Slides used for a seminar at the University of Florida in Gainesville on September 24, 214

1. Strategy Doing:
Designing & Achieving Measurable Strategic
Outcomes with Action-Oriented Collaboration
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL – September 24, 2014
Copyright 2014 – Ed Morrison & Scott Hutcheson
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.

2. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
The Great and the Near
Great in the White River
Country
by Z. M. Horton
The Baxter Bulletin
Dec 31, 1915
S. J. Hutcheson, a well known farmer and stockman of
Norfork, roping a calf

4. White River Ferry at Norfork, Arkansas, circa 1900

6. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Norfork,
Arkansas
(pop. 550)

7. Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

8. ✔
✔
✔
✔
Our communities, big and small, are dealing with complex PUBLIC ISSUES

9. 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 strategies
for addressing community
issues successful and
others…not so much?

10. 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 review
2. Interviews
3. Surveys
Answering the Question

11. 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 community issues like
economic development (Kwon, Berry, &
Feiock, 2009).
• Civic leaders face daunting tasks of
developing and implementing
strategies to address these community
issues (Markey, 2010).
• Very little research-based information
to guide decisions about effective
strategy-development processes.

12. • Evolution of community issues
• Institutionalization
• Locus of control
• Increasing complexity
• Tools for managing community
issues
• Early tools
• Evolving tools
• Emerging tools
• Contributing theories
• Strategy formation
• Collaborative governance
• Social innovation
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).
Insights from the Literature

13. 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
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).

14. •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
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
Complex i t y
14
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

15. The Extension Economist Vs. The Rocket Scientist
15

16. •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
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
Complex i t y
16
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

17. •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
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
Complex i t y
17
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

18. •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
Hierarchy of Complex Systems
Complex i t y
18
Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

19. Dealing with the Complexity
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)
19

20. Complex
environment
Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Complexity =
Messes
Community
issues are
complex
Institutions
emerged to
deal with the
complexity
There are lots
of
institutions
No single
institution is
“in charge” of
most public
issues

21. Contributing Theories
• Social Innovation
• Strategy Formation
• Collaborative Governance
21

22. 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)
Social Innovation

23. 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

24. 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
Collaborative Governance

25. 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 (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)

26. The Quantitative Data
• Population of scholars and practitioners who design
curricula, teach, and/or practice strategy development for
addressing public issues (economic development,
community development, community health, etc.)
• 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
Insights from the Panel of Experts

27. Findings from the Interviews
27
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
7. High levels of trust among participants
8. Readiness for change in community

28. Variables
28
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
7. High levels of trust among participants
8. Readiness for change in community
Independent
Variables
Dependent Variable = Effectiveness

29. 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

30. The Qualitative Data
• Population of individuals who have participated in
community-based strategy initiatives to address public
issues (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
Insights from Participants

31. Findings from the Surveys
31
Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

32. Completely
Effective
Completely
Ineffective
Significantly
Effective
Effectiveness Continuum
Somewhat
Effective
Somewhat
Ineffective
Significantly
Ineffective
Findings from the Survey
Dependent Variables
Correlation

33. Findings from the Surveys
Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables
33
Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License.

34. • 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
Recipe for EFFECTIVE Strategies

35. 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

36. Frame Strategies Around Assets

37. Frame Strategies Around Assets

38. Frame Strategies Around Assets

39. Frame Strategies Around Assets

40. Network-Based
Organizational
Structures
10 nodes, 9 connections
10 nodes, 45 connections

41. William Fox
20th Century Fox
41

42. 42

43. 43

44. 20th Century Fox
44
Made by
20th Century Fox…
Made by
20th Century Fox

45. 20th Century Fox
45
Made by
20th Century Fox…
& 130 other companies
Made by
20th Century Fox

46. iPhone

47. Dr. Lowell Catlett
Economist, Futurist, and Professor
New Mexico State University
Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

48. One study looked at 7,000 different economic
predictions and found 47% of them was correct.
Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

49. Flip a coin and you beat the economists by 3%.
Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

50. Doubt and dwindling
motivation comes on
quickly when a big
goal is missed. On
the other hand,
small wins lead to
the progress
principle - more
confidence, high
performance, and
motivation to keep
moving forward.
- Teresa
Amabile
Iterative with Shorter-Term Goals

51. Collaboration & Trust
Turf
Trust
TIME
Sharing
Resources
Sharing
Information
Mutual
Awareness
Co-Execution
Co-Creation
Acknowledgment Exploration Cooperation Collaboration Innovation
Adapted from Collaboration Continuum from ACT for

52. Improving Our Practice

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

55. Strategy
Answers Two
Basic Questions

56. Strategic Doing Divides the Two Basic Questions into
Four Appreciative Questions
56

57. Strategic Doing Moves from the
Linear to the Agile

58. Strategic Doing Is Iterative & Ongoing

59. Practicing Strategic Doing
59

71. To know what you
you’re going to draw,
you have to begin
drawing.
- Pablo Picasso

72. For More Information & to Connect
Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D.
765-479-7704
hutcheson@purdue.edu
www.linkedin.com/in/scotthutcheson/
www.twitter.com/jshutch64
www.facebook.com/scott.hutcheson
http://www.slideshare.net/jshutch/
Copyright 2014 – Ed Morrison & Scott Hutcheson
Slides available
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License.