Learning Resources

Abstract: Before the recession, planning offices were the workhorses supporting institutional growth strategies by translating the ambitions of senior administrators into action. However, the recession derailed many institutional ambitions; austerity suddenly supplanted growth. The future role of planners seems uncertain beyond operationalizing short-term damage control. Yet this article asserts that planners are uniquely positioned to assume an essential role in colleges and universities: sensemakers and sensegivers. Through sensemaking and sensegiving, planners can focus institutional dialogue on the meaning of austerity. Instead of accepting resource constraints as a ubiquitous rationale for retrenchment, planners can guide institutional dialogue toward acknowledging that new constraints merely discipline earlier ambitions within new parameters.

Abstract: The contemporary university operates within a global context characterized by ever-increasing uncertainty and complexity. Strategic planning must, therefore, be cognizant of future trends and how those trends will affect the university by creating both threats and opportunities. Our hypothesis is that an approach we refer to as “strategic foresight” can provide us with the tools, methodology, and process to creatively address uncertainty and complexity in our working environment. Dublin City University has taken the lead in Ireland in terms of its emphasis on strategic planning. Its 2005–2008 strategic plan, Leadership Through Foresight, was part of an ambitious foresight exercise that was aimed at informing subsequent strategic cycles. This article reports on this process in the context of the wider literature examining the value of foresight/futures thinking as applied to universities. The article commences with a review of current uncertainties and complexities in the current operating environment. It broadly outlines foresight/futures thinking and then examines universities specifically. It continues by focusing on Dublin City University’s foresight exercise as an example of how foresight operates in practice. Finally, the article concludes by exploring what a strategic foresight approach to planning might look like based on that experience.

Abstract: Strategic planning is an important tool, but the sole dependence on it across departments and campuses has resulted in the underutilization of equally important methods of analysis. The evolution of higher and postsecondary education necessitates a systemic industry analysis, as the combination of new providers and delivery mechanisms and changing social parameters gives rise to increased competition and innovation. This article tests the applicability of Porter’s five forces model to the higher education industry. While the model provides significant insight into the industry, it has been revised in this article to incorporate government as a prominent sixth force in the analysis.

Abstract: Modern design and planning are routinely confounded by endemic conditions of deep fragmentation, rampant bureaucratization, and ineffective regulation. Such barriers hamper our ability to succeed in the execution of responsive, responsible, and superb ventures. Added to the mix are cost escalation, outdated technologies, cumbersome techniques, conservative posturing, and the damages of “value” engineering. In such a milieu, it becomes extremely difficult to move from concept through construction with clarity, continuity, and even integrity. Abandoned are often the inspiring, enduring, and delightful qualities that elevate buildings to Architecture. Innovative mindsets and methods must be realized to improve the quality of our built environments, especially considering resources are limited, expectations are soaring, and the need for change is non-negotiable. The author presents a holistic integrative framework for more successful and sustainable environmental design. Included are considerations of agility, fitness, diversity, and delight—aspects that loom large in equations for ingenuity in contemporary times.

Abstract: Using a case study, this article describes a method by which higher education institutions construct and use multiple future scenarios and simulations to plan strategically: to create visions of their futures, chart broad directions (mission and goals), and select learning and delivery strategies so as to achieve those broad directions. The four scenarios described in this article are written by combining two assumed “external” sets of future trends and conditions with two “internal” sets of institutional policies. Simulation of future college enrollment under each scenario enables planners not only to mitigate uncertainty and explore implications of different numbers of students but also to analyze the characteristics of these students to design educational content and delivery that is learning centered and, therefore, likely to be effective. The simulations also frame fiscal issues for a broad range of future conditions, thereby alerting planners to long-range strategies and options such as distance learning, partnering, and differential pricing, among others, that might not otherwise have been pursued.

Abstract: Contends that most planners make assumptions about planning and about human and institutional ability to change, and that these assumptions necessarily impact the outcome of strategic planning efforts. Examines the functions served in planning comprehensive institutional change, and suggests that planning failures reflect too great a focus on technique and outcome. Applies the analogy of human development to illustrate the organizational life cycle, with an exploration of institutional "identity issues" – the physical, social, and psychological aspects, as well as the institution’s sense of self.

Abstract: Book Review: Innocenece and Experience, by Stuart Hampshire. Harvard University Press, 1989. 189 pages.

Abstract: In this article, we discuss a method for developing and writing scenarios for a college or university. We begin by reviewing the general literature on scenarios; we then detail a scenario development project at Arizona State University. This project, conducted in 1988–89, was Arizona State University's first institution-wide, futures-based planning and scenario development effort. The focus of the project for Arizona State University was planning and programming for affirmative action. An outside consultant facilitated the group-process portion of the project and instructed university staff in scenario development. Staff in the university's Office of Institutional Analysis then developed and wrote a set of three scenarios to guide the university's affirmative action programming and planning during the decade of the nineties.