Learning Resources

Abstract: Succeeding at integrated planning at colleges and universities is a challenge. Many planning models do not work in higher education because they are not designed for higher education. Planning processes designed for corporations or non-profits do not account for the complex environment of higher education nor its unique challenges.

Many institutions struggle to leverage planning into lasting change because they create plans in a vacuum. They do not grasp the institution’s strategic issues or create a sound value proposition. They are not prepared for good planning.

To provide guidance on where to prioritize efforts, SCUP partnered with the Baker Strategy Group in 2015 to conduct a study with more than 2,200 leaders who plan at colleges and universities, and ran quantitative analysis on their responses. Several themes emerged around planning challenges and how to respond, which are explored in this report.

Abstract: “[This] is a complete guide on strategic planning, presenting step by step the 5 major components of an integrated planning process. It is also a most useful, exhaustive, and updated list of definitions; presentation of all components and subcomponents; suggestions of strategies; and well-chosen examples . . . As I continue my work with Francophone universities, some in Africa, it will be my honor and pleasure to be inspired and accompanied by the Fountains’ guide.”
—Roland Proulx, Consultant, Institutional Planning & Strategic Intelligence, University of Montreal

With a heavy use of SCUP resource materials, SCUPers Doug and JoEllyn Fountain have written the book they wish someone had handed them when they began working for eight years with a rapidly growing university in Uganda. “While North American universities are developing LEED certified buildings, we were trying to pave roads and get stable electricity. We looked long and hard for materials and advisors who could help us with basic issues.”

Abstract: Looking for tools to help make your next planning or campus project easier? SCUP’s Resource & Budget Planning Advisory Group generated practical analyses of and insights toward tools and processes that can help you today and with projects to come. Integrated Resource and Budget Planning at Colleges and Universities is the culmination of several years of discussions, face-to-face roundtables, conference calls, and virtual meetings. There is a bit of opinion and some original research, but this publication is mostly very practical descriptions, analysis, and insights into tools and processes. We hope you find it to be informative, interesting, and useful. Each chapter will give you a tool that was crafted by experienced, on-campus peer-practitioners.

Abstract: The Division of Student Affairs at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor engaged in an iterative strategic process to create and implement a set of long-range goals. This strategic journey continues to evolve, uniting a guiding framework of strategic planning steps, a reflective process with an assessment component within each step, and a group process approach to support both individual growth and organizational change.

Abstract: Semester conversion. New academic year calendar. New capital plan. New facilities delivery. Just one of these events can present a campus with challenges. But when they all occur basically at the same time, the potential for disaster looms large. When it faced these changes within a two-year period, 1999–2001, LaGrange College needed “triage.” This article addresses how the college organized, planned, and implemented these changes. It also addresses the errors that occurred and the ways the errors were corrected.

Abstract: Considers how statewide board cooperation regarding the review and support of master’s degree programs might be enhanced. Maintains that two elements are necessary: strengthening the state’s recognition of the value of master’s level education, and balancing state and institutional interests regarding quality control and productivity measures. Concludes with a summary of what each side must to do enhance master’s level education at both levels.

Abstract: Consortia, their impact on cooperating institutions, and critical factors in inter-institutional planning were the subject of a recent study for the United States Office of Education, directed by Harold L. Hodgkinson of the Center for Research and Development in Higher Education at the University of California at Berkeley. The critical issues, according to the study findings, are problems of reciprocity and autonomy, coordination of programs among diverse institutions, and strategies for campus involvement and leadership. The following article, by three staff members of the New Hampshire College and University Council—one of the consortia in the Hodgkinson study—is devoted to a discussion of the process of consortium decision-making, touching on the three key issues. The authors are: Lynn G. Johnson, the Council's associate director in charge of academic programs; Dr. William W. Barnard, consultant and coordinator of a two-year Cooperative Curriculum Project, and Douglas W. Lyon, coordinator of January Term Programs and communications coordinator.