is written more than a century ago, is reflected in the work of Martin Reeves, and his TedTalk.

Reeves argues that we cannot cling to the traditional image of strategic planning. He examines the different contexts through which organizations operate today, and he proposes a strategy collage based upon five different organizational environments:

· Classical: where outcomes are predictable, so it is easier to plan

· Adaptive: where we cannot predict so we experiment

· Visionary: where the outcome does not exist yet, so we must imagine it

· Shaping: where we can influence but we cannot predict outcomes

· Renewal: where we recognize that we must change because we are out of step with our environment

Reeves argues that we should not simply pick the environment from the list of five and act accordingly. He notes that conditions change over time and that units within an organization may reflect different environments and require different approaches to planning. To do this, he suggests that we consider the following three questions:

1. Can we predict it?

2. Can we shape it?

3. Can we survive it?

So, within our strategic planning, it is important to keep these elements in mind. How can we help our institution shape our normative spaces in relation to our expressed values? What questions do we need to ask ourselves? What lines of inquiry should we pursue? How do we set priorities in terms of our time, energy, and finances to support and sustain those spaces?

As academics engage in strategic planning, we need to also consider a powerful lesson Dewey provides related to aims. He does so by using a powerful metaphor. Often when we think of aims, we imagine a bullseye – the target. However, focusing on the target leads us astray. Dewey argues that the aim is not the target; it is shooting the target. Rather than focusing on the bullseye, we need to focus on the elements of archery that will help us succeed. How do we stand? Are our feet shoulder-width apart and perpendicular to the target? How are we gripping the bow? How high is our arm? Have we aligned the bow tip to the target? These elements come together to achieve the aim, but the aim of hitting the target will not be achieved if we are solely focused on the bullseye.

What are the elements that help academics achieve their aims? How do we create our shared normative spaces? In what ways can we consider resources, lines of inquiry, and means of accountability related to our aims? As Dewey notes, this work requires us to engage our “imaginative insight.” It also requires clear efforts to ensure sustainability. How does this work become an ongoing part of the day-to-day work of the unit? How does it become a constant guiding force within the work of the entire academic community? If we are able to work through these questions and then strive to operationalize the choices we make as a collective endeavor, then our strategic planning can become a source of professional renewal.

References:

Dewey, John (1897) ‘My pedagogic creed’, The School Journal, Volume LIV, Number 3 (January 16, 1897), pages 77-80. [Also available in the informal education archives, https://infed.org/mobi/john-dewey-my-pedagogical-creed/. Retrieved: 10/02/2020].

Dewey, John. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.