Many strategies are based simply on an analytical forecast of the way things are currently headed.  How dull.  It was Goethe who said:

Dream no small dreams for they have no power to move the hearts of men.

In his presidential run, Robert Kennedy used to quote George Bernard Shaw at the end of his speeches:

Some men see things as they are and say ‘why,’ I dream of things that never were and say ‘why not.’

The way to tap into dreams is through Vision.  One of the very important steps in the strategy process I use is for a nonprofit to focus on its commitment to fulfilling its unmet mission needs (aka Mission Gap) and then dream about what the organization would look like in an ideal state – so that it could close its Mission Gap as effectively as possible.

We need to let people dream these big, bold visions.  They want to be inspired by something.  Ask your stakeholders about their dreams.  Ask them what your organization would look like if they could have it any way they wanted it – so they could make even more of a difference for those they serve.

Ask, listen, share your own dreams – and create a vision with others that inspires you all.

I am often told that this approach to dreaming an ideal is a totally unreasonable way to go about creating a strategy.  When I am told that, I enthusiastically agree!  And then I share another quote by George Bernard Shaw:

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in attempting to adapt the world to himself.  Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.

We need big, “unreasonable” visions because – face it – we are trying to solve big, challenging problems.  And incremental improvement is just not satisfactory.  Not for me, at least.  Whether your passion is providing affordable housing, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, or something else – we need organizations to build capacity to address these needs.

Doing this is important because vision – based on the opportunity to close a Mission Gap effectively – drives strategy.  And it ignites the “out of the box” thinking that everyone talks about.

Resist the temptation to create a vision you are sure you can achieve.  And remember the words of Nelson Mandela:

Your playing small does not serve the world.

A strategy should not attempt to tell you specifically what you will “do” during the second week of the tenth month of the third year of the strategy time frame.  That would be kind of goofy, right?  And yet, when some people hear “strategic plan,” that’s what they think.

As I said in my last blog “a strategy is a general explanation of how you are going to guide your organization’s performance into the future – from here to there.  It includes ‘themes’ the organization is going to follow, not exact detailed plans.”

But this explanation is based on certain assumptions you make.  And the strategy is also based on your understanding of your internal and external environments – as captured in your SWOTs (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats).  Therefore, an organization needs to regularly monitor its assumptions and its SWOTs for significant changes.  This needs to happen at least annually in a formal way.  And senior leaders in organizations need to be thinking about these things on a regular basis.

What if assumptions prove to be incorrect or the SWOTs change significantly?  Call a time out!  It is unlikely that there have been enough changes in the environment that you need to totally revisit your mission and vision.  You may need to adjust some of your goals.  But then you should rework your SWOTs to see if the strategy you had set still works.  If not, then make a new strategy!  A strategy is not set in stone.

The other thing to check regularly is your performance on your mission metrics.  If your strategy is not providing you with improved results, then – once again – call a time out.  Re-examine what you are doing.  If you think that you have given the strategy enough of a chance and it is not working, then you need a new strategy.

My favorite story about this is when I was doing some research on Mothers Against Drunk Driving.  The group I was studying was very clear on their metrics – they were (and are) committed to reducing the number of deaths from drunk driving crashes.  They had a strategy in place and they were following it.  But after two years the results were not what they wanted.  “What did you do?” I asked.  “We called a ‘time out’ and got everyone together to make a new strategy.  If the drunk driving death numbers are not going down as fast as we want then we need a new strategy.”  Indeed, if the strategy is not producing results then you need a new strategy.  These MADD leaders adjusted their strategy and the numbers started going down faster.  Of course an organization can only do this if it has done the hard work necessary to design those mission metrics.

No one can see into the future when developing a strategy.  And we don’t have to.  All we can do is make certain assumptions that we check regularly.

The final deadly sin will be out soon:  “Not Ambitious Enough”

So what is a strategy anyway?  Keeping it simple, a strategy is a general explanation of how you are going to guide your organization’s performance into the future – from here to there.  Essentially it is a “performance story.”  It includes “themes” the organization is going to follow, not exact detailed plans.  A strategy is like a tune played by a jazz group; everyone knows the tune to follow even though the exact notes aren’t scripted.

The first problem I find is that most “strategic plans” don’t tell you where the organization is going.  What future are you pursuing?  What is your vision?  What are your goals?  Where are you going?  These questions are usually not answered.

Once you state the future you are heading toward, then you need to explain how you are going to get from here to there.  To do this, you need clarity on your current reality – which we usually do by assessing your SWOTs (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats).

Then it is time to create your strategy.  Ask yourself these questions:

*How are we going to leverage our strengths to help us best pursue our future?

*How are we going to fortify our weaknesses to help us best pursue our future?

*How are we going to leverage our opportunities to help us best pursue our future?

*How are we going to block our threats to help us best pursue our future?

Once you have answered these questions, themes will arise – a story will emerge.  You will begin to see which of the SWOTs will play more or less important roles in allowing you to most effectively pursue your future.  Those themes begin to help you build your strategy narrative – your story of how you are going to pursue your future for the next five years or so.

Once you have a concise strategy narrative – of no more than three to four paragraphs – then it is something you can easily share within the organization and help make sure that everyone is following the same strategy.  And what a great idea that would be!

I’ve been very simplistic here so this can be digested in a blog.  If you want to read more, I have a couple of free articles on my web site or if you are really intrigued you can send $26.10 to Amazon for a copy of my book and read about this in more detail.

The 6^th Deadly Sin is next:  How can you keep a strategy relevant?

“We have our strategic planning session scheduled for Friday afternoon, four weeks from now.  Are you available to facilitate?”

I ask a couple of questions to make sure that I am not assuming too much.  But almost always, my suspicion is confirmed – the organization has rushed through its strategy preparation and plans to rush through its strategy development process.

Rushing through Strategy Prep.  There are a number of problems with this, including the fact that the organization has usually left out the idea of seeking any input from stakeholders (see The 2^ndDeadly Sin).  But it’s much more than that.  How about taking some time to collect some environmental data that will be very helpful once you get into analyzing your Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats?  An environmental scan can help uncover important data and can assure that everyone on the strategic planning committee has the same information before you get started.  This does not need to be a dissertation and you can often use easily available government data – if you don’t rush.  And involving stakeholders does not need to take forever.  But at least make sure you don’t ignore key constituencies like staff, donors, and volunteers.

Rushing through Strategy Development.  If you are developing a strategy that is going to guide you for the next five years, then I strongly recommend that you take the time to thoughtfully deliberate what the best strategy is.  I suggest setting aside at least two days for meetings.  And you can only get done that quickly if you begin with everyone in agreement on your mission metrics.  Effective decision making takes time, especially if your strategy committee is using consensus to make decisions – as most do.  And you need time to do some real brainstorming and dreaming about your future.  Inspiration cannot be rushed.  Hopefully you will have some constructive conflict that needs to be discussed and worked through.

Like many of the sins, it is easy to see how so many organizations make this mistake.  Nonprofits are trying to do much more with much less, even more so these days.  So taking the time to prep properly and then deliberate thoroughly can seem like a luxury.  Nonprofits know they need to do strategic planning – and maybe a funder is even requiring it.  But taking the time to do it right is not a luxury at all.  A new great strategy can more than help you make up for the time you invested in it.

Don’t fall prey to the temptation to cut this corner by rushing and end up with a half-baked strategy.

Deadly Sin #5 up next.

An organization has financial challenges and decides it needs a big new fundraising campaign – maybe even a capital campaign.  Then someone remembers that a big fundraising effort will need to be explained as being part of a strategic plan.  So they hasten to throw together a strategic plan that justifies the campaign.  The final product says “Strategic Plan, ” but it is essentially a fundraising plan.

So what?  Why am I making such a big deal out of this?

Well, a strategy is more than a fundraising plan.  And the process I described above is anything but strategic.  A strategy needs to take a big picture look at the organization, its future, and its environment.  Otherwise, opportunities and challenges can be missed.  Here are issues I see that are often overlooked when the strategy development process has an over-emphasis on fundraising:

*Performance Metrics are usually not clarified, beyond “raising more money.”  Strategy development is an ideal time to ask yourself “how do we know we are accomplishing our mission and what metrics are we going to use to determine that.”  Without those metrics you won’t know if you are accomplishing your mission, no matter how much money you raise.

*Weaknesses or Threats not related to fundraising can be overlooked.  Examples:  What about human resources issues?  Is the staff design sustainable?  What about succession planning at the senior levels?  The first baby boomers are turning 65 this year.

*Strengths or Opportunities not related to fundraising can also be overlooked.  Examples:  Can we leverage our good reputation to create strategic alliances that will increase our impact?   Would a merger be an opportunity to be more efficient and increase impact?  These are questions that many funders are asking.

*Innovation in Program Delivery is often not considered.  Do we need to raise 25% more money to deliver more programs/services or do we need to innovate on how we deliver the programs?  Maybe both!

These are just examples of the types of questions that can be asked if an organization broadens its view beyond the need for more money and actually takes a “strategic” approach to developing its strategic plan.

The crying need for funding for most nonprofits makes this sin understandable, but I encourage you not to commit it.  By overlooking some of these other strategic issues you can undermine your fundraising plan and end up in even worse shape.

Deadly Sin #4 coming up soon.

I get push-back on this, because it can take some time.  When a CEO asks me why she/he should take the time to ask others for input, here is my response (this is the unfiltered version):

1. I know you are brilliant.  But brilliance is widely distributed.  Let’s ask others to contribute their brilliant ideas and maybe they will think of something that you and your senior team have not thought of.  (I know, shocking possibility.)

2. Once the brilliant strategy is set, you will need others to help implement it.  Let’s get them involved so they are inspired by it as well.  This will help with successful implementation.

3. It’s their organization too!  You and the senior team don’t own it.  Others have a right to provide input into creating the future of the organization in which they have a stake.

IMPORTANT:  When you ask people for their input, actually listen to them.  It is said that there are two different ways to listen to people – “listening to respond” versus “listening to understand.”  When you are listening to respond, you are mentally preparing to explain to the other person why they are wrong.  When you are listening to understand, you authentically want to hear what they have to say and you will consider adding their ideas to your own.  It is this kind of listening that James MacGregor Burns says is the cornerstone of transformational leadership – the kind of leadership that can transform organizations and communities.

Gathering input from others does not mean you have to individually interview each one of them or that they all have to be on your strategy planning group.  You can do some interviews, but also do focus groups, surveys, and/or town halls.  Provide opportunities for meaningful involvement and input.

Without demonstrated opportunities for people to provide voice, organization leaders run the risk of falling into a fateful pitfall that consultant and author Peter Block calls leadership by lamination.  This is the mistake that leaders make when they go to a mountaintop retreat and come back with a new vision that they print on the back of every employee’s business card, and then laminate it.  Think of it.  If you had an idea of how to make a slight improvement to the vision, you can’t even write it on the card -- it’s laminated.

Don’t provide leadership by lamination.  Involve others.

Next up soon, Deadly Sin #3.  Stay tuned.

The reason it is the worst is because it is so pervasive and represents a huge waste of money and time – from staff, volunteers, and stakeholders who are asked to participate.  This sin can be deadly, indeed, when board members or donors realize the hours they have wasted from making strategic plans that are never implemented.  And for the attorneys on your Board, those are billable hours.

Why does this happen?  I think the responsibility goes, in this order, to CEOs, Boards, and Consultants.

CEOs fall into the trap of knowing that they should do strategy, but they don’t know how.  So, they call a consultant to tell them what to do.  What they need to do first is to get at least minimally informed.  Read a book or at least a few articles.  Yes, I have free articles on my web site and I have a book – but there are lots of good books out there on strategy.  If you don’t want to read mine, I’d suggest John Bryson’s.  If you go into the process informed, then you can work with a consultant to make sure you get a final product that will help you lead and manage the organization for the coming years.  You are the Chief Strategy Officer and you need to own the process.

Boards need to be engaged in the strategy process and hold the CEO accountable for actually implementing the plan.  Even the worst strategic plans I have seen can be turned into actionable ideas by adding specific, measurable goals – for example.

Consultants – my sisters and brothers – shame on us when we let CEOs rely on us too much.  We know we are leaving town after the ink dries on the last flip chart page.  We can’t leave these folks hanging out there like this.  We need to push CEOs up front on what kind of final product will really help them run the organization.  My approach includes the idea that I don’t write up the final product.  We finish the core elements of the strategy together, but the CEO and senior staff need to figure out how to write it up for their different audiences.  Of course I collaborate with them on how this is done, but it is their plan – not mine.  It needs to be written in their voice.

Nonprofits need to heal themselves from this deadly sin by getting informed, taking responsibility for the process, and holding one another accountable for actually implementing the strategy.  And don’t hire consultants to create a plan for you.  Hire them to collaborate with you to assist in creating yourplan.

Stay tuned – six more deadly sins to come.