Planning Process

The strategic planning process at Iowa State University is open, inclusive, and iterative. Throughout the development of the 2005−2010 plan, all full committee meetings were publicized on the strategic planning web site; the public was encouraged to attend. The web site was only one of the tools used to keep the University community updated on the plan. News releases to both the University and local communities alerted constituencies to the availability of draft copies of the plan. These releases were also compiled on the web site for quick access. Documents used in the environmental scan–i.e., studies of both global and local trends in higher education, as well as a careful SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis of Iowa State–were also included on the web site. Open forums were held to generate discussion and collect feedback. A dedicated e−mail address (strategicplan@iastate.edu) was also used to collect feedback. All e−mails were personally acknowledged; the opinions, suggestions, and concerns they contained were posted anonymously to the web site. Input and feedback was solicited from alumni, the community, students, staff, faculty, administrators, county extension offices, and other friends of the University. To allow ample time for input, the process included three iterations of the plan.

The 2005−2010 Strategic Planning Process began in January of 2004 with the naming of the committee and the first committee meeting. The bulk of the input for the environmental scan was collected over the spring semester, although new documents were added throughout the process. Two all−day committee retreats, held in June and August, helped to sharpen work on the Mission, Values and Vision. The first draft of the plan was released on August 30, 2004, to the entire University community for a three−week feedback period (ending September 17, 2004). Subsequent meetings were held during the fall semester to craft the second draft. Starting in June, the facilitation group met at least weekly, and often more frequently. The second draft, released October 11, 2004, incorporated feedback received on the first draft and included a description of measures to be used to indicate progress. Again, the feedback period was three weeks. Final revisions were made and the third draft was submitted to the Faculty Senate on November 17. The Senate and the Professional and Scientific Staff Council each reviewed and endorsed the plan in December 2004. The Board of Regents reviewed and approved the plan in March and April 2005. The plan went into effect July 2005.

The committee structure for strategic planning was two−tiered. The full committee was comprised of over 40 members representing the colleges, various University units and groups, students, alumni, parents, and the Ames community. Much of the data collection, review of feedback and the writing of drafts was done by a smaller, eight−member, facilitation group.

Because this strategic planning cycle coincided with the accreditation cycle, the two efforts were well integrated and leveraged common activities. Integration of the two was ensured through two mechanisms. Both efforts (planning and preparation of the self−study) were administered through the office of the Provost, under the direction of the Provost and Associate Provost and therefore, shared common personnel. The leader of the facilitation group for strategic planning was also charged with coordinating the self−study for HLC accreditation. Linking the two processes via the people involved assured coherence. The environmental scan, SWOT analysis, and constituency involvement in focus groups informed both strategic planning and self−study preparation.

As the self−study reflects on accomplishments, evaluates performance, and informs future directions, the strategic plan provides the goals and measures and vision to do so. The common components of each effort ensure that planning is informed through self−study and reflection.

Colleges and units were asked to give feedback and make suggestions on each draft of the strategic plan. This involvement in the process not only enabled colleges and units to impact the content and direction of the plan, but also to develop their own strategic plan with full knowledge of the University’s vision.

All committee members, including the facilitation group members, were given a survey requesting feedback on the strategic planning process. Thirteen responses were returned. Most comments were very positive and complimentary of the facilitation group's efforts. The substantive recommendations were:

• Summarize the results of the environmental scan and make them available to the general public
−While all documents were made available and many were summarized, the volume of information was still overwhelming.

• Full day meetings are too long (half−day would work better)
−It was suggested that the bulk of productivity occurred in the first half of the day.

• Better records of the process would make things easier next time.
Records of prior strategic planning processes were scarce. In this planning process, activities of the planning committee were published, records of all correspondence and activities (both on paper and electronic) were maintained, and a final report was published.