Slides used on July 23, 2014 in Dubuque, Iowa during presentation at the Annual Conference of the Community Development Society

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

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;

17. Better understand he nature of collaboration
Identify what stage your collaborations are in
Consider ways to move a collaborations to the next level
Complexity
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
DependentVariables
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