strategic management process case study

Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies of 2021

Two cases about Hertz claimed top spots in 2021's Top 40 Most Popular Case Studies

Two cases on the uses of debt and equity at Hertz claimed top spots in the CRDT’s (Case Research and Development Team) 2021 top 40 review of cases.

Hertz (A) took the top spot. The case details the financial structure of the rental car company through the end of 2019. Hertz (B), which ranked third in CRDT’s list, describes the company’s struggles during the early part of the COVID pandemic and its eventual need to enter Chapter 11 bankruptcy. 

The success of the Hertz cases was unprecedented for the top 40 list. Usually, cases take a number of years to gain popularity, but the Hertz cases claimed top spots in their first year of release. Hertz (A) also became the first ‘cooked’ case to top the annual review, as all of the other winners had been web-based ‘raw’ cases.

Besides introducing students to the complicated financing required to maintain an enormous fleet of cars, the Hertz cases also expanded the diversity of case protagonists. Kathyrn Marinello was the CEO of Hertz during this period and the CFO, Jamere Jackson is black.

Sandwiched between the two Hertz cases, Coffee 2016, a perennial best seller, finished second. “Glory, Glory, Man United!” a case about an English football team’s IPO made a surprise move to number four.  Cases on search fund boards, the future of malls,  Norway’s Sovereign Wealth fund, Prodigy Finance, the Mayo Clinic, and Cadbury rounded out the top ten.

Other year-end data for 2021 showed:

• Online “raw” case usage remained steady as compared to 2020 with over 35K users from 170 countries and all 50 U.S. states interacting with 196 cases.
• Fifty four percent of raw case users came from outside the U.S..
• The Yale School of Management (SOM) case study directory pages received over 160K page views from 177 countries with approximately a third originating in India followed by the U.S. and the Philippines.
• Twenty-six of the cases in the list are raw cases.
• A third of the cases feature a woman protagonist.
• Orders for Yale SOM case studies increased by almost 50% compared to 2020.
• The top 40 cases were supervised by 19 different Yale SOM faculty members, several supervising multiple cases.

CRDT compiled the Top 40 list by combining data from its case store, Google Analytics, and other measures of interest and adoption.

All of this year’s Top 40 cases are available for purchase from the Yale Management Media store .

And the Top 40 cases studies of 2021 are:

1.   Hertz Global Holdings (A): Uses of Debt and Equity

2.   Coffee 2016

3.   Hertz Global Holdings (B): Uses of Debt and Equity 2020

4.   Glory, Glory Man United!

5.   Search Fund Company Boards: How CEOs Can Build Boards to Help Them Thrive

6.   The Future of Malls: Was Decline Inevitable?

7.   Strategy for Norway's Pension Fund Global

8.   Prodigy Finance

9.   Design at Mayo

10. Cadbury

11. City Hospital Emergency Room

13. Volkswagen

14. Marina Bay Sands

15. Shake Shack IPO

16. Mastercard

17. Netflix

18. Ant Financial

19. AXA: Creating the New CR Metrics

20. IBM Corporate Service Corps

21. Business Leadership in South Africa's 1994 Reforms

22. Alternative Meat Industry

23. Children's Premier

24. Khalil Tawil and Umi (A)

25. Palm Oil 2016

26. Teach For All: Designing a Global Network

27. What's Next? Search Fund Entrepreneurs Reflect on Life After Exit

28. Searching for a Search Fund Structure: A Student Takes a Tour of Various Options

30. Project Sammaan

31. Commonfund ESG

32. Polaroid

33. Connecticut Green Bank 2018: After the Raid

34. FieldFresh Foods

35. The Alibaba Group

36. 360 State Street: Real Options

37. Herman Miller

38. AgBiome

39. Nathan Cummings Foundation

40. Toyota 2010

• Our Approach
• Strategic planning facilitation
• Online Training
• Strategy and Leadership Podcast
• SME Strategy on Youtube
• Strategy and Leadership Community

Strategic Plan Examples: Case Studies and Free Strategic Planning Template

By Anthony Taylor - May 29, 2023

As you prepare for your strategic planning process, it's important to explore relevant strategic plan examples for inspiration.

In today's competitive business landscape, a well-defined strategic plan holds immense significance. Whether you're a private company, municipal government, or nonprofit entity, strategic planning is essential for achieving goals and gaining a competitive edge. By understanding the strategic planning process, you can gain valuable insights to develop an effective growth roadmap for your organization.

In this blog, we will delve into real-life examples of strategic plans that have proven successful. These examples encompass a wide range of organizations, from Credit Unions that have implemented SME Strategy's Aligned Strategy process to the Largest Bank in Israel. By examining these cases, we can gain a deeper understanding of strategic planning and extract relevant insights that can be applied to your organization.

• Strategic Plan Example (Global Financial Services Firm)
• Strategic Plan Example (Joint Strategic Plan)
• Strategic Plan Example: (Government Agency)
• Strategic Plan Example (Multinational Corporation)
• Strategic Plan Example: (Public Company)
• Strategic Plan Example (Non Profit)
• Strategic Plan Example: (Small Nonprofit)
• Strategic Plan example: (Municipal Government)
• Strategic Plan Example: (Environmental Start-up)  

When analyzing strategic plan examples, it is crucial to recognize that a strategic plan goes beyond being a mere document. It should encapsulate your organization's mission and vision comprehensively while also being actionable. Your strategic plan needs to be tailored to your organization's specific circumstances, including factors such as size, industry, budget, and personnel. Simply replicating someone else's plan will not suffice.

Have you ever invested significant time and resources into creating a plan, only to witness its failure during execution? We believe that a successful strategic plan extends beyond being a static document. It necessitates meticulous follow-through, execution, documentation, and continuous learning. It serves as the foundation upon which your future plans are built.

It is important to note that a company's success is not solely determined by the plan itself, but rather by how effectively it is executed. Our intention is to highlight the diverse roles that a company's mission, vision, and values play across different organizations, whether they are large corporations or smaller nonprofits.

Strategic plans can vary in terms of their review cycles, which can range from annual evaluations to multi-year periods. There is no one-size-fits-all example of a strategic plan, as each organization possesses unique needs and circumstances that must be taken into account.

Strategic planning is an essential process for organizations of all sizes and types. It assists in setting a clear direction, defining goals, and effectively allocating resources. To gain an understanding of how strategic plans are crafted, we will explore a range of examples, including those from private companies, nonprofit organizations, and government entities.

Throughout this exploration, we will highlight various frameworks and systems employed by profit-driven and nonprofit organizations alike, providing valuable insights to help you determine the most suitable approach for your own organization.

Watch: Examples of Strategic Plans from Real-Life Organizations 

Strategic Plan Example  - The Bank Hapoalim Vision:  To be a leading global financial services firm, with its core in Israel, focused on its clients and working to enhance their financial freedom.

Bank Hapoalim, one of Israel's largest banks with 8,383 branches across 5 different countries as of 2022, has recently provided insights into its latest strategic plan. The plan highlights four distinct strategic priorities:

• Continued leadership in corporate banking and capital markets
• Adaptation of the retail banking operating model
• Resource optimization and greater productivity
• Differentiating and influential innovation

Check out their strategic plan here: Strategic Plan (2022-2026)

We talked to Tagil Green, the Chief Strategy Officer at Bank Hapoalim, where we delved into various aspects of their strategic planning process. We discussed the bank's strategic planning timeline, the collaborative work they engaged in with McKinsey, and the crucial steps taken to secure buy-in and ensure successful implementation of the strategy throughout the organization. In our conversation, Tagil Green emphasized the understanding that there is no universal template for strategic plans. While many companies typically allocate one, two, or three days for strategic planning meetings during an offsite, Bank Hapoalim recognized the significance of their size and complexity. As a result, their strategic plan took a comprehensive year-long effort to develop. How did a Large Global Organization like Bank Hapoalim decide on what strategic planning timeline to follow?

"How long do you want to plan? Some said, let's think a decade ahead. Some said it's irrelevant. Let's talk about two years ahead. And we kind of negotiated into the like, five years ahead for five years and said, Okay, that's good enough, because some of the complexity and the range depends on the field that you work for. So for banking in Israel, four or five years ahead, is good enough. "  Tagil Green, Chief Strategy Officer, Bank Hapoalim 

Another important aspect you need to consider when doing strategic planning is stakeholder engagement, We asked Tagil her thoughts and how they conducted stakeholder engagement with a large employee base.

Listen to the Full Conversation with Tagil:

Strategic Planning and Execution: Insights from the Chief Strategy Officer of Israel's Leading Bank

Strategic Plan Example: Region 16 and DEED (Joint Strategic Plan)

Mission Statement: We engage state, regional, tribal, school, and community partners to improve the quality and equity of education for each student by providing evidence-based services and supports.

In this strategic plan example, we'll explore how Region 16 and DEED, two government-operated Educational Centers with hundreds of employees, aligned their strategic plans using SME Strategy's approach . Despite facing the challenges brought on by the pandemic, these organizations sought to find common ground and ensure alignment on their mission, vision, and values, regardless of their circumstances.

Both teams adopted the Aligned Strategy method, which involved a three day onsite strategic planning session facilitated by a strategic planning facilitator . Together, they developed a comprehensive 29-page strategic plan outlining three distinct strategic priorities, each with its own objectives and strategic goals. Through critical conversations, they crafted a clear three year vision, defined their core customer group as part of their mission, refined their organizational values and behaviors, and prioritized their areas of focus.

After their offsite facilitation, they aligned around three key areas of focus:

• Effective Communication, both internally and externally.
• Streamlining Processes to enhance efficiency.
• Developing Effective Relationships and Partnerships for mutual success.

By accomplishing their goals within these strategic priorities, the teams from Region 16 and DEED aim to make progress towards their envisioned future.

To read the full review of the aligned strategy process click here

Download Now Starting your strategic planning process soon? Get our free Strategic Planning Template

Strategic Plan Example: (Government Agency) - The City of Duluth Workforce Development Board

What they do:

The Duluth Workforce Development Board identifies and aligns workforce development strategies to meet the needs of Duluth area employers and job seekers through comprehensive and coordinated systems.

An engaged and diverse workforce, where all individuals, regardless of background, have or are on a path to meaningful employment and a family sustaining wage, and all employers are able to fill jobs in demand.

The City of Duluth provides an insightful example of a strategic plan focused on regional coordination to address workforce needs in various industry sectors and occupations. With multiple stakeholders involved, engaging and aligning them becomes crucial. This comprehensive plan, spanning 82 pages, tackles strategic priorities and initiatives at both the state and local levels.

What sets this plan apart is its thorough outline of the implementation process. It covers everything from high-level strategies to specific meetings between different boards and organizations. Emphasizing communication, coordination, and connectivity, the plan ensures the complete execution of its objectives. It promotes regular monthly partner meetings, committee gatherings, and collaboration among diverse groups. The plan also emphasizes the importance of proper documentation and accountability throughout the entire process.

By providing a clear roadmap, the City of Duluth's strategic plan effectively addresses workforce needs while fostering effective stakeholder engagement . It serves as a valuable example of how a comprehensive plan can guide actions, facilitate communication, and ensure accountability for successful implementation.

Read this strategic plan example here: Strategic Plan (2021-2024)

Strategic Plan Example: McDonald's (Multinational Corporation)

McDonald's provides a great strategic plan example specifically designed for private companies. Their "Velocity Growth Plan" covers a span of three years from 2017 to 2020, offering a high-level strategic direction. While the plan doesn't delve into specific implementation details, it focuses on delivering an overview that appeals to investors and aligns the staff. The plan underscores McDonald's commitment to long-term growth and addressing important environmental and societal challenges. It also highlights the CEO's leadership in revitalizing the company and the active oversight provided by the Board of Directors.

The Board of Directors plays a crucial role in actively overseeing McDonald's strategy. They engage in discussions about the Velocity Growth Plan during board meetings, hold annual strategy sessions, and maintain continuous monitoring of the company's operations in response to the ever-changing business landscape.

The McDonald's strategic plan revolved around three core pillars:

• Retention: Strengthening and expanding areas of strength, such as breakfast and family occasions.
• Regain: Focusing on food quality, convenience, and value to win back lost customers.
• Convert: Emphasizing coffee and other snack offerings to attract casual customers.

These pillars guide McDonald's through three initiatives, driving growth and maximizing benefits for customers in the shortest time possible.

Read the strategic plan example of Mcdonlald's Velocity growth plan (2017-2020)

Strategic Plan Example: Nike (Public Company)

Nike's mission statement is “ to bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world .”  

Nike, as a publicly traded company, has developed a robust global growth strategy outlined in its strategic plan. Spanning a five-year period from 2021 to 2025, this plan encompasses 29 strategic targets that reflect Nike's strong commitment to People, Planet, and Pay. Each priority is meticulously defined, accompanied by tangible actions and measurable metrics. This meticulous approach ensures transparency and alignment across the organization.

The strategic plan of Nike establishes clear objectives, including the promotion of pay equity, a focus on education and professional development, and the fostering of business diversity and inclusion. By prioritizing these areas, Nike aims to provide guidance and support to its diverse workforce, fostering an environment that values and empowers its employees.

Read Nike's strategic plan here

Related Content: Strategic Planning Process (What is it?)

The Cost of Developing a Strategic Plan (3 Tiers)

Strategic Plan Example (Non Profit) - Alternatives Federal Credit Union

Mission: To help build and protect wealth for people with diverse identities who have been historically marginalized by the financial industry, especially those with low wealth or identifying as Black, Indigenous, or people of color.

AFCU partnered with SME Strategy in 2021 to develop a three year strategic plan. As a non-profit organization, AFCU recognized the importance of strategic planning to align its team and operational components. The focus was on key elements such as Vision, Mission, Values, Priorities, Goals, and Actions, as well as effective communication, clear responsibilities, and progress tracking.

In line with the Aligned Strategy approach, AFCU developed three strategic priorities to unite its team and drive progress towards their vision for 2024. Alongside strategic planning, AFCU has implemented a comprehensive strategy implementation plan to ensure the effective execution of their strategies.

Here's an overview of AFCU's 2024 Team Vision and strategic priorities: Aligned Team Vision 2024:

To fulfill our mission, enhance efficiency, and establish sustainable community development approaches, our efforts will revolve around the following priorities: Strategic Priorities:

Improving internal communication: Enhancing communication channels and practices within AFCU to foster collaboration and information sharing among team members.

Improving organizational performance: Implementing strategies to enhance AFCU's overall performance, including processes, systems, and resource utilization.

Creating standard operating procedures: Developing standardized procedures and protocols to streamline operations, increase efficiency, and ensure consistency across AFCU's activities.

By focusing on these strategic priorities, AFCU aims to strengthen its capacity to effectively achieve its mission and bring about lasting change in its community. Watch the AFCU case study below:

Watch the Full Strategic Plan Example Case Study with the VP and Chief Strategy Officer of AFCU

Strategic Plan Example: (Small Nonprofit) - The Hunger Project 

Mission: To end hunger and poverty by pioneering sustainable, grassroots, women-centered strategies and advocating for their widespread adoption in countries throughout the world.

The Hunger Project, a small nonprofit organization based in the Netherlands, offers a prime example of a concise and effective three-year strategic plan. This plan encompasses the organization's vision, mission, theory of change, and strategic priorities. Emphasizing simplicity and clarity, The Hunger Project's plan outlines crucial actions and measurements required to achieve its goals. Spanning 16 pages, this comprehensive document enables stakeholders to grasp the organization's direction and intended impact. It centers around three overarching strategic goals, each accompanied by its own set of objectives and indicators: deepening impact, mainstreaming impact, and scaling up operations.

Read their strategic plan here  

Strategic Plan example: (Municipal Government)- New York City Economic Development Plan 

The New York City Economic Development Plan is a comprehensive 5-year strategic plan tailored for a municipal government. Spanning 68 pages, this plan underwent an extensive planning process with input from multiple stakeholders. 

This plan focuses on the unique challenges and opportunities present in the region. Through a SWOT analysis, this plan highlights the organization's problems, the city's strengths, and the opportunities and threats it has identified. These include New York's diverse population, significant wealth disparities, and high demand for public infrastructure and services.

The strategic plan was designed to provide a holistic overview that encompasses the interests of a diverse and large group of business, labor, and community leaders. It aimed to identify the shared values that united its five boroughs and define how local objectives align with the interests of greater New York State. The result was a unified vision for the future of New York City, accompanied by a clear set of actions required to achieve shared goals.

Because of its diverse stakeholder list including; council members, local government officials, and elected representatives, with significant input from the public, their strategic plan took 4 months to develop. 

Read it's 5 year strategic plan example here

Strategic Plan Example: Silicon Valley Clean Energy

Silicon Valley Clean Energy provides a strategic plan that prioritizes visual appeal and simplicity. Despite being in its second year of operation, this strategic plan example effectively conveys the organization's mission and values to its Board of Directors. The company also conducts thorough analyses of the electric utility industry and anticipates major challenges in the coming years. Additionally, it highlights various social initiatives aimed at promoting community, environmental, and economic benefits that align with customer expectations.

"This plan recognizes the goals we intend to accomplish and highlights strategies and tactics we will employ to achieve these goals. The purpose of this plan is to ensure transparency in our operations and to provide a clear direction to staff about which strategies and tactics we will employ to achieve our goals. It is a living document that can guide our work with clarity and yet has the flexibility to respond to changing environments as we embark on this journey." Girish Balachandran CEO, Silicon Valley Clean Energy

This strategic plan example offers flexibility in terms of timeline. It lays out strategic initiatives for both a three-year and five-year period, extending all the way to 2030. The plan places emphasis on specific steps and targets to be accomplished between 2021 and 2025, followed by goals for the subsequent period of 2025 to 2030. While this plan doesn't go into exhaustive detail about implementation steps, meeting schedules, or monitoring mechanisms, it effectively communicates the organization's priorities and desired long term outcomes. Read its strategic plan example here

By studying these strategic plan examples, you can create a strategic plan that aligns with your organization's goals, communicates effectively, and guides decision-making and resource allocation. Strategic planning approaches differ among various types of organizations.

Private Companies: Private companies like McDonald's and Nike approach strategic planning differently from public companies due to competitive market dynamics. McDonald's provides a high-level overview of its strategic plan in its investor overview.

Nonprofit Organizations: Nonprofit organizations, like The Hunger Project, develop strategic plans tailored to their unique missions and stakeholders. The Hunger Project's plan presents a simple yet effective structure with a clear vision, mission, theory of change, strategic priorities, and action items with measurable outcomes.

Government Entities: Government entities, such as the New York City Development Board, often produce longer, comprehensive strategic plans to guide regional or state development. These plans include implementation plans, stakeholder engagement, performance measures, and priority projects.

When creating a strategic plan for your organization, consider the following key points:

Strategic Priorities: Define clear strategic priorities that are easy to communicate and understand.

Stakeholder Engagement: Ensure your plan addresses the needs and interests of your stakeholders.

Measurements: Include relevant measurements and KPIs, primarily for internal use, to track, monitor and report your progress effectively.

Conciseness vs. Thoroughness: Adapt the level of detail in your plan based on the size of your organization and the number of stakeholders involved.

By learning from these examples, you can see that developing a strategic plan should be a process that fits your organization, effectively communicates your goals, and provides guidance for decision-making and resource allocation. Remember that strategic planning is an ongoing process that requires regular review and adjustment to stay relevant and effective.

Need assistance in maximizing the impact of your strategic planning? Learn how our facilitators can lead you through a proven process, ensuring effectiveness, maintaining focus, and fostering team alignment.

Our readers' favourite posts

Subscribe to our bi-weekly newsletter: leaders digest, quick links.

• Podcast (Spotify)
• Speaker & Media
• Alignment Book
• Privacy Policy

Free Resources

• Strategic planning session agenda (Sample)
• Strategic plan template
• How to create a strategic plan (Start here)
• Weekly Strategy Tips
• Non profit program

Products and Services

• Strategic Planning Facilitator
• Strategy Implementation Consulting
• Strategic Planning Course
• 1-855-895-5446

Copyright © 2011-2023 SME Strategy Consulting | Strategic Planning Facilitator + Strategy Implementation Consulting. All rights reserved.

What is the strategic management process + how to get started

Every day in every department of your organization, people are making decisions.

It’s important that all of those decisions are aligned with the same goals — goals that give your business a competitive edge.

But how do you determine your company’s strategy? How can you be sure you’re headed in the right direction?

The answer lies in the strategic management process. The strategic management process guides you through planning, implementing, and maintaining the strategies that lead to the best business performance.

This article introduces the strategic management process and gives you tips on how to do it right.

• What is the strategic management process?

Strategic management is the process of defining and implementing an organization’s strategy. It involves analyzing current circumstances, developing a plan to reach important goals, and executing that plan.

All businesses can benefit from strategic management to help them meet long-term objectives. The process is especially important when the organization is going through big changes or facing aggressive competition. For example, a start-up moving into the scale-up phase can implement strategic management to guide growth.

• Why is strategic management important?

Strategic management ensures that the actions of everyone in your organization are aligned with your major goals. It helps departments and business leaders make better, faster decisions.

Strategic management keeps departments on the same page.

Instead of every department head making their own choices about what the company needs, a strategic plan provides a framework for prioritizing projects.

It helps your organization find new opportunities and anticipate new challenges.

Strategic management involves an in-depth analysis of your current circumstances, the market, and the competitive landscape. This helps you discover new opportunities for success.

Strategic management allows for more efficient organizational performance.

Having a strategy helps people in your organization make tactical decisions more quickly, and it keeps you from wasting time on projects that don’t align with the company’s mission.

This streamlines your processes and creates greater operational efficiency.

• What are the 5 steps of the strategic management process?

Now you know why strategic management is so important, let’s take a look at the 5 essential steps in the strategic management process:

1. Goal setting

The strategic management process is all about creating a roadmap to help you achieve your vision. So before you go any further, you need to clarify what your company wants to achieve.

Many companies kick off the strategic management process by writing a vision statement. A vision statement communicates where you want to be in the future. It’s different from your mission statement — which describes why your company exists — but both statements should inform your strategic plan.

Once you’ve created or reviewed your vision statement, it’s time to pick some broad areas of focus. You don’t need to have specific, measurable goals yet, but you should go into the planning process with an idea of what you want to work on.

For example, growing revenue or improving customer service could be goals at this point.

2. Environmental scanning and analysis

The next part of the process is analysis. Before you can define strategies and tactics, you need to know where you stand currently. That includes internal factors, like your location, structure, and talent, as well as external factors like your competition and market forces.

The more information you have, the stronger the foundation of your strategic plan. Here are some tips for conducting an analysis.

1. Solicit feedback.

Talk to team leaders to get a better understanding of internal operations. Employee surveys, interviews, and discussion groups can be used to learn about the perspectives of everyone in the company.

2. Learn about your customers.

You can survey your existing customers or email list to learn more about how your customers and prospects feel. For example, if they’re generally frustrated with your customer service team’s response time, then improving that can be a strategic objective. Or maybe you’ll learn about new product features they want, and you can plan to develop them.

3. Research the competitive environment.

Researching your competitors can help you find your weak spots and learn where you stand out from the crowd.

You can use Miro’s competitor analysis template to analyze and evaluate the competitive landscape for products, services, and companies.

4. Consider your resources.

When you’re setting your goals, you’ll have to know if you have the people and resources to accomplish them. Having a clear idea of your resources from the start will help you set realistic objectives.

5. Conduct a SWOT analysis.

SWOT stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. You can organize your SWOT analysis visually by using Miro’s SWOT Analysis template .

3. Strategy formulation

It’s finally time to write your strategic plan. In addition to your mission and vision statement, a strategic plan has a few key components.

Strategic objectives

Strategic objectives are high-level goals that help you accomplish your mission. Some examples of strategic objectives include:

• Grow earnings per share by 10% per year
• Launch two new products per year
• Increase NPS to 50 by 2024

For each strategic objective, use tactics that tell you specific actions to achieve the goal. For example, if your strategic objective is to increase awareness of your brand, a tactic could be to create profiles on the major social media sites.

Part of the strategic planning process is determining how you’re going to measure your progress toward your objectives. Choose a metric for each goal and make sure you have the ability to track it.

What about projects?

Your strategic plan doesn’t need to go into the projects that each department will undertake. Projects are related to strategic planning as the vehicle for accomplishing a strategic objective. However, projects can be planned by individual departments once the plan is complete.

For example, if your strategy is to improve customer loyalty and your tactic is to implement a rewards program, the marketing or customer experience teams will be put in charge of managing the creation of the program.

4. Strategy implementation

You’ve determined your organization’s strategy, but the work has just begun. Now you need to make a plan for implementing your strategic objectives.

Secure any resources you need.

Make sure you have the resources, budget, and approvals necessary to execute your plan.

Delegate the work.

Roles should be clearly defined at this point. Who’s in charge of communicating the plan to teams? Who will report on plan progress? Which departments will be responsible for which tactics?

Launch the plan.

Communicate the details of the plan to the company.

Depending on your organization, you may also need a plan to communicate your strategy with the board, key customers, investors, or the public.

Communication is a two-way street. Give people a way to ask questions or submit concerns about the plan.

Offer training.

If business decisions are going to be based on your company strategy, decision-makers need to know what that strategy is.

For people who require a deep understanding of your strategic plan, like department leaders, offer educational sessions to get them up to speed.

Make a plan to share your progress.

The whole company is working toward common goals — make sure you keep everyone updated on how they’re doing. Regular communication about how the strategic plan is going will increase buy-in.

5. Strategy evaluation

Most strategic plans cover the next three to five years. But that doesn’t mean you can’t adjust your strategies along the way.

Part of your implementation plan should be a schedule for continually reviewing your strategic plan, including its relevance to your current circumstances, its practicality, and how much progress you’ve made so far.

If any of your strategic objectives or tactics haven’t been implemented on time, ask yourself:

• Are we still making progress toward this goal?
• Do we have the resources to achieve the goal?
• Can the goal be accomplished if the deadline is extended?
• Is the goal still relevant to our current circumstances?
• Can the goal be changed slightly to accomplish something similar?

Some strategies may need to be removed from the plan or updated.

• Strategic management process secrets for success

The strategic management process has many points of possible failure. Some organizations never agree on a plan, while others have great ideas that fall apart in the implementation process.

Following these best practices will give you the best chance of strategic management success.

Start with a core team that owns the process.

Brainstorming and collaboration are easiest if you start with a small group of stakeholders. This shouldn’t just be a few executives. Bring in a diverse group of thinkers from around the organization.

These people will help make and implement the plan. Their buy-in will also be important in making sure that every department is enthusiastic about the company’s new direction.

Make your goals optimistic but realistic.

Setting your strategy for the next several years is exciting — you get to decide the direction your company is headed and what you intend to accomplish. It’s okay to be optimistic about your vision.

But don’t get too carried away. If your objectives aren’t realistic, the plan will fall by the wayside quickly.

Agree on due dates.

To make sure your plan is carried out, everything should be on a schedule. That includes your strategic objectives (like “increase revenue 30% by the end of 2023 ) as well as elements of the strategic management process, such as holding the planning meeting, communicating the plan to your company, and reporting on your progress.

Have a plan for communication.

Part of the strategic planning process is letting everyone in the company know about the plan — and inspiring them to be enthusiastic about it.

Consider having a company-wide strategic plan kickoff event. When you introduce the plan, you can also let employees know about any rewards that will be given to teams or individuals that exceed the plan’s goals.

Use tools that make collaboration easy.

The strategic management process involves the entire organization, so collaboration is key. But group work can be disorganized and unproductive if you don’t have methods to stay on track and share ideas.

The right tools can help you keep planning sessions organized, share ideas, make collaborative decisions, and convey your ideas to others.

Miro’s visual workspace is a full-featured digital space that makes it easy to plan, share, discuss, and review information in real-time. Try brainstorming ideas, add comments and questions using sticky notes , and vote on potential courses of action using our plugin .

The strategic management process sets the long-term direction for your organization, so it’s important to get it right. That means bringing teams together to share ideas and work toward a common goal.

Miro can aid and enhance collaboration on your strategic management process. Get started with one of the fully-customizable templates from our strategic planning suite. Try it for free .

Miro is your team's visual platform to connect, collaborate, and create — together.

Join millions of users that collaborate from all over the planet using Miro.

Keep reading

Pert chart: how to build better plans in project management.

How to use the Ansoff Matrix for strategic planning (with examples)

How to hold a strategic planning meeting: A simple, step-by-step guide for facilitators

• Strategic Management

Strategic Management Process - Meaning, Steps and Components

The strategic management process means defining the organization’s strategy. It is also defined as the process by which managers make a choice of a set of strategies for the organization that will enable it to achieve better performance.

Strategic management is a continuous process that appraises the business and industries in which the organization is involved; appraises it’s competitors; and fixes goals to meet all the present and future competitor’s and then reassesses each strategy.

Strategic management process has following four steps:

It helps in analyzing the internal and external factors influencing an organization.

After executing the environmental analysis process, management should evaluate it on a continuous basis and strive to improve it.

After conducting environment scanning, managers formulate corporate, business and functional strategies.

Strategy implementation includes designing the organization’s structure, distributing resources, developing decision making process, and managing human resources.

The key strategy evaluation activities are: appraising internal and external factors that are the root of present strategies, measuring performance, and taking remedial/corrective actions.

Evaluation makes sure that the organizational strategy as well as it’s implementation meets the organizational objectives.

These components are steps that are carried, in chronological order, when creating a new strategic management plan.

Present businesses that have already created a strategic management plan will revert to these steps as per the situation’s requirement, so as to make essential changes.

Strategic management is an ongoing process . Therefore, it must be realized that each component interacts with the other components and that this interaction often happens in chorus.

  Related Articles

• Strategy - Definition and Features
• Components of a Strategy Statement
• Vision & Mission Statements
• Environmental Scanning
• Strategy Formulation

View All Articles

Authorship/Referencing - About the Author(s)

The article is Written and Reviewed by Management Study Guide Content Team . MSG Content Team comprises experienced Faculty Member, Professionals and Subject Matter Experts. We are a ISO 2001:2015 Certified Education Provider . To Know more, click on About Us . The use of this material is free for learning and education purpose. Please reference authorship of content used, including link(s) to ManagementStudyGuide.com and the content page url.

• Strategic Management - Introduction
• Strategic Management Process
• Strategy Implementation
• Strategy Formulation vs Implementation
• Strategy Evaluation
• Strategic Decisions
• Benefits of Strategic Management
• Business Policy
• SWOT Analysis
• SWOT Analysis of Google
• SWOT Analysis of Starbucks
• SWOT Analysis of Blackberry
• Personal SWOT Analysis
• SWOT Analysis of Amazon
• SWOT Analysis of IKEA
• SWOT Analysis of Nike
• SWOT Analysis of Microsoft
• SWOT Analysis of China Mobile
• Competitor Analysis
• What is Competitive Advantage ?
• Human, Social, and Intellectual Capital as a Means of Competitive Advantage
• Porter’s Five Forces Model
• Blue Ocean Strategy and its Implications for Businesses
• Overfished Ocean Strategy: How to Drive Growth and Attain Profitability
• Porters Five Forces Analysis of the Airlines Industry in the United States
• Porters Five Forces Analysis of Samsung
• Porters Five Forces Analysis of Virgin Atlantic
• Porters Five Forces Analysis of China Mobile
• Strategic Leadership
• Some Pitfalls to be Avoided
• Corporate Governance
• Business Ethics
• Social Responsibilities of Managers
• Core Competencies
• Core Competency Theory of Strategy
• Ansoff Matrix
• Routes to Strategic Growth
• Diversification as a Viable Corporate Strategy
• 5 Configurations of Strategic Management
• Role of Planning, Plans and Planners
• Reasons for Avoiding Strategic Planning
• Strategic Management for the Millennials
• Strategizing for the Future
• PESTLE Analysis of the Global Aviation Industry
• PESTLE Analysis of Starbucks
• PESTLE Analysis of Samsung
• SWOT Analysis of Unilever
• Business Strategies to Beat the Downturn
• Analysis of Amazon’s Corporate Strategy
• How Amazon Can Improve its Corporate Strategy
• Cutting Costs Strategically
• Actualizing Business as Usual Strategies for Mission Critical Organizations and Functions
• Why Indian Firms Must Strive for Strategic Autonomy in Their Geoeconomic Strategies

.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:42px;color:#F5F4F3;}@media (max-width: 1120px){.css-s5s6ko{margin-right:12px;}} Discover how today’s most successful IT leaders stand out from the rest. .css-1ixh9fn{display:inline-block;}@media (max-width: 480px){.css-1ixh9fn{display:block;margin-top:12px;}} .css-1uaoevr-heading-6{font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-1uaoevr-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} .css-ora5nu-heading-6{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:start;-ms-flex-pack:start;-webkit-justify-content:flex-start;justify-content:flex-start;color:#0D0E10;-webkit-transition:all 0.3s;transition:all 0.3s;position:relative;font-size:16px;line-height:28px;padding:0;font-size:14px;line-height:24px;font-weight:500;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;color:#F5F4F3;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{border-bottom:0;color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover path{fill:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div{border-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover div:before{border-left-color:#CD4848;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active{border-bottom:0;background-color:#EBE8E8;color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active path{fill:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div{border-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:active div:before{border-left-color:#0D0E10;}.css-ora5nu-heading-6:hover{color:#F5F4F3;} Read the report .css-1k6cidy{width:11px;height:11px;margin-left:8px;}.css-1k6cidy path{fill:currentColor;}

• Business strategy |
• How to implement a strategic management ...

How to implement a strategic management process

Strategic management is the ongoing process of strategy formulation, evaluation, and improvement in order to gain a competitive advantage. Learn about the five stages of strategic management and how implementing a strategic management process benefits your organization.

Clear eyes, full hearts, can’t lose. When your team has a clear sense of where you’re going and why, they’re empowered to get their best work done efficiently and effectively. 

But building that level of clarity takes time—and effort. That’s where strategic management comes in. In this article, we’ll take a look at what strategic management is and how your team can benefit from the strategic management process. 

What is strategic management?

Strategic management is the organization and execution of business resources in order to achieve your company goals. This isn’t an individual initiative but rather an ongoing process of strategy formulation, evaluation, and improvement in order to gain a sustainable competitive advantage. 

The strategic management process includes:

Long-term, large-scale goal setting, like BHAGs

SWOT analysis

Strategy evaluation

Internal analysis of your organizational structure

Analysis of your external, competitive environment

Strategic planning

Process implementation plans to achieve your organization’s objectives

Competitive strategy implementation

Strategic management might sound similar to several other critical business elements. Here’s how it stacks up in the business environment. 

Strategic management vs. strategy

At first glance, strategic management and strategy seem like the same thing. The easiest way to differentiate between the two is to think of strategic management as the implementation of your corporate strategy. 

In a business setting, strategy is the process of formulating decisions to hit your organization’s goals. An effective strategy is critical to help your business team understand what your priorities are and where you’re going. But to put the strategy into motion, you need strategic management. Strategic management takes your competitive environment into account and factors in how you’ll execute against your company’s strategy. 

Strategic management vs. strategic planning

A strategic plan is a tool to define where your organization wants to go and what actions you need to take to achieve those goals. Strategic planning is the process of creating a plan in order to hit your strategic objectives.

Strategic management includes the strategic planning process, but also goes beyond it. In addition to planning howyou will achieve your big-picture goals, strategic management also helps you organize your resources and figure out the best action plans for success. 

Strategic management vs operational management

Even though the terms are very different, strategic management is often confused with operational management. Operational management is what your company does. This includes your organization’s value chain—in other words, the processes and practices your organization does on a regular basis in order to deliver a final product, good, or service.

If operational management is the “what,” strategic management is the “why” and “how.” To start, strategic management helps you define why you’re prioritizing different business initiatives and what you’re aiming to achieve in the long term. Then, during the implementation and planning phase, strategic management also defines how you’ll achieve your goals. 

Strategic management example

Strategic management helps companies achieve ambitious goals that require strategic alignment across departments. 

For example, imagine your company is introducing a brand new service line and wants to implement a strategic management process to ensure execution goes smoothly. You’ll first want to evaluate a few things about your current processes and future goals. 

What are the goals of introducing a new service? 

What areas have we struggled with in the past?

What is our budget?

How can we differentiate ourselves in our industry?

By using the strategic management process, you can use the questions above to create a coordinated plan that helps you reach your target goals. Keep reading as we break down the five stages of the strategic management process along with some benefits strategic management can have for your organization. 

5 stages of the strategic management process

The important concepts of strategic management can be viewed in five stages:

1. Identify your goals

The first step in the strategic management process is to evaluate where you’re going, and why. Ideally, you already have some goal materials in place, including: 

Your vision statement

Your mission statement

Your long-term goals and/or BHAGs

Your company’s core competencies

There are additional documents you can consider at this point, including:

Your strategic plan

Your yearly objectives, OKRs , and KPIs

It’s critical to identify your goals and plans in order to understand how you’re going to achieve them. Your goals form the basis of your strategic decisions.

2. Analyze your current situation

Once you’ve compiled a list of where you want to go, it’s helpful to get a bearing on where you are. The second step of strategic management is to take a look inwards at your current processes. If you haven’t already, run a SWOT analysis to get a better understanding of your organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. 

Also consider:

What’s currently working? 

What competitive advantages does your company have? 

What isn’t working? 

What, if any, operational issues have you run into? 

What is your current market share, and how does it compare to your goals? 

What are your current business needs, and are they being met? 

What, if anything, could potentially impact your organization’s goals? 

How does the external environment (including public opinion and the competitive environment) impact your business?

How does your internal environment (including your operations, employee retention and satisfaction, and team morale ) impact your business? 

What does your organization need to do to achieve profitability?

3. Form your strategy

If you haven’t already, this is the step where you build your strategic plan to describe exactly where you want to go and how you plan to achieve those goals. Depending on your organization, and whether or not you’re a new business, this is also when you’d use business process management (BPM) to improve processes.

Key questions to ask during this stage include:

What steps do you need to take to reach your goals? 

How will you measure success? 

What are your current processes, and are you able to achieve your goals with them? 

4. Implement your strategy

You’ve identified your strategy—now it’s time to put it into action. The fourth step of the strategic management process takes the longest. This is where you implement your strategic plan and see it come to life. 

This step depends largely on your business strategy. Essentially, you’re deciding which processes you need to evaluate, monitor, and improve—and putting those process improvement plans into action. This includes anything from better resource allocation or implementing business process automation (BPA) to streamline processes, to developing a company-wide project management office (PMO) . 

Remember that implementing your strategy is a long-term process. In addition to your long-term strategic goals , make sure to set short-term goals to guide your strategy implementation and make sure you remain on track.

5. Evaluate your process

Strategic management isn’t a one-and-done thing. Your management strategy and business environment also change as your company matures. Similar to how you should revisit your strategic plan every three to five years, make sure you’re revisiting your overall strategic management plan regularly as well. Take into consideration any new potential threats, relevant success metrics, and developing avenues your business may want to pursue.

Strategic management frameworks

There are a number of frameworks that can help you approach strategic management. Some of the most popular include:

A SWOT analysis guides you in identifying your strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for your business strategy. When working through the strategic management process, factor a SWOT analysis into the “Analyze” phase, as it helps establish your baseline and where you can go from there. 

Balanced scorecard

 A balanced scorecard can help you evaluate four major elements of a business: learning and growth, business processes, customer satisfaction, and financial performance. By analyzing these aspects separately, you can visualize where your organization has a competitive advantage and where you can make improvements. 

Like a SWOT analysis, this framework can help you during the “Analyze” phase, as it dives into your baseline for each aspect of your business model. 

Value chain analysis

The value chain describes the systems and processes involved in producing new products or services. Analyzing the value chain allows organizations to identify opportunities for improvement within the project life cycle. Some questions that come from value chain analysis include:

Is there an opportunity for cost reduction? 

Can we streamline this process? 

What can we do to make our product or service different from competitors? 

Diving into a value chain analysis will help you pick apart your process and add more specific plans to your strategic management process.  

Why is strategic management important?

Strategic management benefits every level of your organization. While the process takes time, energy, and effort, the upsides are immense and echo throughout the entire organization. With effective strategic management, you’re building:

Clear plans on how you’ll reach organizational goals

At its core, strategic management is a roadmap for achieving company goals. Using the frameworks stated above, strategic management paints a clear picture of an organization’s goals and outlines the path to reach them. 

A team-wide understanding of organizational priorities

The strategic management process ensures that your goals align with what’s best for your organization. By diving into techniques like SWOT analyses and value chain analyses, you’ll discover what opportunities should be at the forefront of your improvement efforts. 

Strategic alignment across the organization

When you establish and communicate your company’s goals and priorities, strategic improvement will trickle down from the leadership level to the whole organization. 

The strategic management process is so effective because it takes strategic initiatives from ideation to execution. By establishing the right goals in the first stage of the process, you’ll find your whole organization aligned with the plan to achieve them.                                                                                             

An ongoing business process

Perhaps the most beneficial aspect of the strategic management process is that it creates a system that is ongoing. The end result of the strategic management process should be a new system that you can tweak as your company evolves. 

Reach new heights with strategic management

Strategic management doesn’t happen in a vacuum. You need key business units and project stakeholders to buy into your strategic plan. Effective strategic management permeates all levels of your organizational structure and factors in all of your organization’s resources in order to build the best long-term strategy for your business.

Related resources

How Asana uses work management for organizational planning

How Asana uses work management to optimize resource planning

Solve your tech overload with an intelligent transformation

9 steps to craft a successful go-to-market (GTM) strategy

Smart. Open. Grounded. Inventive. Read our Ideas Made to Matter.

Which program is right for you?

Through intellectual rigor and experiential learning, this full-time, two-year MBA program develops leaders who make a difference in the world.

A rigorous, hands-on program that prepares adaptive problem solvers for premier finance careers.

A 12-month program focused on applying the tools of modern data science, optimization and machine learning to solve real-world business problems.

Earn your MBA and SM in engineering with this transformative two-year program.

Combine an international MBA with a deep dive into management science. A special opportunity for partner and affiliate schools only.

A doctoral program that produces outstanding scholars who are leading in their fields of research.

Bring a business perspective to your technical and quantitative expertise with a bachelor’s degree in management, business analytics, or finance.

A joint program for mid-career professionals that integrates engineering and systems thinking. Earn your master’s degree in engineering and management.

An interdisciplinary program that combines engineering, management, and design, leading to a master’s degree in engineering and management.

Executive Programs

A full-time MBA program for mid-career leaders eager to dedicate one year of discovery for a lifetime of impact.

This 20-month MBA program equips experienced executives to enhance their impact on their organizations and the world.

Non-degree programs for senior executives and high-potential managers.

A non-degree, customizable program for mid-career professionals.

Teaching Resources Library

Strategy Case Studies

404 Not found

Current students

• Studying at York
• Yorkshare VLE
• Library catalogue
• Semester dates
• Student home
• Manage your studies
• Programmes and modules
• Things to know this week
• Student news
• Student events
• New students' welcome
• Teaching hours
• Enrol or re-enrol
• Your student record
• Your timetable
• Change your plan
• Programme specifications
• Studying beyond your department
• Module catalogue
• University study spaces
• Student Visa holders
• Study skills
• Assessment and examination
• Academic progress issues

Support and advice

Health and wellbeing, work, volunteering and career planning, study and work abroad, accommodation, it and online services, student life in york, if things go wrong.

• Student Centre

Case Studies in Strategic Management - MAN00066M

« Back to module search

Department : The York Management School Module co-ordinator : Dr. Ali Naqvi Credit value : 20 credits Credit level : M Academic year of delivery : 2022-23 See module specification for other years: 2021-22 2023-24 2024-25

Module will run

Module aims.

This module is concerned with the strategic management process. Corporate complexity and market uncertainty result in ambiguous and political processes. Many of the concepts, frameworks, and tools that are proffered for strategic managers appear straightforward in theory but can be difficult to apply in practice. This may be for two reasons: First, theories are abstractions used to capture a complex world and inevitably have limiting assumptions; Second, because at its heart strategy is a social process, which can be difficult to quantify or to analyse objectively. The module starts from the premise that it is these social processes that underpin economic performance.

This module aims to develop an in-depth knowledge of strategic management and to integrate knowledge from previous learning and experience to identify and address strategic concerns of firms. Key themes include strategic leadership, social responsibility, and ethics, the context of strategic management, competitive analysis, strategy in the multi-business firm, disruptive innovation, transformation and renewal, and strategic resilience. Themes are based around case studies in strategic management.

The case studies in strategic management that students will examine, provide technology for the application of theory and analysis, providing a proxy for practical decision making and problem-solving. The case method provides an opportunity for students to deal with ambiguity. The module aims to develop important employability skills in persuasive argumentation, critical thinking, problem definition, problem-solving, analysis and application and evaluative and integrative thinking.

Module learning outcomes

Academic and graduate skills

The ability to manage and synthesise relevant information about firms explicitly and rigorously Broad, integrative thinking; The ability to use management concepts to produce persuasive conclusions Ability to apply theories and models to new environments and contexts Ability to evaluate and critique business theories and models Ability to analyse complex business situations

Other learning outcomes (if applicable) Skills of argument development and persuasion Group working and presentation skills The ability to communicate analyses and conclusions clearly and persuasively

Module content

Subject content

The nature and source of competitive advantage and the fundamental drivers of strategic performance;

Business level and multi-business level strategy, organisational design, synergy, and responsiveness

The complexity of strategic management, including organisational purpose, the business environment, competitive analysis, and the firm

Key concepts associated with strategic management processes for formulating and implementing strategy, providing different perspectives for managing strategically;

The current issues being faced by strategic managers, including knowledge, information and technology management, strategic management of social responsibility, sustainability and business ethics

Special assessment rules

Reassessment, module feedback.

A comprehensive module assessment report is released to students after the spring term exam board (within six weeks of the assessment submission). Individual written feedback is made available to students at the same time.

Indicative reading

Carter, C., Clegg, S.R. and Kornberger, M. (2008). Strategy, Theory and Practice , Sage, London

Grant, R. (2010). Contemporary Strategy Analysis . Wiley

Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J. (2008). The Strategy Safari . NY: Free Press.

• Student visa holders
• Develop your skills
• University card
• Student Hub
• Student Connect
• International students
• Student Buddying Scheme
• Faith and religion
• Equality and diversity
• Self-certification of illness
• Help and support
• In crisis now
• Tips for wellbeing
• Workshops and groups
• Exploring your options
• Finding jobs
• Get skills and experience

York Futures

• Campus accommodation
• Private sector accommodation
• Paying the University
• Tuition fees
• Managing your money
• Assistance funding
• Bursaries and scholarships
• Student loans
• Where do your fees go?

© University of York Legal statements | Privacy | Cookies | Accessibility

Get full access to Case Studies in Strategic Management and 60K+ other titles, with a free 10-day trial of O'Reilly.

There are also live events, courses curated by job role, and more.

Case Studies in Strategic Management

Read it now on the O’Reilly learning platform with a 10-day free trial.

O’Reilly members get unlimited access to books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.

Book description

Through handpicked cases from a variety of areas and business houses, this book illustrates how strategic management can be used to achieve better operational performance and strengthen their services by aligning business goals with performance measures.

Table of contents

• Copyright (1/2)
• Copyright (2/2)
• ONLINE WEB RESOURCES
• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• BSC PERSPECTIVES
• BSC APPROACH TO BUSINESS VALUE DELIVERY
• FRAMEWORK FOR DESIGNING MIS
• FURTHER READINGS
• INTRODUCTION
• RMRB INTERNATIONAL’S DIVISIONS
• SECTORS RESEARCHED BY RMRB
• SERVICES OFFERED BY RMRB
• SYNDICATED OFFERS
• PARENT COMPANY
• KANTAR GROUP
• RMRB INTERNATIONAL’S DIVISION: SRRI
• INFORMATION SECURITY
• DERIVATION OF OPERATIONAL STRATEGY
• DESIGN OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS)
• MIS FOR THE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT
• DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• COMPANY PROFILE
• HOLDING STRUCTURE
• BUSINESS DIVISIONS
• INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
• BUSINESS STRATEGY
• UNDERSTANDING THE TERM MERGER AND ACQUISITION (M&A)
• M&AS: A BUSINESS STRATEGY
• SOME ISSUES IN M&As
• MANAGING THE CHANGE DURING INTEGRATION
• STAGES IN M&A INTEGRATION
• BUSINESS PROCESS
• MAJOR STAKEHOLDERS
• MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS) FOR INTEGRATION
• OBJECTIVES OF A MIS
• PRE-INTEGRATION STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEM
• STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEM FOR PROCESS INTEGRATION
• ARCHITECTURE FOR STRATEGIC INFORMATION FLOW
• BALANCED SCORECARD FOR M&A
• BUSINESS LOGIC
• MEASUREMENT OF KEY PARAMETERS
• A SAMPLE MIS REPORT
• BUSINESS BENEFITS OF MIS
• ECONOMIC BENEFIT PROJECTION
• BIBLIOGRAPHY
• INTRODUCTION TO TATA CHEMICALS
• GROWTH WITH RESPONSIBILITY
• ENRICHING LIFE
• FERTLIZER SECTOR OF TCL
• INDIAN AGRICULTURE AT A GLANCE
• TATA FERTILIZER
• STATERGIES ADOPTED FOR FERTILIZER BUSINESS
• INFORMATION FLOW FOR MARKETING OF FERTILIZERS BY TATA CHEMICALS
• COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENT
• COMPETITION ANALYSIS
• SWOT ANALYSIS
• HISTORY OF MONSANTO
• ORGANOGRAM OF MONSANTO
• STAKEHOLDERS OF MONSANTO—A BRIEF REVIEW
• STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS (SWOT) ANALYSIS
• ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING (ERP) TAKES ROOT
• FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION
• INFORMATION SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
• MONSANTO’s BUSINESS STRATEGY
• OPERATIONAL STRATEGY
• DEVELOPING R&D METRICS USING THE BALANCED SCORECARD APPROACH
• STRATEGY TREE
• THE BENEFITS OF INFORMATION SYSTEM (IS) ENABLED MANAGEMENT TRANSFORMATION
• FUNCTIONAL BENEFITS OF FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION
• COST–BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF FUNCTIONAL INTEGRATION
• EVALUATION OF TANGIBLES
• MODEL FOR EVALUATION OF INTANGIBLES
• SAMPLE ITEMS FOR CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY
• CBA (TANGIBLES AND INTANGIBLES)
• RECOMMENDATIONS
• WHAT IS EVA?
• EVA COMPUTATION
• INTRODUCTION TO DCM SHRIRAM CONSOLIDATED LIMITED (DSCL)
• HISTORICAL MILESTONES
• DSCL'S BOARD OF DIRECTORS
• CORPORATE VISION OF DSCL
• MISSION STATEMENT OF DSCL
• DSCL AGRIBUSINESS
• STAKEHOLDERS OF DSCL AND THEIR OBJECTIVES
• BUSINESS OBJECTIVES OF DSCL
• BALANCED SCORECARD AND THE DERIVATION OF OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES
• ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS
• PERIODICITY AND ROLE OF THE ACTIVITIES DESIGNED IN THE INFORMATION SYSTEM
• SAMPLE STATUS REPORT
• INTRODUCTION TO AGRIBUSINESS AND MICROFINANCE
• COMPANY PROFILE OF HDFC
• BUSINESS SEGMENTS OF HDFC
• MISSION AND STRATEGY OF HDFC
• ORGANIZATIONAL HIERARCHY OF HDFC
• AGRIBUSINESS AND MICROFINANCE BUSINESS
• KISAN GOLD CARD (KGC)
• IT AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS) IN HDFC BANK
• BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
• INTEGRATED INFORMATION SYSTEM
• TEMPLATE OF BALANCE SCORECARD
• RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND THE FUTURE
• INSURANCE: AN INDUSTRY OVERVIEW
• ICICI LOMBARD: COMPANY OVERVIEW
• OBJECTIVES OF STAKEHOLDERS
• SERVICES OFFERED BY ICICI LOMBARD
• CHANNELS USED TO TAP CUSTOMERS
• ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
• CORPORATE STRATEGY OF ICICI LOMBARD
• BALANCED SCORECARD
• BENEFITS OF MIS
• INDIAN LIFE INSURANCE INDUSTRY
• RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE (RLI)
• VISION, MISSION AND GOALS
• STAKEHOLDERS AND THEIR OBJECTIVES
• STAGE OF THE ORGANIZATION
• PRODUCTS OFFERED BY RLI
• ISSUES AND CHALLENGES FACED BY RLI
• OPERATIONS STRATEGY OF RLI
• STEPS INVOLVED IN THE PREPARATION OF A BALANCED SCORECARD
• USE OF INFORMATION SYSTEM IN INSURANCE INDUSTRY
• FUNCTIONAL AREAS
• SOFTWARE TOOLS USED IN RLI
• REDRESS PERCENTAGE
• PERCENTAGE CONTRIBUTION OF NEW OFFERINGS
• PERCENTAGE OF ACTIVE ADVISORS
• AVERAGE NUMBER OF PRODUCTS SOLD PER ADVISOR
• FREQUENCY OF NUMBER OF CALLS LOGGED
• AVERAGE TURNAROUND TIME (TAT)
• SAMPLE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS) REPORT
• COST–BENEFIT ANALYSIS
• VISION OF A FIRM
• VISION OF PANTALOONS
• MISSION STATEMENT OF A FIRM
• MISSION STATEMENT OF PANTALOONS
• CORE VALUES AND BELIEFS OF PANTALOONS
• STAKEHOLDERS OF PANTALOONS AND THEIR OBJECTIVES
• BUSINESS MODEL FOR PANTALOONS
• BUSINESS OBJECTIVES OF PANTALOONS
• STEPS TO IMPLEMENT THE BALANCED SCORECARD TO DRIVE PERFORMANCE
• DERIVATION OF OBJECTIVES USING BALANCED SCORECARD FOR PANTALOONS
• MIS TOOLS USED IN PANTALOONS
• DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS
• RPG: BACKGROUND
• CURRENT SITUATION
• COMPANY OVERVIEW
• VISION OF THE COMPANY
• MISSION OF THE COMPANY
• VALUES OF THE COMPANY
• OBJECTIVES OF RPG
• CORPORATE STRATEGY
• IT STRATEGY
• CALCULATING THE ROI
• MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS) IMPLEMENTATION
• INDUSTRY ANALYSIS
• ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
• STRATEGY OF TATA SKY
• PARAMETERS FOR BENCHMARKING
• DISTRIBUTION NETWORK
• FACTORS AFFECTING THE IT STRATEGY OF TATA SKY
• IT STRATEGY FOR TATA SKY
• ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER (CIO)
• ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE
• IMPLEMENTATION
• IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH
• BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
• ARCHITECHTURE
• A COMPONENT-BASED ARCHITECHTURE
• BUSINESS ANALYTICS
• RISK MANAGEMENT
• TECHNOLOGY IN THE INDIAN BANKING INDUSTRY
• ICICI BANK COMPANY OVERVIEW
• CORPORATE STRATEGY OF ICICI BANK DERIVED FROM SWOT ANALYSIS
• STAKEHOLDERS OF ICICI BANK
• CORPORATE STRATEGY TO ADDRESS STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES
• ROLE OF CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER (CIO)
• IMPLEMENTATION OF MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM (MIS)
• PROPOSED BI SYSTEMS FOR ICICI
• BI TOOLS USED IN ICICI BANK
• BUSINESS INFORMATION STRATEGY (BIS)
• RISK MANAGEMENT AND IT SECURITY
• RISK ASSESMENT AND SECURITY SYSTEMS USED BY ICICI
• TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS THAT ARE SECURED AT ICICI
• BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLAN (BCP) AND DISASTER RECOVERY IN ICICI
• RISK MANAGEMENT SOLUTION ARCHITECTURE
• HARDWARE AND NETWORK AT ICICI
• IT-ENABLED SERVICES
• CURRENT SYSTEMS IN PLACE
• WAY FORWARD

Product information

• Title: Case Studies in Strategic Management
• Author(s): Sanjay Mohapatra
• Release date: June 2011
• Publisher(s): Pearson India
• ISBN: 9788131759844

You might also like

Case studies in strategic planning.

by Hakan Butuner

Case Studies in Strategic Planning shows you how to do systematic strategic planning in real-life cases, …

Case Studies on Marketing Management

by Ramendra Singh

Case Studies in Marketing Management presents case studies that are carefully mapped to the Indian market …

Strategic Business Management

by Gary Cokins

Presenting core theories alongside practical applications, this publication will help students understand how to effectively move …

Case Studies in Management

by J. A. Kulkarni, Asha Pachpande

A collage of case studies for prospective managers that emphasizes on problem solving, decision-making, and effective …

Don’t leave empty-handed

Get Mark Richards’s Software Architecture Patterns ebook to better understand how to design components—and how they should interact.

It’s yours, free.

Check it out now on O’Reilly

Dive in for free with a 10-day trial of the O’Reilly learning platform—then explore all the other resources our members count on to build skills and solve problems every day.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The components and benefits of the strategic management process: A case study of Trade kings (z) ltd

Related Papers

hygeia-design.com

June L Kaminski

TALVINDER KAUR

International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 4(2), 51-61

FADUN Olajide Solomon

IOSR Journals

The study aimed to test the influence of competitive strategies on performance. A descriptive cross-sectional survey design was adopted. The target population was large scale manufacturing firms in Kenya. Structured questionnaire was emailed to senior managers in a sample of 139 firms spread across 13 sub-sectors. A response rate of 75 questionnaires which represent 54% was obtained. Data obtained were analyzed using descriptive statistics and linear regression. Descriptive results indicate that differentiation strategy was displayed through high quality products, brand reputation management, distinctive products. Cost leadership strategy was also a key competitive pathway to performance in the large manufacturing sector. Focus strategy contributes a significant contribution to the performance of large manufacturing firms in Kenya. Results of regression analysis indicated that competitive strategies significantly influenced performance of large manufacturing firms. The study concludes that adopting a combination of cost based strategies and differentiation was more beneficial to firm performance as opposed to solo adoption of either strategy.

Gobinath Muthusamy

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

Vitaly Balashchenko

We present results on the existence, uniqueness and regularity of solutions to the modified Camassa-Holm equation (which depends on the inverse of a second order differential operator) and to the generalized bosonic string equation (which depends on an exponential of a second order differential operator). Camassa-Holm and geometry The Camassa-Holm equation, [2], 2ux uxx + uuxxx = ut − uxxt + 3ux u , (1) is a bi-hamiltonian equation describing shallow water waves. It possesses classical solutions that blow-up in finite time for some regular data (i.e., it admits wave breaking, see [4]) and it also admits traveling wave solutions which are not always smooth [8]. The Camassa-Holm equation also has a geometric interpretation: it describes pseudo-spherical surfaces (see [3] and the recent review [12]). Paper issued with the financial support of Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Cient́ıfico y Tecnológico grant #1111042.

Germán Achury

Introducción. La malaria representa uno de los mayores desafíos de salud pública, principalmente en los países pobres. Ciertas características sociales de Colombia, como la migración, el trabajo informal y la escasez económica, favorecen la minería ilegal. El análisis de la situación de la malaria en estas áreas permite establecer una guía para la prevención, el control y el tratamiento de la enfermedad en los programas de salud pública existentes.Objetivo. Describir la situación de la malaria en las poblaciones mineras colombianas entre el 2012 y el 2018.Materiales y métodos. Se hizo un estudio descriptivo y retrospectivo que incluyó la creación de gráficos y mapas. Para el análisis estadístico se utilizaron la correlación de Pearson y el índice de Moran.Resultados. Entre el 2012 y el 2018, se notificaron 44.032 casos de malaria en la población minera, 43.900 de malaria no complicada y 132 de malaria complicada, así como tres muertes, dos por Plasmodium vivax y una por infección mi...

SPIE Proceedings

Jianchong Yin

RELATED PAPERS

Antonius Suparno

Shawn Van Ausdal

Hemlata Agnihotri

Not Just a Victim: The Child as Catalyst and Witness of Contemporary Africa

Sandra Evers

Langue, traduction et mondialisation : interactions d’hier, interactions d’aujourd’hui

Arnaud Laygues

1º Encuentro Nacional sobre PERIURBANOS e INTERFASES CRITICAS. 2º Reunión Científica de PNNAT. 3º Reunión de la Red Periurbana. Ciudad de Córdoba, Córdoba, 12 al 14 de septiembre de 2017.

Beatriz Giobellina

Journal de Théorie des Nombres de Bordeaux

Marco Antei

The oncologist

Yoshito Komatsu

Composite Structures

Archivos Argentinos de Pediatria

Mariana Duhau

PHI: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika

Faisal Hidayat

Experimental Mechanics

Abir Bhattacharyya

The Journal of Clinical Hypertension

Davide Carvalho

Revista de Historia Naval nº 81

Revista de Historia Naval D.E.I.

Abdullah Alsaad

Valérie Delaunay

Lia Y U L I A Budiarti Arivin

M S-medecine Sciences

Jean-louis Nahon

Diabetes & vascular disease research : official journal of the International Society of Diabetes and Vascular Disease

Solomon T E S F A Y E Doelaso

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy

Introduction, starbucks strategy analysis: pestle analysis of the uk market, macro-environment analysis, pestle analysis of the uk market, microenvironment analysis, starbucks strategic management analysis, reference list.

Starbucks Corporation is a private limited company that was established in 1971. The firm operates within the specialty eateries industry. Upon its inception, the firms’ operation entailed roasting and retailing ground and whole coffee beans, spices, and tea. Its operations were solely based at Seattle’s Pike Place market.

Due to its focus to attain an optimal market share both domestically and internationally, the firm currently operates approximately 18,000 retail stores, which are located in 60 countries. The firm has adopted a unique mission that entails inspiring and nurturing the human spirit. In an effort to position itself in the market, Starbucks has adopted a unique market strategy, which entails product differentiation and growth.

The firm has achieved this goal by dealing with specialty products. Over the years, Starbucks has continued to provide a wide range of beverage products such as coffee, tea, and juices. The firm also deals with a variety of fresh food items such as pastries, salads, and oatmeal.

Its product differentiation strategy has enabled Starbucks to incorporate premium-pricing strategy. In line with its differentiation strategy, Starbuck has adopted a unique marketing strategy. The firm has attained this objective by adopting unconventional marketing strategies. The firm does not engage in aggressive marketing strategies such as advertising, but instead it focuses on branding and high-level marketing using alliances, partnerships, and word of mouth (Larson 2009).

Some of the most effective marketing strategies that the firm has adopted include provision of high quality coffee products, ensuring a high level of customer satisfaction, and establishing itself as the 3 rd place for consumers to patronise between home and work, brand marketing, and establishing a Starbucks’ community.

By adopting the unique marketing strategies, Starbucks has positioned itself as a market leader in an industry that is increasingly becoming very competitive. In a bid to develop a better understanding of Starbucks, the paper entails a detailed analysis of Starbucks internal and external environment. An analysis of the internal environment comes out clearly in the process of undertaking a comprehensive strategic management analysis.

Firms face numerous factors emanating from the external business environment, which makes it paramount for firms’ management teams to develop a comprehensive understanding of the environment in which they operate (Kotter & Schlesinger 2008, p. 136). Market environment analysis should take into account the macro-environment such as the economic, political, legal, social-cultural, and technological environments (Gilligan & Hird 2008, p. 36).

The analysis should also incorporate microenvironment analysis, which entails evaluating the industry in which a firm operates. The micro and macro environments vary across countries. Thus, it is paramount for firms’ management teams to conduct an analysis of the macro-environment of the country in which they operate.

One of the models that firm’s management team should undertake is the PESTLE model in a bid to undertake market environment analysis effectively. In its UK market, Starbucks’ operations are impacted by changes in the macro-environment.

Political environment

The UK has continued to experience a high level of political stability. Consequently, most local and foreign investors perceive the UK as an attractive investment destination. The UK is a member of a number of economic integration and trading blocs such as the G20 and the Euro Zone.

This aspect increases the probability of Starbucks marketing its products to a large number of countries in Europe. Companies operating in the UK benefit from the tariff-free market because of being a member of the European Union. The UK is also in a free trade agreement with Liechtenstein, Switzerland, and Norway.

The UK is also a member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). As a multinational company, Starbucks sources its raw materials from different countries through importing. One of main challenges that the firm experiences in its importing process relates to the existence of international trade regulations and tariffs. These tariffs may adversely affect the firm’s competitiveness in the UK market.

Economic environment

The global economic environment has become very dynamic over the past one decade. The changes in the economic environment have adversely affected firms in different economic sectors. The 2007/2008 economic recession stands out as one of the worst economic recession of the 21 st century.

Due to the recession, Starbucks experienced a decline in its sales revenue, which occurred due to decline in the consumers’ purchasing power. The recession led to an increment in the rate of unemployment thus reducing the consumers’ ability to purchase, and thus there was a change in the consumers’ consumption behaviours.

For example, consumers who previously afforded Starbucks’ products became unable to purchase the same products. Most consumers adjusted their spending habits by being very cautious in their discretionary spending. As a result, consumers became more concerned with purchasing necessities rather than luxuries. The consumers’ regarded specialty products as luxuries.

The 2012 sovereign debt crisis being experienced in the Euro Zone is also adversely affecting business operations in the UK. Following the crisis, the UK has experienced an increment in the rate of unemployment to 11.2 per cent (Cha 2012). Consequently, the consumers’ spending has declined significantly.

The crisis has thrown UK consumers into deep uncertainty with reference to their economic future. In response to their uncertainty, consumers have reduced their spending on both big and small items such as cars and a cup of coffee. The severe nature of the crisis has forced the Moody’s (credit rating agency) to consider downgrading the country’s rating from its current AAA. This move will adversely affect the country’s competitiveness and attractiveness ( This Money 2012).

Social environment

The prevailing social trends in the UK present an opportunity for Starbucks to market its products. Most UK consumers spend a substantial amount on coffee. It is estimated that approximately 511 million cups are consumed in the UK every week. The largest percentage of coffee consumption takes place in shopping malls and franchises such as Starbucks. UK consumers greatly enjoy relaxing as they drink a cup of coffee (Walsh 2011).

Therefore, there is a high probability of the firm increasing its sales revenue. Changes in consumer tastes and preferences can adversely affect Starbucks’ sales. Consumers may shift to specialty coffee products offered by its competitors. The high rate at which consumers are becoming health-conscious in their consumption patterns may affect the firm’s future operations. Therefore, to align itself with these changes, it is critical for Starbucks’ management team to conduct a continuous analysis of the prevailing social environment.

Technological environment

The UK has experienced a wave of technological advancements over the past decades, and to benefit from these changes, it is important for Starbucks to implement the necessary technological changes. UK consumers have become technologically shrewd in their purchasing patterns. In an effort to exploit this phenomenon, Starbucks has embraced a new mobile phone payment system.

The system has played a vital role in reducing queuing at its outlets especially during peak times. Additionally, the emergence of social networks also presents an opportunity that the firm can exploit. Through these social networking sites, Starbucks can engage its customers through communication.

Legal environment

In a bid to improve the country’s competitiveness, the UK government has implemented a number of measures, which make the UK very attractive to local and foreign investors. One of the ways through which the UK government has attained this goal is by recognising intellectual property rights such as patents, copyrights, and trademarks. By ensuring an effective legal environment, Starbucks has managed to operate effectively in the UK.

The UK government has also established 21 new enterprise zones. The zones aim at stimulating economic growth in some areas in the UK. Moreover, to attract investors in such areas, the UK government has implemented a 5-year tax holiday amounting to GBP 275,000. The UK government has not incorporated any exchange control that would affect remittance of royalties, patent fees, and dividends (Deloitte, 2011).

Porter’s five forces

In an attempt to succeed in their respective industries, it is paramount for firms’ management teams to understand the prevailing industry dynamics. One of the ways through which a firm can understand the industry in which it operates is by taking into account the Porter’s five forces model (Grundy 2006, p. 215).

The model evaluates the characteristics of a particular industry by evaluating the potential entrants, the buyers and suppliers’ bargaining power, existence of substitute products, and degree of industry rivalry. The chart below illustrates the prevailing characteristics of the UK specialty eateries industry.

The industry is characterised by low supplier bargaining power because of the numerous coffee beans exported into the UK from other countries such as Brazil and Indonesia. The profitability potential of the UK specialty eateries industry has made most investors to consider the possibility of venturing in the industry.

One of the most common modes of entry that these firms are adopting is importation. The low capital requirement coupled with the fact that no special knowledge is required to venture into the industry has increased the attractiveness of the industry. Emergence of other beverage products such as hot chocolate and tea has led to an increment in the number of substitutes available to consumers.

The UK specialty and eateries industry continue to experience an increment in buyers’ bargaining power due to the low-switching cost associated with the industry.

The occurrence of the recent global economic recession coupled with the sovereign debt crisis has increased the degree of price sensitivity amongst consumers (Miller 2009). Consequently, Starbucks will be required to adjust to these industry dynamics.

The industry is characterised by a high degree of rivalry due to the large number of industry players. Some of the major firms in the industry include Costa, Nero, Caffee Ritazza, BB’s, and Pucchino. Despite this aspect, Starbucks has managed to attain an optimal market position.

Critical success factors

The success of every business organisation is dependent on the effectiveness with which it adheres to the critical success factors. These factors vary across firms and industries. In its operation, Starbucks has incorporated a number of critical success factors, which include attaining global dominance, offering a high level of customer service, and brand development. These factors have played an important role in the success of Starbucks over the years.

Effective strategy development is one of the ways through which a firm can attain coherence between its internal abilities, resources, skills, and the external factors affecting the firm’s operations (Srinvasan 2005).

Therefore, it is important for firms’ management teams to identify the external and internal factors that may affect their firms’ overall performance (Ghani, Nayan, Ghazali, Shafie, & Nayan 2010, p. 52). Different analytical tools can be used to conduct internal analysis of a firm. An example of such a tool is the strategic factor analysis summary matrix.

The chart below illustrates internal factor analysis summary of Starbucks.

Starbucks core capabilities/competencies

Starbucks has been committed to attaining a high level of competitive advantage, and to attain this goal, the firm has nurtured a number of capabilities that aim at improving the level of customer satisfaction.

Over the years, the firm has nurtured the capability of offering high quality specialty coffees and eateries. Starbucks has developed its stores in such a way that customers can enjoy and relax to enhance the level of customer satisfaction. Its ability to develop these capabilities arises from the fact that it has developed a sufficient financial and human resource base.

In the process of offering its products and services to customers, Starbucks greatly emphasises on good business practices and ethics. In 2011, Starbucks was ranked as one of the most worlds’ most ethical company ( Environmental Leader 2011). Considering the intense competition in the specialty coffee market, Starbucks has developed a strong competence with regard to product innovation.

Since its inception, the firm has developed sufficient competence with regard to market and customer innovation process. The objective of its innovativeness is to enable the firm to meet the needs of various market segments. Additionally, innovation contributes towards the firm being effective in addressing the changing consumer tastes and preferences.

Strategic Fit Analysis

Starbucks’ strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats

In the course of its operation, Starbucks has managed to attain a number of strengths. However, its operations have not been without some weaknesses. From the above analysis, a number of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in relation to Starbucks are evident as shown below:

In the course of its operation, Starbucks has managed to position itself as the market leader within the specialty and eateries industry. Its success has arisen from the adoption of effective market strategy, which entails product differentiation and growth. An analysis of the market environment depicts the UK as an attractive market.

The macro environment analysis shows that the UK has managed to ensure a high level of stability with regard to the political and legal environment. The stability established in the UK has made it possible for Starbucks to implement its aggressive expansion strategy. However, the recent global economic crisis coupled with the current sovereign debt crisis presents a major challenge for the firm. Through the Porter’s five forces, it is evident that the UK specialty and eateries industry is very attractive.

Consequently, Starbucks should implement effective strategies to exploit the presented market opportunities. Starbucks’ success in the UK market has emanated by the fact that it has nurtured a number of unique resources, core capabilities, and competences. With regard to resources, Starbucks has nurtured a strong human resource base. As a result, it has managed to offer sufficient customer service. Other capabilities that the firm has developed relate to product innovation and adherence to quality.

These capabilities have made Starbucks a favourite amongst many customers. The capabilities have also enhanced the firm’s strengths. In an attempt to survive in the future, it is paramount for Starbucks to assess its threats and weakness and make the appropriate adjustments. The firm should also exploit the opportunities available in the external business environment.

Cha, A. 2012 , European financial crisis has ripple effect on US businesses. Web.

Deloitte: Taxation and investment in United Kingdom 2011. Web.

Environmental Leader: Ford, Starbucks, among most ethical companies . Web.

Ghani, K., Nayan, S., Ghazali, S., Shafie, L. & Nayan, S. 2010, ‘Critical internal and external factor that affect firm’s strategic planning’, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, vol. 3 no 51, pp. 50-57.

Gilligan, C. & Hird, M. 2008, International marketing: strategy and management , Taylor and Francis, New York.

Grundy, T. 2006, ‘Rethinking and re-inventing Michael Porter’s five forces model’, Strategic Change , vol. 15 no. 5, pp. 213-229.

Kotter, J. & Schlesinger, L. 2008, ‘Choosing strategies for change’, Harvard Business Review , vol. 2, pp. 130-150.

Larson, R. 2009, Marketing strategy and alliances; analysis of Starbucks Corporation, Liberty University, New York.

Miller, C. 2009, Will the hardcore Starbucks customer pay more? The chain plans find out . Web.

Srinvasan, L. 2005, Strategic management, the Indian context , PHI Learning PVT, London.

Theodore, S. 2002, Expanding the coffee experience; Starbucks keeps sales brewing with new products, innovation and global expansion, Beverage Industry , vol. 1, issue 3, pp. 57-62.

This Money: Moody’s could downgrade UK’s ‘AAA’ credit rating in early 2013 if the economy fails to shape up . Web.

Walsh, J. 2011, Britain’s caffeine boom: Why can’t we wake up without smelling coffee . Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, June 19). Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy. https://ivypanda.com/essays/strategic-management-analysis-starbucks-coffee-company/

"Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy." IvyPanda , 19 June 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/strategic-management-analysis-starbucks-coffee-company/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy'. 19 June.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/strategic-management-analysis-starbucks-coffee-company/.

1. IvyPanda . "Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/strategic-management-analysis-starbucks-coffee-company/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Strategic Analysis of Starbucks Corporation: Management & Process Strategy." June 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/strategic-management-analysis-starbucks-coffee-company/.

• Emirates Airline Company HRM Process
• Business Plan: Oloibon Eateries
• Motivational Issues in the Fast Food Sector
• Master Blenders: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management
• The Panera Bread Company: Products and Competitors
• Starbuck and Specialty Coffee
• Starbucks Coffee Business
• Starbucks Corporation Detail Analysis
• Starbucks Coffee in Indian Market
• Howard Schultz View of the Possibilities for the Fledgling Specialty Coffee Market
• Strategic Planning Relevance in an Academic Institution
• Assouplir Company's Sustainability Plan
• HR and Sustainability: Australian Tourism and Hospitality
• Organisational Structure and Value Chain
• Organisational Learning against Learning Organisation

Integrating strategic planning and performance management in universities: a multiple case-study analysis

• Open access
• Published: 13 March 2022
• Volume 26 , pages 417–448, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Lucia Biondi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3284-5919 1 &
• Salvatore Russo 2  

10k Accesses

8 Citations

Explore all metrics

This article has been updated

Over time, public universities have been involved in a process of modernisation based on a new concept of governance and managerial methods for increasing efficiency and effectiveness, as well as transparency and accountability. This paper aims to investigate the link between strategic planning systems and performance management systems in Italian universities by answering the following research question: to what extent do strategic planning tools contribute to performance management systems and, vice versa, to what extent can performance management systems help in the reshaping of universities’ strategies? To this end, we adopt a qualitative approach by conducting a multiple case-study analysis in the Italian context. Data are gathered through documentary analysis and interviews as primary research methods. Since scholars have mainly focused their attention on strategic planning or performance management in universities in isolation, the originality of this research lies in the attempt to connect these two important research fields, whose mutual interdependences are still to a certain extent unexplored. The implications of this study concern recommendations and suggestions for universities’ governance bodies to support their decision-making processes in the definition of their long-term objectives and performance management systems.

Similar content being viewed by others

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Implementation: A Review and a Research Agenda Towards an Integrative Framework

Tahniyath Fatima & Said Elbanna

Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations

Gordon W. Cheung, Helena D. Cooper-Thomas, … Linda C. Wang

Stakeholder Management: Framework and Philosophy

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Over the last 20 years, in Italy, as in the rest of Europe, a series of systemic changes has occurred in the university sector. These have strongly promoted the adoption of new governance models and consequent strategic choices. The determinants include: the instances of change triggered by reforms in the governance of the main public sector organisations; and the need to make higher education organisations more effective and efficient. This has required systemic structural interventions both in organisational models and internal decision-making mechanisms.

The wider process of modernisation has been inspired by the reforms following the pervasive wave of New Public Management (NPM) (Hood, 1991 ; Lapsley, 2009 ; Pollitt, 2007 ) and in subsequent movements such as New Public Governance (Osborne, 2006 ). From this perspective, there has been increasing focus on the need to strengthen the governance of public organisations by providing them with strategic tools able to support decision-making processes and, at the same time, the need to appropriately monitor the efficiency and effectiveness of the services offered, ensuring transparency in administrative actions and accountability (Broadbent & Laughlin, 2009 ; Jansen, 2008 ).

The reforms of university governance in Italy culminating in Law 240/2010 (the so-called “Gelmini reform”), which is characterised by a centralised and top-down structure and by considerable uncertainties regarding certain central nodes of the new governance envisaged for universities, are set in this context. In this sense, the analyses carried out attempt to distinguish between the systemic governance orientation, which concerns the contextualisation of universities in their affiliation to the public sector, and specific university governance, which is more focused on examining the tools available for internal decision-making and organisational mechanisms.

The reform of universities has increasingly encouraged the definition, from a multi-year perspective, of development guidelines, pushing for the implementation of a planning process and, at the same time, introducing a performance management cycle, similar to other public administrations. In fact, the regulations for university planning have concerned the adoption of a Three-Year Planning Document (TYPD), which can be revised annually, consistent with the ministerial guidelines that divide the specific objectives to be reached and the possible lines of action, alongside the related operational indicators. As documents with a strong strategic value, they assume therefore a central role in achieving the main objectives related to a university’s mission.

Seizing the opportunity related to regulatory changes, the most proactive universities have attempted to develop a real Strategic University Plan (SUP) with the same time horizon. This choice is part of a managerial dynamism that several universities have chosen to adopt by reconfiguring the tools and boundaries of strategic governance. In this way, they have been able to demonstrate the degree of the spread of “managerialism” within their complex organisational structures, which are required to support innovation but are often subject to constraints and rules that limit their action.

Simultaneously, the performance management cycle is being affected by another important three-year planning document, the Performance Plan (PP), which is a tool that should define the objectives, indicators, and targets of universities’ activities. The PP establishes the main elements for the annual measurement, assessment, and reporting of performance, which, at the end of the year, should be expressed in the Performance Report (PR).

In this context, this paper investigates the link between the two dimensions (strategic planning and performance management) within universities by answering the following research question: to what extent do strategic planning tools contribute to performance management systems and, vice versa, to what extent can performance management systems help in the reshaping of universities’ strategies?

The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. Sections 2 and 3 provide a review of the relevant literature regarding the topics of strategic planning and performance management, respectively, both starting from public sector organisations in general and then focusing on universities in particular. Section 4 details the research methodology adopted. Section 5 presents the results of the analysis conducted for the three case studies. Finally, Section 6 discusses the results and presents the conclusions.

2 Strategic planning in public sector organisations and universities

The use of a strategy in public sector organisations, while the focus of significant debate in the literature, has met with broad consensus regarding its implications for performance. In particular, this has happened at a time when the functioning of public organisations has attracted the attention of results-oriented management. Recent studies in this field confirm that “managerial autonomy” and “result control” have independent and positive effects on an innovation-oriented culture in public sector organisations (Wynen et al., 2014 ).

In order to establish trajectories and make objectives measurable, strategic guidance and co-ordination instruments are needed. According to Boyne and Walker ( 2010 , p. 186), “strategy is believed to set a direction for collective effort, help focus that effort toward desired goals, and promote consistency in managerial actions over time and across parts of the organisation”. Indeed, the focus has been on using strategic planning as a precursor to the implementation of a more pervasive, process-oriented approach, such as strategic management. Although strategic management is often discussed as an extension of strategic planning, and the two terms often are confused and used interchangeably, they are by no means synonymous (Poister & Streib, 1999 ).

Strategic planning has been defined as a disciplined effort to produce fundamental decisions and actions that shape and guide an organisation (Bryson, 1988 ). It blends futuristic thinking, objective analysis, and the subjective evaluation of goals and priorities to chart future courses of action that will ensure the long-run vitality and effectiveness of the organisation. According to Bryson and Edwards ( 2017 , p. 320), “strategic planning consists of a set or family of concepts, procedures, tools, and practices meant to help decision makers and other stakeholders address what is truly important for their organisations and/or places”. The underlying assumption that drives public organisations to use strategic planning is often considered to be that it guarantees a result-oriented approach and better performance.

However, the relationship between strategic planning and strategic management needs to be further investigated and understood. In its broader vision, the system considers strategic planning as the first step in a model oriented towards the measurement and evaluation of results. In particular, in public sector organisations, the use of strategic plans is a way of reducing the political-institutional meaning of choices through strategic guidelines and objectives. In this sense, the strategic plan enables the application of performance management.

Strategic planning is normally considered the main element, but not the essence, of strategic management, which instead uses several phases considered outside of the realm of planning (in the strictest sense of the term) that are related instead to resource management, the implementation of activities and processes, and control and evaluation (Bryson, 2011 ; Poister & Streib, 1999 ). Strategic planning should be understood as a set of concepts, processes, and tools to determine “what an organisation is”, “what an organisation does”, and “why it does it” (Bryson, 2004 ).

From this perspective, strategic planning has been widely used in strategic management applied to the public sector (Barzelay & Jacobsen, 2009 ; Bryson, 2011 ; Poister & Streib, 2005 ). In addition, strategic management tools, such as the balanced scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, 1996 ) and strategic mapping (Kaplan & Norton, 2000 ), have proven to be particularly useful in the public sector because they are able to make the public value more perceptible for the various stakeholders (Talbot, 2011 ).

Since its conceptualisation in the 1960s (Bolland, 2020 ), strategic management has become a diversified field that ranges from the analysis of strategy in businesses to that of strategies in non-profit organisations and the public sector. Its adoption was partly a response to environmental turbulence in the 1970s, which made the traditional planning approach antiquated, and partly a reaction to the non-functioning of some management models, such as the Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS), with strong demands in terms of information processing and management capacity (Johnsen, 2015 ). Since the 1980s, therefore, public sector organisations have also begun to make more consistent use of strategic management concepts and techniques and it is now common in the public sector in many countries and at different levels of government (Boyne & Walker, 2004 ; Bryson et al., 2007 ; Poister & Streib, 1999 ).

According to Poister and Streib ( 1999 , p. 308), “effective public administration in the age of results-oriented management requires public agencies to develop a capacity for strategic management, the central management process that integrates all major activities and functions and directs them toward advancing an organisation’s strategic agenda”.

While it is assumed that organisations in general will attract the attention of different stakeholders, it is important to consider how public sector organisations are by their very nature more prone to political processes than other organisations, thus needing to use tools such as stakeholder analysis to analyse actors, interests, and power relations, as well as to find ways other than business to motivate employees (Wright & Pandey, 2011 ) and associates. This is appropriate when the use of documents with a strong strategic purpose becomes part of the set of tools available to public organisations, comprising elements, structures, and methods borrowed from those used in for-profit organisations.

As far as universities are concerned, starting from the 1990s, studies such as that of Conway et al. ( 1994 ) have emphasised the importance of the role of users in defining strategic plans and, in particular, of students in outlining the mission of tertiary education organisations, as well as from a competitive point of view in relation to the surrounding environment; more generally, some contributions have highlighted how to shape a process of mid- to long-term planning in universities (and why this is necessary) (Holdaway & Meekison, 1990 ; Lerner, 1999 ; Rowley, 1997 ). More recently, some studies on the theme have focused on specific territorial contexts, confirming the close link between strategy and the reference environment (Howes, 2018 ; Kenno et al., 2020 ; Luhanga et al., 2018 ; Moreno-Carmona et al., 2020 ; Mueller, 2015 ). With reference to the relationship between the strategic dimension and performance, strategic management is certainly at a higher level and can be interpreted as a performance management process at the strategic level (Poister, 2010 ). The role of strategic management focuses on the actions to be taken to position the organisation so that it can move into the future, while performance management is largely concerned with the management of current programs and current operations. Performance management in public organisations, specifically in universities, will be discussed in the following section.

Traditionally, because of the specific nature of their activities, universities have been considered different institutions from businesses and other public sector organisations. For this reason, studies on universities have, for a long time, not focused on how they operate, how they are managed, or how they conduct their decision-making processes. In these organisations, inputs, outputs, and outcomes are often not clearly established and consequently the measurement system appears severely limited. In the late 1990s, a pioneering study aimed at detecting the presence of strategic planning in European universities found that just over half of the universities surveyed had strategic plans in the form of written documents designed to prioritise objectives; in most cases, however, the strategic plans had an incentivising rather than a prescriptive function (Thys-Clément & Wilkin, 1998 ).

Although the literature on university strategies is not still well developed, some studies have shown that the mere focus on strategic planning in practice may not be particularly relevant. Such practice would be resolved in verifying that the goals achieved fit the objectives. It would, therefore, have a formal or neutral role. Other studies have proposed strategic planning as an indispensable tool for improving performance in these organisations, with particular reference to colleges and universities (Cowburn, 2005 ; Dooris et al., 2004 ; Fathi & Wilson, 2009 ; Ofori & Atiogbe, 2012 ).

In addition, applied proposals to implement performance measurement systems appear to be applicable and capable of measuring the achievement of results in these organisations (Johnes, 1996 ; Johnes & Taylor, 1990 ). The higher education literature identifies several limitations in higher education performance: the lack of data availability; the presence of too many indicators that are not particularly useful in representing performance; and confusion between input, processes, and outcomes (Layzell, 1999 ).

Because of their specific nature, universities would require as a priority “models and systems of strategic awareness, management and progress that recognize the issues, contexts and processes that actually shape their strategic change” (Buckland, 2009 , p. 533).

3 Strategic implications for performance management in public sector organisations and universities

Strategic planning and performance management are closely interconnected. In fact, if on the one hand it is difficult to achieve good results without an adequate strategic planning process, on the other hand it would make no sense to define mid- or long-term objectives, and the corresponding operational actions, without then verifying if, how, and to what extent they have actually been met and what results they have produced (Bryson, 2003 , 2004 ).

Despite this indisputable link, research in public management has mainly focused on performance rather than on strategy (Cepiku, 2018 ). This is probably due in part to the reforms that, over the last 30 years, have introduced this concept (of Anglo-Saxon origin) into the public sector by increasingly formalising its reporting (Bouckaert & Halligan, 2008 ).

Performance measurement (and management) systems are normally aimed at identifying performance targets, enabling the assessment of individuals, and informing managers when to take action to prevent deterioration in performance or when it becomes apparent that targets have not been met (Neely et al., 1994 ). The result is the need for organisations to allow the performance measurement system to support the achievement of objectives and the efficiency and effectiveness of the strategic process.

Several contributions have focused on performance management in the public sector in general (Arnaboldi et al., 2015 ; Broadbent & Laughlin, 2009 ; Cepiku et al., 2017 ; Dal Mas et al., 2019 ; de Bruijn, 2002 ; Jansen, 2008 ; Kearney & Berman, 2018 ; Lee Rhodes et al., 2012 ; Van Dooren et al., 2010 ; Van Dooren & Van de Walle, 2016 ). Others, however, have dealt with the topic of performance in specific public organisations. To name just a few, Smith ( 2005 ) analysed the topic in the healthcare sector, Mussari et al. ( 2005 ) discussed the performance of local public companies, Grossi and Mussari ( 2008 ) attempted to identify the possible different dimensions of local governments’ performance, Cohen et al. ( 2019 ) focused on the relations between local government administrative systems and their accounting and performance management information, highlighting the existence of a mismatch between the two, Bracci et al. ( 2017 ) examined the implementation of a performance measurement system in two public entities, Papi et al. ( 2018 ) elaborated and tested a model for measuring public value in a municipality, and Xavier and Bianchi ( 2020 ) investigated how performance management systems can support governments in crime control.

These studies have sometimes highlighted the important difference between performance measurement and performance management systems (Arnaboldi et al., 2015 ; Broadbent & Laughlin, 2009 ). In fact, the effort to translate results into numbers should not be a mere bureaucratic exercise but should result in the opportunity to use these data to improve the provision of services to the public (Jansen, 2008 ; Van Dooren & Van de Walle, 2016 ).

On this point, Bouckaert and Halligan ( 2006 ) specified that a complete performance management system should follow a logical sequence with three main steps: (i) measuring; (ii) integrating; and (iii) using. Merely measuring, which means collecting and processing performance data into information, is insufficient if such information is not incorporated within a broader system of documents, procedures, and discourses and subsequently used to improve decision-making, strategies, results, and accountability.

Incorporation, which is what this paper investigates, deals with including performance information in the policy, financial, and contract cycles (Van Dooren et al., 2010 ). Specifically, the policy cycle starts from the strategic plan (which defines major objectives and targets for resources, activities, outputs, and outcome), continues with the implementation, then the monitoring, followed by the evaluation (the reports from which incorporate performance information), and this feeds into the next strategic plan. The financial cycle includes budgeting and is ideally embedded in the policy cycle.

Regarding performance in higher education, this theme has attracted the attention of many scholars who have investigated the peculiarities of performance measurement tools in universities (Balabonienė & Veþerskienė, 2014 ) or how they are applied in some territorial contexts. For example, Higgins ( 1989 ) explored the case of British universities, Modell ( 2003 ) dealt with the subject in Swedish tertiary education, Guthrie and Neumann ( 2007 ) outlined the establishment and mechanisms of a performance-driven Australian university system, Ter Bogt and Scapens ( 2012 ) focused on the case of the universities of Groningen in the Netherlands and Manchester in the UK, Kallio et al. ( 2017 ) emphasised the problems of measuring quality aspects in academic work in the Finnish case, and Dobija et al. ( 2019 ) provided experiences from Polish universities. These contributions highlight that different types of performance management are used in universities and that its scope varies among different actors, depending on diverse external and internal factors. Moreover, measuring performance is difficult in knowledge-intensive organisations, where quantitative indicators may fail in catch the complexity of such institutions. Often, performance management is adopted by a university simply to comply with regulations or gain external legitimation, rather than to make a real change in the use of resources to the enhance efficiency and effectiveness of their activities.

Aversano et al. ( 2017 ) examined the evolution of performance management systems in the university context. Their study confirmed that, beyond the desired intentions, the focus is still strongly on the production of the data rather than its use to provide a holistic view of university performance that can guide strategies, programs, and activities.

Moreover, as pointed out by several authors (Bower & Gilbert, 2005 ; de Bruijn, 2002 ; Francesconi & Guarini, 2018 ; Goh et al., 2015 ; Van Thiel & Leeuw, 2002 ), one of the distinctive characteristics of strategic planning and performance management in public organisations, including universities, is connected to the issues encompassing resource allocation and budgeting practices. In fact, assigning adequate resources through the budgeting process is crucial in order to translate strategic objectives into operational objectives. Further, a feedback loop exists as, especially in recent years, the results achieved (as measured via performance management) are increasingly used by the governance body in decision-making related to budgeting.

Recently, Deidda Gagliardo and Paoloni ( 2020 ) took a snapshot of the state of the art of performance management in national universities, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses as well as predicting future challenges.

Examining the Italian context, the Italian experience has been marked by a reform in 2009 (Decree no. 150/2009), which highlighted the inadequacy of existing planning and control systems, as well as the absence or insufficiency of mechanisms for measuring and managing performance in public sector organisations. Nevertheless, to date, there remains no empirical evidence of the concrete usefulness of the tools introduced and their effective capacity to produce improvements in terms of effectiveness and efficiency in public administrations (Arnaboldi et al., 2015 ).

As illustrated, academic literature on the two research topics (strategic planning and performance management in universities) taken in isolation is quite extensive. However, the review of the literature highlights how few contributions directly link the two streams of research, looking for their interconnections (Biondi & Cosenz, 2017 ; Campedelli & Cantele, 2010 ; Cosenz, 2011 ; Francesconi and Guarini, 2018 ). In particular, the study conducted by Bronzetti et al. ( 2011 ), examining the planning methods of Italian public universities and analysing the related strategic plans under the dual dimension of process and content, identified as a future study trajectory the need to investigate the use of this document for decision-making purposes also in relation to the PP. The current paper attempts to join the debate by answering this call.

4 Methodology

In order to address our research question, this paper adopts the case study as a qualitative approach. Case study research is described as a method with which: “[…] the investigator explores a real-life, contemporary bounded system (a case) or multiple bound systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information, and reports a case description and case themes. The unit of analysis in the case study might be multiple cases (a multisite study) or a single case (a within-site case study).” (Creswell, 2013 , p. 97).

Our analysis is carried out through a comparative study of the strategic planning tools and their degree of influence on the performance management systems of three Italian state universities, identified as case studies.

We applied a multiple case studies methodology with an exploratory purpose to understand “how” and “why” certain phenomena occur in a specific economic-social context (Stake, 2005 ; Yin, 2003 ).

Our decision was also motivated by interest in analysing both the single universities in detail and comparatively, in order to investigate similarities, differences, and patterns across the cases (Gustafsson, 2017 ). In this sense, the analysis is also comparative (Yin, 1993 ).

The choice of cases was driven by selecting universities that have been early adopters of these planning tools, thus being pioneers in the Italian context. This made it possible to carry out a longitudinal study for at least two complete planning cycles, highlighting their development characteristics from a temporally consistent perspective (Pauwels & Matthyssens, 2004 ). Although each university examined belongs to a different complexity group according to a recent classification (Rostan, 2015 ), the choice of strategic planning was unrelated to this dimension.

The study was based on the same level of observation, focusing on how the three universities proceeded with the introduction of the strategic planning system over time and which framework they have been using to link it to the performance management system. For all three universities, the analysis took as reference at least two programming cycles, albeit with a different time horizon.

The analysis is supported by the different context and dimensional variables of the three universities (see Table  1 ). These universities are differentiated by year of foundation (one founded in the second half of the nineteenth century, the other two more than a century after), by being located in different geographical areas (North, Central, and South Italy) and therefore having different direct competitors, as well as by size, in terms of student population, departmental articulation, active study courses, tenured teaching staff, and technical-administrative staff.

The research design is structured into different phases. Initially, we created an interpretative framework that could homogeneously highlight the areas under investigation. Hence, the variables that could better highlight the elements characterising the three universities were identified. Subsequently, the three case studies were reconstructed and illustrated. To this end, data were collected through a triangulation of sources. First, we carried out a documentary review of secondary sources, namely institutional documents (Corbetta, 2003 ) pertaining to strategic planning and the performance management cycle of the three universities. Specifically, we reviewed:

three-year planning documents;

strategic plans;

three-year and annual budgets;

reports on periodic monitoring;

performance plan and/or integrated plans;

performance reports;

minutes of the meetings of the academic bodies; and

quality manuals.

These documents are publicly available from the institutional websites of the universities.

Subsequently, evidence was complemented using primary sources, namely semi-structured interviews (Longhurst, 2003 ; Qu & Dumay, 2011 ). The interviews were with academic administrative managers involved in the strategic planning and performance management processes, and who actively participated in the drafting of these documents in each of the universities investigated. The interview protocol was based on open questions agreed by the authors, aimed at investigating “how” and “why” these processes have been developed over time. The answers helped the authors to understand the content of the documents and the dynamics underlying their elaboration.

Evidence gathered from the three case studies is presented according to the following structure, aimed at facilitating the comparison and highlighting the peculiarities among them:

the development of strategic planning process;

articulation and content; and

linking strategic planning with the performance management cycle.

5.1 The development of the strategic planning in the three cases

The three case studies may be considered as early adopters of a structured strategic planning process, in line with the relevant regulation (Law no. 240/2010). However, they have different starting dates. The first SUP of University A was issued in 2012 (although the process began in 2010), while University B’s first SUP was issued in 2013. University C can be considered not just a pioneer but a precursor of what the regulation would require, in that it started the formalisation of its planning process even before the reform came into force, in 2009.

University A’s SUP was entitled “Towards 2018” to symbolise the far-sightedness of a vision aiming for strong innovation. In the preface, according to the Rector’s assertion, the document represents a challenge to enable the university to “ compete and collaborate, with the most prestigious universities to fulfil all three of its institutional missions: research, teaching, and innovation ” (SUP 2012–2014, p. 1).

Since its inception, the SUP has been considered a document to support the Rector in his mandate by involving the top management of the organisational structures considered crucial for the university regarding its preparation (from the central structure to the individual departments, schools, and research centres). A special team was created to work on this, comprising an internal expert in corporate strategy and various collaborators. This team was also supported by the “Planning and Evaluation” Office, an organisational unit of the “Strategic Planning and Programming” area. The SUP of University A is, therefore, the result of meetings, discussions, and comparisons with the main competitors, which creates a shared strategic view of the governance of that university. Creating such “shared strategic ambition” is fundamental to mapping the strategic paths to be adopted and makes it possible to consider the plan as an actual guiding document for the university, shared by all the organisational units.

Hence, the strategic planning process of University A passes through several stages. As mentioned above, the first stage involves mapping the strategic ambition of the main subjects in charge of the university’s governance (phase 1) to verify their degree of alignment (phase 2). These two “interlocutory” phases are followed by an “objective” analysis of the internal and external environment (phase 3) to verify, in the case of conflicting subjective perceptions regarding a topic or objective, which is the correct one, but also in case of agreement, to test the validity of the concordant “subjective” perceptions. In the opinion of those who have experienced it first-hand, this is a critical “dialogical” stage in which different actors participate and discuss to reach a joint agreement. This makes it possible to reach a greater degree of alignment (phase 4) on which University A’s strategic goals should be based, which are then submitted for the attention of stakeholders before creating the final draft of the plan (phase 5). Moreover, University A has also used external consultants for specific aspects of the plan for which there was no in-house expertise.

Regarding University B’s strategic planning process, this happens in a somewhat different way. In fact, the starting point of the process is not the SUP but the TYPD. The TYPD is issued by the Rector considering the programmatic indications coming from the relevant Ministries, the proposals of the Academic Senate (SA), and the indications of the Evaluation Board. The TYPD is part of a multi-year planning process that aims to achieve the university’s effective strategic governance and management. The TYPD is an act of political direction since, drawing inspiration from the university mission, it illustrates the reference values of the government action and, from them, at the strategic level, the general objectives to be pursued regarding the typical institutional functions (research, teaching, third mission), as well as the transversal and support functions (personnel, construction, communication). The planning process then continues with the drafting of a SUP. This document defines in a more concrete and detailed way what is reported in the TYPD. In the preparation of such a document, the Rector is assisted by the Vice-Rectors (covering the areas of: teaching; research; university networks; schools, societies and institutions; relations with the labour market; innovation and technology transfer; infrastructural and workplace safety policies; and relations with university governing bodies and regulatory matters). From the analysis of the last TYPD and SUP, a link emerges between these two strategic planning documents and the document that formalises the performance cycle [called the Integrated Plan (IP), which will be discussed later]. In fact, it has been established that the SUP will undergo a periodic review, and that the TYPD itself may undergo revisions, on an annual basis, concerning the preparation of the IP.

However, the planning process seems less structured and participatory than in University A. As required by the regulations, and as confirmed in the words of one of the managers interviewed: “ The political office is responsible for political guidance, while the administration is responsible for administrative management and assists the political office. On the one hand, the SUP and TYPD are both policy documents and are, therefore, within the sphere of competence of the governing bodies. They are drawn up by the Rector and Vice-Rectors, and then approved by the Board of Directors. On the other hand, the Integrated Plan is an administrative document .”

Nevertheless, it is likely that the Vice-Rectors informally consult the General Director (GD) also regarding the definition of strategic programming documents.

Another difference from University A is that, in University B, the entire process is carried out internally, without involving external consultants. Moreover, we did not find any evidence regarding periodic monitoring of the SUP at University A. In contrast, University B draws up an intermediate monitoring document to check to what extent the objectives have been achieved and, if necessary, to modify decisions and actions. This check takes place one and a half years after the approval of the SUP. A final report is then issued at the end of the three years. While the strategic planning process is top-down (since once the SUP is approved, the departments have to draw up their own strategic plans), drafting the report on the implementation of the SUP is a bottom-up process. Each structure, starting from its strategic plan, verifies in itinere the achievement of the objectives for teaching, research, and the third mission, respectively. These reports are then consolidated and summarised at the central level by the relevant Vice-Rectors.

Moving on to the strategic planning process of University C, as highlighted, this is the university that started the formalisation of its planning process earliest, in 2009. The first SUP had a time horizon of five years and included the triennial strategic guidelines (2010–2012). This is a peculiarity in comparison with the other cases, in that the TYPD is not a separate document but embedded in the strategic plan itself.

As declared in the document, the process to issue the SUP involves much participation and different actors are engaged (like University A). In fact, the aim is to gain consensus among all the university’s stakeholders (students, academics, administrative staff), support the governance, and facilitate decision-making processes and activities, based on participation and shared ideas (SUP 2010–2014, p. 4). This first document was drawn up by a Commission made up of delegates and experts, with an advisory and consultative function of the Rector, with a specific mandate to support the preliminary stage of the university’s strategic planning documents. The document was then presented to the university’s governing bodies, ultimately incorporating the requests that emerged from its public presentations. As stated by an interviewee: “ The whole academic organisation is involved in providing the data; departments have also to adapt their strategic plan to the university’s plan ”.

This path of elaboration, redefinition, and involvement, although taking more time than expected, enhances legitimation, and strengthens consensus regarding its strategic vision by defining quite detailed and shared lines of action. For University C also, the entire process was carried out without involving external consultants.

The drawing up of this document started from the analysis of the university’s current situation, measured through the principal indicators adopted for the assessment of the university system. At the same time, the SUP considered the need for financial sustainability and enhanced efficiency and effectiveness of the university’s activity. Coherently, the delegate of the Rector for strategic planning pointed out that the main objective of University C for the next five years was enhancing the quality of performance by reducing costs and increasing revenues.

In the preface of the document, written by the Rector, we learn that the SUP will also assist in providing the main variables to be used in the next triennial strategic guidelines. In fact, the Ministry assesses and finances higher education entities based on their performance indicators and their improvement according to the objectives. This is an interesting point, which highlights a strong link between the SUP and the triennial strategic guidelines: the strategic plan initially includes the previous triennial strategic guidelines, and at the same time, conversely, is the basis for extracting information to create subsequent guidelines. Moreover, as we will see better later, the SUP also refers to the IP.

Unlike University B, the achievement of objectives is not periodically evaluated, or at least it is not formalised in any way.

5.2 Articulation and content of the documents in the three cases

The three case studies show the SUPs’ different approaches and content. These differences depend on the meaning that each university has given to the SUP, what the motivation is, and what the relationship is with the TYPD. The relationship with the latter is, in fact, a conditioning factor for the entire content of the SUP.

In University A, as already mentioned, the process of formulating the SUP began with several meetings and discussions to map and compare the subjective perceptions of the main subjects in charge of strategic governance (Rector, Vice-Rectors, Faculty Chairs, chairman of the Board of Departmental Directors, GD). To formulate a document involving the strategic nodes of the university’s future, several critical variables were considered regarding the definition of a common strategic ambition: internal structure; external structure and specific context (sector, competitors, potential entrants, complementary companies, customers, suppliers, financing bodies, communities, etc.); mission and vision; internal and external objectives; and strategies and three-year actions. As highlighted in the methodological attachment to the SUP 2012–2014 (p. 3), this document, which precedes all forms of planning and programming for the whole organisation, has been designed in such a way that it can be linked to the strategic guidelines identified, the TYPD, and the PP.

People involved were asked to describe in narrative terms their perception of University A’s strategic ambition, based on which a strategic map was created, leading ultimately to the issuing of the final SUP. The final version was based on the identification of ten objectives to be achieved through specific strategies: strategic reorganisation of research and educational activities; improving University A’s local, national, and international visibility; integration with other close universities and higher education institutions; integration with the territory; improving University A’s student services and attractiveness; enhancing the teaching staff’s potential; enhancing the technical and administrative staff’s potential; reorganising the internal structure; providing new and better spaces; and assuming a transversal sustainability orientation.

As well as focusing on the three macro areas (teaching, research, and third mission), this document also examines each objective in relation to strategies achievable through specific actions (measured via indicators).

The second strategic planning experience was developed under different conditions and initially appeared to have fewer expectations. Moreover, governance conditions had changed [turnover of the Rector and Board of Directors (BoD)] and the change in the SUP’s style appeared to be an element in distancing itself from the previous approach, while maintaining a common basis.

This emerges clearly from examining the document and the responses gathered from those who collaborated in drafting both SUPs.

The second SUP was also developed through a co-owned process that involved the entire academic community and took place in two phases. This is a completely different document, less voluminous in its content and without any methodological details, although the approach has changed.

The first phase was dedicated to identifying the university’s objectives by sharing strategic guidelines and defining the actions to be pursued in 2016–2020. The Vice-Rectors were primarily involved and, in collaboration with the reference structures, helped identify the primary objectives and strategies by dedicating ample space for all the university’s components to collaborate. The second phase was aimed at systematising the collected material, clearly defining the vision, mission, objectives, strategies, actions, and monitoring indicators, and subsequently preparing the final document.

In this sense, the interviews show that the strategic planning in these different periods was emblematically the reflection of the two different styles of governance. In the first SUP, the university wanted to demonstrate strong choices and changes, justified by work carried out with a scientific method but that also ended up creating important breaking points within the organisation. The second SUP focused more on the concept of inclusion, utilised a different leadership approach, focused on objectives other than transversal, and focused on the central administrative apparatus’s functioning. The structure of the document was based on the identification of five macro-objectives: promoting impactful research; creating a transformative study experience; acquiring an international dimension; acting as a catalyst for innovation; and guaranteeing a sustainable academic future. Subsequently, each macro-objective was broken down into objectives for which strategies and actions were identified, confirming the structure followed in the first SUP.

In University B, the SUP is divided into three separate sub-documents in more detail: a Strategic Research Plan (SUP-R); a Strategic Teaching Plan (SUP-D); and a SUP for the Third Mission (SUP-TM). These plans were prepared by the Vice-Rectors; in particular, as far as the third mission is concerned, University B has decided to establish three Vice-Rectorates who together promote and monitor: innovation and technology transfer activities; relations with schools, companies, and institutions (so-called public engagement); and relations with the world of work. As stated by an interviewee: “ The idea behind the choice of the strategic plan, articulated by areas, is to favour comprehensiveness, taking care of each area of detail. The strategic plan must be firmly linked to the lines of academic innovation; it also requires to be based on a broad consensus implemented through an increasingly participatory and inclusive procedure, involving the collegiate governing bodies, departments and schools. ”

Unlike the other two cases, which are more deeply rooted in time, the first SUP relates to the period 2015–2017, while the following SUP refers to the 2018–2020 three-year period. Analysing the two documents from a longitudinal perspective, they are identical regarding the division into the three macro-areas with which the university is concerned (this division was agreed at a central level in adherence with the three institutional activities). However, there are small changes in structure and content, partly due to natural refinements in preparing the document, and partly resulting from a change in governance (Rector and Vice-Rectors). As far as the SUP-R is concerned, its structure mirrors the two programming cycles, defining the general strategic objectives starting from the TYPD, which in turn are then translated into specific strategic objectives for which indicators are identified and actions to support them are suggested. The SUP-D, in its first formulation, after explaining the mission and vision for teaching, indicated objectives, actions, and monitoring/success factors. The second version, however, begins with the formulation of the overall strategy for the university’s didactics, moving to an “as is” analysis based on data derived from the university’s Indicators Sheet (made available by ANVUR, the Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of the University and Research Systems) to identify strengths and weaknesses, subsequently identifying four general “strategic objectives” (called “general lines”), each with (specific) “objectives” and “actions”. The SUP-TM has undergone major changes in the transition from one three-year period to another. In its first formulation, the SUP-TM 2018–2020 was a descriptive report of the initiatives conducted by the university (e.g. activities related to lifelong learning, the Palladium theatre, the Job SOUL platform, summer schools, and social reporting); the SUP-TM 2018–2020 is much more structured, articulating the three established Vice-Rectorates’ third mission areas and indicating for each of them the general strategic objectives (called “lines of intervention”), outlined in actions and a proposal of indicators for evaluating their achievement.

There is no direct evidence of how the Vice-Rectorates proceeded operationally in elaborating the individual plans, although in his policy document the Rector encouraged a “participative” process and, from the minutes of approval of the last SUP by the SA and the BoD, it can be seen that: “ the document is the result of collective work, which has been widely participated and shared ”.

It is only in the SUP-TM 2018–2020 that it is clearly stated that, in order to draw up the document, “ it was considered appropriate to schedule meetings with the individual Departments with the intention of carrying out a complete survey of the experiences and good practices in progress, as well as to submit the main strategic lines represented here, in order to gather possible stimuli and suggestions for improvement from the departmental realities that have so far largely contributed to the development of the Third Mission ” (SUP-TM 2018–2020, p. 40). The data appear to be important as they show how the content of the document is the expression of sharing and participation with the individual departments representing the main driving force of the university, despite their autonomy.

The administrative bodies also participated, as it emerged that the Vice-Rectors, despite having prepared their respective plans without consulting the offices, informally consulted the GD and various structures. This is evident both from the interviews and the minutes mentioned above, where it is stated that the Rector, in addition to thanking the Directors, also thanked the GD as well as the BoD “ for having contributed effectively, each for the aspects within his or her competence, to the drafting of the Plan ”.

In University C, regarding the first document issued in in 2009, by integrating the strategies outlined in the triennial strategic guidelines, the Rector declared: “ The document outlines the roadmap of the university’s actions in the main areas, namely education, student services, research and knowledge transfer, internationalisation, human resources, organisational structure and building plan ”.

The initial aim was to address areas considered of absolute strategic importance, i.e. the three macro-areas (teaching, research, and the third mission), focusing on describing the university, context analysis, and identifying objectives and related targets and indicators. This immediately clarified the meaning to be given to the instrument. Transversal to the whole document, in contrast to the other two cases considered, is the financial dimension and the link between objectives and the forecast of financial flows in and out. As claimed by an interviewee: “ The key point for the university is the improvement of all the university’s performances in relation to parameters of the ordinary financing fund, parameters of the three-year plan, but also to all those parameters that can bring the university back to a better position in national and international rankings ”.

The SUP is articulated in different sections. It begins by describing the university (number of students, professors and lecturers, administrative staff, etc.) and then illustrates its situation “as is” through a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis. The SWOT analysis represents the starting point for the elaboration of the SUP. The SWOT analysis, used as a method to define strategy, focuses primarily on the following points: training, student services, and internationalisation; research and knowledge transfer; and human resources.

Consequently, the document then highlights seven “strategic lines” of interventions: teaching; students services; research and knowledge transfer; internationalisation; human resources; organisational structure; and building plans. For each strategic line, different indicators are derived from the current legislative regulations. Finally, a summary table synthesises objectives, actors, starting year, and human and financial resources allocated for each strategic line.

In the conclusions, the Commission states that the plan is intentionally concise, and it is not further expanded on or detailed in order to allow the governing bodies to define methodologies and responsibilities for implementation. It is also stated that an essential condition for initiating, sustaining, and continuing the process is a control both for the implementation and monitoring of the plan.

The second SUP shortens its time horizon to three years (2014–2016). The document appears less readable, has no summary, is full of tables, and has few descriptions. It includes again a SWOT analysis and subsequently describes the strategic lines, which are almost the same as in the previous SUP. However, unlike the previous SUP, it does not contain a summary table with the objectives, actors, timing, and resources for each strategic line. Moreover, no final considerations or conclusions are displayed; there is only an initial page, written by the delegate for strategic planning, quickly commenting on “how” what they planned in the SUP 2009–2013 had been achieved, and stating that the university had to manage the shortfall, which was worse than expected. Overall, it considers that the general objective of “ enhancing the quality of performance by reducing costs and increasing revenues ” was achieved.

This document appears to be less focused than the first plan and was probably less participatory.

The SUP 2016–2018 starts with the macro-objectives for the following three years: enhancing the quality of teaching, research, and internationalisation; increasing commitment toward the third mission; and pursuing and implementing the university’s quality assurance system. Again, it opens with an analysis of the context, subsequently identifying the strategic lines: didactics; student services; research; internationalisation; third mission; and staff required. For each there are now clearly highlighted objectives, related actions, and coherent indicators. The document also appears to be more understandable thanks to summary tables for each strategic line.

The current SUP (2019–2021) is the shortest in length (35 pages). It appears as an extract from the minutes of the BoD. Both the format and the content are similar to the previous SUP. The only significant difference relates to the strategic lines, with the inclusion in the summary tables of a column highlighting the target.

From the documentary analysis of University C and the interviews, it emerges that there is no real TYPD among the planning documents. The triennial strategic guidelines are somehow included in the SUP. This entails that it is not easy to understand the relation between the two, i.e. whether the strategic planning documents’ strategic objectives are derived from the triennial strategic guidelines or vice-versa.

In all three cases, the SUPs were created in response to the needs arising from governance reforms and different decision-making and management tools at their disposal. In University A, the SUP’s adoption is more than a methodological and recognition exercise, as evidenced by the document that preceded the first concrete plan. The document also makes explicit the decision to promote integration between the TYPD and the PP, as opposed to between the SUP and the PP. This is largely different in Universities B and C, in which this relationship is more linear and the choice of the SUP, in addition to choosing explicit values, objectives, and expected results, becomes a choice of thematic areas on which to work pragmatically.

In University A, as the former Rector states in the prologue to the formulation document, “ the university has gone beyond the regulatory wanted to formulate a Strategic Plan to clearly define the values in which it believes, its mission values in which it believes, the mission it has set itself and, above all, its vision and related objectives, the strategies to achieve them and the necessary actions the necessary actions ”. In University B, although the methodological value of the preamble to the SUP explains the articulation of the components, the document immediately focuses on the three main areas (teaching, research, and third mission). In University C, the drafting methods, while providing an explicit methodological basis, identify various strategic lines, similar to University A.

5.3 Linking strategic planning with performance management in the three cases

From the analysis of the data gathered through the documentary analysis and the interviews, it is possible to attempt to identify a link between strategic planning and performance management systems in the three cases analysed, as well as with the allocation of financial resources.

In University A, as already mentioned, there is a kind of logical inversion between the two strategic planning documents, since the TYPD is a tool for implementing the SUP, through three-year actions. The opposite happens in University B, where the SUP is characterised as a document implementing the three-year strategic guidelines. Something different again happens in University C, where the SUP initially includes the previous triennial strategic guidelines, and at the same time, conversely, is the starting point to for defining subsequent ones.

In University A, the main document of the performance management cycle, the PP, refers to the TYPD. As the methodological document attached to the SUP indicates, “ TYPD and PP can be consolidated into a single document that, while distinguishing the specific areas of intervention, leaves no doubt about their common starting point: the strategic ambition of the University ” (Methodological attachment to the SUP 2012–2014, p. 3). The PP 2014–2016, therefore, explicitly refers to a cascading system between the SUP, the TYPD, and the PP, confirming, on the one hand, the regulatory obligation and, on the other hand, the need to link the planning of activities to the degree of response from the organisation in its various components. The TYPD represents, in terms of continuity and the cascading of objectives, the link between the strategic objectives defined by the SUP and the operational objectives of the individual organisational structures of the university identified by the PP. In other words, the PP is the tool for implementing the TYPD. The PP, structured on an annual horizon (despite having a three-year duration), constitutes the reference for measuring results and assessing organisational and individual performance.

Unlike the strategic planning documents, the PP is prepared by the administrative staff. In University A, the individual organisational structures are required to propose operational objectives indicating: (1) the reference strategy identified within the SUP; (2) the perspective within which the identified operational objective is placed, concerning the eight perspectives identified by the TYPD; (3) the process overseen by the structure to which the objective refers; (4) a brief description of the objective and expected results; (5) the proposed indicator and its valuation with respect to the expected value; and (6) the financial resources allocated to the pursuit of each operational objective. Subsequently, the objectives of the PP are linked to the individual perspectives of the TYPD, such as the internal structure, teaching, integration with the territory, internationalisation, personnel, research, sustainability, and students.

Focusing on the development of the performance management system and the link with the strategic planning system over time, the document’s structure has been kept almost unchanged. However, after 2015, the idea of a document with a solid operational connotation, respecting the three phases of the performance cycle, became more generally accepted. At the same time, an increasing need was perceived to develop, in a systemic way, the planning of administrative activities in terms of performance, transparency, and anti-corruption. In this context, since 2016, the new guidelines have introduced the IP. As declared by an interviewee: “The intention has always been to keep the Strategic Plan separate from the performance management instruments, so that the Integrated Plan would draw on the objectives set by the Strategic Plan, but could also have a life on its own. We are aware that sometimes in other public sector administrations the Strategic Plan coincides with the Integrated Plan.”

The performance objectives identified in the IP, which are operational, are strictly linked to the strategic objectives contained in the SUP. The process for their definition follows two stages. In the first phase, the structures propose transversal objectives, shared by two or more organisational units; in the second phase, the structure objectives are proposed (individual, i.e. associated with a single organisational unit). The performance goals are divided into organisational performance goals and individual performance goals. The process of evaluating organisational performance is hierarchical and starts from the evaluation of the university’s performance based on the evaluation of those indicators related to economic and financial sustainability, scientific productivity, and internationalisation. The organisational performance of the departments, schools, and research centres is measured considering indicators related to research, teaching, internationalisation, and management efficiency. The PR closes the cycle, using the indicators provided by ANVUR.

In University B, the PP, whose first issuing was in 2011, from 2016 also started including information relating to transparency and anti-corruption, becoming an IP. The reason for that can be found in the words of an interviewee: “ The need to move from the PP to the IP derives from the need to avoid writing the same things in different documents or, vice versa, the risk of writing different things in the three documents (actually this has never happened in our university, since the documents were prepared by the same structure). Moreover, it is appropriate to have an IP because, in defining the managers’ objectives, they take into account different aspects (anti-corruption, transparency, efficiency). ”

This document is essentially aimed at the central administration, albeit with references to the university’s entire activity. The IP is drawn up by the office managers and the GD, while the structure that coordinates the entire process is the personnel area management.

As highlighted before, the IP concerns the administrative sphere and is an expression of how the academic organisation pursues its management objectives and implements its functions, in support of the political bodies, in achieving the strategic objectives of teaching, research, and the third mission, as reported in the planning process. The preparation of the IP, therefore, starts from the basic guidelines contained in the TYPD and the SUP and then, through various meetings with managers and top management, they are translated into operational objectives, which are subsequently translated into actions, indicators, and targets based on which performance measurement, evaluation, and reporting is carried out. This is clearly represented in the performance tree, a tool which, in a “cascading” logic, “graphically represents the links between strategic priorities, general strategic guidelines and operational objectives” (IP 2020–2022, p. 15).

While there was no clear link between strategic planning and performance management cycle in the past, University B’s last IP now displays an explicit reference to the SUP. In particular, the GD’s objectives (and related actions) derive directly from the strategic objectives set out in the SUP, while the managers’ objectives derive, in turn, from those of the GD, and therefore only indirectly from the SUP.

Finally, the closing document is the PR. The PR is drawn up by the GD annually, following a specific format. This document makes it possible to highlight the organisational and individual results achieved in relation to the expected targets regarding the individual planned objectives and resources.

The approach described for the IP is also confirmed in this document, i.e. a comparison is made with the strategic planning documents and, in particular, with the monitoring of the SUP, as well as taking into account the report that the GD prepares at the end of each year on management activities.

As declared by the GD during a meeting of the BoD: “ The IP has been really improved compared to the past, both in terms of editorial and content. This is thanks to the fruitful work of the managers involved. The IP demonstrates, in the best possible way, the ability to coherently correlate administrative activities with the planning policy documents adopted by the university […]. This document […] highlights the coherence between the university’s strategic planning system at the political level, the management activities, and the financial planning. ”

In line with the regulations, University C planned also to adopt a system of performance evaluation in 2010 by issuing the first PP for the period 2011–2013. However, on the institutional website of the university, we found an archive where the first PP is the one dated 2013–2015, so we do not have any information about the very first PP, except for the fact it was based on the application of the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) model.

In this document, a performance tree highlights the logical roadmap, which links the institutional mandate, the mission, the strategic areas, the strategic objectives (with their indicators and targets), and the operational plan (which includes operational objectives, actors, and resources). In the first PPs, three different strategic areas were identified: didactics; research; and services (then named the “Executive Plan”). The latter includes the objectives assigned to the GD from which are derived the objectives to be assigned to each manager, in addition to those arising from the strategic planning documents. However, we did not find an explicit link between these objectives and those of the SUP; instead, the document seeks alignment between the performance cycle and the financial reporting planning cycle.

By comparing the different PPs, it emerges that the strategic objectives related to the three strategic areas have changed over time. Moreover, while the strategic areas of didactics and research are under the responsibility of the political bodies, the strategic area of the Executive Plan is under the responsibility of the GD who, also through the other managers, is responsible for the correct management of the organisation, as well as for verifying its effectiveness and efficiency.

Another crucial strategic objective is transparency, which is directly related to the performance of the administrative activity and the best use of public resources; therefore, the objectives of the PP are closely related to the strategic and operational planning of the administration and are considered strategic for the university itself.

In the process of identifying the areas of intervention, different actors have been involved: the political body; the Rector; the delegates of the Rector in the areas of strategic planning, didactics, and research; and the GD, who in turn consults the managers involved. In order to gather and analyse the data, the self-evaluation committee and self-evaluation support group are also involved. The 2013–2015 PP concludes with the desire to improve the process both by anticipating the preparation of the plan together with the budget, and by better involving stakeholders and all delegates and managers and sharing with more actors the actions and strategies to be implemented.

Similar to Universities A and B, in 2016, the PP became an IP. The IP is organised in five sections:

The strategic framework of the university, where the main lines of development of the administrative activity are indicated, according to the strategic planning documents, the financial reporting planning documents, and the actions taken and to be taken.

The organisational performance, which constitutes the central part of the IP, which lists the objectives of the planned actions, the related monitoring and measurement indicators, and all those involved in administrative performance.

Analysis of risk areas, drawn up according to the guidelines provided by the Anti-Corruption Authority (ANAC), whereby the areas at risk of corruption are defined.

Communication and transparency, which specifies the actions that the university intends to promote in order to meet the requirements of transparency and contains the communication plans aimed at informing stakeholders about the results achieved by the university.

Individual performance, the last section of the plan, which describes the criteria that the university intends to adopt for the assignment of individual objectives, as well as for the evaluation and monetary incentives for technical-administrative staff.

In the IP 2016–2018, for the first time, an important attachment was added highlighting the links between the SWOT analysis and the SUP by creating a more direct link between strategic planning and performance management.

This link is strengthened in the IPs 2018–2020 and 2019–2022, where a specific section recalls the macro-objectives of the SUP and connects the strategic guidelines of the IP with them. The document explicitly states that, although the IP strategic guidelines do not precisely coincide in wording and number with those mentioned in the SUP 2016–2018, these strategic objectives derive from that document (IP 2018–2020, p. 12).

Further on in the document, it is reaffirmed that the link between the university’s strategies and the performance cycle is of fundamental importance: the relationship between strategic planning and performance management systems is expressed as a link between the university’s political perspective of development, set out in the SUP, and the management actions to be implemented to achieve the expected results, contained in the IP (IP 2020–2022, p. 17). As learned from an interviewee: “ The university in the last years has introduced a new planning process which aims to maintain coherence between the operational dimension (performance), the dimension linked to access and usability of information (transparency), and the dimension linked to access to information (transparency). Moreover, the more recent IPs aim for greater consistency with the strategic planning system, in that the objectives of the performance planning are in line with, and derive from, the objectives of the strategic planning .”

As literature highlights (Bower & Gilbert, 2005 ; Francesconi & Guarini, 2018 ; Goh et al., 2015 ), evidence confirms that the strategic planning and the performance management dimensions are strongly connected with the resource allocation in all three cases. In University A’s budget, we read that its “ formulation is carried out through a process in which the (strategic and operational) objectives of the University drive the resources allocation aimed at their achievement. It represents the translation of those strategic lines in monetary terms ” (Annual and Three-Year Budget, p. 8). At the same time, in the IP, we found a link between the budget and the performance cycle. In fact, University A is trying to progressively optimise the allocation of its resources, by investing them in long-term projects that can have a positive impact on performance, to draw up a budget that is as consistent as possible with the strategies, following the circularity that characterises the strategic, financial, and operational planning phases.

As far as University B is concerned, on the one hand, the annual budget and the three-year budget (composed of the economic and investment budgets) are the technical and accounting tools through which the university’s strategic goals are set out in the short and medium term following the institutional mission of the university. Another important tool is represented by the activity budget, a document included in the explanatory note to the budget, through which strategic and operational goals are connected to the quantity and the quality of resources allocated to their achievement by highlighting the budget specifically earmarked for the pursuit of strategic actions and objectives. On the other hand, the IP represents the document by means of which performance is linked to the budget cycle. As it is clearly expressed: “ The integration between the budget cycle and the performance cycle makes the Integrated Plan the means through which disclosing both the recommendations included in the strategic planning documents, as well as the initiatives aimed at improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the University’s management processes ” (IP, p. 3). Coherently, the IP depicts the amount of budgetary resources necessary to achieve the operational objectives, as determined in the planning phase.

Turning to University C, both the documentary analysis and the interviews revealed the willingness to make the budget increasingly consistent with the strategic objectives provided by the governance, through a path of integration and circularity between the strategic planning and the budgeting processes aimed at enhancing the quality and efficiency of services, with a view to continuous improvement. This connection was still partial during the years under investigation; however, an interviewee stated that: “ In the next years, we intend to draw up a road map to define the timing of all operational activities, also for a gradual coordination between budget and objectives, towards an alignment of the two planning processes phases ”. Conversely, a similar path has been traced to increasingly link resource allocation to performance. In fact, as scholars have also identified in other cases (Van Dooren et al., 2010 ; Van Thiel & Leeuw, 2002 ), University C has started a performance budgeting system, by identifying specific financial resources for all the GD’s objectives from 2017 onwards. Moreover, the internal distribution of resources to departments is based on the results achieved, with a budget allocation policy based on awards and other selective criteria.

In all three universities, we therefore notice that the integration between strategic planning and performance management systems is an ongoing process that is being improved over time. Evidence demonstrates the willingness of these universities not only to meet regulatory requirements, but also to implement the logic of planning, both at political and administrative levels, to promote the proper functioning of the academic organisation, with a view to improving decision-making processes and accountability towards its stakeholders. However, while strategic planning information is incorporated in the performance management system, the role that performance management systems play in redefining strategies is less evident.

6 Discussion and conclusions

The comparative analysis of the multiple case studies carried out in Section 5, although without making any claims regarding generalisability, provides interesting food for thought on how strategic planning is conceived by universities, how the process to define strategies is developed and connected with the operational documents and budget, and to what extent the strategic planning system can be integrated with the performance management system, overcoming semantic boundaries and capturing the implicit links.

Moreover, the interviews with some of the main actors involved in the two systems help to understand also the reasons underpinning certain political and administrative choices. Table  2 summarises our findings across the three case studies, as detailed in Section 5.

Concerning the strategic planning system, evidence demonstrates that, as Boyne and Walker ( 2010 ) claimed, the definition of the strategies is a process that is more effective the more it results in a shared and collective effort towards a common vision.

This is more likely to happen in those public organisations where the unitary strategy is the synthesis of different strategic visions, linked to heterogeneous contexts and needs. Universities, embracing several areas of teaching, specialisation, and research, fall into this situation. In addition, the decision-making processes at universities are often complicated and extended due to the involvement and different interests of academic structures composed of professors and administrative staff.

Examining the three cases, a core aspect is the degree of participation of different actors involved in the process. While for University B the elaboration of the SUP is mainly delegated to the Vice-Rectors, who probably only informally consult the GD, in University A and University C, it appears to be more participatory and formalised. In fact, in University A, the project team involves different stakeholders in the process (including their competitors) through sharing the strategic ambitions of the governance bodies. This was mainly observed in the first wave of strategic planning. In the second wave, the phenomenon was scaled down, also in terms of participation, to make way for a more apparently centralised vision, but less impactful than the previous one. In University C, different political and administrative actors are involved in defining the areas of strategic intervention: the political body; the Rector; the delegates of the Rector in the areas of strategic planning, didactics, and research; and the GD, who in turn consults the other managers involved. During this time, University C has experienced better involvement from stakeholders and managers, and shared the actions and strategies to be implemented with more actors.

Moreover, University B has apparently not used external consultants, and neither has University C. University A, however, in the drafting of the second SUP, turned to external parties for various specific aspects (definition of strategic positioning and internationalisation strategy).

Therefore, three different patterns emerge, which can be placed along a spectrum ranging from University B, through University C, to University A. For example, University B still wants to maintain a clear distinction between the political and administrative sphere, and the strategic planning process involves only internal actors and only at the political level. University C, still maintaining the process as entirely internal, is instead trying to make a collective effort to bring both the political and administrative spheres of the university together towards common goals. The latter formalises a process in which participation is the widest, even involving external stakeholders.

This is also largely confirmed by when and where the SUP is placed in the strategic planning process and among the planning documents. For example, the placement of the SUP in the three universities is different. In University B, the SUP derives from the TYPD, and both are interpreted as documents of a more political-institutional nature (also due to the methods and actors involved in their elaboration). In University A, the SUP is placed upstream of the TYPD. This position, in addition to projecting a different integration of the concept of strategy that should normally be inferred from political indications/lines, also predisposes it in a different way with respect to the IP. University C displays a peculiarity compared to the other cases, in that the TYPD is not a separate document but embedded in the strategic plan itself. This has been done to highlight and reinforce an even stronger connection between the two planning documents. It should be pointed out that the TYPD takes on a more strictly bureaucratic and ritual programmatic character, while the SUP becomes the instrument to which a more managerial character is assigned, in accordance with a methodology and content more capable of incorporating the involvement of the organisation.

Despite the high political value of strategic planning documents, examining their time horizon reveals that none of the three SUPs has a duration equal to the rectoral mandate. In University B, the duration of the plan is three years, in University A it is four years, and in University C three to four years. Moreover, observing the programming cycles from a longitudinal point of view, it emerges that, for all three universities, although the change in the governance bodies has marked an important transformation, strategies have not been overturned and the SUP has maintained its consistency over time, outlining for all the three universities the importance of guaranteeing continuity and a medium- to long-term vision.

Regarding the performance management system, all three universities comply with the academic regulations, which require issuing a PP (which recently extended its content in terms of transparency and anti-corruption by becoming an IP). At the end of the year, the GD elaborates the PR, highlighting the organisational and individual results achieved with respect to the planned objectives and allocated resources. However, going beyond mere bureaucratic compliance, as the literature affirms (Bouckaert & Halligan, 2006 ; Van Dooren et al., 2010 ), the measuring of performance is only the first step towards a proper performance management process from which implementation should follow. In fact, performance information needs to be incorporated into the management system before it can be used.

The issue of implementation is relevant in answering our research question. As stated, our analysis focuses on the policy cycle, attempting to understand to what extent there is a link between strategic planning and performance management systems, also considering the budgeting process within the financial cycle. As emerges from the documentary analysis and the interviews, all three universities declare a correlation between the two systems and show coherence between the performance objectives and strategic objectives. On the one hand, it is possible to state that performance documents, procedures, and discourse incorporate strategic planning information. Hence, strategic planning tools contribute to performance management systems, since evidence demonstrates that performance objectives included in the IPs are partly derived from the strategic areas of interventions included in the strategic documents. This link is expressed in the connection between each university’s development policy perspectives, outlined in the strategic planning documents, as well as the systems, operations, and logic used by the administration to define its management objectives, monitor its performance, identify corrective actions, and evaluate the results achieved. This seems to happen according to a top-down logic, from the political function (responsible for defining strategic guidelines) to the administrative function (responsible for the most operational activities).

However, on the other hand, performance management systems do not really help to reshape universities’ strategies; barely any performance information is incorporated in the strategic planning process. In fact, the PR evaluates performance information for the purpose of assessing past performance. According to the policy cycle (Van Dooren et al., 2010 , p. 91), these evaluation reports should feed forward into the next strategic plan. However, we do not have evidence about whether, or how, this happens. This is probably because, in many cases, performance barely meets organisational and academic needs. While descending from strategies, the performance system in complex organisations such as universities risks impeding an integrated view of the organisation in its different administrative and academic components.

As far as the financial cycle is concerned, evidence demonstrates that, although internal resources allocation is different among the three cases, this difference reflects their different strategies and priorities. It is, therefore, possible to highlight consistency not only between the strategic planning and performance management systems of these universities, as Francesconi and Guarini ( 2018 ) also demonstrated, but also with their budgeting process. Indeed, in all three cases, willingness is evident to achieve an increasingly meaningful connection between the strategic planning process, the financial planning process, and the more operational dimension of performance. The need to pursue this virtuous path derives from a growing awareness from the academic governance and management of the currently perceived connection and interdependence of these dimensions. The dynamic environment in which universities operate leaves no room for isolated management of these aspects. Therefore, it is necessary to take an overall view to exploit the synergies arising from this link, aiming to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the services provided.

This study’s main limitation is its focus primarily on the policy cycle, since our analysis has been carried out at the governmental and top management level, without going into detail at the lowest organisational levels, such as departments and other structures. Although conscious of this limitation, we believe this research may have important theoretical and practical implications.

The theoretical implications are twofold. First, evidence leads to considerations regarding the adoption of strategic planning in public organisations with different effects than in other organisations. Although the value of strategic planning is recognised as fundamental for public sector organisations, what emerges for public universities is not immediately generalisable to other public entities because of the specific nature of the higher education sector. Strategic planning shifts from opportunity to necessity for rationalising decisions and vision, redirecting the organisation towards shared values, objectives, and goals, as long as participation in the elaboration of plans is not neglected.

Second, the link between strategic planning and performance management seems to be more evident, even if a university’ performance system undergoes different declinations and it is not always easy to find a cohesive link with strategies. Universities are extremely complex in the articulation of their established aims. What a strategic plan can support in organisational terms may not be of value from an academic point of view in the narrower sense, particularly regarding research, which requires different planning rules from other activities in the organisation. This has consequences on performance, which take on different connotations and nuances. A performance measurement system is undoubtedly linked to the organisation’s ability to define achievable and successful strategies, but the ability to forecast university performance is not always anchored to all the elements that characterise it.

The practical implications of this study include suggestions for universities’ governance bodies related to supporting their decision-making processes in the definition of their long-term objectives and performance management systems. It is also recommended that information arising from the performance management system should also be used to periodically reshape strategies, implementing a virtuous circle between strategic planning and performance management systems.

Change history

22 july 2022.

Missing Open Access funding information has been added in the Funding Note.

Abbreviations

Italian Anti-Corruption Authority

Italian National Agency for the Evaluation of the University and Research Systems

Bachelor’s Degrees

Board of Directors

Common Assessment Framework

General Director

Integrated Plan

Master’s Degrees

New Public Management

Doctoral Degrees

Performance Plan

Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System

Performance Report

Academic Senate

Strategic University Plan

Strategic Teaching Plan

Strategic Research Plan

Strategic Plan for the Third Mission

Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats

Three-Year Planning Document

Arnaboldi, M., Lapsley, I., & Steccolini, I. (2015). Performance management in the public sector: The ultimate challenge. Financial Accountability & Management , 31(1), 1–22

Article   Google Scholar  

Aversano, N., Rossi, M., F., & Tartaglia Polcini, P. (2017). I sistemi di misurazione delle performance nelle università: considerazioni critiche sul sistema Italiano. Management Control , 1, 15–36

Balabonienė, I., & Veþerskienė, G. (2014). The peculiarities of performance measurement in universities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences , 156, 605–611

Barzelay, M., & Jacobsen, A. S. (2009). Theorizing implementation of public management policy reforms: A case study of strategic planning and programming in the European Commission. Governance , 22(2), 319–334

Biondi, L., & Cosenz, F. (2017). La misurazione della performance accademica: un’analisi applicata al “costo standard per studente in corso”. Rivista Italiana di Ragioneria e di Economa Aziendale (RIREA) , 3(9–12), 357–376

Google Scholar  

Bolland, E. J. (2020). Evolution of strategy: Origin, planning, strategic planning and strategic management. Strategizing (pp. 25–48). Emerald Publishing Limited

Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2006). Performance and performance management. In B. G. Peters, & J. Pierre (Eds.), Handbook of public policy (pp. 443–459). Sage

Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2008). Comparing performance across public sectors. In W. Van Dooren, & S. Van de Walle (Eds.), Performance information in the public sector (pp. 72–93). Palgrave Macmillan

Bower, J. L., & Gilbert, C. (2005). From resource allocation to strategy . Oxford University Press

Boyne, G., & Walker, R. M. (2004). Strategy content and public service organisations. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory , 14(2), 231–252

Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2010). Strategic management and public service performance: The way ahead. Public Administration Review , 70, s185–s192

Bracci, E., Maran, L., & Inglis, R. (2017). Examining the process of performance measurement system design and implementation in two Italian public service organisations. Financial Accountability & Management , 33(4), 406–421

Broadbent, J., & Laughlin, R. (2009). Performance management systems: A conceptual model. Management Accounting Research , 20(4), 283–295

Bronzetti, G., Mazzotta, R., & Nardo, M. T. (2011). Le dimensioni della pianificazione strategica nelle universitÃ. Economia Aziendale Online , 2(2), 141–155

Bryson, J. M. (1988). A strategic planning process for public and non-profit organizations. Long range planning , 21(1), 73–81

Bryson, J. M. (2003). Strategic planning and management. In P. W. Ingraham (Ed.), Handbook of public administration (pp. 38–47). Sage

Bryson, J. M. (2004). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organisations . Jossey-Bass

Bryson, J. M. (2011). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organisations (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass

Bryson, J. M., Ackermann, F., & Eden, C. (2007). Putting the resource-based view of strategy and distinctive competencies to work in public organisations. Public Administration Review , 67(4), 702–717

Bryson, J., & Edwards, L. H. (2017). Strategic planning in the public sector. In R. Aldag (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management . Oxford University Press

Buckland, R. (2009). Private and public sector models for strategies in universities. British Journal of Management , 20(4), 524–536

Campedelli, B., & Cantele, S. (2010). Governance, strategie e performance dell’azienda università. In G. Airoldi, G. Brunetti, G. Corbetta, & G. Invernizzi (Eds.), Economia aziendale & management: scritti in onore di Vittorio Coda . Università Bocconi Editore

Cepiku, D. (2018). Strategia e performance nelle amministrazioni pubbliche . EGEA spa

Cepiku, D., Hinna, A., Scarozza, D., & Bonomi Savignon, A. (2017). Performance information use in public administration: An exploratory study of determinants and effects. Journal of Management and Governance , 21, 963–991

Cohen, S., Manes Rossi, F., Caperchione, E., & Brusca, I. (2019). Local government administration systems and local government accounting information needs: is there a mismatch? International Review of Administrative Sciences , 85(4), 708–725

Conway, T., Mackay, S., & Yorke, D. (1994). Strategic planning in higher education: Who are the customers. International Journal of Educational Management , 8(6), 29–36

Corbetta, P. (2003). Social research: Theory, methods and techniques . Sage

Cosenz, F. (2011). Sistemi di governo e di valutazione della performance per l’azienda «Università» (51 vol.). Giuffrè Editore

Cowburn, S. (2005). Strategic planning in higher education: Fact or fiction? Perspectives , 9(4), 103–109

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches . Sage

Dal Mas, F., Massaro, M., Lombardi, R., & Garlatti, A. (2019). From output to outcome measures in the public sector: a structured literature review. International Journal of Organisational Analysis , 27(5), 1631–1656

de Bruijn, H. (2002). Managing performance in the public sector . Routledge

Deidda Gagliardo, E., & Paoloni, M. (Eds.). (2020). Il performance management nelle università statali. Stato dell’arte e nuove sfide. FrancoAngeli

Dobija, D., Górska, A. M., Grossi, G., & Strzelczyk, W. (2019). Rational and symbolic uses of performance measurement. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal , 32(3), 750–781

Dooris, M. J., Kelley, J. M., & Trainer, J. F. (2004). Strategic planning in higher education. New Directions for Institutional Research , 123, 5–11

Fathi, M., & Wilson, L. (2009). Strategic planning in colleges and universities. Business Renaissance Quarterly , 4(1), 91–103

Francesconi, A., & Guarini, E. (2018). Performance-based funding and internal resource allocation: the case of Italian universities. In E. Borgonovi, E. Anessi-Pessina, & C. Bianchi (Eds.), Outcome-based performance management in the public sector (pp. 289–306). Springer

Goh, S. C., Elliott, C., & Richards, G. (2015). Performance management in Canadian public organizations: Findings of a multi-case study. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management , 64(2), 157–174

Grossi, G., & Mussari, R. (2008). Effects of outsourcing on performance measurement and reporting: The experience of Italian local governments. Public Budgeting & Finance , 28(1), 22–38

Gustafsson, J. (2017). Single case studies vs. multiple case studies: A comparative study. Working paper, Halmstad University

https:// www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1064378/FULLTEXT01 .pdf%20(10

Guthrie, J., & Neumann, R. (2007). Economic and non-financial performance indicators in universities: The establishment of a performance-driven system for Australian higher education. Public Management Review , 9(2), 231–252

Higgins, J. C. (1989). Performance measurement in universities. European Journal of Operational Research , 38(3), 358–368

Holdaway, E. A., & Meekison, J. P. (1990). Strategic planning at a Canadian university. Long Range Planning , 23(4), 104–113

Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration , 69(1), 3–19

Howes, T. (2018). Effective strategic planning in Australian universities: How good are we and how do we know? Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management , 40(5), 442–457

Jansen, E. P. (2008). New public management: Perspectives on performance and the use of performance information. Financial Accountability & Management , 24(2), 169–191

Johnes, J. (1996). Performance assessment in higher education in Britain. European Journal of Operational Research , 89(1), 18–33

Johnes, J., & Taylor, J. (1990). Performance indicators in higher education: UK universities . Open University Press and the Society for Research into Higher Education

Johnsen, Å. (2015). Strategic management thinking and practice in the public sector: A strategic planning for all seasons? Financial Accountability & Management , 31(3), 243–268

Kallio, K. M., Kallio, T. J., & Grossi, G. (2017). Performance measurement in universities: Ambiguities in the use of quality versus quantity in performance indicators. Public Money & Management , 37(4), 293–300

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). Using the balanced scorecard as a strategic management system. Harvard Business Review , 74(1), 75–85

Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2000). Having trouble with your strategy? Then map it.Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2000/09/having-trouble-with-your-strategy-then-map-it

Kearney, R., & Berman, E. (2018). Public sector performance: management, motivation, and measurement . Routledge

Kenno, S., Lau, M., Sainty, B., & Boles, B. (2020). Budgeting, strategic planning and institutional diversity in higher education. Studies in Higher Education , 46(9), 1919–1933

Lapsley, I. (2009). New public management: The cruellest invention of the human spirit? Abacus , 45(1), 1–21

Layzell, D. T. (1999). Linking performance to funding outcomes at the state level for public institutions of higher education: Past, present, and future. Research in Higher Education , 40(2), 233–246

Lee Rhodes, M., Biondi, L., Gomes, R., Melo, A. I., Ohemeng, F., Perez-Lopez, G. … Sutiyono, W. (2012). Current state of public sector performance management in seven selected countries. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management , 61(3), 235–271

Lerner, A. L. (1999). A strategic planning primer for higher education. Working paper, California State University. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.498 .7012&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Longhurst, R. (2003). Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. Key Methods in Geography , 3(2), 143–156

Luhanga, M. L., Mkude, D., Mbwette, D. J., Chijoriga, M. M., & Ngirwa, C. A. (2018). Strategic planning and higher education management in Africa: The University of Dar es Salaam experience . Dar es Salaam University Press

Modell, S. (2003). Goals versus institutions: The development of performance measurement in the Swedish university sector. Management Accounting Research , 14(4), 333–359

Moreno-Carmona, C., Feria-Domínguez, J. M., & Troncoso, A. (2020). Applying the open government principles to the university’s strategic planning: A sound practice. Sustainability , 12(5), e1826. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051826

Mueller, R. A. (2015). Do values drive the plan? Investigating the nature and role of organisational values in university strategic planning. Tertiary Education and Management , 21(1), 41–55

Mussari, R., Grossi, G., & Monfardini, P. (2005). Le performance dell’azienda pubblica locale . CEDAM

Neely, A., Mills, J., Platts, K., Gregory, M., & Richards, H. (1994). Realizing strategy through measurement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management , 14(3), 140–152

Ofori, D., & Atiogbe, E. (2012). Strategic planning in public universities: A developing country perspective. Journal of Management and Strategy , 3(1), 67–82

Osborne, S. P. (2006). The new public governance? Public Management Review , 8(3), 377–387

Papi, L., Bigoni, M., Bracci, E., & Deidda Gagliardo, E. (2018). Measuring public value: A conceptual and applied contribution to the debate. Public Money & Management , 38(7), 503–510

Pauwels, P., & Matthyssens, P. (2004). The architecture of multiple case study research in international business. In C. Welch, & R. Marschan-Piekkari (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods for international business (pp. 125–143). Edward Elgar

Poister, T. H. (2010). The future of strategic planning in the public sector: Linking strategic management and performance. Public Administration Review , 70, s246–s254

Poister, T. H., & Streib, G. (1999). Performance measurement in municipal government: Assessing the state of the practice. Public Administration Review , 59(4), 308–325

Poister, T. H., & Streib, G. (2005). Elements of strategic planning and management in municipal government: Status after two decades. Public Administration Review , 65(1), 45–56

Pollitt, C. (2007). The new public management: An overview of its current status. Administration and Public Management Review , 8, 110–115

Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management , 8(3), 238–264

Rostan, M. (2015). La governance centrale degli Atenei. In G. Capano, & M. Regini (Eds.), Come cambia la governance. Università Italiane ed Europee a confront (pp. 23–38). Fondazione CRUI

Rowley, D. J. (1997). Strategic change in colleges and universities: Planning to survive and prosper . Jossey-Bass

Smith, P. C. (2005). Performance measurement in health care: History, challenges and prospects. Public Money & Management , 25(4), 213–220

Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443–466). Sage

Talbot, C. (2011). Paradoxes and prospects of “public value”. Public Money & Management , 31(1), 27–34

Ter Bogt, H. J., & Scapens, R. W. (2012). Performance management in universities: Effects of the transition to more quantitative measurement systems. European Accounting Review , 21(3), 451–497

Thys-Clément, F., & Wilkin, L. (1998). Strategic management and universities: Outcomes of a European survey. Higher Education Management , 10, 13–28

Van Dooren, W., Bouckaert, G., & Halligan, J. (2010). Performance management in the public sector . Routledge

Van Dooren, W., & Van de Walle, S. (Eds.). (2016). Performance information in the public sector: How it is used . Springer

Van Thiel, S., & Leeuw, F. L. (2002). The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance & Management Review , 25(3), 267–281

Wynen, J., Verhoest, K., Ongaro, E., & Van Thiel, S. (in cooperation with the COBRA network). (2014). Innovation-oriented culture in the public sector: Do managerial autonomy and result control lead to innovation?Public Management Review, 16 (1),45–66

Wright, B. E., & Pandey, S. K. (2011). Public organisations and mission valence: When does mission matter? Administration & Society , 43(1), 22–44

Xavier, J. A., & Bianchi, C. (2020). An outcome-based dynamic performance management approach to collaborative governance in crime control: Insights from Malaysia. Journal of Management and Governance , 24, 1089–1114

Yin, R. K. (1993). Case study research: Design and methods applied . Sage

Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. In L. Maruster (Ed.), Qualitative research methods (pp. 359–386). University of Groningen

Download references

Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi Roma Tre within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Studies, University of Roma Tre, Rome, Italy

Lucia Biondi

Department of Management, University Ca’ Foscari of Venice, Venice, Italy

Salvatore Russo

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucia Biondi .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Biondi, L., Russo, S. Integrating strategic planning and performance management in universities: a multiple case-study analysis. J Manag Gov 26 , 417–448 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-022-09628-7

Download citation

Accepted : 02 February 2022

Published : 13 March 2022

Issue Date : June 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-022-09628-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Strategic planning
• Performance management
• Public governance
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research