I was preparing for a short session on collaboration for a client this week, assisted by the local PA. She was setting up the data projector, but we were a bit low to the screen. “No problem” she said, whipping out an inch-thick book to sit under the projector. “At least one use for the strategic plan”, and she went on to wonder why the only people who seemed to look at it were the planners……
It struck a chord, and reminded me of a similar experience a few years back, when I was at a Council, and the planner brought out at least 4 versions of a Parks’ Strategy prepared over a number of years. She lamented the lack of ownership of each, and how the planners had been singularly unsuccessful in getting any of the recommendations implemented
Given this gap between planning and implementation seems to be a bit endemic, how might we tackle it?
People are more likely to own the result if they have been part of the process of designing it, so the challenge might be to get the implementer’s fingerprints on the plan in some way. This may be tricky given there is often a gap between planning and delivery, both geographically and with timeframes. However, it might provide a potential pathway for greater ownership and implementability.
So perhaps a good question at the start of planning is “who eventually needs to implement this, and how can they can get their fingerprints on the planning process?” i.e. making the co-design more explicit, and inviting others to see it as ‘our plan’ rather than ‘their plan’.
You have at least a couple of choices:
- You continue with your current approach and develop the plan as you normally would, especially as you tend to engage with those implementers anyway as part of your planning consultation…….
- Or you sit down and consider how you might think and act as if all the implementers were with you throughout the planning process… If they were sitting here, what would they need to say, see or hear that would have them all over this plan…?
Thinking in this new way will likely raise practical questions of involvement, resourcing, interest, and so on, but perhaps the real issue is less about the extent of the implementers involvement, and more about the mindset of the planners:
i.e. how do I think about this so it is more likely that those implementing this will see it as their plan too and have the energy to make it happen?
This will prompt different behaviours from the planners more consistent with “our plan”, and generate a plan better illuminated in delivery.
Damn, now where is that book to support my next presentation……..?