Preface to the Second Edition

In 1993, the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) published my volume, Strategic Planning for Local Government. That text described the process of strategic planning as it had been practiced in the private sector for many years and the successes of city and county leaders who applied those practices to the public sector as well. At that time, although some governments were well versed in the concepts of strategic planning and had achieved significant results, these governments were few and far between. Other local governments were just beginning to acknowledge the applicability of strategic planning to local issues, but most local governments had not yet focused on the benefits that could be derived from such a process. In 1993, developing and pursuing a longer-term vision was the stuff of political rhetoric and theory and was thought to represent a less-than-critical demand on peoples’ time.

For the 1993 edition, approximately 40 strategic plans were collected from across the United States, and positive examples were selected for that book. Sections of plans, entire plans, and descriptions of planning processes were drawn from municipalities throughout the country—north, south, east, west; urban, suburban; large, small; thriving economies and struggling.

Lessons from 1993

From the examples presented in 1993, community leaders report that they were able to apply the process and learn the lessons of other communities that had already engaged in strategic planning. Nine important lessons were covered in the first edition of Strategic Planning for Local Government.

1.There are no significant variations in the strategic planning process for different local governments.

Although the content of strategic plans was distinct from one community to the next, the process of planning remained essentially the same. Issues varied among communities, and content variations were often the result of areas’ distinguishing characteristics. Cities, towns, and counties have different responsibilities and powers; similarly, strategic planners in larger or urban localities tended to identify issues in the planning processes that were different from the issues identified by their counterparts in smaller or rural locations.

Leaders in all communities tended to walk staff and constituents through the same steps, starting with developing a vision and identifying the organizational mission. From there, they conducted various forms of environmental scanning, which culminated in goals, objectives, and strategies. This consistency enabled local government leadership to observe the processes of other communities and apply them at home.

2.The process needs to be promoted locally.

Many participating communities in 1993 addressed the importance of having the local government initiate and strongly promote the strategic planning process. They derived benefits from community awareness of, and involvement in, the process. Sessions were often conducted in open meetings. Leadership actively used local print and electronic media to apprise the community of progress on the plan. Public hearings sometimes permitted citizens to comment on the plan while it was still in draft. The support and involvement of the most senior people in the community— elected and executive—was made clear. Residents knew the process had the full support of those at the top, and support was generated even before conclusions and action steps were announced.

3.Strategic planning begins with strategic thinking.

Communities embarked on their strategic planning exercises by determining their vision for the future and by addressing broad themes of common interest to all. The issues of the day and the most common concerns of those living and working in the area were addressed later. It was first important to define what the future should be like; afterward it would be possible to begin to assess what the specific issues were and how best to address them.

4.The planning group should be more, rather than less, inclusive.

Local government leaders in 1993 noted the value of including staff from different levels of the organization in the planning process. Staff who received and responded to citizen inquiries and complaints were possibly more aware than their supervisors of the issues and concerns citizens were raising. Their input provided valuable intelligence in the environmental scanning phase of strategic planning. An unexpected benefit of including staff from other levels was that it led to greater employee “buy-in” for the final document.

5.It is important to assess and announce the core values, or inherent beliefs, of the local leadership.

It appeared to be important for strategic planners in 1993 to state the core beliefs of the local government and its elected and appointed officials. In most cases, the statements of most communities were similar—all communities want to provide efficient and effective services to their constituents and enhance the general quality of life of their communities—but in addition there was an acknowledgment that those statements needed to be made to the public. Themes of different jurisdictions varied because they were responsive to either specific local issues or local histories.

6.The most critical element of the strategic planning process is the environmental scan.

The environmental scan is a structured process through which participants in the process seek to apply their collective wisdom to describe the future as clearly and comprehensively as possible. It is from this exercise that strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats are identified, and goals, objectives, and strategies developed. Compromise viewpoints often emerge and issues under review are categorized according to importance. Local government planners in 1993 realized that if the scan was not thorough and rigorous, the final plan would be flawed. This scan is recognized as the most critical phase as well as the most time-consuming phase of strategic planning, and it is the most voluminous in terms of the final written plan.

7.The strategic plan must outline measurable outcomes that will result from its implementation.

A plan without measurable outcomes provides no way to assess its success. It is essential that community leaders be able to document what transpires after the planning phases. Such measures are equally important to those who implement the plans because they provide a guide to both daily and longer-term activities. Staff and volunteers of local governments need to know how many, when, and how often; and those who manage agencies of local government need to participate in those decisions lest the plan result in demands that exceed available resources— financial or human.

The conundrum comes when staffs attempt to apply measures to goals, objectives, and actions. Many local government strategic planners in 1993 recognized that measurement need not be only by the numbers. A valid measure can be a date; for example, one might finish streetscape improvements by May 1. Another measurement that was specified in the 1993 plans was the completion of a specific project. In the 1993 plans, attempts to achieve the measures often fell short, and none of the 1993 plans reviewed mentioned the need to put measurement systems in place to capture data necessary to determine whether the plans had been met.

8.Those who implement plans need to understand and embrace them.

Including representatives of different levels of the municipal government in the planning process provides valuable input and typically results in a higher level of buy-in for the plan. Important also is a review of the finished product with agency staffs because it will help them understand why their activities are important to the bigger picture. Connecting individual performance with an appreciation and implementation of the plan and staff members’ pay with the completion of those objectives can provide a strengthened focus and commitment on the part of local government employees.

9.Feedback loops and scheduled replanning sessions are important means of ensuring that plans do not become the end but, rather, the means to an end.

Many of the 1993 plans—especially those that recognized the need to promote the process publicly—stated the need for a schedule of meetings to ensure that strategic plans were revisited, reconsidered, and reworked. Some even included a schedule in the printed document. The resultant feedback on the plan and progress made toward its objectives were deemed to be valuable for local leaders. The schedule also provided a series of time frames in which planners could report back to their constituents on the progress of their efforts.

In 2004

Now, more than a decade has passed and much has changed. Cities, towns, and counties still confront the issues of a decade ago and have added new issues. Economic problems of the first years of the twenty-first century have combined with the new challenges of public safety to add to the planning issues on already crowded agendas. Local governments report that the continued loss of state and federal revenues—exacerbated by unfunded mandates—has cluttered the planning agendas for their communities. Finally, users of the 1993 volume have pointed out the need to tie together their strategies and their business plans more closely.

In short, a decade later, we need to reexamine the lessons of 1993. This book is intended to do just that. Despite the growing complexities of municipal governance specifically, and of life in general, the second edition of Strategic Planning in Local Government has in many ways been an easier task. A greater proportion of cities and counties report that they have been conducting strategic planning processes than was the case in 1993. Most officials who participated in the second edition simply e-mailed me copies of their plans or were able to direct me to appropriate sections of their Web sites.

In other ways, the research was not so much simple as it was different. In this volume, I include communities that represent specific issues in outer suburbs, a comparative concept that was not widely recognized in 1993. Issues in the outer suburbs could well be distinct from issues confronting areas closer to the center city.

In rewriting this volume, I intended to evaluate whether, ten years later, there are new or different lessons to be learned. To discover the answer, I asked community leaders across the United States to allow me to review their plans. From these, I have selected what I believe to be excellent examples of the process and the components of municipal strategic planning. From that analysis, I have drawn conclusions about the lessons for municipal leaders who will conduct strategic planning exercises that are appropriate to our new times and needs. Again, positive examples are cited and sections of plans or whole plans are provided to illustrate the concepts under discussion. In this way, local government leaders can see what has worked elsewhere. A new step-by-step guide, accompanying poster, and PowerPoint^® presentation are provided to facilitate the process for others.

The 1993 volume generated a great deal of constructive feedback. My expectation is that this volume will as well, as a result of a rapidly changing world and a quickly growing public administration practice.

Gerald L. Gordon, Ph.D.
May 2005