Strategic planning is the process of defining the fundamental direction in which you want to guide your organization and aligning your organizational resources to reach that ultimate destination. Stated more simply, it is determining where you want to go and how you're going to get there.

As you review this definition, you will find that it contains two key elements. . .  "where" and "how." Using this definition, it is easy to eliminate a number of planning activities that, while they may be valuable in and of themselves, do not qualify as strategic planning.

For instance, an annual plan or program of work is not strategic planning. These activities tend to focus more on the "how" than the "where." A budget is also not strategic planning. While it may direct your spending activities, it will not necessarily direct your organization. Finally, a marketing plan is not a strategic plan since it usually addresses only one element of your operations. . .  your marketing activities.

A good strategic plan usually incorporates all of the planning activities identified here, but each individually does not equal a strategic plan.

This model has, as its primary advantage, a high degree of efficiency. That is, it requires a minimum number of person-hours to complete. It can also be completed in a short timeframe since only one person's schedule must be considered.

The significant disadvantage of this model is that the final plan is seldom supported with broad consensus. Since only one person developed the plan, only one person has any real ownership of it. While a management team or board of directors may approve the final plan and staff may read it, they seldom feel they "own" it.

The second approach to strategic planning is highly participative. In this model, a planning team representing the leadership of the organization is formed. This team meets over a period of time to assess the current state of the organization and chart its future direction. This approach can often take four or five days to complete and usually requires some degree of scheduling. Inherent in this model is also the need to balance diverse and sometimes conflicting ideas and directions.

The benefits of this second model of strategic planning is that the results are usually "richer" since the contributions of many people are included. Additionally, the final plan is owned by a larger group of people. Anyone who participated in the process will have some sense of authorship and, therefore, accountability to the newly established direction of the organization.

The disadvantage of this second model is that what it gains in effectiveness, it usually gives up in efficiency, at least short term. While the first model of planning can often be accomplished in a matter of hours, the second model may require days, and these days will be multiplied by the number of people participating in the process.

Before you actually embark on your planning initiative, it is essential that you select the model you will use for planning. Beginning with one model and shifting in mid-stream to the other often results in confusion and frustration. Except in the most urgent of situations, it is our recommendation that you use the second model. While it might take more time and be somewhat "messier," our experience has demonstrated that it yields the best long-term results.

The primary, if not singular, advantage to not using a consultant is that it saves money. This money may not be inconsequential. If you are operating on a tight budget, this investment could prove burdensome, if not prohibitive.

On the other hand, the advantages to using a consultant to guide you through the process are many. A good consultant will

• have the capability to conduct any preplanning research required to help you objectively assess the current status of your organization.
• have a defined process for planning and know that process well. He or she can shave weeks, if not months, off your learning curve.
• enable you to be an active participant in your planning process rather than a participant/leader/facilitator/scribe. This will enable you to more effectively contribute to your plan.
• have the facilitation skills necessary to guide and direct even the most vocal, opinionated and argumentative members of your planning team.
• have a system in place to handle mechanical concerns such as document preparation and meeting schedules.
• possess the knowledge of your industry and strategic thinking capability to challenge your assumptions and ensure a direction that is both innovative and appropriate for your organization.
• add credibility to your entire process and therefore, your outcomes.
• be willing to develop a long-term relationship with you and your organization.

This last item is of particular importance since the last person you need helping you chart the long-range future of your agency is a "hit-and-run artist" who only pays attention to you while your project is underway and is not willing to invest him- or herself in the follow-up contact necessary to positively influence the achievement of your plan.

Before you make the decision to "go it alone" and save money, you may want to ask yourself what the real cost to your organization will be if you miss any of the advantages previously described. You may find that the investment in expertise far outweighs the costs.