WHO NEEDS STRATEGIC PLANNING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 13, 2013
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: October 12, 1989
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13:
CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3 ?
STAT
STAT
-04A 89-
2 OCT 1989, .
Deputy Director for Administration
oc.
ef frt.
4-fr4A ?
Gt-t- A-1-4-4-AA-AA^v ?
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13:
CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
WHO NEEDS STRATEGIC PLANNING?
A newly appointed Assistant Secretary walks into the
Congressional hearing room and is sworn in to testify about
the agency's R&D program. The Congressmen, prodded by a
Congressional staff investigation, attack specific R&D
projects but what irks them the most is that the Assistant
Secretary has no strategic vision and therefore no strategic
plans to meet the long-term needs of the agency. The
Assistant Secretary is embarrassed arid vows never to return
to Capital Hill without a strategic vision (within the
context of the Administration's priorities) and accompanying
plans to guide the agency to meet it's charter.
Does this sound unrealistic? It probably happens every
four years and perhaps more frequently. The point of
presenting the Assistant Secretary versus the Congressmen
scenario is to dramatize the need for top management to
actively participate in strategic planning whether it may be
for program operations, R&D, or program evaluation. However,
before delving into the "nuts and bolts" of top management
participation in creating a strategic vision, a few key terms
need be defined. A review of the literature indicates that
there is much confusion between the "strategic planning" and
"long-term planning". Let's now define them so that we're
clear on terminology and can distinguish between the two
concepts.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
Peter Drucker in his book Management: Tasks,
Responsibilities and Practices defines strategic planning as
a continuous process of making present entrepeneurial
(risk-taking) decisions systematically and with the
greatest knowledge of their futurity; organizing
systematically the efforts needed to carry out these
decisions; and measuring the results of these decisions
against the expectations through organized, systematic
feedback.
The key elements of Drucker's definition revolve around
the concepts of entrepeneurial decision making (risking-
taking) and that of providing management with systematic
feedback. This is especially important in an political
environment where priorities are constantly changing. John M.
Bryson, on the other hand, differentiates between strategic
planning and long term planning:
STRATEGIC PLANNING
* relies on identifying &
resolving issues
LONG TERM PLANNING
* focuses more specifying
goals & objectives &
fatunl mationu
11L 1g
Declassified in in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
* more suited to politicized
circumstances
* embodies qualitative shifts
in direction
* summons forth a idealized
version of the organization,
a "vision of success"
translating them into
current budgets
* assumes current trends
will continue into the
future, that is, linear
extrapolations of present
trends
In sum, the key distinctions to
strategic planning are:
be made in defining
* visualizing future situations in which the
organization may be involved
* placing these situations in priority order relative to
the objectives of the organization
* considering ways in which the most preferred of these
future situations can be brought about and the least
preferred avoided
How does all this apply to the Office of Human Development
Services (HDS)? I maintain that besides a statement of goals
and objectives HDS has no real strategic vision for where it
wants to be in 4 years. If there is a strategic vision
besides creating " a kinder and gentler America " , it has
not been adequately communicated to the staff of the agency.
At this juncture of assembling a management team at HDS, an
opportunity exists to create a strategic vision for HDS that
will operationalize the theme of creating " a kinder and
gentler America".
HOW TO CREATE A STRATEGIC VISION
The following fifteen" laws" of strategic planning are
abstracted from a book by Perry Smith entitled Creating
Strategic Vision put out by the National Defense University
Press. However, before listing and discussing the fifteen
laws, it is useful to note that one fatal mistake can reduce
the strategic planning to an exercise in futility, that is,
top management's assumption that it can delegate the planning
function to a planner. Key decision-makers need help from the
planning staff but it cannot delegate the planning function.
Now the fifteen laws.
FIF1EEN LAWS OF STRATEGIC PLANNING
1. Strategic planners must answer the " What's in it for me?"
question.
Bosses must impress upon their staffs that strategic
planning is worthwhile not only to the institution but also
to themselves.
2. Strategic planners must get and maintain the support of
-2-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
the top decisionmaker.
There must be enough priority given to the planning
function so that meetings are not constantly postponed or
rescheduled.
3. Strategic planners must have direct access to the top
decisionmaker.
Most of the best run agencies and companies in the United
States have strategic planners that work directly for the
chief executive officer.
4. Briefings by strategic planners to the top decisionmaker
must go thru the normal coordination process.
Planners must realize that some of their recommendations
will opposed or tainted during the coordination process and
must attempt preserve the innovative nature of their
proposals.
5. The strategic planning process must lead to some decisions
in the present.
Making decisions in the present is a wonderful way to
legitimize the long-range process.
6. The process must be institutionalized.
If there is no institutionalized process to encourage the
leaders at the top of the organization to consider strategic
issues on a regular basis, many opportunities will be lost.
7. Within the institutionalized process, strategic plans must
remain flexible.
All plans should be reviewed periodically so that they don't
become too rigid or out of date.
8. In addition to the institutionalized process, periodic
studies are needed.
No matter how profitable a study is, it should never be a
substitute for an institutionalized planning process.
9. Strategic plans must be readable and short.
Strategic plans should be no longer than 12 pages with a 1
to 2 page executive summary so that it will be read and have
real impact.
10. Planners must develop implementation strategies.
Planners should not be implementers, but should assist in
the transition from the planning stage to programs to budget
-3-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
to reality.
11. Planners must avoid constraining the innovation and
divestiture process.
There should be no sacred cows; planners must be encouraged
to recommend changes to existing programs or possibly
recommend their elimination. Constraints such as budget,
technology, and time should not stifle the innovation
process.
12. Planners must avoid single-factor causality.
It is the job of the strategic planner to take into account
the many factors that may affect a policy, program, or
decision.
13. Planners must avoid determinism - economic, political,
technological, and others.
Planners must assume that people in key positions can and do
make a difference. Those involved in the strategic plans
creation should be careful that no predetermined outcomes
creep into the calculus of decisionmaking, the briefing, or
the plan itself.
14. Planners must stay in close contact with R&D, evaluation,
and policy communities.
Only by staying in close contact with these communities can
strategic planners and top managers develop plans that are
based in reality.
15. Incentives must be provided if innovation is to be
maximized.
Incentives must be established and publicized to encourage
people to come forward with new ideas. Creative and
innovative strategic thinkers are occasionally going to make
people angry. Risk-avoidance careerists will have little to
contribute to the strategic planning process.
Now that we've listed some of the "laws" associated with
strategic planning, what are the benefits. A number of the
guru's (Steiner,1979; Barry,1986; Bryson,1986; Whitter,1987)
associated with -strategic planning believe that it can help
an organization:
* Think strategically and develop effective strategies
* Clarify future direction
* Establish priorities .
* Develop a coherent ?amd defensible basis for
decisionmaking (the Asst. Sec. vs. Congressmen
scenario).
-4-
Declassified in Part -Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3
STAT
* Exercise maximum discretion in areas under
organizational control
* Make decisions across levels and functions
* Help solve organizational problems
* Improve organizational performance
* Deal effectively with a rapidly changing environment
* Build teamwork and expertise
SUMMARY
Strategic planning, as K.J. Radford maintains, is above
all concerned with power and politics. It is a political
process rather than a mechanistic process. The interaction of
the parties involved will bring about an interchange of
values, perceptions, hidden agendas, etc. that will probably
ruffle some feathers of the parties involved but will also
result in a clear direction for the organization to follow.
Prepared by:
-5-
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2013/12/13: CIA-RDP92G00017R000900040002-3