IEEE Standards Education
09 December 2013
Standards Education: Strategic Scenario Planning
Alex Torres
Sr. Business Strategy Manager
IEEE Educational Activities
1
Executive Summary
The Standards Education Committee identified a need to complete a strategic planning
workshop by year end 2013.
On 09 December 2013, Alex Torres, Sr. Business Strategy Manager, IEEE Educational
Activities facilitated a strategic scenario planning session for IEEE Standards Education
staff and Standards Education Committee members.
The strategic planning session focused on two parts. First, three exercises were
completed to better understand the Standards Education environment and its
stakeholders. Secondly, results of these exercises along with pre-meeting survey
results were used in a strategic scenario planning session.
As a result of this strategic planning workshop …
– Two critical uncertainties were identified and used to explore the future of standards education
– Four distinct scenarios were created to represent possible futures where the standards education
may reside in three to five years
– A strategic path was chosen beginning in the present day, to three years out, and finally five
years out
Recommendations at the end of this debrief provide the necessary next steps to follow
to utilize the scenarios and strategic path for the Standards Education Committee
2
Agenda
Item
AGENDA
Description
1
Welcome and Introductions
2
Icebreaker
4
Exercise: Visioning the Standards Education Environment (influence
mapping)
Exercise: Who Are Our Stakeholders? (buying center)
5
Exercise: Profiling & Prioritizing (lost in translation)
6
Overview: Strategic Scenario Planning (SSP)
3
Person
Time
(mins)
Jen McClain
5
Alex
15
Alex & All
15
Alex & All
15
Alex & All
15
Alex
5
BREAK (5 min)
7
SSP for the Standards Education Environment
All
30
8
SSP for the Standards Education Environment continued.
All
45
9
The Path Forward for Standards Education
All
15
10
Exercise: Monday Morning
All
15
11
Closing
Jennifer McClain
5
3
7/28/2017
Objectives
Part I: Explore the Standards Education
environment and its key components
Part II: Engage the future through a strategic
scenario planning exercise that will ultimately help
to create a strategic path for the Standards
Education
4
Please Join Your Team …
Team A
Yatin Trivedi
David Law
James Irvine
Amin Karim
Kishik Park
Jeff Handal
Susan Tatiner
Jill Bagley
Chris Salicco
Samantha Bradley
John Teehan
Steve Welch
Martha Tejada
Robert Ivan
Jennifer McClain
5
Team B
PART 1: Exploring the Environment
Alex Torres
6
Exercise 1: Influence Mapping
Goals:
• Create an influence map that represents all of the
major components of the Standards Education
environment
• Identify and prioritize the critical components we
want to keep in mind for today’s workshop
Instructions:
1.
Write Standards Education in the center of the page
2.
Identify through bubbles the different items influenced by it
3.
Use the size of the bubble to determine how much that item is
influenced
Influence Mapping: Standards
Education Group A
IEEE
Money
Accreditation Criteria
Job opportunities
Government
Asses to standards
Development Resources
Corporate training
Educational Demand
Students/engineers
Understanding Need
Industry/company
Public perception
Understanding need
Standards
Education
Standards Association
Continuing Education
Universities
Educational Activities
Connected vs. Distributed
University perception
Content Creation/delivering/method
Standards Bodies
Technologies (to teach) (to use for teaching)
8
7/28/2017
Teaching methods
Influence Mapping: Standards
Education Group B
Educational Technologies (delivery)
Staff
Publishers
Practicing Engineers
SA
Educational Activities
Volunteers
Governments
Training Organizations
Human Resources
Standards
Education
Regulatory Bodies
Companies
Funding Organizations (e.g. NSF)
Accreditation (e.g. ABET)
Academia
Cultures
SDOs (e.g. ITU)
International Trade
9
7/28/2017
Students
Faculty
Exercise 2: Who Are Our
Stakeholders
Goals:
• Complete the Buying Center exercise
• Identify and prioritize the critical stakeholders for
the Standards Education
Who “Buys Into Standards Education
and it’s Recommendations?”
11
Influencer
Purchaser
End-User
Decider
Group A
INFLUENCERS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Accreditation bodies
Standards bodies (including SA)
Industry – Training department
Government – Policy makers + Regulators
Universities
Educational Activities
Professional bodies
Students, Engineers, MBA, Law Professors
Librarians
PURCHASERS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
END USERS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Individuals
Students – Engineering, MBA, Law
Practicing engineers
Professors
Professionals
Industry
University
Researchers
12
7/28/2017
Individuals
Students – Engineering, MBA, Law
Practicing engineers
Professors
Professionals
Librarians
Industry
DECIDERS
•
•
•
•
•
Individuals
University admin
Industry executive
Government executive
Training Department
Group B
INFLUENCERS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SDO
Research/Innovation
Corporations
Government
Accreditation Bodies
Publishers
Training Organizations
International Regulatory Body
NGOs
Culture
PURCHASERS
•
•
•
•
•
END USERS
•
•
•
•
Students
Faculty
Practicing Engineers
General Public (World)
13
7/28/2017
Corporations
Academia
Students
Practitioners
Government
DECIDERS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
SDO
Publishers
Training Organizations
Accreditation Bodies
Funding Organization
Professional Organization
Government
Exercise 3: Profiling and
Prioritizing
Goals:
• Complete the Lost in Translation exercise
• Identify and prioritize the goals, constraints and
key outcomes for three of your stakeholders
Instructions:
1. Complete this exercise as a group
2. Discuss your results and look for commonalities across
the stakeholders
3. Present back your findings to the larger group
Lost In Translation
Goals
The job that the
customer is trying to
achieve
New Value
Creation
Constraints
Metrics
What gets in their way
Includes the metrics for these
outcomes
15
Adapted from: Lost in Translation; A. Ullwick et al HBR Strategy & Innovation May-June 2004
Audience: Professors
Constraints
• Time
• Subject Matter
Knowledge
• Time + Curriculum
• Accreditation body
16
7/28/2017
Goals
• Attracting students
•
• University Reputation •
• Keep curriculum
•
Relevant
•
• Personal reputation
•
• Get students jobs
Metrics
# of Students
# of Standards
Projects
Ratemyprofessor
Employment rate
Audience: Students
Constraints
• Lack of awareness of
importance of
standards
• Lack of trained
mentors
• Resources (e.g.
textbooks)
• Course
offerings/curriculum
• Deadlines
• Just-in-time
education
17
7/28/2017
Goals
•
•
•
•
•
•
Pass course
Get degree
Become employed
Increase knowledge
Certification
Project-specific
Competence
Metrics
• Employment
• Passing
grade/Certificates
• Job competence
Part II: Scenario Planning for
Standards Education
18
Parameters …
Determine our timeframe 3 to 5 years
Global scope
Consider survey results and exercise results to help build scenarios
19
Strategic Scenario Planning
Strategic Scenario Planning
Process Overview
Key Trends
(macro issues)
Phase 1: Review data
as we see it today.
Focal Issues (key factors)
Phase 2:
Methodically analyze
and apply the data
via scenario-based
thinking
Phase 3:
Process is debriefed
and reported.
Includes the key
findings as well as all
strategic elements
2
0
Key Uncertainties
Interactive Session
Find the Two Most
Critical Uncertainties
Multiple Scenarios & Strategic Path
Uncertainties
21
Two Critical Uncertainties
• What are the two biggest questions we have
about this environment?
• These two questions should not involve IEEE in anyway.
22
Two Critical Uncertainties
How will Colleges & Universities utilize standards education?
High Engagement
Afterthought
How will continuing professional development evolve?
Status Quo/Minimal
Evolution
23
Revolution in
Continuous Learning
How will Colleges & Universities utilize standards
education?
High Engagement
24
Revolution
Status Quo/Minimal
How will continuing professional
development evolve?
I.
Afterthought
II.
My Education, My Way
Student Left Behind:
Learning Needs for
Tomorrow
5
IV.3
III.
Standards, by ABET
T
Creeping Along
I. My Education, My Way
High Engagement / Revolution
• Accreditation bodies & regulation bodies require standards education
in courses.
• Significant proportion of project based learning
• Standards are used in classroom
• Universities subscribe to standards
• Professors involved in Standards activities
• Customizable, affordable, flexible student-defined learning
• Smaller, discrete accredited modules
• Teaching more vocational
• Core groups of standards prioritized
• More open content
• More interdisciplinary study
• Geographic & language diversity, new markets
• Increased industry influence in teaching
25
7/28/2017
II. Student Left Behind: Learning
Needs for Tomorrow
Afterthought / Revolution
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
26
On the job training
Classroom/training flexibility
Just-in-time education/learning (e.g. MOOCs)
University accreditation issues
Employers needs into curriculum
Faculty-focused needs prioritized before trends/market
High graduation rate vs. employment/employability
Purchasers: industry, practicing engineers
Technology: better delivery
7/28/2017
III. Standards, By ABET
High Engagement / No CPD Change
• Accreditation & regulatory bodies require Standards Education in
courses.
• Recruiting practices require Standards trained students
• Standards used in classroom
• Significant proportion of project based learning
• Universities subscribe to Standards
• Professors involved in Standards Activities
• Smaller, discrete accredited modules
• More volunteer, self-supported study methods
• Lower revenue opportunities for CPD
• Flexible, student-defined study opportunities
• More opportunities for students who do exist in CPD
• More accreditors, more regulation
27
7/28/2017
IV. Creeping Along
Afterthought / Status Quo
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
28
Lack of mentors
Lack of resources ( e.g. books, courses )
Available material has constraints ( e.g. only available face-to-face)
ABET requirement awareness
Student-driven research
Company / universities left “Out of the drivers seat”
Purchasers: hardly any…
Technology: limited delivery
7/28/2017
Recommendations
Answer the following questions:
– What must we do at minimum to succeed on this path (per year)?
– What unique action steps should the team take to insure success (per year)?
– What must we do over the next 3-5 years if we are off the designated path (per
year)?
Complete a Strategic Mapping exercise to summarize the path
Complete a Business Model Canvas (s) to better understand the
possible business models available
Refine the story you want to tell then have other stakeholders
provide feedback on it
29
IMPORTANT: Please avoid creating a task/to do list until the
strategic planning process has been completed. Operational
planning will naturally provide key tasks on a strategic level at the
appropriate time.
Thank You!
30
Appendix
31
Strategy Map
External Issue
External Issue
External Issue
External Issue
External Issue
Over what period of time?
Where you are today.
Where you want to be in
the future.
Key Issues
Issue 1:
• Description
• Description
Issue 2:
• Description
• Description
Issue 3:
• Description
• Description
Issue 4:
• Description
• Description
Critical Success Factors
CSF 1:
• Description
• Description
CSF 2:
• Description
• Description
CSF 3:
• Description
• Description
CSF 4:
• Description
• Description
Tactic 3:
• Description
• Description
Tactic 4:
• Description
• Description
Tactics
Tactic 1:
• Description
• Description
Tactic 2:
• Description
• Description
Metrics
Metrics 1
Metrics 2
Metrics 3
Metrics 4
The Business Model Canvas
Key Partners (KP)
•
Who are our key
partners?
Who are our key
suppliers?
•
Key Activities (KA)
•
•
What activities
must we do to
make this business
model work?
What do we need
to create in order
to offer the value
proposition?
Key Resources (KR)
•
What assets to we
need in order to
make this business
model work?
Cost Structure (C$)
•
33
All of the costs involved in developing and
offering the product/service.
7/28/2017
Customer
Relationships (CR)
Value Proposition (VP)
•
•
It is the reason
why customers
will choose our
product/service.
What benefits
does our
product/service
offer that has
customers
choosing us
instead of another
organization’s
products?
•
What type of
relationships do
we have with our
customer
segments?
Channels (CH)
• How do we
communicate and
reach our
customer segment
to deliver the
value proposition?
Revenue Stream (R$)
•
The revenue generated from
each customer segment
Customer
Segments (CS)
• Defines the
different groups of
people/
organizations we
are try to reach
and serve.