For those of you who feel that your current strategic plan is successful and useful:

We're working on a new strategic plan, and I'm pondering the level of detail required, and also the extent to which it should be a comprehensive plan for everything we do, or emphasize NEW strategies and new goals. Obviously, we will continue to clean the floors, pay the bills, and do  everything routine that is working, including some interpretive goals and strategies that are succeeding. Is all that to be included in the plan, under, for example, "maintain and routinely evaluate cleaning processes" etc.? Or do we leave that as a given, and detail the changes, new initiatives, changed priorities, the more "strategic" elements, in that they are a response to a new environment or new opportunities? Does that risk overlooking what is core to the organization, or does it allow a clear focus on what needs to change?

What has worked for you, in terms of the degree of detail needed for discussion with Board/staff/others; and in terms of the detail needed for regular tracking of your progress?

I have some sample plans from AAM, called either "institutional plans" or "strategic plans" - but I'd welcome some discussion about what you find effective planning, as opposed to just "good on paper."  Thoughts?

Carol Ely
Historic Locust Grove
Louisville

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).