getting from here to there: eight characteristics of effective economic & community development...
Post on 14-Sep-2014
118 views
DESCRIPTION
Slides used on July 23, 2014 in Dubuque, Iowa during presentation at the Annual Conference of the Community Development SocietyTRANSCRIPT
Copyright 2014 – Scott HutchesonThis 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 StrategyScott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
Community Development Society Annual Conference
Dubuque, IA – July 23, 2014
Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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 collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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 review2. Interviews3. Surveys
Better understand he nature of collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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 collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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
lexi
tyBoulding, 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
lexi
tyBoulding, 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
lexi
tyBoulding, 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
lexi
tyBoulding, 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 collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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 collaborationIdentify what stage your collaborations are inConsider 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 structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community
Variables
25
1. Network organization structures2. Asset-based Frameworks3. Iterative planning/implementation process4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals5. Decentralized implementation6. Metrics to learn what is working7. High levels of trust among participants8. Readiness for change in community
Independent Variables
Dependent Variable = Effectiveness
EffectivenessFor the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how would you describe its level of effectiveness:
• Completely effective• Significantly effective• Somewhat effective
IneffectivenessFor 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
Dep
ende
nt V
aria
bles
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 Floridafound 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 onthe Space Coast saw the opportunity to launch a new clean energy cluster.
Now, Energy Florida is leading the development of new businessopportunities 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 UniversityUniversity of Alaska
University of MissouriNew Jersey Institute of Technology
University of Central FloridaStanford University
Southhampton Solent University (United Kingdom)
University of the Sunshine Coast (Austrailia)
Teaching Strategic Doing
Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.765-479-7704
[email protected]/in/scotthutcheson/
www.twitter.com/jshutch64www.facebook.com/scott.hutchesonhttp://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/
For More Information & to Connect
Copyright 2014 – Scott HutchesonThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.
Slides available