1. Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License. Getting from Here To There: Eight Characteristics of Effective Strategy Economic & Community Development Strategy Scott Hutcheson, Ph.D. Community Development Society Annual Conference Dubuque, IA – July 23, 2014

3. 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)

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

5. ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

6. 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 economic and community development successful and others…not so much?

7. Answering the Question 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

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

9. Evolution of dealing with community change Institutionalization Locus of control Increasing complexity Tools for managing community change 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).

10. 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).

11. Hierarchy of Complex Systems 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 11 Complexity Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

12. The Extension Economist vs. The Rocket Scientist 12

13. Hierarchy of Complex Systems 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 13 Complexity Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

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

15. Hierarchy of Complex Systems 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 15 Complexity Boulding, K. (1956). General systems theory—the skeleton of science. Management Science 2(3): 197-208.

16. Dealing with the Complexity 16 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)

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

18. Contributing Theories Social Innovation Strategy Formation Collaborative Governance 18

19. 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)

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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)

23. 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 and 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

24. Findings from the Interviews 24 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

25. Variables 25 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

26. 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

27. Insights from Participants The Quantitative Data Population of individuals who have participated in economic and community development strategy initiatives 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

28. Findings from the Surveys 28 Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License. Effective & Ineffective Strategy Initiatives – Mean Responses

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

30. Findings from the Surveys 30 Source: Scott Hutcheson, Distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 License. Correlation Between Strategy Initiative Effectiveness and the Eight Independent Variables

31. 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

32. 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 Build high levels of trust among participants Assure that participants are ready to change

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

34. Strategy Answers Two Basic Questions

35. Strategic Doing Divides the Two Basic Questions into Four Appreciative Questions 35

36. Strategic Doing Moves from the Linear to the Agile

37. Strategic Doing Is Iterative & Ongoing

38. http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/accelerating_civic_innovation_through_strategic_doing

39. http://www.choicesmagazine.org/choices-magazine/theme-articles/public-sector-options-for- creating-jobs/transforming-regions-through-strategic-doing

40. Proceedings of the 2014 International Research & Development Conference, Stuttgart, Germany (published) Community Development Journal (accepted) Economic Development Journal (accepted) Long Range Planning Journal (invited) The Bridge: Journal of the National Academy of Engineering (invited) Harvard Business Review (proposed) Recent & Forthcoming Scholarship

41. Practicing Strategic Doing 41

43. In neighborhoods besieged by complex, wicked problems, Strategic Doing creates hope through the power of taking action with the assets or gifts that we already possess. In that moment when we combine assets, we begin to tell a new story of opportunity and possibility, and it gives us the power to change our lives, our neighborhoods, and our communities. Bob Brown, Associate Director of University-Community Partnerships Michigan State University We finally broke our “grant addiction.” Flint Community Resident

44. With the pending NASA shuttle shutdown, the Space Coast region of Florida found itself struggling to define a strategy to respond. They turned to Strategic Doing. In a series of large-scale workshops, a small group of civic leaders on the Space Coast saw the opportunity to launch a new clean energy cluster. Now, Energy Florida is leading the development of new business opportunities and the Space Coast is transforming.

46. Local & Regional Economic Development Strategy Community Development Strategy Cluster Development Local/Regional Food Systems Community Health Innovation Platform Development Strategic Alliances Inter-unit collaboration within a single organization National Associations Practicing Strategic Doing

47. Teaching Strategic Doing Existing & Emerging University Partnerships Michigan State University University of Alaska University of Missouri New Jersey Institute of Technology University of Central Florida Stanford University Southhampton Solent University (United Kingdom) University of the Sunshine Coast (Austrailia)

48. Teaching Strategic Doing

50. 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/ For More Information & to Connect Copyright 2014 – Scott Hutcheson This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 License. Slides available