The Strategy Primer
November 2006
Purpose
A framework for reviewing major strategies, whether new or not.
E x e c u t i v e S u mm a r y
Strategy matters. Major strategies designed to achieve goals and drive performance will:
1.
Focus on big, tractable issues that dominate other issues in the sector.
2.
Target significant change for New Zealanders (measurable results based on tangible goals).
3.
Use evidence to justify the big interventions (e.g. of need, impact and cost-effectiveness).
4.
Be clear about what must happen, and when, i.e. present or outline a credible:
1



5.
performance management plan showing when and how major results will be demonstrated;
implementation plan and budget covering delivery and performance measurement outputs;
risk management plan showing how major constraints and risks will be managed.
Lay out clear governance, assessment and feedback processes to adjust the plan.
Us e
The framework lays out criteria for reviewing strategies designed to produce tangible results. The
summary is written for Boards, Chief Executives and senior managers. Touchstones (overleaf) are
written for managers and authors producing
strategies, and staff working in assurance
Eager Client
roles.
The first question is whether a strategy is
wanted, not what strategy is needed. The
main purpose is to drive performance by
setting goals, aligning actions and gauging
progress. But too many strategies (and poorly
crafted strategies) can obscure priorities, set
conflicting directions, confuse staff, and
dissipate energy.
Having decided that a strategy can add value,
ensure it covers the five areas listed above.
But the framework as a whole outlines a
‘high-tide mark’, not a universal requirement.
Compliance with all the touchstones listed
overleaf may spread effort too thinly. Focus
first on areas, issues and actions most
needing improvement.
Deals with
Big, Tractable
Issues?
Still Relevant
to the Situation?
& Champion?
MAJOR
STRATEGY
Acceptable to
Stakeholders?
Fit with Sector
Direction?
Informed
by Evidence,
Achievable &
Affordable?
Progress can
be Gauged &
Governed?
Figure: 1: Conditions for Making Strategies Successful
Opportunities for improvement may arise through political interest, or slow progress against outcomes
or plans. Negative answers to questions in the diagram above can also trigger rework.
Where overly aspirational strategies are already in place, sponsoring agencies should ensure that
governance mechanisms are robust, major goals and outcomes are specified tightly, and a process is
in place to improve the strategy (for instance by review and report back).
All criteria do not need to be met by the strategy itself. Some may be covered in subsidiary plans. But
actions, benefits and costs should be clear before Ministers are asked to approve strategies. Where
this is not the case, approval of the strategy constitutes a weak argument for resources.
1
The principal beneficiary may, in some instances, be a non-New Zealander (e.g. for overseas development initiatives).
For further information, please approach your usual Treasury contacts.
T o u c h s t o n e s f o r A s s e s s i n g S t r a te g i e s
The template allows you to enter a rating against each criterion.
1.
Focus on big, tr actable i ssues (‘ Do we r eal ly need thi s str ategy?’ )
Opportunity or problem is big enough to warrant a major effort, & well aligned to goals, SOI, etc.
Opportunity or problem has precedence over (or parity with) other major strategies in the sector.
Outcome objectives are tractable, given stakeholder attitudes & the sector’s ability to intervene.
2.
Tar get si gnifi cant change f or New Zeal ander s
Performance gain sought is clear, appropriate, worthwhile & provides reasonable stretch.
Timely achievement of results (outcomes) will be demonstrated, e.g. via targets & measures.
Places current & future practice in context of goals, operating environment & operational
realities.
3.
Use evi dence to justi fy b i g inter venti ons
States where the status quo is working & for whom, & identifies major gaps / challenges / targets.
Identifies "what works" – nationally & internationally – for the target group (e.g. literature review).
Evidence of (cost-) effectiveness used to prioritise major intervention choices, where feasible.
Builds on existing knowledge & previous reviews, when appropriate.
Post-implementation reviews & data gathering activities are in implementation plans & budgets.
4.
Be cl ear about what w ill happen, when ( and at what c ost)
Identifies how 'big’ interventions must be implemented & work for the strategy to work well.
Clear project plan. (Who must deliver what interventions, when & at what cost?).
Clear picture (& measures) of what success looks like during & after implementation.
Plans & budgets cover how performance information will be produced.
Prioritisation shows what will be displaced or reduced by the new interventions.
Risk management plan focuses on ‘big’ challenges & risks (e.g. weak ‘evidence-based’ culture).
2
Flow-on effects are clearly stated, acceptable, & fiscal impacts are included in costs .
Work plans & conditions attached to extra resources are agreed & signed off.
5.
Lay out cl ear gover nance , feedback and a dj ustment processe s
Governance arrangements & decision-making rights are clear.
Major stakeholders – not just government stakeholders – have ‘bought in’.
Clear responsibility for developing the whole strategy, not just its major components.
Ensure staff re-orientate when faced with bad news – not just bury it or review it to death.
Decision-making & information systems cause plans to change, & resources to be reallocated.
When a strategy is not working well, assess its risks, & then either redesign it or withdraw it.
A d d i t i o n a l Re a d i n g



2
The Strategy Survival Guide
(http://www.strategy.gov.uk/downloads/survivalguide/site/download/index.htm)
Strategic management: concepts and cases. AA Thompson & AJ Strickland, 1998. McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Evidence-based practice manual: research and outcome measures in health and human
services. AR Roberts & KR Yeager (eds), 2004. Oxford University Press, New York.
For example, increased or reduced demand for services, or risks of unintended consequences.
2