Learning Resources

Abstract: Securing financial viability requires an engaged board that is monitoring the right trends and campus indicators, asking the right questions of campus leaders about the institution’s finances, and doing the scenario planning and stress testing necessary to transform a business model under stress.

The governing board’s fiduciary duty to steward the institution’s financial health requires that boards and leaders consider business model transformations, and plan for a range of scenarios like mergers, affiliations, strategic partnerships, and even—when all other options are exhausted—final transformations such as campus closures when continued mission fulfillment is impossible.

This is part two of a two-part webinar series delivered in partnership between SCUP and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB), “Higher Education Business Models Under Stress: Planning for Successful Transitions”. This series will help build your fiduciary understanding of your institution’s business model as you prepare the campus for a range of possible business transformations, from mergers, strategic affiliations, corporate partnerships, or even the ultimate scenario of a campus closure. View the recording for part one, “Board Oversight of Finance and the Business Model: Key Indicators and Trends for Scenario Planning and Stress Testing”.

Abstract: This article outlines the process by which a public university sought to develop and grow a culture of problem-solving and innovation at a time when the institution was undergoing a number of transitions. By developing a Barriers Team, the institution brought together a group of individuals representing all aspects of the university and charged the members with tackling barriers to success. The authors outline how they used the institution’s strategic plan as a starting point, and then describe the steps, provide examples, and reflect on the long-range viability of the approach.

Abstract: The tension between practical planning and blue-sky thinking has never been stronger than it is right now. Current times require both integrated planning and a fundamental reimagining of our institutions’ virtual, physical, and procedural environments to serve our stakeholders. William Lindner has led transformational initiatives at every level of government and education with this consistent message: “Tear the Page Out.” This session will demonstrate an approach to attacking big challenges by empowering audacious creativity inside tradition-bound institutions. Come join us to gain a new perspective on leadership that delivers new solutions to big opportunities.

Abstract: This is the third in a series of complimentary, interactive webinars, “Planning in Times of Crisis and Beyond: Reviving Your Strategic Planning Process,” hosted by SCUP in partnership with SPOL focusing on planning for the new normal and beyond.

Our panel of experts discusses how integrated planning can help develop a robust culture and take a deep dive into strategic, operational, continuity, and scenario planning.

Recorded July 15, 2020.
Moderator: Mike Moss, President, SCUP.

This video recording is a member-only resource.
Attention Members: Log in to display the video player below.

Abstract: Do you call it a “goal,” “objective,” or “priority”? The terms used to describe planning vary from campus to campus. That’s why it’s critical that your college or university creates a shared language around planning that everybody understands. The SCUP Integrated Planning Glossary gives you a place to start. Use our list of common planning terms and our definitions to begin conversations about your institution’s unique planning language. Updated October 2021.

Find this helpful? Creating a common language is one of the many vital points discussed in the SCUP Planning Institute workshop—designed to help you and your team move from goals to implementation together.

Abstract: This article applies the three stages of change (mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization) to the academic curricular process change that occurred during the 2014–2015 academic year at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Reflecting on the manner in which this major initiative was conceptualized and executed has revealed an inadvertent yet seamless application of Curry’s (1992) organizational change model. Throughout each stage of this organizational change, some inherent principles were maintained while balancing the required condensed timeline for completion. These principles included consistent and transparent consultation with many branches of the university community and revision of proposed processes based on feedback from community members. The goal of the authors in sharing the change process at IUP is to provide potential insights for others on recognizing a need for organizational process revision. The authors highlight the actions taken at IUP, offer recommendations, and identify potential hazards to institutions contemplating organizational change.