Communication Planning

An Integrated Approach

Sherry Devereaux Ferguson

• Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc
• Year: 1999
• ISBN:
  9781506314082
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Filología
• Subtopic: Estudios de comunicación

The nature of the communicator's job has changed dramatically over the last decade. While communicators still prepare speeches, press releases and articles for corporate magazines, they are now being asked to perform managerial duties such as planning, consulting stakeholders and advising CEO's and vice presidents.

Communication Planning focuses on these additional responsibilities and examines the role of integrated planning in modern organizations. Sherry Ferguson's comprehensive study includes the theoretical foundations of communication planning and strategic approaches to planning for issues management.

PART
I

Strategic Planning Cultures

1

The Making of Strategic Planning Cultures

The new buzz words among managers are continuous planning and integrated planning. Continuous planning refers to ongoing planning efforts, at all levels of the organization, to ensure that the organization adjusts to changes in its internal and external environments (Redding & Catalanello, 1994). Distinctions in the management literature among long-term, middle-term, and short-term planning have all but disappeared as terms such as the learning organization, strategic readiness, institutionalization of change, and proactivity have come to dominate discussions of planning (Kaufman, 1992; Morgan, 1992). The days when organizations could follow a 10-year (or even a 5-year) strategic plan have disappeared. Frequent updates to relatively long-term strategic plans enable the organization to respond to threats from changes in the technological, economic, political, demographic, and other societal spheres. These societal shifts are occurring at an exponential rate as we enter the new millenium. From a demographic perspective, the face of the workforce is changing rapidly: It is growing older and is more culturally and racially diverse. Also, more often than in the past, it is female. The pace of technological change ensures the redundancy of knowledge, almost before it can be packaged and disseminated. The ability of publics to acquire information at the same time as their leaders has reduced—to unprecedented and dramatically low levels—response times available to politicians, chief executive officers, and bureaucrats. Despite the fact that “planning for change” may appear to be a contradiction in terms, much like “fighting for peace,” many organizations believe that anticipating change is critical to their survival and prosperity.

Getting Ready for Strategic Planning

To prepare for these planning exercises, the organization must undertake three activities (Bryson, 1988). First, the organization must review its mandate. Second, the organization must develop or clarify its mission statement. Third, the organization must conduct a situation audit.

Reviewing the Mandate

A mandate specifies the organization’s responsibilities and delegates authority to pursue these responsibilities. Usually contained in legislation, articles of incorporation, or charters, a mandate states the “musts” confronting an organization. The following illustrates a mandate statement: The Environmental Protection Agency is responsible for policies and actions to preserve and enhance the quality of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.

Both governments and businesses have undertaken dramatic restructuring of their mandates in recent years, with many firms moving into new business lines. For example, many film companies also produce videos. Department stores sell insurance and eye care. Publishers market books, computer software, and videos. Some organizations have completely abandoned their former business lines and entered new markets. Federal governments have moved increasingly into the business of coordinating and communicating as state and local governments take over the design and delivery of programs. In other words, these organizations have rewritten their mandates—even if the changes do not always appear on paper.

Developing or Clarifying Mission Statement

The organization that wishes to engage in successful strategic planning must write or update its mission statement (Kaufman, 1992). A mission statement “defines the ultimate objective of the organization and the most important strategies to be applied in attempting to achieve the ultimate goal” (Ingstrup, 1990). Like the mandate, the mission statement responds to the most fundamental question: “What is the nature of our business?” The mission statement, however, also contains statements of purpose, strategy, values, behavioral standards, and sometimes guiding principles. Levi Strauss generated a document in the late 1980s titled “Crusaders of the Golden Needle” which demonstrated the first four components. The mission read as follows (Ireland, Hitt, & Williams, 1992):

We seek profitable and responsible commercial success creating and selling jeans and casual clothing [purpose]. We seek this while offering quality products and service—and by being a leader in what we do [strategy]. What we do is important. How we do it is also important [values]. Here’s how [behavioral standards]: By being honest. By being responsible citizens in communities where we operate and in society in general. By having a workplace that’s safe and productive, where people work together in teams, where they talk to each other openly, where they’re responsible for their actions, and where they can improve their skills, (p. 35)

Purpose statements in the mission suggest what the organization aims to produce or achieve. For example, Daimler-Benz aims to produce the best engineered car. The purpose of universities is to contribute to the knowledge of society and to transmit that knowledge to students. Police departments strive to protect society, and hospitals aim to alleviate the suffering of the injured, ill, and dying. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1997) stated its mission in the following way: “To enhance the health and well-being of Americans [purpose] by providing for effective health and human services and by fostering strong sustained advances in the sciences underlying medicine, public health, and social services [strategy].”

Strategy statements suggest the means by which the organization will achieve its goals. For example, Wal-Mart’s ability to offer high-quality discount goods (purpose) relates to its extremely cost-efficient warehousing system (strategy). Universities transfer knowledge (purpose) by hiring the best qualified instructors and researchers (strategy).

Mission statements also include statements of values. Core values in the mission statement for the U.S. Department of Justice include access to justice, honesty and integrity, pursuit of excellence, cooperation and partnership, importance of the individual, and openness in government. At the end of a lengthy process that involved 1,400 managers, Bell Atlantic managers reached consensus on five values: integrity, respect and trust, excellence, individual fulfillment, and profitable growth. The corporation then moved toward operationalizing these values in the form of concrete behaviors and work practices (Kanter, 1991). After establishing a committee to articulate corporate values for the Washington Mutual Financial Group, Chairman Lou Pepper appointed middle managers to roam the organization to find out where conflicts existed between “rhetoric and reality” (Tregoe & Tobia, 1990, p. 20). Where the two diverged, the managers reported back to Pepper, who made the necessary changes. Much of the cynicism concerning mission statements relates to the tendency of many organizations to tolerate inconsistencies between stated values and behavioral standards.

The fourth category in a mission statement is behavioral standards. Government departments and businesses often state their commitment to behave in ethical or socially responsible ways. Levi Strauss included an extended statement of behavioral standards in their mission statement. They observed that “what they do is important” but “how they do it” is also important. Finally, they detailed the specifics of how they intended to behave.

Other organizations include guiding principles in their mission statements. The mission statement for the Correctional Service of Canada (1990) demonstrates all these components. Their mission statement reads: “The Correctional Service of Canada, as part of the criminal justice system, contributes to the protection of society [purpose] by actively encouraging and assisting offenders to become law-abiding citizens [strategy], while exercising reasonable, safe, secure and humane control [behavioral standards]” (p. 4). The values of the Correctional Service of Canada are as follows (p. 4):

Core Value 1: “We respect the dignity of individuals, the rights of all members of society, and the potential for human growth.”

Core Value 2: “We recognize that the offender has the potential to live as a law-abiding citizen.”

Core Value 3: “We believe that our strength and our major resource in achieving our objectives is our staff and that human relationships are the cornerstone of our endeavor.”

Core Value 4: “We believe that the sharing of ideas, knowledge, values and experience, nationally and internationally, is essential to the achievement of our Mission.”

Core Value 5: “We believe in managing the Service with openness and integrity and we are accountable to the Solicitor General.”

Guiding principles are tied to core values (Correctional Service of Canada, 1990, pp. 8-16). Guiding principles for Core Value 1 were “We will accommodate, within the boundaries of the law, the cultural and religious needs of individuals and minority groups, provided the rights of others are not impinged”; “The disciplinary process, when used, will be fair, timely, and constructive”; and “Offenders, as members of society, retain their rights and privileges except those necessarily removed or restricted by the fact of their incarceration.” Guiding principles for Core Value 2 were “We believe that offenders should be productively occupied”; “We recognize that the establishment and maintenance of positive community and family relationships will normally assist offenders in the reintegration as law-abiding citizens”; and “The involvement of community organizations, volunteers, and outside professionals in program development and delivery will be actively encouraged.” Guiding principles for Core Value 3 were “We will be sensitive to the staff members’ individual needs, interests, capacities, values, and aspirations in the workplace”; “We respect the need for employment equity achieved through a staff complement that represents a cross section of Canadian society”; and “We believe that our relationship with unions must be characterized by openness, mutual respect, and a desire to solve problems.” A guiding principle for Core Value 4 was “We believe that we must actively encourage the gathering, creation, application, and dissemination of new knowledge if we are to remain a contributing member of the national and international correctional communities.” Guiding principles for Core Value 5 were “We will endeavor to be a positive presence in the community and to be a social, cultural, and economic asset”; “We will ensure that appropriate segments of the public are consulted in the development of the Service’s key policies”; and “We recognize the role of the media in a democratic society and we will work actively and constructively with them in order to demonstrate that we are open and accountable.”

In short, a mission statement reflects the personality of the organization and distinguishes it from other organizations with similar business lines. Those who claim that mission statements are too broad to be meaningful should examine the implications in the mission statement for the Correctional Service of Canada. It should be obvious that countries such as Thailand have very different values and guiding principles for their correctional systems. Although the minimum period of imprisonment in Thailand for drug trafficking is 25 years, the average survival time is 12 years. Few graduate from Thailand’s prison system, and China executes its drug traffickers. The same is true for many other countries throughout the world, in which a belief in rehabilitation of criminals does not figure into their justice systems. A mission statement written by these countries would appear quite different from American, British, or Canadian statements.

Conducting a Situation Audit

After clarifying the organization’s mandate and writing its mission statement (purpose, strategy, values, behavioral standards, and guiding principles), the organization must conduct a situation audit. Situation audits examine

• The past performance of the organization (achievements, failures, trends in products and services, profits, and other indexes of performance)
• Forces in the organization’s environment (economic, social, technological, and demographic)
• The identities, biases, and loyalties of stakeholders (clients and others who have a stake in the success or failure of the organization)
• Organizational resources

At this point, the organization has completed all necessary steps to prepare for the strategic planning exercise. The organization has reviewed its mandate, developed or clarified its mission statement, and conducted a situation audit. In some cases, the communication group will have contributed to the writing of the section on stakeholders in the situation audit. The organization is now ready for the strategic planning exercises.

Engaging in Strategic Planning

Strategic planning serves the function of determining where the organization wants to go, in the long term. From a policy perspective, a strategic plan constitutes a navigator’s map for change and improvement—the “vision of a strongly desired future that the organization is committed to pursue” (Ingstrup, 1990). Strategic planning is the big picture, wide-screen, cinemascope vision.

Planning periods vary between organizations and over time. The time lines cannot always be specified. A recent U.S. government document (National Performance Review, 1997) found that most organizations viewed planning as an “evergreen process, one with no clear beginning and no clear end” (p. 4). They view the process of planning as more important than publication of the plan. They also see the ideal process as flexible and dynamic. Whereas strategic planning cycles used to involve 3 to 5 years, a growing number of organizations now update their plans every year (Brooker, 1991).

Similar to writing a mission statement, strategic and operational planning are cooperative, team-building exercises. Gaining commitment from the larger membership of an organization implies obtaining high levels of participation, involving all hierarchical levels (Burkhart & Reuss, 1993). In a 1990 speech, Ingstrup stated,

Ownership in the plan is of paramount importance. The senior executives are responsible for the development of the plan, but a plan to which only a handful of people are committed has little chance of becoming more than a piece of window dressing to which people, at best, will pay little attention and which, at worst, will contribute to the image of the executives as unrealistic, uncommitted, or unable to do what they plan.

The U.S. government also affirmed the importance of upper management commitment to strategic planning: “Senior leaders own their strategic planning processes. Clear, consistent, and visible involvement of senior executives in the creation and deployment of the strategic plan was a hallmark of the best-in-class organizations” (National Performance Review, 1997, p. 4). Others agree that the best planning efforts are “visible, easily understood, and sufficiently important to motivate action” (Benveniste, 1989, p. 168).

Effective planning requires orchestration of efforts. In the 1980s, General Electric introduced a strategic management sector, one level above the business units, to ensure consistency between plans formulated at the business unit level and overall corporate objectives articulated in the strategic plan (Andriole, 1985). Following their study to identify “best-in-class” organizations, the U.S. government (National Performance Review, 1997) made the following comment:

Effective strategic planning benefits from a consistent and cohesively structured process employed across all levels of the organization. Regardless of the type of partner studied, or the maturity of the planning process, the partners agreed on the importance of well-structured, well-understood planning process. Each of the study partners demonstrated an integrated approach to strategic planning that was linked from corporate ...