Strategic Doing: Designing & Achieving Strategic Outcomes with Action-Oriented Collaborations

Preview:

DESCRIPTION

Slides used for a seminar at the University of Florida in Gainesville on September 24, 214

Citation preview

Strategy Doing:Designing & Achieving Measurable Strategic

Outcomes with Action-Oriented Collaboration University of Florida

Gainesville, FL – September 24, 2014

Copyright 2014 – Ed Morrison & Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

The Great and the Near Great in the White River Country

by Z. M. Horton The Baxter Bulletin

Dec 31, 1915

S. J. Hutcheson, a well known farmer and stockman ofNorfork, roping a calf

White River Ferry at Norfork, Arkansas, circa 1900

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Norfork, Arkansas

(pop. 550)

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Research Question

Why are some strategies for addressing community issues successful and others…not so much?

Answering the Question

A grounded theory exploration using a sequential mixed method

approach beginning with a qualitative phase in which semi-

structured interviews resulting were conducted with a purposively

sampled panel of experts resulting in data that was open coded using

the data spiral analysis method followed by a quasi-experimental quantitative phase in which two

contrasted groups of purposefully sampled, randomly assigned participants were surveyed,

resulting in data that was analyzed using Spearman’s rho to determine

correlation coefficients.

1. Literature review2. Interviews3. Surveys

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Problem Statement

• Literature gap regarding factors contributing to effective strategy in the context of community issues like economic development (Kwon, Berry, & Feiock, 2009).

• Civic leaders face daunting tasks of developing and implementing strategies to address these community issues (Markey, 2010).

• Very little research-based information to guide decisions about effective strategy-development processes.

• Evolution of community issues• Institutionalization• Locus of control• Increasing complexity

• Tools for managing community issues• Early tools• Evolving tools• Emerging tools

• Contributing theories• Strategy formation• Collaborative governance• Social innovation

Insights from the Literature

Conducted as part of the grounded theory data collection process (McGhee, Marland, and Atkinson, 2007).

Conducted to provide contextualization (Dunne, 2011) and orientation to the phenomenon (Pozzebon, Petrini, de Mellow, and Garreau, 2011).

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Evolution of How We Deal with

Public Issues

Institutionalization• Pre-institutional (Pre- WW2)• Institutional (1950-1990)• Multi-Institutional (1990 to today)

Locus of Control • Control in the hands of the “elite”

(Perrucci & Pilisuk, 1970). • Most economic & community

development issues are “Type 3 Public Problems” and control is shared by a group of “nonexperts” (Heifitz and Sinder, 1988).

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics•Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

14

Co

mp

lexi

tyBoulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

The Extension Economist Vs. The Rocket Scientist

15

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

16

Co

mp

lexi

tyBoulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

17

Co

mp

lexi

tyBoulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools•Animal – mobility, information processing•Plants – viability•Open Systems – matter, energy•Cybernetics – computers•Clockworks – engines•Frameworks – buildings, cells

18

Co

mp

lexi

tyBoulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Dealing with the Complexity

19

Early Models• 1960s in universities, schools, municipalities (Hamilton, 2007)• Late 1980s/Early 1990s first economic development strategic plans

(Blackerby & Blackerby, 1995) • Borrowed from industry models (Blair,2004)

Evolving Models• Recognition that corporate models are less effective (Bryson and Roering,

1987).• U.S. Economic Development Administration’s CEDS; Cooperative Extension

Service’s Take Charge (Hein, Cole, & Ayres, 1990); Asset-Based Community Development, (Kretzmann and McKnight, 1996; Community Capitals, Flora, 1992)

Emerging Models• Effectiveness of strategic planning in business questioned (Mintzberg, 1994).• Effectiveness of strategic planning in economic & community development

questioned ( Blair, 2004; Robichau, 2010; Morrison, 2012)• Organic Strategic Planning (McNamara, 2010, Open Source Economic

Development (Merkel, 2010), Strategic Doing (Hutcheson, 2008; Hutcheson & Morrison, 2012; Walzer & Cordes, 2012)

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Complexity =Messes

Community issues are complex

Institutions emerged to

deal with the complexity

There are lots of institutions

No single institution is

“in charge” of most public

issues

Complex environment

Contributing Theories

•Social Innovation•Strategy Formation•Collaborative Governance

21

Social Innovation

Social innovations… • are best designed and implemented in networks• emerge from heterogeneousness (diversity)• are framed using existing assets• are products of co-creation• are the result of collective action• should have decentralized implementation• ,when implemented should focus on tangible results

Bland, Bruk, Kim, and Lee (2010); Bouchard (2012); Mulgan, Ali, Tucker and Sanders (2007); Neumeier (2012); Oliveira and Breda-Vazquez (2012)

Strategy Formation

Strategies… • are formed intuitively• are iterative•must be designed to account for unanticipated variables•must take into account contextual values, assumptions,

beliefs, and expectations•must be flexible• should be designed collaboratively• and best developed as an intra-organizational activity

Feser, 2012; Johanson, 2009; Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg, 1978; Parnell, 2008; Rindova, Dalpiaz, and Ravasi, 2011; Sminia, 2012; Tapinos, Dyson, and Meadows, 2011

Collaborative Governance

Collaborative governance…• takes advantage of network structures• connects existing assets• focuses first on small wins• Requires decision making to be made by consensus•works when there is trust among participants• is efficient• involves successful management of both internal and external

stakeholders

Ansell and Gash, 2008; Chiclana et al., 2013; Clarke, Huxley, Mountford, 2010; Emerson, Nabatchi, and Balogh, 2012; Gibson, 2011; Johnston, Hicks, Nan, and Auer, 2011; Kwon, Berry, and Feiock, 2009; Merkle , 2010; Olberding, 2009;

Ospina and Saz-Carranza, 2010; Pammer, 1998; Poister, 2010

Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

These Things Matter

•Organizational Structure (hierarchy, network, etc.)• Framework (asset-based, deficit-based)•Processes (planning and Implementation separate and distinct, planning and implementation integrated and iterative, etc.)• Timeframe (focused on longer-term goals, focused on shorter-term goals, etc.) • Implementation (tasks centralized with one organization, tasked disseminated among multiple organizations)

Insights from the Panel of Experts

The Quantitative Data• Population of scholars and practitioners who design curricula, teach, and/or practice strategy development for addressing public issues (economic development, community development, community health, etc.)• Sample: N=12• Semi-structured interviews (IRB-approved, anonymity)• Verbatim transcripts, data spiral analysis with three levels of coding: open, axial, selective using qualitative analysis software• 56 single-spaced pages/over 31,000 words of data

Findings from the Interviews

27

1. Network organization structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community

Variables

28

1. Network organization structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community

Independent Variables

Dependent Variable = Effectiveness

EffectivenessFor the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how would you describe its level of effectiveness:

• Completely effective• Significantly effective• Somewhat effective

IneffectivenessFor the ineffective strategy initiative you have in mind, how would you describe its level of ineffectiveness:

• Somewhat ineffective• Significantly ineffective• Completely ineffective

Organizational Structure, etc.

Measuring the Variables

Hierarchical, with a clear top and bottom

Network, with a hub and spokes

Insights from Participants

The Qualitative Data• Population of individuals who have participated in

community-based strategy initiatives to address public issues (economic development, community development, community health, etc.)

• Sample of 300 (plus those reached by use of snowball sample) participants were randomly selected from PCRD contact database (N=209). Assured that Indiana was not over represented

• IRB-approved survey constructed using the factors identified in phase 1, participants randomly assigned to two contrasting groups

Findings from the Surveys

31

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses

Completely Effective

Completely Ineffective

Significantly Effective

Somewhat Effective

Somewhat Ineffective

Significantly Ineffective

Findings from the Survey

Effectiveness Continuum

Dep

ende

nt V

aria

bles

Correlation

Findings from the Surveys

33

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables

Recipe for EFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a network organizational structure• Frame strategies primarily around

building on existing assets • Have a planning and implementation

processes that is iterative • Include short-term, easy-win goals• Decentralize responsibilities for

implementation among multiple organization • Use metrics to learn what is working

and to make adjustments along the way• Build high levels of trust among

participants• Assure that participants are ready to

change

Recipe for INEFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a hierarchical organizational structure

• Frame strategies primarily around addressing problems or deficits

• Have a planning and implementation process that is linear and sequential

• Include only long-term, transformational goals

• Centralized responsibilities for implementation with one organization

• Uses metrics primarily for accountability

• Proceed even though there are low levels of trust among participants

• Proceed although participants are not ready for change

Frame Strategies Around Assets

Frame Strategies Around Assets

Frame Strategies Around Assets

Frame Strategies Around Assets

Network-Based

Organizational Structures

10 nodes, 9 connections

10 nodes, 45 connections

William Fox20th Century Fox

41

42

43

20th Century Fox

44

Made by 20th Century Fox…

Made by 20th Century Fox

20th Century Fox

45

Made by 20th Century Fox…

& 130 other companies

Made by 20th Century Fox

iPhone

Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

Dr. Lowell CatlettEconomist, Futurist, and Professor

New Mexico State University

Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

One study looked at 7,000 different economic predictions and found 47% of them was correct.

Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

Flip a coin and you beat the economists by 3%.

Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

Doubt and dwindling motivation comes on quickly when a big goal is missed. On the other hand, small wins lead to the progress principle - more confidence, high performance, and motivation to keep moving forward. - Teresa Amabile

Collaboration & Trust

Turf

Trust

TIME

SharingResources

Sharing Information

MutualAwareness

Co-Execution

Co-Creation

AcknowledgmentExploration Cooperation Collaboration Innovation

Adapted from Collaboration Continuum from ACT for Youth

Improving Our Practice

Strategic Doing enables people to form action-oriented collaborations quickly, move them toward measurable outcomes, and make

adjustments along the way.

Strategy Answers Two

Basic Questions

Strategic Doing Divides the Two Basic Questions into Four Appreciative Questions

56

Strategic Doing Moves from the Linear to the Agile

Strategic Doing Is Iterative & Ongoing

Practicing Strategic Doing

59

To know what you you’re going to draw, you have to begin drawing.

- Pablo Picasso

Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.765-479-7704

hutcheson@purdue.eduwww.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/

www.twitter.com/jshutch64www.facebook.com/scott.hutchesonhttp://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/

For More Information & to Connect

Copyright 2014 – Ed Morrison & Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Slides available

Copyright 2014 – Ed Morrison & Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Recommended