Slides used at the Mid-Continent Regional Science Association Annual Conference in May 2015

1. Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.
Effective Strategy Making in
Economic & Community Development
Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
Mid-Continent Regional Science Association
46th Annual Conference
St. Louis, M) – May 27-29, 2015

3. Strategy3
Strategy = the employment of battles to win the war.
- General Carl von Clausewitz

6. 6

7. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Research
Question
Why are some economic &
community development
strategies effectiveand
others…not so much?

8. Answering the Question
A grounded theory exploration
using a sequential mixed method
approach beginning with a
qualitative phase in which semi-
structured interviews 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 review
2. Interviews
3. Surveys

9. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Problem
Statement
• Literature gap regarding factors
contributing to effective strategy in the
context of economic & community
development (Kwon, Berry, & Feiock,
2009).
• Civic leaders face daunting tasks of
developing and implementing
economic & community development
strategies (Markey, 2010).
• Very little research-based information
to guide decisions about effective
strategy-development processes in the
context of economic & community
development.

10. • Evolution of dealing with economic
& community development
• Institutionalization
• Locus of control
• Increasing complexity
• Tools for managing economic &
community development
• 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).

11. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Evolution of
How We
Deal with
ECD 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).

12. Dealing with the Complexity
12
Early Models
• Borrowed from industry models (Blair,2004)
• 1960s in universities, schools, municipalities (Hamilton, 2007)
• Late 1980s/Early 1990s first economic development strategic plans
(Blackerby & Blackerby, 1995)
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;

13. Contributing Theories
•Social Innovation
•Strategy Formation
•Collaborative Governance
13

14. 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)

15. 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

16. 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

17. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
These Things
Matter
• Organizational Structure (i.e.,
hierarchy, network)
• Framework & Orientation (i.e., asset-
based, deficit-based, efficiency-based)
• Processes (i.e., relationship between
planning and implementation)
• Timeframe (i.e., timeline for goals)
• Implementation (i.e., centralized,
decentralized)
• Metrics (i.e., accountability, feedback

18. 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 development, 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

19. Themes from the Interviews
19
1. Toward network organization structures, away from
hierarchical structures
2. Toward asset-based frameworks, away from deficit-based
frameworks
3. Toward iterative planning/implementation processes, away
from sequential processes
4. Toward a progressive series of shorter-term goals, away from
longer-term transformational goals
5. Toward decentralized implementation, away from centralized
implementation
6. Toward using metrics to learn what is working, away from
metrics used primarily for accountability

20. Variables
20
1. Network organization structures
2. Asset-based frameworks
3. Iterative planning/implementation process
4. Inclusion of shorter-term goals
5. Decentralized implementation
6. Metrics to learn what is working
Independent
Variables
Dependent Variable = Effectiveness

21. Effectiveness
For the effective strategy initiative you have in mind, how
would you describe its level of effectiveness:
• Completely effective
• Significantly effective
• Somewhat effective
Ineffectiveness
For 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

22. Insights from Participants
The Quantitative Data
• Population of individuals who have participated in
community-based strategy initiatives to address community
change (economic development, community development,
community health, etc.)
• 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

23. Findings from the Surveys
23
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.
Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses
- = ineffective | + = effective

24. Completely
Effective
Completely
Ineffective
Significantly
Effective
Somewhat
Effective
Somewhat
Ineffective
Significantly
Ineffective
Findings from the Survey
Effectiveness Continuum
DependentVariables
Correlation

25. Findings from the Surveys
25
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.
Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Six Independent Variables
M = Moderate Positive
S = Strong Positive

26. 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

27. Strategic Doing enables people to form action-
oriented collaborations quickly, move them
toward measurable outcomes, and make
adjustments along the way.

28. Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
765-479-7704
hutcheson@purdue.edu
www.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/
http://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/
For More Information & to Connect
Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.
Slides available