P-L-A-N. Is it just another four-letter word? Or is it a roadmap for attaining important objectives?

Every editor and publisher does planning. It can be as simple an activity as dummying the next issue. But when it comes to more advanced planning, it seems that the process becomes more controversial. I've heard publishers oppose planning by saying: "No amount of planning will ever replace dumb luck." Or, "a formal plan will limit my flexibility." Or, "we don't have time to waste on planning."

On the other hand, there are some compelling benefits of planning. They have been expressed as: "A clear plan allows all our people to work toward common goals -- and that means better morale and greater productivity." And, "our planning promotes decision making that's good for the long haul not just in the short term." And, "without the driving force of a plan, we wouldn't be experiencing so much deliberate growth."

If you have aspirations or objectives that extend beyond getting out your next issue, a strategic plan is an essential element for achieving them. It can spell out where you want to go, who is to do what in order to get there, and how you will know that you are making progress toward your destination. Trying to operate without a plan reminds me of lines from a tune sung by Dan Fogleberg: "It isn't easy and it's never clear, Who's to navigate and who's to steer, And so we wander drifting ever near, the rocks."

So, stay away from the rocks. Plan!

Strategic?

What is a strategic plan, anyway? For many, a strategic plan is just another term for a long-range plan.

If you're talking about a plan for the next issue, or an editorial calendar for the year, you're talking about an operating plan. Likewise, a workflow plan is an operating plan, as is an editorial or advertising budget. I.e., they are simply the directions for accomplishing a routine job. Sometimes an operating plan is called a tactical plan. But by whichever name, it is a plan that establishes short-term goals and sets out a program of action.

Strategic planning, however, is also conceptual planning. It is mostly concerned with assessing significant external and internal forces, and establishing long-term objectives. It is the grand design by which one reaches one's objectives. Obviously, a strategic plan will involve strategy. Strategy is making the best use of forces over which we have little or no control, by skillfully using the forces that we do control.

Some Examples

There are numerous things for which an editor or publisher might develop a strategic plan. Here are a few examples:

1. Developing new or ancillary editorial products.

2. Getting consistently ahead of the competition in covering your field.

3. Targeting a new segment of the market for selling advertising space and developing specific content to attract readers in that demographic category.

4. Repositioning an existing publication, including upgrading the reporting, writing, and editing, as well as implementing a redesign.

You may say that some of these things are just a part of business as usual. But, if they are really important objectives, you'll have a better shot at achieving them with a strategic plan.

Essential Elements

Developing a strategic plan should be an individualized and creative process and not a cookie-cutter operation. But there are a number of common elements or building blocks that every plan should include. They are:

1. Objectives

2. Goals (and milestones)

3. Strategies

4. Tactics

5. Controls

An objective indicates a long-term aspiration. (Example: Get ahead of competition in covering your field.)

A goal tells what will have happened when the objective has been achieved. (Example: For each major development in your field, scoop the competition 80% of the time.) In addition to a goal, a plan will usually include a number of measurable sub-goals or milestones so that progress in reaching the ultimate goal may be assessed.

Strategies are defined above. Tactics are the detailed specifications for how something will be achieved. Tactics give us the means and tell us what we are going to do. For each strategy, there should be one or more tactics. Controls are the means of monitoring progress (like periodic reports and meetings), and of intervening when necessary (like bringing in more help or reassigning resources).

It's a Process

There is a common misconception about a strategic plan. It is that the plan is a thing, a document, something you can point to and say, "Here's our plan." That's part of it. But more importantly, a strategic plan must represent a process. Much of the value of strategic planning comes from participating in the process of constructing the plan.

How many times have you seen an organization boast that they've got a mission statement, only to see that the document has little to do with what they're actually doing? In practice, their mission statement is just something to look at and show others, but is not a working document. A strategic plan is vulnerable to that same malady, unless it involves a participatory process.

Who Does the Planning?

Broad-based participation in the planning is usually the best answer. There are two reasons for this. The first is that with everyone's involvement, you're more likely to acquire grassroots-level detail about how your business really operates -- the kind of things that don't get routinely communicated to management, or the things management might consider too insignificant to be concerned with regularly. Developing your plan with cognizance of these details, however, can create the difference that will make your plan work at a practical level -- and not be just a for-show document.

The second reason for widespread involvement has to do with resistance to change. Simply put, a plan usually leads to change. People usually respond to imposed change with resistance. As people become involved in the planning process, they will be able to share in the ownership of the ideas embodied in the plan. They will also be gaining an understanding of the reasons for change.

The only times I've seen a participatory approach fail to help has been in organizations employing a strong, autocratic, top-down management style. Employees were not accustomed to providing input. They distrusted the sudden opportunity to do so. Therefore, the process was awkward and not very productive. Going from an autocratic culture to one of shared and delegated responsibility is a process unto itself and should not be attempted concurrently with a strategic planning process without having a good plan for doing so!

What to Do?

One of the first steps toward a strategic plan is to do a no-nonsense analysis of your organization's strengths and weaknesses regarding the subject of your plan. It makes good sense to involve an outside expert at this point, who will be able to look at your operation more dispassionately than you. With that analysis in hand, here is a checklist to guide you in rounding out your plan:

1. Are current capacity and resources adequate or can they be augmented?

2. Is there a satisfactory management or supervisory structure in place?

3. Is the strategy workable?

4. Are the objectives and strategies working in consonance, or are they at cross-purposes?

5. Is there sufficient expertise for carrying out the tactics?

6. Are the financial resources available to backup the plan?

7. Is the amount of risk acceptable?

8. Is the timing appropriate?

9. Does the plan anticipate future conditions?

Managing Change

Planning often leads to change. So do a multitude of external forces.

If your publishing organization isn't undergoing change right now, you may be losing ground! Why? Because the publishing business is undergoing profound changes. So, if you're not adapting and changing, too, by definition, you are being left behind.

For instance, the whole concept of how information is gathered, packaged, and delivered is changing. Today's publishers are making use of the various social media instruments available online -- including blogs, social networking (e.g., Facebook and Twitter), syndication feeds (e.g., RSS and Atom), and social bookmarking (e.g., Digg, Technorati, Stumbleupon, etc.) Particularly given the current print media crisis, magazines are abandoning their outmoded business modes in order to stay current and attract subscribers.

What Kind of Change?

Some say that change is always the norm, that change is the only constant. Certainly, every editor and publisher knows that well. Each issue is a whole new ball game. Today's hot stories and issues may be old hat tomorrow. No editor plans the next issue to be the same as the last one. Change is the lifeblood of our editorial content.

The way we go about our business is less likely to change, however. Our deadlines are usually the same. Our style conventions are intended to be enduring. Workflow routines are hopefully routine. Our design offers continuity. These are not things we put on the drawing board with each new issue. Over time they change, they evolve. But for the most part, these changes are usually incremental. But, that's not the kind of change we're talking about here.

A Faster Pace

Innovative change is what's upon us now with the Internet and new media. It is revolutionary, not incremental. It is the type of change that affects the way we do our business, if not the content itself of our publications.

Periodical publishing has gone through noteworthy innovative changes before. Publications are no longer set in hot metal and addressed by Addressograph plates. The Internet Age has sparked meteoric changes in production, editorial, and sales departments as digital content becomes the norm.

Who's in Charge of Change?

Indeed, in your organization, who is responsible for dealing with innovative change? Usually, we have well-established structures for issue planning, for analyzing trends in the fields we cover, and for being innovative with our content.

But what about the methodology for how we do our work? What about the macro changes in how our society deals with information -- and how that affects our approach to publishing? Who is responsible for analyzing these issues and for planning a response?

I'd bet most publishing organizations have not assigned responsibility for this. After all, over the past ten years, staffs have been kept very lean. There's been traditionally no need to have your own in-house think tank to ponder editorial and production methodologies or the role of information in society!

But the new landscape presented by the emergence of social media has placed new demands on the organization, staffing, and management of any editorial department, large or small.

Leadership

If our deadlines, procedures, and performance standards are the forces that move us to get out each issue and plan for the next -- what will be the force behind innovative or revolutionary change? Leadership is the answer, I suggest. Through effective leadership, you can chart the correct course for your organization and guide your publication's journey along that path. It can be the key to being master of your destiny, rather than slave to your fate.

Here are some steps in the leadership process:

--Create a strong, clear vision. Analyze. Explore options, possibilities. Identify pitfalls and benefits. We're talking about changing in the midst of change. Therefore, you can't have a really reliable, detailed picture of the exact destination. But you should have cogent conceptual goals.

--Passionately communicate your vision. Inspire your coworkers and employees. Read Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech, or the works of other charismatic leaders. Study the techniques they've used and incorporate appropriate ones in your communication.

--Empower people. Significant change can not be accomplished single-handedly, nor can it effectively be instituted autocratically. Provide your people with experiential opportunities to view that which led you to your conclusions. Don't offer pat answers on how to attain your vision. Enlist the help and creativity of your people in rounding out your vision and planning the detailed course leading to your goals.

--Create new organizational structures and procedures. Encourage teamwork. Establish working groups or committees. Give them the necessary authority and support. Develop milestones through a participatory process. Coach and provide feedback for your people.

Resistance to Change

No matter how effective a leader you may be, you should be prepared for resistance to change. Handling that resistance effectively will be very important to your success. In an earlier day, when businesses were just starting to incorporate the new work systems brought on by the personal computer revolution, many managers were confronted with resistance to change. And even though many of the computer technologies were new and not fully tested, a major cause of failure was not the technology, but the resistance of those who would use it.

Fear of Loss

In my experience, an underlying contributor to resistance to change is a fear of loss on the part of staff members. It can center on any number of factors such as loss of: job ... income ... status ... future opportunities ... perks ... reputation ... influence ... responsibility ... autonomy ... relationships ... familiar routines ... security.

Don't expect these concerns to be expressed as simply and clearly, though.

Employees may feel more comfortable opposing change based on abstractions or technical considerations, rather than through disclosure of their underlying feelings.

Overt or Covert

The resistance may be overt. Employees may directly challenge your goals. You'll hear things like: "This may work at other publications, but not here -- we're special." And, "Our readers aren't the kind who will be affected by all this social media stuff." And, "We're already doing more than most publications' staffs can handle."

Or, the resistance may be covert. People may verbalize acceptance and then behave in an opposite way. Low energy levels may result. Even slowdowns may occur. Staff may see procedural problems along the way and not report them, thus allowing the problems to sabotage any progress.

Toward a Solution

Regardless of how the resistance is expressed, if you realize that fear of loss is at the bottom of it, and deal with it accordingly, you will have a more successful outcome.

Now, this fear of loss may be real, or it may come from misperceiving what change portends. If the fear comes from a misperception of your vision for change, further explanation in a non-threatening atmosphere can be the remedy. But if the fear is rooted in real elements of the change itself, the process may take longer.

When there are to be real losses, expect that the affected staffers will need to go through a process. While you can fight the misperceived loss head-on, you will need to give employees perturbed by real losses a chance to work through their feelings. You can help that process by giving them opportunities to express and explore their concerns and to offer an understanding response, while being authentic to your basic goals. Hopefully, they will proceed from a focus on displacement to one of beginning and reintegration.

The Danger of Not Changing

A couple of years ago, while on a consulting assignment in Moscow, Russia, I was being given a tour of a printing plant by its chief engineer. It was the old Pravda printing house, designed to print multiple large newspapers every day, produce untold magazines, and scores of books. It was an enormous facility, perhaps the largest in the world.

The chief engineer took me into one cavernous room. It was filled with clacking, bulky, hot-metal typesetting machines, like our old Linotype machines. He described for me the work flow through the room, and then asked if we had machines like this in the United States. In my halting Russian I had to tell him that, yes, we did, but only in museums.

The import of the story is, of course, that this plant had not kept up with revolutionary changes in the very business in which it existed. Their approach to change had been to ignore it, not to advocate it, and not to manage it.

As a result, they were vested in the past, and uncompetitive for the future.

Don't let that happen to you!