SOAR: A New Approach to Strategic Planning

376



planning methods



Phase Two: Imagine

They created the following:

• Values: dedication, flexibility, creativity, team spirit, and continuous communications

• Vision: To be a diverse and global leader providing best-in-class engineering; noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH); sealant; and adhesive solutions with unsurpassed sales and

service.

Phase Three: Innovate

Strengths and opportunities were developed into meaningful aspirations. The team

engaged in dialogue about initiatives, markets, strategies, structure, and processes. Two strategic

statements were created:

• We are hardworking, flexible employees who design, sell, and service cost-effective and

innovative engineering, NVH, and sealant solutions that are value added to our original

equipment manufacturers (OEMs).

• We provide a safe, positive environment conducive to creativity that attracts and retains

best employees.

These became part of the center’s strategy—the “how”—to achieve measurable results. Then, the

team produced a tactical plan with action-oriented activities.

Phase Four: Inspired

The team identified its aspirations to drive them to results. This phase encompassed shared

dialogue on the best way to implement and sustain a collective sense of purpose—mission statement and attainment.

The VP left with an objective to complete the SOAR approach with the 400 employees at

the corporate office. He stated:

The process went beyond my expectations because three divisions became boundaryless and came together to co-create the future. Everyone was heard and everyone

has a stake. Now we have a strategic action plan to best move forward.

A team member shared his feelings about SOAR:

I’ve been with Orbseal for one year and this allowed me to openly share what I

believe we can be! It was nice to hear that others have similar aspirations. I feel connected to this team.

Today, a continuous improvement mind-set now drives the culture at Orbseal.



soar



The Basics

What Is SOAR?

SOAR is an innovative, strength-based approach to strategic planning and invites the whole

system (stakeholders) into the process. This approach integrates Appreciative Inquiry (AI) with a

strategic planning framework to create a transformational process that inspires organizations to

SOAR.

The SOAR framework goes beyond the original AI 4-D model1 to link the concepts (figure 1).

This framework, using AI principles, transforms the traditional strategic planning SWOT model

(Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) into SOAR and accelerates the strategic planning efforts by focusing directly on those elements that will give life energy to the organization’s

future. The AI Principle of Relational Awareness builds dynamic and sustainable relationships

among stakeholders.2



Illustration by Nancy Margulies



Figure 1. SOAR: What We Do and How We Do It



When and Where Is SOAR Used?

SOAR can be used whenever the strategic planning process is done to complete environmental scanning; revisit or create organizational values, vision, and mission; formulate

strategy, strategic plans, and tactical plans; and bring about transformational change. This

framework has been used in for-profit and nonprofit settings: education, manufacturing, service, health care, automotive, pharmaceutical, and banking at the corporate and strategic



377



378



planning methods

business unit level. The first clients to use SOAR in their strategic planning efforts were Roadway, Tendercare, Textron Fastening Systems, Positive Change Corps, Utah Education Association, and CASE University.

What Are the Outcomes?

SOAR has been used in four-hour to three-day planning sessions. Participants learn to:

• identify the positive core of the organization (strengths and opportunities)

• obtain clarity of values, vision, and mission to align with initiatives, strategies, and action

plans

• plan, design, and facilitate a whole-system strategic planning session

• identify measurements that drive performance

Participants have achieved improved results in:

• productivity and sales

• communications—continuous and open



Illustration by Nancy Margulies



Figure 2. Summarization of SOAR



soar



379



• morale and attrition rates

• goal attainment

How Does SOAR Work?

To achieve a strategic impact, this approach integrates AI, Dialogue, and the whole systems

approach with a framework that builds upon an organization’s positive core to SOAR. By focusing on Strengths and Opportunities, organizations can reach their Aspirations (desired outcomes)

with measurable Results by:

1. Inquiring into strength and opportunities;

2. Imagining the best pathway to sustainable growth;

3. Innovating to create the initiatives, strategies, structure, systems, and plans; and

4. Inspiring action-oriented activities that achieve results (figure 2).



Table of Uses

Setting



Project Length



Participants/Time



SOAR Planning Sessions

Corporate/department level

• Strategic Inquiry

• Imagine the Future

• Innovate Strategy, Structure

and Plans



2–4 times/year

Annual

Complete to-one or team interviews



10–400 people

2–3 days

• 2–4 hours

• 2–4 hours

• 2–4 hours



• Inspire to Implement Plan



• 1–2 days



Higher Education

Completed environmental scan

Identify vision, mission, and initiatives for campuswide strategic

plan



1-day kickoff launched



125 people

4 hours



Manufacturer—completed Balanced Scorecard to align with

strategic initiatives



Yearly—review quarterly



40 people

1.5 days



Statewide Education System—

stakeholders created strategic and

tactical plan with accountability

systems



Ongoing—Meet one to three

times/year



40–200 people from 2 to 2.5 days



Health Care—facility strategic renewal plan



18 months



Core Team—10 people; 76 interviews in 6 weeks



380



planning methods



About the Authors

Jackie Stavros (jstavros@comcast.net) is professor at Lawrence Technological University. She

coauthored Dynamic Relationships: Unleashing the Power of Appreciative Inquiry in Daily Living

and Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. Her clients include: ERIM International, Tendercare, General

Motors, and Girl Scouts USA.

David Cooperrider (dlc6@po.cwru.edu) is professor and director for Business as Agent World

Benefit (BAWB) at CASE University. He coauthored Advances in Appreciative Inquiry: Constructive Discourse in Human Organizations and Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. His clients include:

Roadway, Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, United Nations, and GTE.

D. Lynn Kelley (lkelley@textron.com) is responsible for enterprise-wide global programming in

Six Sigma and Integrated Supply Chain at Textron University.



Where to Go for More Information

References

Stavros, J., D. Cooperrider, and L. Kelley. “Strategic Inquiry with Appreciative Intent: Inspiration

to SOAR!” AI Practitioner: AI and Strategy (November 2003).

Sutherland, J., and J. Stavros. “The Heart of Appreciative Strategy.” AI Practitioner: AI and Strategy

(November 2003).

Influential Sources

Cooperrider, D., D. Whitney, and J. Stavros. Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. Bedford Heights,

OH, and San Francisco: Lakeshore Communications and Berrett-Koehler Communications, 2003.

Stavros, J., and C. Torres. Dynamic Relationships Unleashing the Power of Appreciative Inquiry in

Daily Living. Lima, OH: Fairway Press, 2005.

Organization

Dynamic Relationships—www.dynamic-relationships.com

1. The model is Discovery, Dream, Design, and Destiny. Visit AI Commons: http://ai.cwru.edu.

2. This principle calls us to be reflective and actively engaged to move a system forward in a positive direction. For more information, visit: www.dynamic-relationships.com.



39

chris soderquist



Strategic Forum

Tell me, I forget.

Show me, I remember.

Involve me, I understand.

—Ancient Chinese proverb



Real-Life Story

In March 2005, a nationally known health-care provider wished to develop a long-term strategy

for delivering dialysis services. The dialysis system is notoriously hard to manage due to a wide

variety of factors: high expenses (both operating and capital investments), technologically

sophisticated processes requiring a variety of staff skills, burnout and rapid turnover of nursing

staff, and patient scheduling conflicts. Also, dialysis is often the result of a progressive disease

that saps the strength and morale of patients and staff. Further, Medicare regulations dictate a

treatment regimen that medical professionals consider less than ideal—so to provide exceptional service usually takes the organization into the red. In addition, with the surge in adult

onset diabetes that is expected to result from an increasingly aging and obese population, there

is the potential for demand to overwhelm capacity in the near- to midterm.

Over the course of three months, an external consulting team interviewed the staff (physicians, nurses, and administrators) to identify the major issues (many mentioned above) and

examine the historical trends, as well as projected future trends. Because it was clear the stakeholders held vastly different assumptions about the future, as well as what were optimal treatments, the consulting team suggested a Strategic Forum (computer simulation model) where

physicians, nurses, and administrators were provided a practice field to:

1. Understand future population scenarios

2. Explore different treatment strategies



382



planning methods

3. Observe implications of treatment strategies on population, staff, and expenses

4. Test the ability of process capability to facilitate the efficacy of strategies

During the Strategic Forum, participants were amazed to see a wide discrepancy in

assumptions about future patient dynamics, as well as the wide variety of desired treatments. In

particular, physicians were more likely to suggest innovative treatment strategies, while administrators and nursing staff—who understood the financial and staffing implications—saw a more

tempered approach to migrating to innovative strategies. The resulting conversations brought the

entire stakeholder group onto the “same page” regarding optimal treatments and how to systemically orchestrate a strategy to implement. The staff is now in an ongoing process of revising the

computer simulation (and map shown in figure 1) to include insights generated from the

forum—they are in a continuing process of learning regarding the dialysis system.

Dialysis Access



arriving

catheter only



Patients

Catheter

Only



Patients

Better

Access



receiving

better

access



hospitalized

catheter only



hospitalized

better access



arriving

better

access



hosp rate

catheter only

dying

catheter only



Patient

Knowledge



dying

better

access



hospitalization rate

better access



mortality better

access



building patient

knowledge



building phys know

Experienced

PC Staff

develop and

teach CME



Primary Physician

Knowledge



Treatment Knowledge



Figure 1. A Section of the Forum Map



The Basics: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

When Is a Strategic Forum Appropriate?

Although it works well for a variety of strategic (even tactical) issues, it is especially suited

for issues where the future is filled with uncertainty, where multiple scenarios are likely to occur,



strategic forum

and where there is little data to understand how the current system works. In addition, it’s ideal in

organizations where there are contentious debates about multiple strategies because the highly

experiential process (system mapping and computer simulation) helps to “cool off ” the personality focus and get the group to concentrate on the issues.

How Does a Forum Work?

A forum works by helping the group apply a different paradigm to the development of

their mental models of how the system works. This paradigm leads them to:

• Look at the issues as long-term (behavior over time) patterns rather than events

• Develop an operational mental model using a visual language that reduces ambiguities and

forces rigorous thinking/testing

• Use computer simulation as a way to test the usefulness of the mental model

What Should I Know About Mapping and Simulation?

Mapping is used to synthesize the implicit mental models of stakeholders into an explicit

visual representation. Simulation software translates those maps into something a computer can

use to test out “what ifs” regarding the synthesized mental model. The mapping methodology

used in a forum relies upon the more sophisticated (and operational) language of stocks and

flows. This language better represents time delays, leading indicators, bottlenecks, and unintended consequences—increasing the likelihood of identifying appropriate levers and timing for

pulling those levers—than the more commonly employed causal loop mapping methodology. It

also enhances mental simulation of how the group believes the organization/system works.

How Do I Know What Should Be Included in the Forum Maps/Models?

All models (whether mental or those turned into computer maps/models) are developed

using a particular lens of what we value—what we think is important to understand, or what performance we wish to develop or improve. Although organizations can build forum models focusing on the performance measure du jour, they would be well advised to use a systemic or integral

framework for what to include. The Balanced Scorecard (chapter 50) framework (Financial, Customer, Business Processes, and Learning & Growth) provides an excellent and systemic frame of

what to include—how to develop measures in each of those areas. Other frameworks worth mentioning include Triple Bottom Line frameworks or Ken Wilber’s Four Quadrant framework.



If I Were Interested in Delivering a Forum, What Are the Steps

I’d Need to Follow?

1. Identify the issue as something requiring a systemic understanding

2. Locate a competent system dynamics practitioner



383



384



planning methods

3. Assemble a multidisciplinary team (internal and external) to understand the issues and

how the system works

4. Develop simple maps and ask for rapid feedback across stakeholder groups to assess usefulness of map

5. Build and test the model(s) with a core team of stakeholders

6. Create learning objectives and learning environment for forum

7. Implement forum and generate list of next steps

8. Don’t shelve the models/maps! Rather, use them in an ongoing process of updating the key

assumptions in the models/maps, and hold annual forums to evaluate current applicability

of model and strategy to the organization.

What’s the Long-Term Impact of a Forum on the Organization?

Once an organization implements a forum, strategic discussions tend to become more in

line with a systems-thinking paradigm. Leaders begin to ask: What are potential unintended consequences? Is there internal consistency with the strategic objectives? How will this unfold over

time—is there some way to better orchestrate implementation? If we are achieving objectives,

what are leading indicators that will help us assess this sooner?



Table of Uses

Typical Setting



Brief Description



All types of organizations have used the

Strategic Forum. Examples include:

• health care



Issues that have:

• proven intractable

historically

• multiple stakeholders who must buy

in to implement

• several likely futures

• complex interrelationships



• manufacturing

• high-tech

• nongovernmental

organizations

(NGOs)

• defense

• government (national and local)



• an accelerating pace

of change



Project

Length

2–6 months



Key Events



Number of

Participants



Assessment and

Interviews

(1–4 weeks)



5–20



Mapping and

Modeling

(2–8 weeks)



5



Development of

Forum Materials

(2–4 weeks)



5



Strategic Forum

Event

(1–2 days)



5–30



Implementation

(2–6 months)



The organization



strategic forum



About the Author

Chris Soderquist (chris.soderquist@pontifexconsulting.com), president of Pontifex Consulting,

helps individuals, teams, and organizations in building capacity to develop strategic solutions to

complex issues. With his extensive experience in Systems Thinking/System Dynamics, group

facilitation, communication skill development, and statistical/process analysis, he integrates the

“hard stuff ” and the “soft stuff ” for effective, actionable solutions. Representative clients include:

Boeing, Dow Chemical, WW Grainger, Hewlett-Packard, Merck, MnDOT, NASA, Nextel,

Northrop Grumman, Sustainability Institute, and the World Bank.



Where to Go for More Information

References

Kaplan, R., and D. Norton. The Strategy-Focused Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School

Press, 2001.

Richmond, Barry. “The Strategic Forum: Aligning Objectives, Strategy and Process.” System

Dynamics Review 13, no. 2 (1997).

Soderquist, C., and M. Shimada. Operational Strategy Mapping: Learning and Executing at the

Boeing Company. Waltham, MA: Pegasus Communications, 2005.

Influential Source

Wilber, Ken. Introduction to Integral Theory and Practice: IOSBasic and the AQAL Map. Boulder,

CO: Integral Institute, 2003.

Organization

Pontifex Consulting—www.pontifexconsulting.com



385



40

david sibbet



Strategic Visioning

Bringing Insight to Action

One of the more difficult lessons to learn is to recognize current reality as it

now is, which often is different from what you think it is supposed to be or

how you want it to be.

—Robert Fritz



Real-Life Story

The Save the Redwoods League (SRL) is a California-based organization committed to preserving some of the oldest—and tallest—organisms on the planet. SRL has a long and successful history of preserving old-growth redwoods since its founding in 1918. Although skillful in its

efforts, the league had never developed a formal strategy, and external factors began to make the

need more evident. The election of a new board president and appointment of a new executive

director—combined with growing public misperception that its mission had largely been

accomplished—led the league’s directors to undertake a process to chart a course for the next five

years. It was important to them that the process lead to a strong consensus among key stakeholders, resulting in a compelling vision linked to actionable strategies, and that the process be able to

handle the complexity of the issues.

SRL chose a Strategic Visioning process, a highly visual method that uses large graphic

templates to guide people through the different perspectives needed to do good strategy work.

The league process involved three one-day sessions with key stakeholders over three months.

League staff, board, and council members and other stakeholders participated. A key step was

creating a graphic history of SRL, understandably important to everyone concerned. This was

analyzed to better understand the guiding principles and processes that had served it best over