STRATEGIC CHANGE 1

PPPA - 8465 - 7 Strategic Planning: Collaboration, Cooperation & Coordination

Week 4 Assignment: Strategic Change

Walden University

Jacquelyn Layman

03/27/2016
STRATEGIC CHANGE 2

Abstract

This paper will attempt to describe a non-profit or public organization that is in need of strategic

change. Further, the reasons for suggesting strategic change will be addressed in depth by the

offering of a SWOT analysis for the organization with an explanation of the analysis--in the

context of its possible influence on the strategy planning process followed by an Appreciative

Inquiry 4-D analysis of the organization and the possible implications of the results on the

strategic planning process. Closing summary will compare the organizational outcomes of the

SWOT analysis to those of the Appreciative Inquiry.

STRATEGIC CHANGE 3

Save Our City Kids

The organization

Save Our City Kids or as it is most well known, S.O.C.K. began as a local cab driver’s

mission in the late 1980’s to keep the youth of his city off of the streets by offering them a safe

alternative to either being home alone or running the streets while waiting for their parental

figures to return from work. The 1980’s saw an increase single parent households, as well as a

rise in households where both parents were employed, a push for welfare reform, and increasing

childcare costs. These conditions gave rise to the self-care child, coined in the 1940’a as the

‘latchkey kid’ (Leung, Robson, Cho, & Lim, 1996).

What began as a simple ‘safe zone’ for kids to hang out, soon became a full fledged

after-school enrichment program, funded solely by donations and foundation grants, rather than

out of the pocket of the founder, as it had begun. Initially, the founder or Executive Director of

the program worked without any income from the organization, opting instead to devote his

salary to the growth of the organization, and to the well-being of the youth it served. The Deputy

Director followed suit, donating much of her time and receiving little or no compensation in the

beginning, a symbol of her dedication to the organization’s mission. Their dedication would pay

off when the organization was nominated for and won a national award for its dedication to

crime prevention by Ameritech, and the National Council on Crime Prevention (Ameritech,

1987). This nationwide recognition paved the road for the organization to increase their reach

through the availability of increased grants both local and federal, as well as strengthening the

organization’s reputation, opening doors to larger foundation grants from an increased pool of

sources.
STRATEGIC CHANGE 4

The organization was finally sustainable, with continued support from initial funders, and

the promise of annually renewable foundation awards, the executive and deputy directors finally

took home an actual paycheck. The organization grew quickly, their mission was present in all

that they offered and in every speech, public event or appearance, and most importantly in the

boardroom. Decisions were made in the interest of the mission rather than the organization, and

as the time progressed, this thinking seemed to be the golden ticket to longevity.

The need for change

Until this point the organization had the support of local funders as an after school

enrichment program for at-risk inner city youth. As the client base grew, so did the need for

funding, and an expanded pool of funders, both private and government. The grant requests until

this point were being written by a volunteer, in fact much of the professional help the

organization received was on a volunteer basis, since the funding was tight and resources were

limited. The regular employees the organization had, while few, were becoming a strain on the

available resources. The bike shop--run by the program, which taught the youth the marketable

skill of bike repair, was the only self-sustaining division of the program. Other divisions such as

the ‘whiz kids’ computer lab,, the drill team, the after school tutoring, and the ‘let’s talk’ open

talk sessions, were a constant drain on available funds.​ With no official designated grant writer

on board, the grant writing process was a collaborative effort between the Executive Director

(strictly as a source of information), the Deputy Director, a volunteer college student and the part

time Program Director. As such, grants requests were, on occasion, past deadline,or incomplete

in the context of requested documentation. As anyone who has requested funding for a nonprofit

organization knows, the intricacies of the dreaded grant request process can be hard to maneuver,
STRATEGIC CHANGE 5

even for a seasoned vet. To be successful, you must know the agency you are requesting the

funding for inside and out, and it helps to be passionate about their mission. One of the major

reasons grant proposals get denied is question about the validity or qualifications of an

organization to complete the task for which they are being funded (Walker & Pascoe, 2015). A

convincing argument must be made in a proposal not just that the organization is capable, but

step by step each major point of argument must be backed with a plan for implementation and a

timeframe for completion. Walker & Pascoe refer to the formation of the main argument for a

proposal as ​schemata​, and add that the use of schemata “requires careful scholarship, reflection,

and a vision that forecasts details of their role in solving a high priority problem or addressing an

urgent need’ (2015). While the executive team offered insight into the process, the volunteer

had no storytelling skills, and was not familiar enough with the organization’s leaders or their

qualifications to make a convincing argument on their behalf. This resulted in lost opportunities

for which the organization was qualified, and would have excelled at without a doubt, had the

proposal been more tailored to the wants of the granting foundation.

The nomination and subsequent receipt of the national award as a leader in neighborhood

crime prevention came none too soon. Along with the prestige came an increase in funding

opportunities. The organization however, was not in a position to reap the full benefits of the

moment. Being behind on bills, and unable to pay some of its employees due to the dismal

funding outlook immediately before the national award and accompanying grant, the funds were

almost immediately spent as the organization caught up, and even made good on owed salaries.

Now back in the black the organization was faced with the dilemma of paying salaries and

supporting its programming or dedicating part of the budget to a full time grant writer. The
STRATEGIC CHANGE 6

board of directors felt that after the national recognition the programs had just gotten, the closing

of any of them, even temporarily would negatively impact their chances at receiving any grants

with or without a grant writer, and for that reason they chose to have the organization continue to

approach the proposal process as they have been. This was a costly mistake. Without someone

who knew the correct way to word a proposal, the funding did not come. One by one the

programs had to close down due to lack of funding and reduced donations. The Whiz Kids

program which offered the kids a chance to earn their own computer after completing x amount

of hours in the computer lab was one of the first to go. Next went the drill team, the

organization’s main presence in the community, a walking billboard advertisement for the

organization and its mission if you will. Finally, the drop in center and Let’s Talk program

ended. All that was left was the office, where the directors and volunteers tried until they could

no more to attain funding.

SWOT Analysis
STRATEGIC CHANGE 7

The Community Tool Box is a service of the ​Work Group for Community Health and

Development​ at the University of Kansas (University of Kansas, 2015). Among the tools offered

is the SWOT analysis, described by Bryson as a tool that “juxtaposes two fundamental

dimensions of existence, good or strengths and opportunities, and bad or weaknesses and threats”

(Bryson, 2011). The SWOT for SOCK recognizes the good in the organization, such as national

recognition and experience but also gives the issues of lack of formal hierarchy, and defined

roles, as well as lacking dedicated funding department equal status. Similarly, the free marketing

and recognition that comes with receiving the award is tarnished by the diminished resource

availability to ride the recognition to the fullest reward.

The 4-D Model of Appreciative Inquiry

The core tenet of the 4-D Model of Appreciative Inquiry is the context in which the

questions are posed. Positive questions bring positive answers (Cooperrider & Whitney, n.d.) .

The 4-D model used to assess the organization netted the following:
STRATEGIC CHANGE 8

Discovery-​ During this step two of the questions posed, “SOCK is a nationally

recognized, proven success, and has much to offer the community. What is the organization's

greatest asset?” and “What can we do to highlight our unique talents to funding agencies?”

netted the following answers:

Sock has a working business model, programs that identify with the needs of the

community and consistently deliver solutions in a way that has won national awards. The

programming, and even more the founder and creator of the programs is the greatest asset to the

organization. In order to most clearly bring the qualifications of this organization to the funding

community, a position must be made in the organization for a skilled professional grant proposal

writer.

Dream-​SOCK is exceptionally honored to have been a recipient of the Ameritech/

National Council on Crime Prevention award for their work in the field of crime prevention. This

is a position the organization would like to realize again.

​ OCK is no stranger to volunteer talent and incorporating that talent into

Design-S

operations to see the mission of the organization to fruition. One shortage is the funding to hire a

grant writer. As a concession, for the long term growth of the organization, salary structure and

organizational structure can be designed to enlist more volunteer resources for those areas that

currently draw from the operating budget, and free funding for a grant writer.

Destiny-​Rather than eliminating programs altogether, the program hours could be

reduced temporarily, and a reduction in the physical use of assets could be called for until further

notice, (ie...shut off lighting in unused rooms and programming areas, no free computers until

funding returns but lab hours will be logged, drop in hours from 2-3 instead of 2-4, etc,..).
STRATEGIC CHANGE 9

Summary

Comparing organizational outcomes while using the traditional SWOT analysis vs. the

4-D model of affirmative inquiry we find that traditional SWOT offers great insight into the

forces that factor into the success of the organization both internal and external, and the 4-D

model offers direction in strategic planning when aligning the vision of the organization with the

operational goals in a more concise visual manner.

In considering the results of each of these analysis and their effect on the strategic

planning process I believe that traditional SWOT analysis, while a useful tool for identifying

forces that affect the success of the organization, can be a useful tool to aid in directing the

strategic planning design itself, but the 4-D model can well be used as a template for the strategic

plan if the need were such due to the completeness of the model.
STRATEGIC CHANGE 10

References

Bryson, J. M. (2011). ​Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to

strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement.​ Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Chapter 3. Assessing Community Needs and Resources | Section 14. SWOT Analysis: Strengths,

Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats | Main Section | Community Tool Box. (n.d.).

Retrieved

from:​http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/assessment/assessing-community-needs-and-r

esources/swot-analysis/main

Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. (2011). What is appreciative inquiry.

Leung, A. K., Robson, W. L., Cho, H., & Lim, S. H. (1996). Latchkey children. ​The Journal of

the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health,​ ​116(​ 6), 356-359.

doi:10.1177/146642409611600603

Walker, H. M., & Pascoe, S. M. (2015). ​Foundations of grant writing : a systemic approach

based on experience.​ Eugene, OR: University of Oregon.

What is Appreciative Inquiry? - The Appreciative Inquiry Commons. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/intro/whatisai.cfm