Research methods unit VI Scholarly Activity and DQ Question

November 2005 / 17

ften considered a daunting task filled with such complicated procedures and

“SWOT” Tactics Basics for Strategic Planning By Randy Garner, Ph.D.

“We must plan for the future because people who stay in the present will remain in the past.”

—Abraham Lincoln

O terms that it makes some want to ignore the activity altogether, strategic planning need not be an overly complicated process. Instead, managers can view it as simply considering where their organizations are—or should be—going over the next year or more and how they will get there. As it relates to law enforcement agencies, a strategic plan is the product of a leadership process that helps depart- ments better focus their energies and resources to ensure that all members work toward the same goal.

The entire strategic planning process may take many forms and follow a variety of paths. At some point in the process, however, planners will iden- tify or update the strategic philosophy. This may include a mission, vision, or value statement—or some combination. While each has similarities, some general distinctions exist. Typically, a mis- sion statement is a brief description of the intent of the organization, an expression of the agency’s unique reason for existence usually contained in a formal statement of purpose. A vision statement, which many agencies increasingly use, offers a vivid image of the desired future. It compellingly describes how the department will or should oper- ate at some point in the future and how customers benefit from its services. A value statement often lists the overall priorities of how the organization will operate. It may focus on moral values, such as integrity, honesty, and respect, or operational val- ues, such as efficiency or effectiveness. This also may include an agency’s core values or principles that describe how it should conduct itself in carry- ing out its mission.

THE PROCESS Four basic questions comprise the essence of

the strategic planning process: 1) Where is the organization now? 2) Where does it want to be? 3) How will it get there? and 4) How does it measure its progress? While a number of terms are associ- ated with this process, departments should focus only on what works for them. Some agencies have separate mission, vision, and value statements; others combine them. Some organizations create strategic goals, strategies, objectives, and tactics; others merely offer an identified goal and the ob- jectives to reach it. Some review and update their current mission or vision statements before doing an analysis of their environments; others examine their mission statements after completing an as- sessment. More important than any particular or- der is examining all aspects of the agency and the

Focus on Strategic Planning

18 / FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin

environment it operates in while remaining flex-

ible enough to make adjustments as needed.

Regardless of the terms or order used, getting

started remains one of the most important parts of

the strategic planning process. It is akin to pushing

a car: the greatest difficulty lies in getting it rolling;

after that, the task becomes easier. Departments

should not get lost in the search for the perfect

method or approach; it does not exist. Rather, they

should start with the basic questions and move

forward, not getting sidetracked

by “analysis paralysis” wherein

they overly obsess about getting

everything just right or worrying

about “neatness” in the begin-

ning. They should concentrate

on just getting the process

started.

Generally, agencies should

consider three main tasks when

working on a strategic plan. The

first, strategic analysis, is a re-

view of the organization’s envi-

ronment, both internal and exter-

nal. The next, strategic direction,

involves what the department must do as a result of

the major issues and opportunities that it may face.

Finally, action planning deals with explaining how

the agency will accomplish its strategic goals.

Each component is important in creating the over-

all plan.

Strategic Analysis:

“SWOT” Tactics

Not surprisingly, for an organization to deter-

mine where it wants to go in the future, it must

assess where it is now. In this part of the strategic

planning process, law enforcement administrators

can call on the “SWOT” team for help. Simply put,

this acronym stands for assessing an agency’s

strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats,

a critical phase in the general planning process as it

helps determine exactly where the agency is and

what resources it may or may not have. Strength

assessment identifies what the department tends to

do well and can include a skilled, professional staff

and a modern, well-equipped facility. Weaknesses

denote what the agency may not do so well or what

diminishes its effectiveness. Inadequate financial

resources may fit into this category. Opportunities

reflect what the organization might seize upon to

do better. This area could include increasing com-

munity interactions and taking

advantage of particular grants.

Finally, threats are environmen-

tal factors that may hinder per-

formance. Examples could in-

clude a rising demand for service

or increased legislative mandates

that can impact resources. Man-

agers should consider “SWOT”

analysis for issues both external

to the agency, such as population

growth and increased industrial-

ization, and internal to it, such as

an aging workforce that might

result in excessive turnover or

competing priorities for resources. “SWOT”

analysis constitutes one of the most important

aspects in the overall strategic planning process.

Strategic Direction:

SMARTER Goals

To move from an assessment of where it is to a

plan for where it wants to be, a law enforcement

agency must articulate particular strategies and

identify strategic goals. When considering goals, a

department can use the acronym SMARTER to

create specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic,

and timely goals that extend the capabilities of

those working to achieve them while being re-

warding for the organization and its members. An

organization should make its goals as specific as

possible so as not to cover too broad an area or to

“ “

”

Simply put, this acronym stands for

assessing an agency’s strengths, weaknesses,

opportunities, and threats....

November 2005 / 19

Dr. Garner, a former police chief and executive director of the Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas and the Texas Regional Community Policing Institute, currently is the associate dean of the College of Criminal Justice at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas.

require completing a large number of steps or satis- fying a vast array of objectives. Usually easier to assess for success, specific goals lend themselves to helping an agency determine if it has accom- plished them. Those charged with carrying out the goals must find them acceptable and realistic in scope. “Pie in the sky” ideas or goals that have no reasonable chance of success do not help the orga- nization or the individuals who must work toward a goal’s completion. Some, believing that they are providing challenging direction to an agency, may set such lofty or demanding goals that no one possibly can satisfy them and, thus, predestine the organization to fail—exactly the opposite of the intended effect.

Timely goals identify a specific issue that a depart- ment can accomplish in a reasonably appropriate time frame. Additionally, an agency should avoid overly simplistic, easy, or obvious goals. Instead, goals should challenge the organization within its limits and extend the capabilities of those working to achieve them. Careful consider- ation in goal creation can lead to renewed enthusi- asm for the agency and its mission.

Strategic Success: Action Planning

Once a department has assessed the environ- ment (“SWOT” tactics) and arrived at a set of (SMARTER) goals, it must place the strategic plan into action. One of the biggest problems in strate- gic planning (after giving up on trying to find the “perfect way”) is not following the steps to imple- ment the plan. It does little good to spend the time and energy identifying where the organization is and determining where it wants to be to then let the

whole thing stagnate for a lack of action. In fact, strong leadership at this critical stage often proves key to successfully implementing a strategic plan. An action plan simply sets forth the goals, speci- fies the set of objectives needed to reach them, and identifies the responsible entity for accomplishing each one and in what time frame. This process ensures that the hard work of developing the strate- gic plan will become more than an exercise of enumerating “dreams.” The difference between a wish and a goal is the initiation of an action plan

that specifically outlines the responsibilities for success.

CONCLUSION The purpose of strategic

planning is to help a law en- forcement agency better rec- ognize where it is, where it wants to go, and how it can best get there. Although dif- ferent departments use vary- ing terms, they should focus on the creation of a thought- ful plan to achieve growth and success. This need not

be an overly difficult task. As the saying goes, “if you fail to plan, you plan to fail.” This proves particularly true in organizations that may face numerous challenges and competing priorities. The law enforcement profession cannot afford to practice “pinball leadership,” getting bounced around by every unexpected event. Instead, leaders must plan proactively to create a future that en- compasses the vision they desire and the plan re- quired to achieve its success.

“

The Essence of the Strategic Planning Process

• Where is the organization now?

• Where does it want to be?

• How will it get there?

• How does it measure its progress?