Change #1:  Open it Up

It is more important than ever to get as much involvement as possible from the entire organization.  Strategic planning should not be the sole province of the board of directors and a handful of senior staff.  The more you can involve—and I mean truly involve—in the creation of the plan those who will be accountable for actually executing it, the more commitment (as opposed to mere compliance) you will obtain.  People like to see their “fingerprints” on something they are being charged with carrying out. 

Change #2:  Plan for Less, Get More

Do you still use a five to ten year cycle for your planning horizon?  I now recommend that my clients look only two or three years into the future to set their vision.  Change is happening much too quickly for there to be accuracy in planning beyond that.  There isn’t “visibility,” as you might hear the pundits say.  People truly can’t envision a longer future.  Twelve months ago, could you—or anyone—have predicted the world we find ourselves in today?  Set the vision two to three years out; then couple that with a very concrete, practical action plan for the next twelve months. 

Change #3:  Hone on the Range

Instead of talking about a mountain for the vision, I should really call it a mountain range.  The vision for future success is rarely a singular point in the future.  I used to spend quite a bit of time during and after a strategic planning session working with the board or a sub-committee to refine a mission and/or vision statement that would be “suitable for lamination.”  I think it is much more important that everyone in the organization be in agreement directionally and less to be in agreement literally.  I have found that the conversation sparked is more important than the actual statement we developed (which always ended up reading as though it had been created by a committee … because, in fact, it had!).

Change #4:  Begin at the End

I was trained as a strategic planning consultant to begin with a very clear picture of where you are today.  “How can you effectively plan for the future without the hard, cold reality of your current state?” some ask.  I say that most boards and staff are acutely aware of the difficulties of their current state.  My experience has shown that they are better served to think aspirationally first.  Now, in almost every case (the exception being when there are extremely divergent views of the current state), I begin with the end in mind, creating the vision for the future.  Once this picture is clearly in each person’s mind, I assure you a more targeted, accurate assessment will follow.

Change #5:  Swat the SWOT

This may be heresy in some strategic planning circles, but I have switched from the conventional SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis to the lesser-known but much more effective Force Field Analysis for assessing the current reality.  I simply facilitate the identification and discussion of those forces working for and against our success in making this vision a reality.  Too often with the SWOT (and I know you have all been there), what should have been a healthy dialog denigrated into unhealthy conflict over which box to put something in. Was it a strength or an opportunity? A weakness or a threat?  Instead, through a deeper level of conversation, we found that in fact the same factor could be both positive and negative, and thus we could focus the majority of our attention on how to address it.

By making these changes to your annual strategic planning session, you will develop a plan that gets the whole organization aiming in the same direction and catapults your results to even higher levels of success!

Tim Brown is an industrial designer by training, and has won numerous design awards.  His team even appeared on a news show, demonstrating how to create a new and improved shopping cart in just 4 days.  His passion is finding ways design can be used to promote the well being of people living in emerging economies. [In fact, many innovative ideas are being created by focusing on these emerging economies].

 He says one of the keys to great ideation is great preparation.  And great preparation begins with a design brief.  Here he captures the power in his own words:

“The difference between a design brief with just the right level of constraint and one that is overly vague or overly restrictive can be the difference between a team on fire with breakthrough ideas and one that delivers a tired reworking of existing ones.”

And I have found this to be true in my work facilitating innovation sessions, though it may seem counter-intuitive.  Often, the clients I work with say they want the brainstorming session to be very broad because they want to “empower” the participants.  In fact the opposite tends to happen.   When the “creativity canvas” is too wide, it actually either leads to too many ideas that are off the mark and not actionable or too many ideas that do not address the most critical challenges. 

As Brown says above, with just the right ending to the sentence – “How might we…” – you too can catch your team on fire with creativty aimed in the right direction!

Deal with other, more insidious “trust busters,” too. One common behavior I see on teams that damages and limits trust is sarcasm disguised as humor.  In order to innovate, people must be able to connect with each other in a real, deeply personal way.  If one or more members (especially the leader) are constantly throwing barbs at other team members under the guise of humor, they’ll cause an erosion of trust.

Make sure quieter fireflies have a chance to glow. Certain people may naturally dominate the discussion while others tend to hang back and go with the flow.  If your big talkers are always allowed to verbally run over the quieter/less visible members of your team, the same ideas and solutions will always get implemented.  Instead, ask everyone to jot down their initial ideas in silence and then share them, round-robin style.  Ask people to speak in headlines.  Or ask everyone to “self-police” their participation levels.

As a team leader, don’t keep too tight a lid on the jar. Just as fireflies’ lights fade when they’re held captive, a leader who dominates and controls his or her team will squelch creativity.  Take deliberate steps not to do this. Don’t sit at the head of the table. Use positive reinforcement (both verbally and nonverbally). Don’t get into a prolonged conversation with only one or two other team members. Share your opinion on the topic last.

Having dispatched of the salad, you look forward to the main course. Five minutes pass, and then ten more. Although you’re enjoying conversation, your host still hasn’t served another dish. As your stomach begins to rumble, you wonder when your friend will realize that he/she has forgotten to bring out the next round of food.

Finally, your host clears away the salad bowls, and you prepare for the arrival of a long-overdue entrée. However, something curious happens. Instead of being served a plate of pasta or chicken, you’re treated to a small cupcake—and that’s it!

An Agenda with Substance

Many meeting-goers can relate to our confused, underfed dinner guest. They show up to a conference room expecting to take part in something substantial, but nothing of consequence is ever discussed. When the meeting adjourns, they feel as if their time has been wasted, and they wonder why they were asked to come in the first place.

The world moves faster than ever, and people’s time is precious. Respect your coworkers and clients by making sure your meetings are meaningful. Before asking for a slot on everyone’s schedule, I would suggest creating a pre-meeting checklist.

• Is it absolutely necessary to meet in person, or could information be passed along in an email?
• Do I have clear objectives to accomplish at the meeting?
• Does the meeting’s objective really require a group decision?

Until you can answer, “yes” to all three questions, don’t schedule the meeting. Otherwise, you’ll frustrate your employees by frittering away their time.

One tool I use is brainwriting. This process taps into the unique perspective of each person and encourages them to build upon the ideas of others. The anonymity of the exercise along with its emphasis on stretching ideas further and further increases the odds of coming up with . . . well, odd and potentially novel solutions.

Let me walk you through how this exercise works, and you will see what I mean:

1. Give each member of the problem-solving team—ideally, four to six people—a blank sheet of paper.
2. On the top of the page, have them write an agreed upon problem statement. Then, ask them to draw vertical lines to separate the sheet of paper into three columns.
3. Set a timer for two minutes. Each participant should brainstorm three solutions, writing one in each column.
4. After the buzzer sounds, ask each person to draw a horizontal line under their solutions across the entire page. Then have them pass the sheet of paper to their left.
5. Now, set the timer for three minutes. Have the participants add to or build upon the existing suggestions by writing their own ideas underneath the original solutions.
6. At the end of three minutes, the papers should again be passed to the left. The process should be repeated as many times as there are people around the table. During each round, allow slightly more time since the addition of ideas makes it harder to think up new solutions.
7. When you’ve finished going around the table, post the sheets of paper on the wall so that each person can read the ideas. Ask them to write their initials beside the ones they think are most likely to solve the original problem. Better yet, see if they can combine ideas from one or more pages to generate an exponentially better idea.

I’ve found brainwriting to be ideal when people are afraid to voice their ideas or when one person is dominating the discussion. Brainwriting jumpstarts the flow of ideas and invites everyone into the problem-solving process. The resulting ideas are collaborative and creative—often leading directly to successful solutions.