Mega Planning
Mega planning has a primary focus on adding value for all stakeholders, including society, for tomorrow’s child. It is realistic, practical, and ethical. It was initially developed by Roger Kaufman starting in the 1960s.
It relies on three basic foundations:
- A societal value-added “frame of mind” or paradigm:
one’s world-view about any organization, people, and our shared communities and society. It focuses on an agreed-upon focus on adding value to all stakeholders.
- A shared determination and agreement on where to head and why:
all people who can and might be impacted by the shared objectives must agree on purposes and results criteria, and
- Pragmatic and basic tools.
Agreement and use of the tools of Mega Planning provides the basic concepts for thinking and planning Mega in order to define and deliver value to all internal and external partners.
The Societal Value Added Perspective and Frame of Mind are unique and defining characteristics of Mega Planning
The required frame of mind for Mega thinking and planning, puts a primary concern on adding measurable value for external clients and society using one’s own job and organization as the vehicle. From this shared societal value-added frame, everything one uses, does, produces, and delivers is linked to achieve shared and agreed-upon positive societal results: Mega level of planning.
A basic tenant is if you are not adding value to our shared society what assurance do you have that you are not subtracting value? Starting with Mega as the central focus is strategic thinking and provides the data base for strategic planning.
A central question that each and every organization is asked using Mega Planning is:
If Your Organization is the Solution, What’s the Problem?
This fundamental proposition is central to thinking and planning strategically—using a Mega focus—represents a shift from the usual focus only on oneself, individual performance improvement, and one’s organization to making certain you also add value to external clients and society.
There are three basic guides, or templates, used to define and achieve organizational success:
Guide One: The Organizational Elements Model (OEM)
Table 1 defines and links (aligns) what any organization uses, does, produces, and delivers with external client and societal value added. For each Element, there is an associated level of planning. Note that Strategic planning (and thinking) starts with Mega while Tactical planning starts with Macro and Operational planning at Micro.
These elements are also useful for defining the basic questions every organization must ask and answer as provided in Figure 1.
Guide Two: Six Critical Success Factors
Following are what provides a vital framework of this approach and for Mega planning. Unlike conventional “critical success factors,” these are factors for successful planning, not just for the things that an organization must get done to meet its mission. These are for Mega planning, regardless of the organization.
Six Critical Success Factors (CSFs) for any organization.4 Six critical success factors for Mega planning (not targeted for any one organizational business but only for the planning process and concern) are shown in Table 2.
Guide Three: A Six-step Problem Solving Model
Figure 1 includes (1.0) Assess needs (identify problems based on needs), (2.0) Analyze needs (determine detailed solution requirements and identify, but not yet select, solution alternatives), (3.0) select solutions from among alternatives, (4.0) implement, (5.0) evaluate, and (6.0) continuous improvement (at each and every step).
New Realities for Organizational Success
To be successful—to do and apply Mega Planning—one realizes that yesterday’s methods and results often are not appropriate for creating a better tomorrow. Most planning experts agree that the past is only prologue, and tomorrow must be crafted through new patterns of perspectives, tools, and results. The tools and concepts for meeting the new realities of society, organizations, and people are linked to each of the Six Critical Success Factors.
The details and how-to’s for each of the three guides are also provided in the referenced sources. The three basic “guides” or templates should be considered as forming an integrated set of tools—like a fabric—instead of only each one on their own.
Table 1. The Five Levels of Results, the Levels of Planning, and a Brief Description
|
Name of the Organizational Element
|
Name of the Level of Planning and Focus
|
Brief Description
|
Type of Planning
|
|
Outcomes
|
Mega
|
Results and their consequences for external clients and society (shared vision
|
Strategic
|
|
Outputs
|
Macro
|
The results an organization can or does deliver outside of itself
|
Tactical
|
|
Products
|
Micro
|
The building block results that are produced within the organization
|
Operational
|
|
Processes
|
Process
|
The ways, means, activities, procedures, methods used internally
|
|
Inputs
|
Input
|
The human, physical, financial resources an organization can or does use
|
Figure 1. The six-step problem solving process: A process for identifying and resolving problems(and identifying opportunities).
Based in part on Kaufman, 1992, 1998, 2000, 2006
|
Table 1. Six Critical Success Factors for Mega Planning
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 1
|
|
Don’t assume that which worked for you and others in the past will work in the future.
|
|
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 2
|
|
Differentiate between ends (what) and means (how).
|
|
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 3
|
|
Use all three levels of planning and results (Mega/Outcomes; Macro/Outputs; Micro/Products).
|
|
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 4
|
|
Prepare all objectives—including the Ideal Vision and mission—to include precise statements of both where you are headed as well as the criteria for measuring when you have arrived. Develop “Smarter” Objectives.
|
|
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 5
|
|
Use an Ideal Vision (what kind of world, in measurable performance terms, we want for tomorrow’s child) as the underlying basis for planning and continuous improvement.
|
|
CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTOR 6
|
|
Defining “need” as a gap in results (not as insufficient levels of resources, means or methods).
|
Table 2 The Levels of Planning and Results That Should be Linked During Planning, Doing, and Evaluation and Continuous Improvement and There Are Three Levels of Planning
|
PRIMARY CLIENT AND BENEFICIARY
|
NAME FOR THE LEVEL OF PLANNING
|
NAME FOR THE LEVEL OF RESULT
|
TYPE OF PLANNING
|
|
Society and External Clients
|
Mega
|
Outcomes
|
Strategic
|
|
The Organization Itself
|
Macro
|
Outputs
|
Tactical
|
|
Individuals and Small Groups
|
Micro
|
Products
|
Operational
|
Conclusion
Mega thinking and planning is about defining a shared success, achieving it, and being able to prove it. Mega thinking and planning is a focus not on one’s organization alone but upon society now and in the future. It is about adding measurable value to all stakeholders.
Mega thinking and planning has been offered for many years, perhaps first formally with Kaufman’s 1972 Educational System Planning and further developed in Kaufman & English, 1979, and continuing. In one form or another, using a societal frame for planning and doing has shown up in the works of respected thinkers, including Senge (1990) and more recently Prahalad (2005). There is an emerging mainstream understanding of a requirement for a formal focus on societal added value, such as that from the worldwide managing director of McKinsey & Company (Davis, 2005). Social responsibility must be the central focus of strategic planning, not an “add on.” It is gratifying that there continues this migration from individual performance as the preferred unit of analysis for performance improvement to one that includes a first consideration of society and external stakeholders; it is responsible, responsive, and ethical to add value to all.
Basic References
Bernardez, M. (2005). Achieving Business Success by Developing Clients and Community: Lessons from Leading Companies, Emerging Economies and a Nine Year Case Study. Performance Improvement Quarterly, Vol. 18, Number 3.
Brethower, D,(2006) Performance Analysis: Knowing What to Do and How. Amherst, MA., HRD Press.
Davis, I. (2005, May 26). The Biggest Contract. The Economist. London: May 28, 2005. Vol. 375, Is. 8428, p. 87
Guerra-Lopez, I. (2007). Evaluating Impact: Evaluation and Continual Improvement for Performance Improvement Practitioners. Amherst, MA. HRD Press.
Kaufman, R. A. (1972). Educational system planning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kaufman, R. (2000).
Mega Planning: Practical Tools for Organizational Success. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.
Kaufman, R. (2006). Change, Choices, and Consequences: A Guide to Mega Thinking and Planning. Amherst, MA. HRD Press Inc.
Kaufman, R. & Bernardez, M. (2005) Eds. Performance Improvement Quarterly, Special invited issue on Mega planning. Volume 18, Number 3. Pp. 3-5. http://www.ispi.org/publications/piqtocs/piq18_3.htm
Kaufman, R, & Guerra-Lopez, I. (2008) The Assessment Book: Applied Strategic Thinking and Performance Improvement Through Self-assessments. Amherst, MA. HRD Press Inc.
Kaufman, R. A., Corrigan, R. E., & Johnson, D. W. (1969). Towards educational responsiveness to society's needs: A tentative utility model.Journal of Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 3,151-157.
Moore, S. (2005). The Social Responsibility of a Profession: A Factor Analysis of the Presence of Social Responsibility in Educational Technology Programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO.
Watkins, R. (2007) Performance by Design: the Systematic Selection, Design, Development of Performance Technologies that Produce Useful Results. Amherst, MA. HRD Press.
Subscribe