Essay Grade

Performance Gap Analysis
IT Help Desk Case Study – January 2005
Notice: The contents of this briefing are not intended to serve as legal advice related to any individual situation. This material is
made available from P4 Performance Management for informational purposes only and is provided with the understanding that
P4 Performance Management is not providing legal advice. If legal advice is required, the services of a competent licenses
attorney should be sought.
Copyright © 2005 P4 Performance Management, Inc.
All rights reserved.
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to provide the administrative staff of a nationally recognized
University with a Performance Gap Analysis of their help desk services and capabilities.
Performance Gaps exist in organizations when current process, technology and resource
capabilities do not meet the needs of its ‘customers’ or the overall organization’s business
objectives. P4 Performance Management specializes in identifying and minimizing
performance gaps by eliminating technology and process gaps to increase business process
functionality.
In response to the concerns, state auditors documented surrounding help desk capabilities at
the University, administration formed a help desk committee, lead by the director of
Communications and Technology. The help desk committee was made up of seven help
desk representatives under the direction of Academic Affairs and Finance and Business along
with college IT representatives such as from the College of Engineering. The purpose of the
committee was to have a forum where the auditor’s findings could be discussed, weaknesses
evaluated for alternative resolution and appropriate actions to be implemented could be
recommended. In support of the University’s objective to address the state auditor’s findings
are consistent with the help desk’s committee charter, P4 Performance Management was
brought in to identify performance gaps and provide its expertise.
Sponsors
After initial dialog with the University’s Vice Chancellor of Finance and Business, P4 met
with the vice-provost of Resource Management & Information Systems and the director of
Communications and Technology. The director of Communications and Technology
assumed the sponsor’s role and provided insight and direction as well as coordinating the
necessary introductions, visits and meetings to complete this analysis.
Performance Gap Assessment Method
After initial introductory and direction setting meetings, P4 principles spent two days on
campus meeting with administrative staff representing four of the help desk functions. The
four centers we met and visited were:
•
•
•
•
College of Engineering (CoE)
Administrative Computing Services (ACS)
Network Operations Center (NOC)
Network and Client Services (NCS)
Page 2 of 16
During the visits, information was collected and observations were made that are the basis of
our written analysis. It was not intended by P4 or our sponsors to pass judgment, particularly
in the area of people or functional performance, but rather to identify areas of opportunity
(Gaps) that translate into support weaknesses, inefficient performance and potentially
dissatisfied customers. P4’s objective was to leverage its considerable experience and
expertise in the area of help desks and provide the University an analysis of Performance
Gaps and recommended actions to address them.
Findings/Recommendations
P4 understands the complex issues when serving a diverse ‘customer’ base of students,
administration and faculty in a premier educational and research institution environment.
The unique needs of the University coupled with the high expectations placed on the
country’s institution historically noted for advanced technology and research creates
significant performance challenges. These demands require leadership capable of evaluating
and implementing existing technology within the reduced IT budgets common place in
today’s environment. Adopted solutions must achieve aggressive return on investments
(ROI) and align with overall business goals. P4 believes significant opportunity exists for
the University to achieve its goal of providing a single number, email and web access for
help desk services. This can be accomplished while lowering help desk operational costs,
improving productivity across the entire campus and lowering total cost of technology
ownership.
Complex Business
Environment
Diverse Customer
Base
University
Needs
Gaps represent
opportunities for
University to
lower operational
costs, improve
productivity and
service
Inconsistent or lack of management data reporting
Multiple tier I help desks
Lack of help desk expertise
Limited tools or technology deployed
Weaknesses in Asset Management
Capabilities of existing Help Desks
———————-People, Systems & Applications
Page 3 of 16
Help Desk
Performance
Gaps
The above chart illustrates the performance gaps that exist between the needs and the current
capabilities of the University. These gaps represent significant and immediate opportunities
for the University to lower on-going operational costs, improve productivity and service.
Individual center profiles are attached at the end of this report.
Findings / Recommendations (cont)
1. Inconsistent or lack of management data reporting:
Help desk centers collect, record and report very limited information about the
performance, efficiency or user satisfaction levels for each center. Typical data collected
and reported such as call volumes (PBX, ACD or email), trouble ticket counts, and mean
time to respond/repair/restore, clearance actions and root cause analysis is not generally
available. Service Level Agreements (SLA) between help desk centers has not been
established. Remedy, the University’s resolution tracking system is not deployed or
utilized by every center. Additionally, management objectives relative to service
expectations were either not defined or communicated.
Centers are unable to identify their top reasons for customer inquiries. Without
consistent data, a center cannot perform next day analysis for root cause remedies. This
puts all of the center’s efforts in a reactive mode, only being able to respond to problems,
not prevent them.
P4 recommendations:
Establish Key Performance Indictors (KPIs) that align with business objectives and
‘customer’ expectations. These KPIs should capture metrics that measure current
performance against best practice service level targets. These measurements center on
volume, speed and accuracy. Definition for each KPI should include common terms, data
source, measurement formula, reporting format and objectives across all centers.
Selective KPI creation is required to ensure measurements are reflective of Tier I, Tier II
and other organization contributions. The collection, reporting and trending of help desk
KPIs is the basis for managers/administrators to make evaluations and decisions relative
to resources (people and technology) and is imperative to managing and rewarding
personal performance.
Establish SLAs between depended centers, providing service expectations to be set,
measured and met. A standard SLA template needs to be created that covers the standard
operating agreements across the University. Customized agreements where required
should be negotiated at the director level and performance against all SLAs reviewed
frequently.
Designate Remedy as the resolution tracking system that all help desk
centers/functions utilize, without exception. The University Information Technology
Page 4 of 16
needs to provide a directive that ensures compliance across the campus.
Create Remedy weekly, monthly performance reports that compare actual
performance to KPI objectives. Reports should be created, pulled and published by a
single staff organization. Directors should require performance improvement plans (PIP)
from center managers for KPIs not meeting objectives.
Root cause analysis activities need to be established. Next day analysis needs to occur
and become a discipline. Next day analysis is the trending of network and system events,
collated with user inquiries, determining root causes of outages and degradation of
service. Conducting trouble distribution analysis will identify “TOP” causes and provide
priorities for Tier II and III to address. An effective next day analysis function can
significantly reduce customer issues, lower call volumes and allow a center to move from
reactive to proactive and eventually preventive mode.
2. Multiple tier I help desks:
University administrators, faculty and students have a number of options when seeking
assistance with an IT related issue. These multiple choices for service create confusion
and inefficiencies among the University technology users, as well as dissatisfaction with
overall technology help desk support. Inconsistent and poorly matched help desk
capabilities to user needs are the root cause of why the University has multiple help desk
centers today. Each user community felt at one time or another that the services provided
by a ‘center’ did not meet their needs therefore they decided funding and operating their
own help desk center would better serve them. This obviously has created a duplication
of effort and costs as it relates to technology, facilities and resources and resulted in
fragmented groups which are small in size and diluted in capabilities.
There is no accountability for problem resolution when referring a trouble ticket across
the University help desk community. If a problem is referred to another center for
resolution, even when using Remedy, they are not tracked through closure by the
originating center. This creates a gap in ticket ownership, lost continuity, visibility and a
perception by the user community that there is a lack of understanding of their needs.
Additionally, responsibilities within each help desk center are not clearly defined by
position level. Tier I tasks are sometimes performed by Tier II personnel. As the centers
are organized today, there are constant conflicting priorities to basic help desk
responsibilities. Because multiple functions are performed under each center manager
(consulting, project management, physical dispatch for install and repair, etc.) they are
required to utilize their existing resources to achieve the day-to-day tasks, which at times
can be in conflict with Tier I and Tier II support objectives. Help desk functions,
particularly Tier I where customer interaction is paramount, needs to be a top priority.
Page 5 of 16
Even with multiple help desk locations, there is no disaster recovery plan suitable to
handle multiple help desk responsibilities from a single secure location.
P4 recommendations:
Consolidate all Tier I resources into a single University Service Desk Center (USDC),
therefore establishing one place, one phone number, email and web site for
administration and faculty to call for help. This USDC would be responsible for trouble
resolution tracking and escalation until closure. Consolidating all help desks calls into a
single center would create significant improvements in customer satisfaction and leverage
the economy of scale that comes from a larger, better skilled set of resources.
People, Process and Tools are the three legs of help desk performance and stability.
Establishing a USDC where a set of standard operating procedures, common tools,
objectives and dedicated, skilled staff & management will create significant productivity
gains across the entire University. By providing high caliber services to its user
community, the USDC becomes an enabler of technology, delivering on the original
promise of productivity.
Establish organizational structure for Tier II and Tier III support. Recognizing that
there are specific needs of users, for ex. a college or highly complex application user
group that require dedicated support functions. This should be accomplished without the
replication of Tier I functions. The USDC would serve as the “Front Door” for every
user, providing one call, one place to create and track problem resolution. Tier II
functions would remain dedicated to their specific areas of expertise, allowing their
efforts to be integrated into the fabric of the University’s one call, one place, help desk
strategy (USDC). Position descriptions, job objectives and disciplined management
needs to be established so that the organizational structure created can leverage its
available resources to accomplish its objectives.
Establish Disaster Recovery Plans. A business-continuity strategy needs to be
developed that provides for help desk services and capabilities in the event of a disaster.
This strategy should include an implementation plan that achieves high-availability
during network and system outages, and for disaster recovery in the event of a facility
meltdown.
3. Lack of help desk expertise:
Help desks that we visited lacked staff and management with practical help desk industry
experience. Training for individuals is limited and is generally provided by co-workers
as on the job training. Without an adequately trained help desk or technical resources to
call upon, people seeking assistance bypass Tier I and go directly to Tier II, or another
identified resource, i.e. faculty using building LAN engineers directly.
Page 6 of 16
In some cases students are utilized in rapidly rotating shifts (two hours). It would be very
difficult for someone to achieve a high level of service efficiency without the necessary
training and support required in a complex application environment.
Administration staff largely depends on Microsoft office products to conduct their daily
work. To the best of our knowledge, no University help desk is tasked with providing
user assistance for MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access or MS Project. Training is
almost certainly required provided there is still a need for help support on these
applications. Without a place to call for assistance, staff will spend unproductive time
trying to find the solution, often consuming co-worker’s time by asking for assistance.
This example of a ‘lack of a need being met’ by a help desk is often called an ICEBERG.
The tip represents the person who has the immediate need. Below the water line, the not
obvious or visible part represents the loss productivity of multiple people that are
adversely impacted as a result of their co-worker’s requests for help. The MS Office
example could easily be representative of a user calling the help desk and not getting
their needs met for an existing supported application. Anytime a user calls the help desk
and cannot be serviced, the resulting behavior is counter-productive in terms of utilizing
resources not designated for help assistance, i.e. co-workers. This is illustrated in the
chart below where escalating loss of productivity occurs as a result of user needs not
being met by the help desk. Over time users will stop calling the help desk. The
underlying loss of productivity still remains, but the visibility to the problem is loss. This
is an example of where a highly effective help desk strategy can increase the productivity
of the entire administration staff. The mistake that many organizations make is they
focus solely on help desk efficiencies and lose sight of the bigger picture. A 1%
productivity gain across an entire organization far exceeds a 50% help desk improvement.
Time to resolve (mins)
120
100
Resolution Effort
80
Help Desk
Co-Worker
Self
60
40
20
0
1st
2nd
3rd
Number of problem occurrences
This chart illustrates the escalating loss of productivity when a
help desk fails to meet users expectations and needs
Page 7 of 16
P4 recommendation:
Define the necessary skills & hire experienced people. Identify the experience and
education requirements to perform help desk service functions. Ensure position
descriptions by job classification match requirements. Fill any current open positions
with experienced qualified help desk candidates. Recruit an experienced highly customer
focused Service Desk Manager to operate the University Service Desk Center (USDC).
A leading help desk institute should certify this person.
Training programs for Tier I and Tier II need to be established. A skill inventory of
existing resources should be taken to determine the level of training effort required and
whether or not the University has the capability to deliver this training in-house or use
external training suppliers. It is anticipated that the initial training requirements will be
significant, because it is not unusual for large gaps to exist between current skills and job
requirements. Training is an on-going commitment. Training costs can be substantial,
but the return can be rewarding. An annual training budget should be established that
provides a minimum of 5-7 days of help desk specific training per person, per year.
Investigate services vs. needs. It is recommended that the University conduct a return
on investment (ROI) evaluation for providing help desk support for Microsoft office
products.
4. Limited tools or technology deployed:
Remedy appears largely deployed in most help desk centers, but not across all centers. In
centers where Remedy is utilized there are examples of feature/functionality not being
used that could provide center efficiencies. These include web access, configuration
management, reporting, prioritization of queues and asset management.
Aside from a couple of primitive tools we saw in the Network Operations Center, there
are no monitoring or proactive tools available to assist in hardware or software problem
prevention, quick isolation or resolution. Without call distribution devices (ACD, etc), it
is difficult to track call volumes or route callers to best qualified and available Tier I
agents. Advanced database look-ups, CTI, are not deployed. Routine and common Tier I
problems are not being handled by automated applications or self-service processes, thus
creating unwarranted calls into a center. No knowledge management system exists to
capture self-learning information or provide help desk scripts.
P4 recommendations:
Deploy remote diagnostic and monitoring tools. Many IT service management
applications exist that can provide remote diagnostic and monitoring capabilities for
desktop hardware and applications. The immediate benefit is in moving the help desk
capabilities from its current reactive mode to a proactive and eventually a prevent mode.
Page 8 of 16
An evaluation of competing products and services should be conducted to determine the
best fit for the University’s requirements. A ROI justification threshold should be
established that has a minimum return on investment of any IT tool no more than 12
months.
Begin the planning process for self-service. Many repetitive problems can be
effectively handled using an automated response or self-service application. Password
resets are most commonly dealt with in this fashion, but so are advanced pay for services.
For example, a student calling the help desk to complain about an inability to print. If the
problem is related to the students ‘print quota’, a CTI application would provide a student
profile look up at the time of call receipt, providing the Tier I agent with intelligent
information to resolve the problem quickly and efficiently. Technology to provide
intelligent call routing (skill based routing), allowing the call to be routed to the best
qualified agent, can provide significant service improvements in terms of reduced
resolution times, and customer satisfaction. As the University’s ability to implement selfservice applications grows, the student without live help desk intervention could resolve
the identical printing problem. Most common troubles and problems need to be analyzed
and scoped out for automated response/self-service applications to include IVR and text
to voice. Applications complexities vary greatly as do costs to implement. It is
suggested that the University spend considerable time collecting data and performing a
business justification (ROI) prior to embarking on this development recommendation.
Self-learning opportunities – Evaluation of a knowledge management system should be
considered. The time saving that accompanies self-learning, i.e. trouble resolution scripts
built based on time proven experiences in your center, handing your customers, can be
significant. Like any application to be purchased, a thorough investigation and
justification is required to ensure the anticipated benefits are achieved.
5. Weaknesses in Asset Management:
To our knowledge asset management has been delegated to department heads, without
the assistance of any systems, technology or methodology. There is no management of
the University’s IT assets being conducted by the help desk centers. The centers
represent the most logical and capable organizations to own this responsibility.
Substantial investments have been made in desktop, server, networking, storage and
printing capabilities. Without an effective and cost efficient method to manage the assets,
the University can not be assured of leveraging its investment for the full expected value.
Additionally, without proper asset management, future IT investments can potentially be
made prematurely causing duplication of existing or not needed technology.
Page 9 of 16
Cost Avoidance Opportunity
$3M
$2M
$15M
$5M
$1M
Estimated $ Lost Over 3 Year Period
$5M
$4M
$40M
$20M
$25M
$30M
Chairman Help Desk 2000: Organizations with a
solid technology asset management practice can save up to 30%
in the purchase, operation and disposal of corporate
technology assets
$10M
Estimated Annual Capital Expenditures
Asset Management
5%
10%
1 Yr.
15%
20%
2 Yrs.
25%
30%
Percent Of Lost Assets Over Time
P4 recommendations:
Asset Management, Asset Management, Asset Management – The above chart
represents an illustration of the opportunity asset management provides for cost
avoidance. It states that with larger capital expenditures the likelihood of greater asset
loss will occur over time, as high as 30% over a 3-year period. As an example, an
organization that spends $30million in IT capital expenditures could be exposed to
$9million in asset loses over a 3-year period without properly implemented asset
management.
This area of help desk weakness represents the biggest opportunity for future cost
containment. Many asset management solutions are available for consideration. P4
recommends evaluating a software agent type that provides physical asset inventory and
tracks user information, manages configuration changes and software license compliance
as well as monitors system performance. Very aggressive ROIs can be achieved when a
well thought out asset management program is implemented.
Page 10 of 16
The benefits of an asset manager with the above capabilities are:
•
Reduce Costs
Reduce the cost of desktop support and the overall total cost of ownership by
automatically tracking computer assets and maintaining an accurate inventory of
hardware, software, licenses, maintenance contracts, warranties, leasing terms, etc.
•
Increase efficiency
Increase the efficiency of many processes in your organization by providing
accurate inventory information for purchasing and technology decisions.
•
Improve Service
Improve service by providing service representatives access to accurate inventory
records. With this knowledge, they can provide better and faster service.
Conclusions & Actions
P4 believes that this gap analysis contains a number of “Calls to Actions”. Call to Actions
exists when a combination of compelling data and verified information generates a sense of
urgency. When brought to leadership attention, Call to Actions requires immediate decisionmaking. Choosing to do nothing is not an acceptable option. P4 also believes that its
recommendations align closely with those of the state auditors and if adopted not only
provide resolutions for solving its help desk weaknesses, but opportunities to achieve
significantly lower costs.
The chart below represents P4’s Service Desk vision that is highly customer focused and
leverages the power of knowledge management.
Page 11 of 16
Knowledge
T he U niversity Service D esk B est P ractice M aturity Curve
K no w led ge M anagem ent
Automated Service Capabilities
Self Service
A utom ated Response
Problem Management
System & Application
P erform ance M onitoring
Root Cause Analysis
A sset M anagem ent
Certified Staffing
High Im pact T raining
Dispatch
Business
Continuity
P assword M anagem ent
Fragm ented P rocess
Reactive
Rem ote Assistance
Service Level A greem ents
Case M anagem ent
P roactive
P reventative
C ustom er F ocused
It is our opinion that the University’s current capabilities fall within the lower left corner of the above
chart. This represents largely the reactive and dispatch orientation that the help desks have today. It
is not reflective of the desires for the University, and its users, to advance towards proactive and
preventative services. P4’s recommended initiatives are designed to move the University up the
Service Desk maturity curve in manageable increments that yield short-term return on investments.
University adoption of a Service Desk vision that embraces knowledge management and customer
focus over reactive problem management provides the foundation and sets the course for continuous
improvements. In support of that vision, we have summarized P4’s recommendations into three
major initiatives:
•
Build a University Service Desk Center (Tier I help desk)
•
Deploy performance management tools and develop automated processes
•
Implement an Asset Management program that enables the University to track, evaluate, and
utilize existing IT resources
Page 12 of 16
Initiative Summary
•
Build a University Service Desk Center, USDC (Tier I help desk)
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Consolidate existing Tier I resources into a single center
Establish organizational structure for USDC and the supporting Tier II & III groups
Hire expertise into open positions and develop and implement required training
Incorporate telephony and email routing solutions
Deploy help desk agent solutions to desktops, servers and wireless devices
Establish standard operating procedures, SLAs, KPIs, reporting
Develop a business continuity strategy that includes disaster recovery
Annual Cost
In-Source vs. Out-Source
Internal
Outsourced
1 Year
2 Years
3 Years
Cost To Operate
The above chart suggests that the alternative of out-sourcing the Service
Desk functions could lead to lower initial capital expenditures as well as
lower total operations costs.
A significant amount of data would need to be collected to see if these
cost saving opportunities are available to the University.
•
Deploy performance management tools and automate processes
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Evaluate Network and Desktop remote diagnostic and monitoring tools for deployment
Create an application development roadmap that prioritizes processes for automation and
self-service
Advanced call routing with Computer Telephony Integration (CTI)
Evaluate Web & IVR self-service opportunities
Page 13 of 16
•
Implement an Asset Management system
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Define and implement a IT asset management system
Manages configurations
Tracks user information
Manages software compliance
And monitors system performance
For each of the initiatives, there are three alternative methods for implementation. The options are:
1.
P4 Performance Management implements adopted recommendations.
2.
The University implements adopted recommendations themselves.
3.
The University evaluates other alternatives.
Recommended Next Steps:
•
The University leadership meets with P4 principles to develop Performance Improvement Plans.
These Statements of Work (SOW) would reflect the scope of effort, the budget and schedule
commitments and Return on the Investment analysis. Each SOW would contain measurable
deliverables, estimated costs and 30-60 day milestones.
•
Work can begin within a week’s notice.
Page 14 of 16
Faculty
135
Admin
Users
6000 Student
Users
Building LAN
Administrators
College Of Engineering
Help Desk
Tools:
•Remedy
•Online
Documentation
Aka Website
Access
Methods:
•Phone
•E-Mail
Staffing:
•Hrs. of Operation:
8x5x5
•Tier One: 2 (10 students, 80 hrs./week)
•Tier Two: 5
•Mgr.: 1
Volume
Metrics
Calls/Mo.
Supported Products:
•70 Applications
•Custom in house written applications
•Off the Self some of which have been customized
•Unix, Linux, Windows
•662 Lab Systems
•Faculty is supported by LAN Administrators
F a c ult y
2 1 00
A d mi n .
U s ers
150
E -M ail
B u i ld in g LA N
A d mi n is t rato rs
Ne t wo rk & C lien t Se rv ices
T oo ls :
•R emed y
•N o v el
To o ls
•R emo te
S y s tem
M an ag er
A cces s
Meth o d s :
•P h on e
•E-M ail
S ta ffin g :
•H rs . o f Op eration :
7 :15 a.m. -6 :00 p.m.
O n call 7 p m-11p m
•M g r.: 1
C lie nt Side
•C C I: 1
•C C II: 5
•C C III: 6
•C C IV : 1
V o lu m e
Metrics
6 50 C alls /Mo .
N etwo rk S id e
•S y s P rog rammers : 3
•C o mpu ter Co ns ultan t: 1
Sup po r t e d P r o duc t s:
• D e skto p H W & A p p s.
• E – M a il Se r v er & Se r v er I n fr a str uc tu r e ( 3 5 Se r ve r s)
• H W Co n sultin g , SA N
• SW D e sktop , M S O f f ic e /O S/U tilitie s,
• G r o u p W I SE
• D isa ste r Re c o ve ry P la n
• C lien t S id e H elp D esk p erso n n el w o r k o n a ro tatin g sch ed u le
• C lien t S id e A ctiv ities in clu d e p ro je cts, o n -site co n su ltin g , N C S H elp
Page 15 of 16
9000
Admin &
Faculty
45 InHouse
Developers
50 ACS
Employees
Administration Computing Services
Help Desk
Access
Methods:
•Phone
•E-Mail
Tools:
•Remedy
Staffing: 7 FTE
Volume
Metrics
1100 Call/Mo.
•Hrs. of Operation:
7:15 am – 6:00 pm
•Tier One: 1.5
•Tier Two: 2
•Mgr.: 2
Supported Products:
•PeopleSoft, Sybase
•280 other applications
•Between 75 to 80% are custom,
Some off the shelf but custom.
•Lab support for testing
•Tier One: Dispatch, Password Reset
•Tier Two: Resolve, Quick Response, 1 Day for on site calls
•Tier Three: Install/Test Applications. Work with Developers
F aculty
R esN et
515-H elp
B uild ing L A N
A dm inistra tors
NCS
ACS
N etw or k O p era tio ns C enter
A ccess
M eth od s:
•P hone
•E -M ail
T ools:
•R em edy
•N agio (ping
tool)
•N etF low (status
collector)
•C iscoW orks
S taffing : 4 FT E
•H rs. of O peration:
8x5x5 on call 24×7
•3 D ata/N etw ork
•1 V ideo, D istance
L earning
S up p orted P rod ucts:
•1 000 S w itch/H u bs/R ou ters
•6 500 C isco C ore R ou ters/SW s
•G ig Lin ks, 2 for each Bu ild in g
•1 0 /10 0 ports to th e D esktops
Page 16 of 16
V olu m e
M etrics
100 C alls/M o.
Theodore H. Poister
Georgia State University
PART VI:
THE PAST AS
PRELUDE: WERE
THE PREDICTIONS
OF CLASSIC
SCHOLARS
CORRECT?
The Future of Strategic Planning in the Public Sector: Linking
Strategic Management and Performance
Theodore H. Poister is a professor of
public management and Policy at the
Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at
Georgia State University. He has published
widely on strategic management and
performance measurement in the public
sector. His current research focuses on the
impact of strategy and strategic planning on
the performance of public transit systems in
the United States.
E-mail: tpoister@gsu.edu
While it has become ubiquitous in the public sector over
the past 25 years, strategic planning will need to play
a more critical role in 2020 than it does at present if
public managers are to anticipate and manage change
adroitly and effectively address new issues that are likely
to emerge with increasing rapidity. This article argues
that making strategy more meaningful in the future
will require transitioning from strategic planning to
the broader process of strategic management, which
involves managing an agency’s overall strategic agenda
on an ongoing rather than an episodic basis, as well
as ensuring that strategies are implemented effectively.
Complementing this move to more holistic strategic
management, we need to shift the emphasis of the
performance movement from a principal concern with
measurement to the more encompassing process of
performance management over the coming decade in
order to focus more proactively on achieving strategic
goals and objectives. Finally, agencies will need to link
their strategic management and ongoing performance
management processes more closely in a reciprocating
relationship in which strategizing is aimed largely at
defining and strengthening overall performance while
performance monitoring helps to inform strategy along
the way.
I
n 1942, John A. Vieg wrote that after a century
and a half of a deliberate lack of public planning
in this country, the kind of planning that h