COPYRIGHT WARNING:
©2002 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
DO NOT DUPLICATE THIS OR ANY OF THE
ARTICLES FROM THIS WEB SITE
WITHOUT EXPRESSED WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM
THE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE GROUP.
THE PLANNING DREADS: WHY GROUPS RESIST PLANNING
By Susan Gross, MAGNews, Updated Fall 2002
Almost 15 years ago MAG observed that although nonprofit organizations know in theory that planning would be good for them, in practice they resist planning and have a dozen reasons why they just haven't gotten around to it. Since then, interest in strategic planning has increased, stimulated by foundation prodding and organizations' realizing that they must be able to make a solid and compelling case for support, especially in today's tight money environment. Even so, organizations still resist planning, reluctant to start the process because of vague fears about where it might lead and what it might entail - and gnawing doubts about how productive it will turn out to be. Surfacing these concerns, understanding why they shouldn't stop you, and demystifying strategic planning are often key to opening the door to the benefits planning can bring.
We don't have the time.The threshold barrier to planning is the belief that you don't have the time to do it. The fact is organizations with pressing social agendas never have any spare time. If self-examination, reflection, and charting a future course are to occur, you'll have to make the time for them - which means carving out time from your organization's usual work and making planning a top priority.
We don't know how to do it right.
Many books and articles on planning have done nonprofits a disservice by making strategic planning seem far more complex, technical, and imposing than it really is. Some groups become so tangled, frustrated, and confused over the proper application of planning terms - debating whether something is a purpose, goal, or objective - that they spend more time processing than they do planning. Planning is really no more than getting clear about what your organization wants to accomplish and devising a realistic strategy for getting there. While that requires rigorous thinking and tough self-assessment, it doesn't call for any special expertise or terminology. In fact, organizations are engaged in planning all the time, although it's usually informal, in short time frames, and on a project-by-project basis. What organizations tend to avoid or neglect is comprehensive, long-term planning in which they define their over-arching long-range goals, direction, and strategy. But the principle in both cases is the same: first identify the end results you want to achieve and then figure out how to best accomplish them.
We don't want to lose our flexibility.
Many organizations are reluctant to plan because they see the plan as a straitjacket, closing down their options and destroying their flexibility. They fear that agreeing to a plan means giving up the ability to respond to new opportunities and changing circumstances. They point to the unpredictability of their environment and say, "How can we plan when we don't know what will be happening five months from now?" The mistake here is in viewing a plan as a taskmaster rather than a tool. A plan doesn't prohibit you from taking on something that's outside the plan. But it does give you some standards against which to measure whether taking on a new project is worthwhile, and it forces you to look at what you may have to give up or curtail in order to have the time and resources for an added activity.
Funding realities will determine what we can do.
Why bother to plan, some organizations say, when we know what matters is what funders are willing to support. This is one of the most serious pitfalls organizations can fall into. Nothing can lead more quickly to a loss of direction and identity and to waning conviction about the value of your work than a program that's been shaped by the interests of funders rather than by what your group believes is most essential. Organizations that first identify the course of action they think is most important and then advocate for it through their fund-raising program are often surprised at their ability to reshape funding realities. As one group that successfully tried this approach concluded: "We discovered that it's vision that creates commitment, commitment that creates energy, and energy that creates funding -- not the other way around."
We have to do it all.
Many organizations avoid planning altogether or make long lists that include everything they do because they don't want to make hard choices. They know they're spread too thin but are unwilling to bite the bullet and decide what should be dropped or scaled back. Sometimes they don't want to face the discomfort of cutting anything, or they have divergent views about which activities are most important. They end up trying to satisfy everyone by doing some of everything. What they don't realize is that organizations that confront thorny issues and work through conflict are far stronger than organizations that tiptoe around differences, trying to appease everyone and fully pleasing no one. The irony is that, at the end of the day, these groups are forced - by their limited time and resources - to make choices anyway. But those choices tend to be reactive, haphazard, and disjointed rather than deliberate, strategic, and institutional.
Our last plan just sat on the shelf.
Organizations can go through the motions of planning and wind up with a document that just sits on the shelf, providing little or no real-life guidance. Planning that makes a difference - that shapes an organization's course and enhances its effectiveness - is hard, challenging work. It requires thinking about one's program in a disciplined, creative, and tough-minded manner. It requires stepping back from current activities and focusing on the big picture. It requires asking: "What are we all about? Where do we want to go? How can we make the greatest difference?" These are not easy questions. Many organizations avoid them for fear of being inadequate to the task. The fact is you probably won't be able to figure out all the answers. And you probably won't be certain that all the choices you've made are the right ones. But chances are you'll be amazed by the degree of clarity, unity, coherence, and intentionality you are able to achieve. Indeed, MAG has never seen an organization that was unable to tackle these questions and that didn't emerge stronger and richer for having gone through the process.
