 |
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Applying the ED QUEST Planning Model in a School of Management: A Case Study |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
by James Garner Ptaszynski and James
L. Morrison
The
external environment of schools of business can be characterized by change and
turbulence. Administrators and
faculty have witnessed major shifts in the demographics of their institution's
clientele. Recent scandals on Wall
Street, the decline in American competitiveness, and the increasing dominance of
foreign countries in world markets have to some extent been blamed on American
business education. Such
criticism, in part, prompted the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of
Business (AACSB) to commission a study of management education--past, present,
and future. A book resulted from the project entitled Management
Education and Development: Drift or Thrust into the 21st Century? (Porter
and McKibbin, 1988). Among other
things, the authors recommended the utilization of "futures research"
in order to design management education and development systems to prepare the
leaders of tomorrow for the world of tomorrow. The authors presented a useful, albeit limited, model of assessing
the impact of possible future environments on management education. During
the spring of 1988, the Strategic Planning Committee at the Graduate School of
Management, Wake Forest University, inspired by the AASCB report, decided that
it would be beneficial to implement an environmental scan to identify what
issues, trends, and possible events might impact upon the school in the future.
The committee felt that it would be advantageous to monitor possible
environmental impacts and to develop strategic options the school might utilize
in order to proactively meet the challenges of the external environment. However, since this was the school's first formal attempt at
environmental assessment, the committed decided that rather than focus on the
entire graduate school of management, it would concentrate instead on the
school's office of admissions and financial aid. If the scan proved beneficial for this office, then a scan for the entire
school would be implemented. A
team of five individuals, chaired by one member of the strategic planning
committee, was commissioned to undertake an environmental scanning effort.
The committee chose the ED QUEST model (Morrison and Mecca, 1986) as the
basis for its environmental scanning, forecasting, and planning process because
it is designed to integrate scanning systematically with an organization's
strategic planning effort. Specifically,
this model calls for 1. defining the nature of the organization including
mission components, indicators of performance, and its strengths and weaknesses;
2. identifying the scanning domain; 3. developing a notebook of critical trends,
and competitor information; 4. identifying and assessing the impact of critical
trends and probably future events; 5. developing and assessing scenarios; 6.
selecting strategic options; and 7. incorporating these options into the
strategic management process. The
purpose of this article is to describe the implementation of the ED QUEST
planning model at the Wake Forest Graduate School of Management, discuss the
lessons learned, and present recommendations to planning officers in other
educational organizations in the event they wish to use this planning model. Implementing
the ED QUEST Model The
tasks in the ED QUEST process were divided among three sessions; preparatory
work was done between sessions one and two and sessions two and three. Session one was concerned with defining the nature of the organization
and the scanning domain. Between
sessions one and two, graduate assistants were trained and utilized to compile
information and delineate issues, trends, and possible events. During session two, team members analyzed the material in the
environmental scanning report and identified the critical issues, trends, and
possible events facing the school and, therefore, the admissions office. This session was also used to discuss the school's mission and to
identify key performance indicators. Based
on information gathered in session two, a subcommittee developed preliminary
scenarios of future environments facing the school. In session three, team members revised the preliminary scenarios,
formulated strategic options and related these to the school’s mission and
performance indicators. Table 1
outlines the agenda for implementing the model. Table 1.
The
ED QUEST Process Agenda
A.
Session I a. Identify the mission
b. Identify the key performance indicators
c. Identify organizational strengths and weaknesses
2. Define the scanning domain
a. Identify issues, trends and possible events to be studied
b. Select sources to be scanned B.
Between Sessions I and 11
1. Select and train graduate assistants to assist with scanning
2. Develop environmental scanning notebook/report
a. Compile issues, trends, and possible events within domain categories
(e.g., economic,
political, demographic, etc.)
b. Develop Delphi statements for above
c. Using the Delphi, identify issues, trends, and events that have a
relevance for
the school and ones which might have a high impact on the school. C.
Session II 1.
Verify critical trends and possible events 2.
Conduct a cross-impact analysis of critical issues, trends, and events 3.
Assess critical issues, trends, and events on the school's: a.
Mission b.
Key performance indicators D.
Session III 1.
Present scenarios 2.
Develop implications for the school for each scenario 3.
Formulate preliminary strategic options 4.
Assess strategic options on the school's: a.
Mission b.
Key performance indicators
5. Select strategic options
6. Determine follow-up activities and responsibilities ______________________________________________________________________________ When the team began to implement this model for the admissions office, the focus shifted from the office to the entire school. That is, since the model required a "relook" at the school's mission, strengths and weaknesses, and performance indicators, the team sought to verify its judgment by requesting colleagues' criticism and comment. In turn, the faculty and staff members in the school became involved in the process. Session I Defining the nature of the
organization. Defining
the nature of the organization is an important step in ED QUEST because it
facilitates identifying 1. the trends and future events that could be
particularly critical to the school's future; 2. those aspects of the school's
mission and performance that may be changed or affected by forecasted trends and
events; and 3. the school's strengths and weaknesses that may influence the
strategic options selected by the ED QUEST team. There are three parts to
defining the nature of the organization: developing a mission statement,
identifying indicators of organizational performance, and identifying
organizational strengths and weaknesses. The first task, developing a mission statement, required identifying specific elements which comprised the school's mission. This was done through a general discussion focused around answering such questions as, What group of students and/or clients does the organization serve? What needs does the organization fulfill? What programs and/or services does the organization provide? Using this framework, the team revised the existing mission statement to incorporate responses to clients served, needs fulfilled, and programs/services provided. The revised mission statement was given to the planning committee and the faculty as a whole for their comment and criticism. The draft mission statement was discussed at several faculty meetings, where, under the guidance of the dean, a revised mission statement for the school of management emerged. It differed from previous mission statements in that it not only addressed the questions posed in the ED QUEST manual, but it better represented the views of a majority of the faculty and took into consideration the impact of the external environment on the school. The
next task was to develop a fist of the indicators of organizational performance
critical to the success of the mission of the organization (e.g., measures of
institutional attributes such as effectiveness, efficiency, cost, and
competitive advantages). The
indicators developed by the team included such things as faculty publications
(e.g., number of books, conference papers, journal articles), number of
companies visiting campus to recruit students, average salary of graduating
students, entering-class statistics, business press coverage, support of
university administration, morale (faculty, staff, and students), and positive
changes in student surveys. The
final task to be covered in the first session was to develop a list of the
strengths and weaknesses of the organization. According to Morrison and Mecca (1986), a strength is a current
advantageous situation, capability, and/or success that may be either internal
or external to the institution. A
weakness is a current advantageous situation and/or capability that may be
lacking internally in the institution or external situation that places the
institution in a disadvantageous position (p. 15). For example, some of the organization's strengths included fund raising,
quality of student education, the evening MBA program, and the use of
experiential learning methods. Examples
of organizational weaknesses included faculty research output, the Institute of
Executive Education, facilities, a curriculum more responsive to faculty rather
to student needs, and internal bickering among faculty members. Identifying
the scanning domain. Following
the ED QUEST process as described by Morrison and Mecca (1986), the team
identified those trends, emerging issues, and possible events that should be
monitored. The team developed a
scanning taxonomy and a fist of publications it would scan (Table 2). Utilization
of graduate students. Seven
graduate assistants (MBA students) were each assigned a category and a fist of
publications to scan. They were
asked to xerox and file any information that related to their subcategories. Table 2. Publications Scanned
In addition, they were asked to remain vigilant to any items that, while not on their fist, might still significantly impact upon the school. Items found that might relate to the assignments of other graduate assistants were to be xeroxed and given to the appropriate person who would file them under the appropriate categories. The graduate assistants were
asked to scan all of their assigned publications for the previous calendar year.
While the scanning was proceeding, the graduate assistants periodically
met as a group with the team facilitator in order to share information, foster
possible interconnections among gathered items, and to enhance the group's
concept of the types of items that may affect the school of management. Development of the
scanning notebook and Delphi statements. After initial
scanning was completed, the graduate assistants met individually with the team
facilitator. Together they sifted
through the scores of items and selected those that seemed to be most meaningful
to the school of management. From
these items, they wrote essays that wove together issues, trends, and possible
events representing possible futures that might confront the school of
management. Some of the futures
were short term (one year) while others reached out beyond the year 2000 (a
scant twelve years or six graduating classes away). The
major trends, events, and issues used to develop the essays were also used to
develop Delphi statements (e.g., single-idea statements that captured the
essence of each trend and possible event). These statements incorporated forecasts either from the literature or, if
not available, from the team (e.g., "tuition cost will continue to rise at
an average of 7% per year over the next three years" or "government
loan program will be insufficient to cover the costs of college for the majority
of students"). A draft of the essays and Delphi statements was shared with faculty members who taught and/or did research in each of the scanning areas. The faculty members were asked to review the essay and make additions or deletions that, in their expert opinion, were warranted. The purpose of this "scrubbing' by a panel of informed individuals was another attempt to involve others in the ED QUEST process as well as to increase the value of the information presented. Implementation
of the Delphi. The
revised essays were incorporated together in an environmental scanning notebook
called Beyond 1988: An Environmental Scanning Notebook for the MBA Program. A copy was given to each member of the team as well as to the
remaining faculty and professional staff members. Team members were required (and other community members were requested)
to read the scanning report and to complete the Delphi at the end of the
document. That is, they were asked
to 1. put a check next to those statements which they felt were relevant to the
school; 2. rate on a 1 to 5 scale (5 being highest) each Delphi statement with
regard to its impact on the school if it does materialize as forecasted; and 3.
add any trends or events they felt were important and that the school might face
over the next one to fifteen years. The
results of this first round Delphi were computed and distributed to the team.
Members were asked to review their judgments in fight of what others have
said and make second round judgments (i.e., R2). Session
II Selection of the most salient environmental items. The team analyzed the second round Delphi, which provided the basis for the second ED QUEST session. Those items thought to be relevant and with the highest impact on the school were chosen for additional study. The team facilitator presented the items and requested that each of the team members evaluate them vis-à-vis their importance for the school of management and its admissions program. Each item was thoroughly discussed with particular attention to its future importance to the school of management. Based on this discussion, modifications were made to the list. Items included were such things as the decline in the desirability of the MBA degree, the knowledge of management information systems becoming more important, and international business becoming integrated throughout the curriculum rather than being taught primarily in specialized courses. About
this time in the process, the team felt that it was collecting, developing, and
analyzing a substantial amount of information that potentially could be useful
to the members of the school of management. The team wanted to develop a vehicle, aside from the Environmental
Scanning Notebook, that would both engage people to think about scanning as
well as to inform them about the products of the on-going environmental scanning
process at the school. It was
decided that a scanning newsletter called The Bigger Picture would be
distributed on a regular basis (once a month). The purpose of The Bigger Picture was "a sharing of issues,
trends, events and competitive intelligence with possible implications for the
Wake Forest MBA program." Using PageMaker desktop publishing, The Bigger
Picture provided organizational members with fight but informative reading
on such things as future trends in management, competitor information, and
results of ongoing ED QUEST products. Assessing
major environmental elements on school mission and performance indicators.
Having completed the selection
of the major environmental elements, the team began its next task: assessing
their strength and impact on the school's internal elements (mission and
performance indicators). Each
member of the team was given a cross-impact matrix which fisted the major
environmental elements against the school's performance indicators and mission. Their assignment was to judge first whether an environmental element
impacted a performance indicator or mission element and, if so, whether the
impact was negative or positive. For
example, "a decline in the desirability/value of the MBA degree" might
negatively impact on the entering class statistics, business press coverage,
faculty morale, and student surveys. Each
of the individual judgments was collected and the results tallied. This involved summing all the individual environmental elements on au of
the school elements (rows) and all of the individual school elements on an of
the environmental elements (columns). The
totals were then rank ordered to give a gross estimation of which environmental
elements were the most salient for the set of performance indicators and mission
elements. The column totals gave a
rough indication of which school elements were most susceptible to environmental
impacts, based on the fact that they were impacted by the most environmental
elements. For example, as a result
of this analysis, the most impacted driving forces affecting the school were
reaccredidation policies and procedures, the public’s perception of the
school's prestige, the decline in the value of the MBA degree, the growing
number of less-qualified students, the importance of regional banking powers to
MBA graduates, and the decline in federal aid programs. Those performance indicators and mission elements most affected by
environmental forces were the GMAT scores, average salary of graduates,
prestige, number of companies visiting campus to recruit students, faculty
recruitment, faculty morale. Between
Sessions II and III Developing
alternative futures (scenarios). An
alternative future is a policy—relevant, plausible, and internally consistent
narrative description, usually of a specific pattern of developments proposed to
happen over time. It is based on,
and disciplined by, estimates derived through the Delphi process. Such a narrative is called a scenario (Boucher and Morrison, 1989). Scenarios
are like histories of the future. They
are integrating mechanisms—devices for organizing or synthesizing many separate
developments, such as the results of a round two Delphi. They provide a context, or framework, within which it is possible to ask
questions about one's own planning assumptions. But scenarios go beyond histories.
Because
they provide a way of making forecasted events not only “happen,” but happen
in full view of their causes and consequences, they are also devices that can be
used to ask specific “what if” questions and to examine strategic policy
options. In these and other ways,
scenarios serve as tools that force the users to think in the future tense, to
be explicit about their expectations and their rationale, and to probe models of
how the environment affects their organization (Boucher and Morrison, 1989). In order to expand it's vision of the future, the team built three scenarios. The first was a “most likely” (i.e., nominal or baseline scenario). The second was a “worst case” scenario and the third a “best case” scenario). The team felt that these three future scenarios would provide a good sense of the range of possible futures likely to confront the school of management. Between
sessions two and three, it was the task of a subcommittee of team members to
develop a first draft of the scenarios. This
was accomplished by examining the results of the second session: salient
environmental elements, school elements, and cross-impact matrices.
From these outputs, the subcommittee first sorted into three fists those
items that seemed to categorize most accurately the three scenarios (worst case,
most likely, and best case). Three-by-five
cards were made up with one item from the aforementioned lists printed on each
one. Decisions were based on the
results of the cross-impact analysis as well as on the subcommittee’s own
judgments of possible driving forces in each of the three scenarios. The cards were sorted until the subcommittee decided the scenario was
sufficiently complete in identifying the salient factors in that particular
future. Table 3 describes the
salient elements of each of the three scenarios. The scenarios were circulated among the entire team and fine tuned as to
their readability and plausibility. Table 3. Initial Sorting of Items to Generate Scenarios Worst
case scenario Not re-accredited
Re-accreditation occurs Re-accreditation occurs
Session III Reviewing
the scenarios and developing strategic options. Following the ED QUEST manual, the next task for the team was to develop
strategic options using the data generated, especially the three scenarios.
According to the manual, developing strategic options required the team
to accomplish several tasks. First,
it examined the plausibility of each scenario. The team then examined the scenarios to ascertain if any significant
omissions were made and, if so, corrections performed. The team also revised any trends, events, or issues that did not seem
plausible and sought to identify the implications of each scenario for the
school and for the admissions program. The
team then brainstormed a preliminary list of strategies appropriate for
nomination as strategic options given each scenario, i.e., strategies that were
appropriate and feasible responses to one or more of the implications previously
identified for each scenario. These
options were reviewed vis-a-vis their efficacy in placing the school in an
advantageous position in relationship to the future environments
described in the scenarios. Statements
of proposed options which focused more on operational aspects of the institution
were either rewritten to reflect a more strategic emphasis or combined with
other options into a new strategic option statement.
The team then assessed the potential of each option to enhance the
school's strengths or inhibit its weaknesses. Finally,
the team assessed which options were the most robust and could, if implemented,
address the implications of more than one of the alternative futures presented
in the scenarios. These options
included such things as concentrating more time and resources on the evening MBA
program, developing a one-year MBA program, moving the executive MBA program to
Greensboro and Charlotte, hiring a public relations firm and a full-time
individual in public relations, increasing the financial aid budget, and
increasing course offerings in management information systems and international
business. Lessons
Learned The implementation of
the ED QUEST process in the school of management did not create monumental
changes in the organization. That
is, the school did not uncover highly strategic information from the external
environment that allowed it to make quantum leaps over its competitors in the
MBA market place. In short, ED
QUEST was not the planner's answer to alchemy. However, what was accomplished by the implementation of the ED QUEST
process was significant to the school of management and worthy of consideration
for implementation in other organizations. One
of the main conclusions reached from the study was that the process of ED QUEST
was more important than any of its products (e.g., mission statement, fists of
strengths and weaknesses, scenarios). The
process of people coming together and talking, in great detail and regularly,
about the school was the linchpin to all other benefits. Implementing ED QUEST helped to create an environment in which the
planning was more than just a once-a-year exercise. Elevating planning to a regular activity fostered improvement
in the organization's strategic management and planning; it also set the stage
for other benefits to occur. One of these benefits
was that individuals involved in ED QUEST became more sensitive to external
factors and how such factors might affect the school of management. Prior to implementing the ED QUEST model, these individuals seemed to pay
little attention to developments in the external environment relative to their
possible implications for the school. ED
QUEST not only sensitized the individuals to the importance of external
information but it also gave them a vehicle for capturing this information and
integrating it into the organization's planning activities.
This also resulted in smarter planning. Another
by product of implementing the ED QUEST model was an “opening up” of the
planning process. Prior to ED QUEST, only a few administrators and professional
staff members engaged in the school's planning efforts. The ED QUEST process made information available to more individuals at
many levels within the school. More
important, it involved more individuals in the organization in planning
activities, leading to a greater feeling of a shared vision among organizational
members. Another
lesson learned from the process was that while ED QUEST exposed organizational
members to information that they might not have otherwise encountered, it also
greatly increased the possibility of information overload, which occurred in the
preliminary implementation of ED QUEST, threatening to shut down the entire
process. We quickly realized that
too much information like too much of anything in this world (except, perhaps,
money and disk space) is not a good thing. Maintaining a proper balance between comprehensive scanning and a
manageable load of information was important. Initially, team members saw relationships and implications in almost
everything they read. The result
was literally stacks of clippings on items ranging from the announcement of a
small business to U.S./Japanese talks on free trade. The team felt that, while good information was being collected and
appropriately categorized, its sheer mass inhibited them from digesting the
material and working it into their planning process. We attempted to adjust by examining all information from the
parochial interest of the school and by using graduate students to do the bulk
of the scanning. The use of
graduate assistants may have diluted the strength of the process, but this was
accepted as the price of maintaining the interest of the ED QUEST team. Possible
team burnout became important as the process proceeded. The ED QUEST process, as implemented, was time consuming and required a
great deal of effort and commitment on the part of the ED QUEST team, which felt
that burnout should be anticipated and steps taken to reduce it. One of the most valuable preventative actions is to make participation on
the ED QUEST team a recognized and rewarded organizational activity. The process is too time consuming and energy draining to expect that team
members volunteer their time. To be
effective, team participation should be given the same credit as other major
committee assignments when promotion, tenure, and compensation are considered.
The case study also indicated that information overload or burnout could
be a problem among other organizational members who were not a part of the ED
QUEST team. No matter how relevant or important the information gathered
was for the school, it is necessary to present the information in an inviting
format. Another
conclusion reached concerns the spread of an innovation.
When the study began, the primary focus of the ED QUEST intervention was
the office of admissions and financial aid within the school of management.
The original premise was to perform ED QUEST on one unit of the school
and, at a later date, to introduce ED QUEST into the entire organization.
It was reasoned that it would be beneficial to ascertain the impact of ED
QUEST on one individual unit before attempting to implement it throughout the
total organization. Although
this was the initial plan, the ED QUEST process spread throughout the entire organization. It quickly became apparent to the team that the admissions and financial
aid office The
ED QUEST team, and especially the team leader, recognized early in the process
the value of the ED QUEST innovation. Team
members, through their positions in the organization as well as through products
of the process (e.g., The Bigger Picture newsletter), did have high
access to the organization's communication channels. Their use of these channels to inform the larger organization of the
products and benefits of ED QUEST may be another reason the innovation spread so
quickly throughout the organization. In
addition, the team leader also acted as an opinion leader.
The leader, being attitudinally disposed to the ED QUEST process, used
his position to influence others in the organization to adopt the innovation. This is consistent with and related to what has been said earlier about
the process needing a champion. Recommendations Change
did occur at the school of management through the implementation of ED QUEST.
In order for the model to run more smoothly in the future at the school
of management, as well as in other organizations, the following suggestions are
made: 1.
To insure the survival of ED QUEST and allow to it to achieve its
greatest impact on the organization, ED QUEST needs a champion. This champion needs to be central to the organization. Such a person is necessary to insure that the appropriate resources and
conunitment are available for the process. 2.
In order to focus the project early in the process and to provide an
additional measure against burnout, the scanning categories should include
specific subcategories. 3.
Information gathered in the process should be broken into small
"chunks." Overwhehning organizational members with data, relevant or
not, is the best way to insure that they will tune out of the process. The data should also be presented in an aesthetically pleasing and
inviting format. 4.
ED QUEST is a process and not a one-shot intervention. ED QUEST, like any other major organizational development
intervention, takes time to be fully a part of the organization's culture and
climate. Complete integration into
the organization should not be expected the first time it is implemented. 5.
The ED QUEST team leader assignment ideally should be for a three-year
period. To select and train a new
team leader each year would require the loss of valuable time.
In addition, each successive year, theoretically, the team leader would
become more adept at the idiosyncrasies of the process. Such an appointment would be consistent with many other academic
appointments such as dean, associate dean, or program director. 6.
Work assignments should be made in such a way as to allow for one fourth
of the team facilitator’s time to be given to coordinating the ED QUEST
effort. Dumping this project on an
already busy professional's desk without compensation or reorganization of
duties will almost insure that the process will be neglected. 7.
Environmental scanning should be part of the duties of the strategic
planning committee. One individual
should be chosen as the leader of the ED QUEST process. This person would be responsible for leading a team of graduate
assistants in developing the individual components of the ED QUEST process,
which should be integrated into the agenda of the strategic planning committee. 8.
Any organization considering implementing the ED QUEST model for the
first time should do the following:
Conduct an ED QUEST workshop for the entire organization. The purpose of this workshop would be to educate the
organization as to the products of ED QUEST, possible benefits to the
organization, and an overview of the mechanics of ED QUEST. Assuming the organization decided to engage in ED QUEST, complete
training would be provided at a later date for members of an ED QUEST team.
Build up interest and commitment in the process before implementing the
entire model. That is, experiment
with several of the more salient elements in the process (e.g., scanning) before
requiring the organization to tackle the intricate elements (e.g., scenarios),
which require considerable commitment and understanding of the process.
Initially, limit the environmental scan to a few sources. This will allow the ED QUEST team to "play" with real data
while learning the process and will also reduce the probability of information
overload. References Boucher,
W. I. and Morrison, J. L. Alternative Recruiting Environments for the U.S.
Army. Alexandria, VA.: U.S.
Army Research Institute for the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1989. Morrison,
J. L. and Mecca, T. V. ED QUEST: Linking Environmental Scanning to Strategic
Management. Chapel Hill, NC:
Copytron, 1986. Porter,
L. W. and McKibben, L. E. Management Education and Development: Drift or
Thrust into the 21st Century? New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1988. James
Garner Ptaszynski is a faculty member of the
Babcock Graduate School of Management at Wake Forest University. James
L. Morrison is professor of education at the University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||