Strategic Planning Process

1
Strategic Planning Process Dean Stanley
Lemeshow October 2007
2
CPH Strategic Planning Timeline
SPH established as independent entity August 2003
CEPH Confirmation of Accreditation May 2004
SPH Strategic Plan February 2005
CEPH site visit October 2003
1st faculty retreat under new Dean, September 2003
SP kickoff March 2004
SP retreat September 2004
3
Strategic Planning Process

1. Identify mission, vision, and values
2. Understand external environments and competition
3. Conduct internal analysis of resources and
   capabilities
4. Conduct stakeholder survey
5. Set strategic goals
6. Identify strategic initiatives to support the
   goals
7. Develop an action plan for implementation
8. Use strategic indicators and performance tracking
9. Review annually assumptions, trends and goals

4
Process Stakeholder Involvement

• College leadership was committed and spent time
  working with the strategic planning group to
  brainstorm and develop directions and ideas
• Planning group included key stakeholders and was
  facilitated by a professional planning consultant
• Planning group met bi-weekly for 6 months and
  included stakeholder input
• Interviews with division chairs, faculty leaders,
  employers, state agencies, staff, and students
• Web-based surveys targeted faculty, alumni,
  students, and employers
• Focus groups with faculty, staff, and students

5
Process Vision and Mission

• Develop a shared vision of the future that is
  inspirational, realistic, credible and attractive
• Develop objectives and focus energy in achieving
  these objectives.
• Planning group to include key stakeholders and
  facilitated by professional planning consultant
• Ensure ample opportunities to solicit stakeholder
  input into the process

6
Process Environment

• This includes factors that may influence the
  colleges strategic directions and operations.
• Through retreats, interviews, and focused groups,
  the committee identified the strengths,
  weaknesses, opportunities, and threats that
  helped frame our discussions on setting strategic
  goals and identifying strategies.

7
Environment International, National

• International
• World population growth and globalization
• International dimension improves reputation
• National
• Increasing need for public health education and
  intervention
• Aging population
• Public health workforce reaching retirement age
• Health disparities
• Bioterrorism
• Fast growth in national health expenditures
• Admission to public health majors increased more
  than 50 in 10 years

8
Environment State, University

• State
• Only accredited public health college in Ohio
• Located in state capital
• Good statewide public health infrastructure
• State education support decreased every year from
  1998-2003
• University
• Academic Plan sets ambitious goals
• Budget restructuring creates incentive for
  expansion
• Affiliation with largest health sciences campus
  in the nation
• Newly attained academic status separate from
  College of Medicine
• New Dean determined to get the school into the
  top 20

9
SWOT Analysis SampleService
Strengths
Opportunities

• Office of Public Health Practice
• Strong city, state health depts.
• University encourages and supports outreach
• Many potential external partners

• Strong city, state health depts.
• Practice placements are extension of service
• Grants available for collaboration
• Enhanced public health interest

Weaknesses
Threats

• Limited funding for service activities
• Other MPH programs in the state could fill this
  niche
• Territorial nature of other extensions

• No agreed definition of service
• Service not part of the culture
• School had minimal infrastructure

10
Internal Assessment Survey
Respondents
Faculty 13
Staff 18
Student 32
Others 8
Public health professional 20
Total 91
11
Sample -- Strategic Planning Survey
Percent who considered the following as A Major
Strength or A Strength
63
70
48
53
29
44
37
58
12
Process Goals, Strategy Development

• Based on the analysis of strengths and strategic
  opportunities, identified a set of strategic
  goals that CPH should achieve within a specific
  timeframe.
• These goals were designed to be in close
  alignment with the Universitys academic plan as
  well as fitting our unique environment.
• Associated with the strategic goals was a set of
  tactics to achieve the targeted performance.
  These tactics reflected what our stakeholders
  believed are the most important to help achieve
  our objectives.

13
Prioritization and Implementation

• One of the inherent rationales for strategic
  planning is the realization that we are
  constrained by limited resources. Thinking
  strategically means that we need to set
  priorities and make decisions that have
  trade-offs.
• An implementation plan was developed to translate
  our goals and strategies into specific,
  disciplined, and time-sensitive sets of actions.
• We also prioritized programs and made strategic
  investment decisions based on such priorities
• We also developed performance metrics to track,
  assess, and reward progress towards achieving our
  goals

14
Sample Implementation Plan
15
Sample Performance Indicators
Indirect Cost Recovery and Release Time from
Research Grants, FY 2000 - 2007
Highlights OSU SPHs total indirect cost
recovery increased significantly from the low of
359,455 in FY04 to the height of 846,443 in
FY07. Total release time has been on the rise and
was at 1.3 million in FY07.
Data Source OSU SPH Internal Financial Data.
16
Take-Away Points

• Bring together the right people, beyond
  leadership. Ensure representation of all key
  stakeholders, including those external to the
  university.
• Leadership must signal that the strategic plan is
  a top priority.
• Ensure that your final plan connects with the
  universitys and colleges priorities. Decisions
  from budgeting to personnel to space planning
  should be related to the strategic plan.
• Strategic planning is about deciding who you ARE
  and who you ARE NOT.

17
Take-Away Points

• Allow sufficient time to fully develop the ideas
  and build consensus.
• Engage a strategic planning professional.
• Designate a staff person who will take ownership
  of the process. Clearly, the strategic planning
  process should follow faculty governance
  procedures, and the content of the plan is shaped
  by stakeholders.
• When you think youre done, youre not done.

18
2007 Plan Update
Review of Focus Group feedback, SWOT analysis,
tactical review at Faculty Retreat September 2007
Strategy included in Deans Advisory Board
retreat October 2007
Draft of update presented to faculty January 2008
Focus Groups (faculty, staff, students,
alumni) Spring, Summer 2007
Survey of key stakeholders November 2007
Final draft completed Spring 2008
Discussion of top priorities at faculty
meeting October 2007