Strategic Plan is not a plan

[John Mathiason <jrmathia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Colleagues,

I have just reviewed the draft Strategic Plan as part of completing a  
book on Internet governance for Routledge.  I teach strategic  
planning in international organizations and one of the things that I  
emphasize to my students is that an objective in a plan must specify  
an end-state, something that you can observe at the end of the plan  
period.  It should not be an activity.  Rather it should be the  
result of an activity or activities.  I regret that all of the  
objectives in the Strategic Plan draft, other than the main  
categories, are activities.  The terms used in the some of the main  
categories  (enhancing, strengthening) have to be defined (I can  
enhance my appearance by buying a new tie).

The problem with using activities as objectives is that they are  
really easy to achieve (you simply do the activities).  If my  
students used a term like "Address the technical issues.(1.1) ." I  
would say, all you need to do is write a memo and you've achieved  
that objective.

If ICANN is serious about strategic planning (as opposed to  
projecting current activities infinitely into the future), it should  
convert the objectives into what you would expect to see at the end  
of 2011.  This is not difficult, but it requires ICANN to make a  
commitment to making the objective happen.  For example, you could  
(1) increase the use of IDNs.  For that to happen you need to have an  
agreement on how to use IDN's.  For that to happen, you need to have  
successfully tested trial IDNs.

If you are interested in help on converting activities to objectives  
and outcomes, I would be pleased to give you some advice.  (I have  
been doing this with organizations of the United Nations System for a  
number of years.)

Regards,


John Mathiason
Professor of International Relations
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs
Syracuse University