Learning Resources

Abstract: Success in strategic planning requires decision-making that reflects the collective vision of diverse constituents. At California State University, Fullerton we leveraged data as the essential thread in engaging our community in an inclusive strategic planning process. Data played dual roles, serving as input and output, to provide a common framework through which the ideas and wisdom of our community are reflected and shared, anchoring the strategic plan firmly in the campus voices. Our engagement through data embodied our commitment to evidence-based decision-making and contributed to the success of our strategic planning process.

Abstract: Triton College’s strategic plan focuses on short- and mid-term institution-wide neurodiversity efforts to create a neuroinclusive campus culture. Key aspects of success include a multi-year administrative commitment; connecting the work to the open-access mission; including committee members from across the college; and focusing on programming, space, and partnerships. Triton College built support and overcame barriers by amplifying advocates and identifying champions, tying the work to campus-wide initiatives, ensuring strategic and operational leadership, securing seed funding, including stakeholders, starting small, reducing risk, allowing for development time, defining the work, building on wins, and adhering to an open-access mission.

Abstract: Smith College commissioned MNLA to develop its 20-year Landscape Master Plan to address climate change impacts, inclusiveness, and pedagogy. The process was grounded in robust campus engagement over 18 months. More than 1,600 students and alumnae provided input through online mapping tools and in-person workshops that used cutouts and puzzles to reimagine the open spaces on campus. Staff and faculty were interviewed in person or via phone on ways to incorporate scholarship in the landscape, and 6,400 members of the campus community were reached through Instagram. An online magazine published by MNLA kept the campus community updated on findings, alternative plans, and conclusions.

Abstract: A global health crisis intersecting with a racial reckoning has led to a renewed commitment to reflect on complex histories and plan for more inclusive futures on many American campuses. Institutions, which benefitted from traditional hierarchies of power, are starting to grapple with histories of developing indigenous lands and the legacy of a western and able-bodied vernacular within campus design that continues to reinforce in-groups and out-groups. The authors are presently leading first-of-their-kind DEI planning initiatives; in this article they unpack how a public institution is meeting their past head-on to plan better futures.

Abstract: The most effective master plans are those that reflect the myriad voices of the institution. We’re finding the engagement process is fast becoming as important a product of the plan as the plan itself. Engagement should be informative, inclusive, meaningful, and fun—and should be the product of an integrated process. Leveraging the University of California, Berkeley’s Campus Master Plan as a case study, this article provides a framework for developing custom engagement strategies, and highlights examples, lessons learned, and tips for optimizing meaningful participation.

Abstract: This article describes execution of the balanced scorecard (BSC) strategic framework in a School of Nursing (SoN). The SoN strategy map was the outcome of the development phase. The two-year implementation phase incorporated balanced scorecards that linked outcome measures to the priority strategies. Thirty-two percent of the defined outcome measures were met. Factors in adopting the BSC framework included development of a strategic plan that supports the college mission and vision, improved communication within the SoN, a united effort to institute strategies to sustain the SoN’s future, and establishment of performance indicators to measure success in achieving those strategies.

Abstract: In 2009 the Arizona University System (supporting over 130,000 enrollments) through its Board of Regents directed its board president and the presidents of Arizona State University, University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to create an operational plan that reflected the board’s vision, goals, and strategic directions. A primary objective was to transform the system (or enterprise) vision into concrete goals and outcomes that would directly connect to financial decision making at the system and university level. The backdrop for higher education planning and budgeting expectations included the continuation of severe reductions in state funding, rapidly increasing student tuition and fees, and a call for greater accountability. The planning processes were characterized by the integration of board and presidential discussions, inclusion of constituent debate, identification of strategic choices, and approval of outcomes focused on measuring performance. The integration ran across and within three organizations or levels that included the Arizona Board of Regents, its system administration, and the three universities.