Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Getting from Here To There: Eight Characteristics of Effective Strategy

Economic & Community Development Strategy Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.

Community Development Society Annual Conference

Dubuque, IA – July 23, 2014

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Norfork, Arkansas

(pop. 550)

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

✔

✔

✔

✔

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Research Question

Why are some strategies for economic and community development successful and others…not so much?

Answering the Question

A grounded theory exploration using a sequential mixed method

approach beginning with a qualitative phase in which semi-

structured interviews resulting were conducted with a purposively

sampled panel of experts resulting in data that was open coded using

the data spiral analysis method followed by a quasi-experimental quantitative phase in which two

contrasted groups of purposefully sampled, randomly assigned participants were surveyed,

resulting in data that was analyzed using Spearman’s rho to determine

correlation coefficients.

1. Literature review

2. Interviews

3. Surveys

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Problem Statement

• Literature gap regarding factors

contributing to effective strategy in the

context of community change issues

like economic development (Kwon,

Berry, & Feiock, 2009).

• Civic leaders face daunting tasks of

developing and implementing

community change strategies (Markey,

2010).

• Very little research-based information

to guide decisions about effective

strategy-development processes.

• Evolution of dealing with community change

• Institutionalization • Locus of control • Increasing complexity

• Tools for managing community change

• Early tools • Evolving tools • Emerging tools

• Contributing theories • Strategy formation • Collaborative governance • Social innovation

Insights from the Literature

Conducted as part of the grounded theory data collection process (McGhee, Marland, and Atkinson, 2007).

Conducted to provide contextualization (Dunne, 2011) and orientation to the phenomenon (Pozzebon, Petrini, de Mellow, and Garreau, 2011).

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Evolution of How We Deal with

Public Issues

Institutionalization • Pre-institutional (Pre- WW2)

• Institutional (1950-1990)

• Multi-Institutional (1990 to today)

Locus of Control • Control in the hands of the “elite” (Perrucci &

Pilisuk, 1970).

• Most economic & community development issues are “Type 3 Public Problems” and control is shared by a group of “nonexperts” (Heifitz and Sinder, 1988).

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics

•Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools

•Animal – mobility, information processing

•Plants – viability

•Open Systems – matter, energy

•Cybernetics – computers

•Clockworks – engines

•Frameworks – buildings, cells

11

Co

mp

lex

ity

Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

The Extension Economist vs. The Rocket Scientist

12

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics

• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools

•Animal – mobility, information processing

•Plants – viability

•Open Systems – matter, energy

•Cybernetics – computers

•Clockworks – engines

•Frameworks – buildings, cells

13

Co

mp

lex

ity

Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics

• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools

•Animal – mobility, information processing

•Plants – viability

•Open Systems – matter, energy

•Cybernetics – computers

•Clockworks – engines

•Frameworks – buildings, cells

14

Co

mp

lex

ity

Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Hierarchy of Complex Systems

•Social Organizations – economics, education, politics

• Individual Human – language capacity, knowledge accumulation, design and use of tools

•Animal – mobility, information processing

•Plants – viability

•Open Systems – matter, energy

•Cybernetics – computers

•Clockworks – engines

•Frameworks – buildings, cells

15

Co

mp

lex

ity

Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

Dealing with the Complexity

16

Early Models • 1960s in universities, schools, municipalities (Hamilton, 2007)

• Late 1980s/Early 1990s first economic development strategic plans (Blackerby & Blackerby, 1995)

• Borrowed from industry models (Blair,2004)

Evolving Models • Recognition that corporate models are less effective (Bryson and Roering,

1987).

• U.S. Economic Development Administration’s CEDS; Cooperative Extension Service’s Take Charge (Hein, Cole, & Ayres, 1990); Asset-Based Community Development, (Kretzmann and McKnight, 1996; Community Capitals, Flora, 1992)

Emerging Models • Effectiveness of strategic planning in business questioned (Mintzberg,

1994).

• Effectiveness of strategic planning in economic & community development questioned ( Blair, 2004; Robichau, 2010; Morrison, 2012)

• Organic Strategic Planning (McNamara, 2010, Open Source Economic Development (Merkel, 2010), Strategic Doing (Hutcheson, 2008; Hutcheson & Morrison, 2012; Walzer & Cordes, 2012)

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

Complexity

Community change issues are complex

Institutions emerged to

deal with the complexity

There are lots of institutions

No single institution is “in charge” of most

community issues

Complex environment

Contributing Theories

• Social Innovation

• Strategy Formation

• Collaborative Governance

18

Social Innovation

Social innovations… • are best designed and implemented in networks • emerge from heterogeneousness (diversity) • are framed using existing assets • are products of co-creation • are the result of collective action • should have decentralized implementation • ,when implemented should focus on tangible results

Bland, Bruk, Kim, and Lee (2010); Bouchard (2012); Mulgan, Ali, Tucker and Sanders (2007); Neumeier (2012); Oliveira and Breda-Vazquez (2012)

Strategy Formation

Strategies… • are formed intuitively

• are iterative

• must be designed to account for unanticipated variables

• must take into account contextual values, assumptions, beliefs, and expectations

• must be flexible

• should be designed collaboratively

• and best developed as an intra-organizational activity

Feser, 2012; Johanson, 2009; Lindblom, 1959; Mintzberg, 1978; Parnell, 2008; Rindova, Dalpiaz, and Ravasi, 2011; Sminia, 2012; Tapinos, Dyson, and Meadows, 2011

Collaborative Governance

Collaborative governance… • takes advantage of network structures • connects existing assets • focuses first on small wins • Requires decision making to be made by consensus • works when there is trust among participants • is efficient • involves successful management of both internal and external

stakeholders

Ansell and Gash, 2008; Chiclana et al., 2013; Clarke, Huxley, Mountford, 2010; Emerson, Nabatchi, and Balogh, 2012; Gibson, 2011; Johnston, Hicks, Nan, and Auer, 2011; Kwon, Berry, and Feiock, 2009; Merkle , 2010; Olberding, 2009;

Ospina and Saz-Carranza, 2010; Pammer, 1998; Poister, 2010

Better understand he nature of collaboration Identify what stage your collaborations are in Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level

These Things Matter

• Organizational Structure (hierarchy, network, etc.)

• Framework (asset-based, deficit-based)

• Processes (planning and Implementation separate and distinct, planning and implementation integrated and iterative, etc.)

• Timeframe (focused on longer-term goals, focused on shorter-term goals, etc.)

• Implementation (tasks centralized with one organization, tasked disseminated among multiple organizations)

Insights from the Panel of Experts

The Qualitative Data

• Population of scholars and practitioners who design curricula, teach, and/or practice strategy development for addressing economic and community development issues

• Sample: N=12

• Semi-structured interviews (IRB-approved, anonymity)

• Verbatim transcripts, data spiral analysis with three levels of coding: open, axial, selective using qualitative analysis software

• 56 single-spaced pages/over 31,000 words of data

Findings from the Interviews

24

1. Network organization structures

2. Asset-based Frameworks

3. Iterative planning/implementation process

4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals

5. Decentralized implementation

6. Metrics to learn what is working

7. High levels of trust among participants

8. Readiness for change in community

Variables

25

1. Network organization structures

2. Asset-based Frameworks

3. Iterative planning/implementation process

4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals

5. Decentralized implementation

6. Metrics to learn what is working

7. High levels of trust among participants

8. Readiness for change in community

Independent Variables

Dependent Variable = Effectiveness

Effectiveness

For the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how

would you describe its level of effectiveness:

• Completely effective

• Significantly effective

• Somewhat effective

Ineffectiveness

For the ineffective strategy initiative you have in mind, how

would you describe its level of ineffectiveness:

• Somewhat ineffective

• Significantly ineffective

• Completely ineffective

Organizational Structure, etc.

Measuring the Variables

Hierarchical, with a clear top and bottom

Network, with a hub and spokes

Insights from Participants

The Quantitative Data

• Population of individuals who have participated in

economic and community development strategy initiatives

• Sample of 300 (plus those reached by use of snowball

sample) participants were randomly selected from PCRD

contact database (N=209). Assured that Indiana was not

over represented

• IRB-approved survey constructed using the factors

identified in phase 1, participants randomly assigned to two

contrasting groups

Findings from the Surveys

28

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses

Completely Effective

Completely Ineffective

Significantly Effective

Somewhat Effective

Somewhat Ineffective

Significantly Ineffective

Findings from the Survey

Effectiveness Continuum

De

pe

nd

ent

Var

iab

les

Correlation

Findings from the Surveys

30

Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables

Recipe for INEFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a hierarchical organizational

structure

• Frame strategies primarily around

addressing problems or deficits

• Have a planning and implementation

process that is linear and sequential

• Include only long-term, transformational

goals

• Centralized responsibilities for

implementation with one organization

• Uses metrics primarily for

accountability

• Proceed even though there are low

levels of trust among participants

• Proceed although participants are not

ready for change

Recipe for EFFECTIVE Strategies

• Have a network organizational structure

• Frame strategies primarily around building on existing assets

• Have a planning and implementation processes that is iterative

• Include short-term, easy-win goals

• Decentralize responsibilities for implementation among multiple organization

• Use metrics to learn what is working and to make adjustments along the way

• Build high levels of trust among participants

• Assure that participants are ready to change

Improving Our Practice

Strategic Doing enables people to form action-oriented collaborations quickly, move them toward measurable outcomes, and make

adjustments along the way.

Strategy Answers Two

Basic Questions

Strategic Doing Divides the Two Basic Questions into Four Appreciative Questions

35

Strategic Doing Moves from the Linear to the Agile

Strategic Doing Is Iterative & Ongoing

http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/accelerating_civic_innovation_through_strategic_doing

http://www.choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/theme-articles/public-sector-options-for-creating-jobs/transforming-regions-through-strategic-doing

• Proceedings of the 2014 International

Research & Development Conference,

Stuttgart, Germany (published)

• Community Development Journal

(accepted)

• Economic Development Journal (accepted)

• Long Range Planning Journal (invited)

• The Bridge: Journal of the National

Academy of Engineering (invited)

• Harvard Business Review (proposed)

Recent & Forthcoming Scholarship

Practicing Strategic Doing

41

In neighborhoods besieged by complex, wicked problems, Strategic Doing creates hope through the power of taking action with the assets or gifts that

we already possess. In that moment when we combine assets, we begin to tell a new story of opportunity and possibility, and it gives us the power to change

our lives, our neighborhoods, and our communities. Bob Brown, Associate Director of University-Community Partnerships

Michigan State University

We finally broke our “grant addiction.” Flint Community Resident

With the pending NASA shuttle shutdown, the Space Coast region of Florida found itself struggling to define a strategy to respond. They turned to Strategic

Doing. In a series of large-scale workshops, a small group of civic leaders on the Space Coast saw the opportunity to launch a new clean energy cluster.

Now, Energy Florida is leading the development of new business opportunities and the Space Coast is transforming.

• Local & Regional Economic Development

Strategy

• Community Development Strategy

• Cluster Development

• Local/Regional Food Systems

• Community Health

• Innovation Platform Development

• Strategic Alliances

• Inter-unit collaboration within a single

organization

• National Associations

Practicing Strategic Doing

Teaching Strategic Doing

Existing & Emerging University Partnerships Michigan State University

University of Alaska

University of Missouri

New Jersey Institute of Technology

University of Central Florida

Stanford University

Southhampton Solent University (United Kingdom)

University of the Sunshine Coast (Austrailia)

Teaching Strategic Doing

Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D. 765-479-7704

hutcheson@purdue.edu www.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/

www.twitter.com/jshutch64 www.facebook.com/scott.hutcheson http://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/

For More Information & to Connect

Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

Slides available