What Strategic Planning Methods are Most Related to Higher Capacity Organizations: An Empirical Investigation

IF 0.2 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Crystal A. Evans, Margaret F. Reid, Denise McNerney
{"title":"What Strategic Planning Methods are Most Related to Higher Capacity Organizations: An Empirical Investigation","authors":"Crystal A. Evans, Margaret F. Reid, Denise McNerney","doi":"10.18666/jnel-2023-11546","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Considering the controversy around strategic planning effectiveness for nonprofits, we first ask, “Does strategic planning matter?”. A survey was administered to 1,256 nonprofit organizations to determine a. their capacity to plan and b. what strategic planning processes they used. Using regression analysis, it was found that the presence of a strategic plan acted as a statistically significant indicator of higher organizational capacity. Next, strategic methods were evaluated to determine which ones were associated with higher capacity scores. This research makes two main contributions. First, it enhances, using a large national sample the academic debate as to the usefulness of strategic planning. Second, for practitioners, this research demonstrates which strategic methods were found to be associated with the highest performing organizations, using our capacity indicator. Based on these findings we believe that nonprofit managers can optimize their resources and focus on those methods that provide them with the highest return on their strategic efforts. Additionally, nonprofit faculty now have data to suggest what strategic planning methods should be taught in our classrooms.","PeriodicalId":43170,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18666/jnel-2023-11546","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Considering the controversy around strategic planning effectiveness for nonprofits, we first ask, “Does strategic planning matter?”. A survey was administered to 1,256 nonprofit organizations to determine a. their capacity to plan and b. what strategic planning processes they used. Using regression analysis, it was found that the presence of a strategic plan acted as a statistically significant indicator of higher organizational capacity. Next, strategic methods were evaluated to determine which ones were associated with higher capacity scores. This research makes two main contributions. First, it enhances, using a large national sample the academic debate as to the usefulness of strategic planning. Second, for practitioners, this research demonstrates which strategic methods were found to be associated with the highest performing organizations, using our capacity indicator. Based on these findings we believe that nonprofit managers can optimize their resources and focus on those methods that provide them with the highest return on their strategic efforts. Additionally, nonprofit faculty now have data to suggest what strategic planning methods should be taught in our classrooms.
哪些战略规划方法与高能力组织最相关:实证调查
考虑到围绕非营利组织战略规划有效性的争议,我们首先要问:"战略规划重要吗?我们对 1256 家非营利组织进行了调查,以确定 a. 它们的规划能力和 b. 它们使用的战略规划流程。通过回归分析发现,战略规划的存在在统计学上是衡量组织能力高低的重要指标。接下来,对战略方法进行了评估,以确定哪些方法与较高的能力得分相关。这项研究有两大贡献。首先,它利用大量全国样本,加强了学术界对战略规划有用性的争论。其次,对于从业人员来说,这项研究利用我们的能力指标,证明了哪些战略方法与绩效最高的组织相关。基于这些发现,我们认为非营利组织的管理者可以优化他们的资源,把重点放在那些能使他们的战略努力获得最高回报的方法上。此外,非营利组织的教师现在也有数据来建议我们应该在课堂上教授哪些战略规划方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership
Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
20.00%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信