![]() |
SEND TO PRINTER |
|
BioPerspectives Increasing Science Strategic Planning SuccessComing up with a good plan can address the most important issues science organizations face.
“Our executives have started their annual strategic planning sessions. This involves sitting in a room with inadequate data until an illusion of knowledge is attained. Then we’ll reorganize because that’s all we know how to do.” Why should science organizations do strategic planning? Conventional businesses often struggle with it, and their products and services are much easier to understand and predict than the compounds in development in a lab. Science organizations understandably overlook strategic planning because their focus on their science absorbs the lion’s share of their interest. “Of course we have a strategic plan,” a biotech start-up CEO told me. “It’s ‘get the experiment to succeed.’” Yet it’s important for science organizations to do strategic planning because it addresses the most crucial organizational issues that enable—or obstruct—science. Effective strategic planning involves three kinds of work scientists do well—analysis, innovation and thoughtful action. Analysis assesses the key data that describes the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, often with the shorthand SWOT. Innovation comes into play in clarifying the organization’s Vision, Mission, Values, and Goals. Thoughtful action closes the gaps between the SWOT and Vision with several initiatives that address problems and/or explore opportunities. Strategic planning can help science not only in organization-wide issues but also in a wide range of applications. For project managers, team leaders, and department supervisors, strategic planning provides a handy tool to increase individual focus on group goals and improve the complex communications essential for translating individual efforts into organizational results. Analysis, Vision, Initiatives: Strategic Planning SpecificsApple executive Alan Kay notes, “The best way to predict the future is to invent it.” At its best, strategic planning links the three tasks to create a process of continuous improvement, evolution, and organizational learning. Analysis answers the question, “How are we doing?” Done ineffectively, it involves limited or irrelevant data or worse, no data at all. The concept of “the balanced scorecard” helps leaders remember that effective Analysis includes data on a balanced scope of organizational issues. In science organizations, this usually includes not only progress on the development of concepts but also employee turnover, cash flow, and communications in and across all levels of the organizations. Vision addresses the question, “What do we want?” with several kinds of responses: a Vision describing a bold accomplishment the organization would like to achieve in 3–5 years, a Mission describing what the organization really does, Values clarifying the principles the organization intends to follow and Goals specifying quantifiable business measures it aims to accomplish in a 6–12 month time period. Reaching consensus on these questions may take some time, but it pays off significantly by increasing alignment between employees’ individual efforts and the organization’s focus. Initiatives map actions the organization plans to take within a 3–12 month time period to close the gaps between Analysis and Vision. Typical science project team initiatives include tuning up communications processes and hand-offs among project team members, clarifying each member’s project roles and responsibilities, and drawing a project organization chart that clarifies team members’ working relationships. Increasing Science Strategic Planning SuccessFive principles increase science organizations’ success with strategic planning:
Director of the Biotech Leadership Institute William Ronco, Ph.D., consults on leadership, communications, team, and partnering performance in pharmaceutical, biotech, and science organizations. |
|
© 2012 Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News, All Rights Reserved
