August 2002
Volume 40 Number 4

Linking Strategic Thinking and Project Planning: The Oregon State University Extension Forestry Experience

Mike Reichenbach
Extension Educator
University of Minnesota, Cloquet Forestry Center
Cloquet, Minnesota
Internet Address: reich027@umn.edu

Viviane Simon-Brown
Leadership Educator
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon
Internet Address: viviane.simon-brown@orst.edu

Extension foresters at Oregon State University use a group project planning process to strategically focus more than 25 Extension foresters' efforts on projects of regional and statewide significance. The incorporation of goals developed in a strategic planning process was new in 1998 and resulted in better linkages between program planning and the Extension forestry mission and improved working relationships within the Extension team and generated new ideas for educational programs.

Group Project Planning

Oregon State University has used group project planning processes since the late 1980's. Group projects involve the coordination of activities among county- and campus-based faculty. A group project is defined as having one or more of the following characteristics:

• Involvement of staff from three or more counties.
• A project involving large amounts of time or money.
• A project having statewide significance.
• A project that will substantially improve the organization.

A full description of the group project planning process may be found in Garland and Adams (1992).

Integrating Project and Strategic Planning

In 1997, more than 25 county- and campus-based Extension faculty attended an annual planning meeting. Several Extension foresters suggested linking strategic thinking to the existing group project planning process.

Strategic goals, developed as part of a separate periodic strategic planning process, were used to focus the group's thinking on broad areas of importance. Proposed group project ideas were categorized by the strategic goal or goals they most closely fit under. Group project ideas for each goal were then prioritized by a vote of the group. The estimated time Extension foresters would commit to each goal and the estimated time needed to complete each project was used as a means of determining how many projects to engage in for the year. Prior to this enhancement, projects were not categorized, nor were estimates of time used as a means to determine how many projects to implement.

The enhanced planning process is summarized in Figure 1: The Enhanced Group Project Planning Process:

Figure 1.
The Enhanced Group Project Planning Process

Internal Review of the Enhanced Planning Process

Since the strategic planning process was enhanced in 1998, a focused internal review of the process was conducted. Using a scale of 1-10, with 1 being poor and 10 excellent, Extension forestry faculty were asked to evaluate the overall usefulness of the process and to evaluate each of the planning steps. In-person and telephone interviews encouraged a higher number of responses and proved to be more effective than fax or email.

Extension foresters rated the usefulness of the strategic planning process as 6.76, on a scale of 1 to 10, indicating better than average satisfaction. Interestingly, they rated the individual components of the strategic planning process higher than the "idea" of strategic planning itself.

Thirty-five percent identified positive impacts and cited the following:

• Provided balance,
• Focus,
• Direction,
• Validation, and
• Group cohesion.

A list of the evaluation questions, rankings, frequencies, comments, interpretations, and recommendations is available from the authors.

The integrated planning process as implemented in 1998 resulted in several positive outcomes.

Creating Tighter Linkages

The enhanced planning process ensured that projects implemented are linked to strategic goals identified in a separate strategic planning process.

Opening the Circle

The enhanced planning process allowed regional, national, and international issues and trends to influence group projects selected for implementation. One colleague called it, "looking beyond the trees"; another "opening the circle."

Improving Working Relationships

The enhanced planning process prioritized project ideas under each strategic goal, thus recognizing sub-groups or smaller divisions of the forestry discipline. This recognition improved working relationships between forest products Extension foresters and forest resources Extension foresters.

Thinking Out of the Box

Prioritizing group project ideas by strategic goals allowed new ideas to emerge. For example, a group project selected under the goal of engaging the public in a dialog about forests and forestry resulted in an Art Show to engage the public. Sixty-five thousand people at three locations in Oregon visited "Seeing the Forest: Art about Forests & Forestry." This project would not have gone forward under the previous planning model.

Tom Dowling (1998, personal communication), the strategic planning consultant hired to guide the process, highlighted the changes in Extension forestry planning that he observed:

• Better internal understanding about the future project opportunities;
• Greater agreement between resource allocation and organizational goals;
• Better understanding and communication between Extension foresters and the College of Forestry faculty;
• More focus on strategic goals when selecting group projects;
• Greater participation in the planning process by all faculty members irrespective of rank, length of service, or disciplinary focus; and
• Strategic decisions based on external data in addition to data generated internally.

Conclusion

The enhanced group project planning process ensures that the decisions to implement projects are based on sound data and align with Oregon State University's Extension Forestry Mission.

John Garland (1998, personal communication), one of those personally involved in the original development of the group project planning process, commented, "The end result is that there is no shortage of important things to do. Which ones I do as an individual and in cooperation as a group is the important decision." Most Extension foresters (68%) felt that the integration of strategic goals into the group project planning process helped define what should and should not be done.

References

Garland, J.J., & Adams, P.W. (1992). Coordinated tactical program planning among specialists and agents: The Oregon Extension Forestry experience. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education. 21(1).

This article is online at http://www.joe.org/joe/2002august/iw1.shtml.

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.