92

Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 92 to 98, 1983

Long Range Planning,
Printed in Great Britain

0024-6301/83$3.00+
.OO
Pergamon
Press Ltd.

Identifying the Levels of Strategy

for a College or University
Robert C. Shirley,
San Antonio

Department

of Business Administration,

Little work has been done to date in applying the concept of

strategy to non-profit
organizations.
This article focuses on
strategic planning in the higher education setting and identifies the key strategic decision areas for a college or university.
Four levels of strategy are discussed and contrasted with the
three levels typically used to describe a complex, divisionalized
business firm. Specific decision issues are identified for each
strategy level and compared,
where appropriate,
to similar
issues in the business sector. Finally, several avenues
of
research are suggested
to enable better understanding
of
strategy
content
and process
in institutions
of higher
education.

Strategy as a field of study has grown remarkably

during the past decade, and significant
advances
have been made in theory, research and practice. A
number
of theoretical
advances
have occurred:
Hofer
and Schendels
comprehensive
work
in
paradigm
development;
Vancil
and Loranges
identification
of the various levels of planning and
their interactions.
Ansoffs3q4 work on strategic
issue managemen;
and response strategies, as well
as his more
extensive
treatment
of strategic
management
in general;
and, in general,
the
multiplicity
of theoretical
developments
found in a
wide array of books which have appeared in the past
few years (see Bibliography
for suggested sources).
Of equal importance
are the significant
advances
made in research:
Mintzbergs5s6
ongoing
work
related to processes of strategy formulation;
the
efforts of Schoeffler and others in development
and
refinement
of the PIMS
model;
and a growing
number
of studies focused
on strategy
content.
Developments
in business practice
are harder to
document,
but anecdotal
evidences
from Business
Week,
Fortune and other sources suggest that a
variety of industries are now applying the tools and
techniques
of strategic
planning.
Practical
works

Robert C. Shirley is Chairman

of the Department
of Business
Administration
at Trinity University, 715 Stadium Drive, San Antonio,
Texas 78284,
U.S.A.

Trinity

such as those by Rothschild,

significant
impact
on the
practices of business firms.

University,

are also having

strategic
planning

In light of these developments,

it is puzzling
that so little work has been done in the area of
strategic
planning
for non-profit
organizations.
Many of the concepts and techniques developed for
the business setting would be applicable to the nonbusiness sector as well. Bourgeois
notes that the
strategy concept has its main value, for both profitseeking and non-profit
organizations,
in determining how an organization
defines its relationship
to
its environment
in the pursuit of its objectives.
Yet
few authors
consciously
extend
the concept
of
strategy to the non-profit
sector. Summers
latest
book focuses extensively
on strategic behavior
in
government
(as well as in business) and represents a
pioneering
effort in this regard. Gluecks12
text
contains a short section that focuses on strategy for
institutions,
but
most
books
on
non-profit
corporate
strategy are silent on the matter. At best
such books will include selected cases that are drawn
from government,
education,
health care, religion
or the arts. In short, the non-profit
sector represents
a new and virtually untapped area for research and
writing in strategic planning.
The purpose of this article is to suggest how selected
concepts of strategic planning might be applied to
one particular type of non-profit
organization:
an
institution
of higher education.
Most colleges and
universities will face a number of challenging
forces
throughout
the 1980s including
declining
enrollments (as a result of declines in the birth rate during
the 1960s and 197Os), reduced financial
support
from
local
and state governments,
increasing
demands
for
accountability,
heavily
tenured
faculties, high inflation, increased competition
and
changing attitudes of the general public concerning
the value of a college
degree.
Such challenges
demand
a structured
approach
for analysis
and
evaluation
of environmental
forces in relation
to

Identifying
internal
capabilities
Hatten note that:

and

values.

the Levels of Strategy

Schendel

and

By suggesting
that higher education has been slow to adapt
to changes, that its programs
and policies are not always
consistent
with its objectives,
that objectives
themselves
are unclear or inconsistent,
that resource consumption
may
not be planned with either the objectives
or programs
in
mind, is to suggest that the concept of strategy and its
management
can be usefully applied to managing
higher
education.13

The higher
education
literature
contains
only
slightly more reference
to strategic planning
in
colleges and universities
than is found in the
business
literature.
CopeI
and Parekh
have
developed
useful planning guides for college and
university
administrators,
but both stop short of
full-scale efforts at paradigm development.
This article attempts to identify the principal layers
of a strategic
planning
system for colleges and
universities.
It focuses on what has to be done
rather than how in order to clarify the end results
that
are sought
through
strategic
planning.
Hopefully,
such an approach will provide the basis
for further development
of theory and research in
the non-profit
sector.

Strategic Planning
Education Setting

in the Higher

One of the characteristics

of any discipline during
its infancy
is lack of agreement
on concept
definition.
Despite disagreement
in the literature
over what strategy is, it is generally agreed that the
dual purpose
of strategy
is to relate the total
organization
to its environment
and to provide
unity and direction to all organizational
activities,
Unless this dual purpose is operationalized
through
decision making, however,
the planning process has
no focus, no clear points of closure (albeit the points
of closure will almost always be temporal
in
nature). The major deficiency of most definitions is
the failure to provide this clear decisional focus for
strategy-makers.
In other words,
what are the
decisions which, once made, define the relationship
of the total organization
to its environment
and at
the same time give direction
to all other goaldirected activity?

Strategic
Analysis

Figure

1.

The components

of strategic

planning

for a College

or University

93

In the case of a college or university,

it is helpful to
think in terms of six strategic variables: (1) the basic
mission of the institution;
(2) the target group(s) of
clientele to be served; (3) the goals and objectives
that the institution
must achieve in order to fulfill
its mission and serve the needs ofits clientele; (4) the
programs
and services offered
(and the relative
priorities among them) in order to attain the goals
and objectives; (5) the geographic service area of the
and (6) the comparative
advantage
institution;
sought by the institution
over competitors
engaged
in similar activities. These decisions, once made,
articulate what we are and what we hope to be, i.e.
our strategic directions in relation to the environment. Decisions along these six dimensions
also
give direction
to, and act as constraints
on, all
subsequent
decision
making
and goal-directed
activity
within
the institution.
Thus,
these
decisions serve to operationalize
the two fundamental purposes of strategy-making
and represent
the end results that we seek through
strategic
planning.
In order to make strategic decisions, we must of
course consider a range of alternative choices about
the future. And, in order to generate this range of
choices, we must engage in analysis of environmental threats and opportunities
in relation
to
institutional
strengths and values. This, then, is the
essence of strategic
planning:
it is the process
whereby
data are collected and analyzed, alternatives are generated and evaluated, and decisions are
made
about
the strategic
directions
of the
institution
(Figure 1).

The Levels of Strategy

University

in a

As indicated earlier, Vancil and Lorange identified

three levels of strategy-making:
corporate, business
and functional.
Their approach
has been widely
used to distinguish
between the kinds of strategic
plans developed
by the company
as a whole
(corporate strategies), its various divisions (business
strategies) and the functional
departments
within
the various divisions (functional
strategies).
This
layering
of strategy
provides
a useful start in
constructing
a strategic planning
system in the
non-profit
sector; however,
certain modifications

Long Range

Planning

are necessary in order to adapt

college or university
setting.

June

Vol. 16
the approach

Figure 2 provides
an overview
of four
strategy for a college or university.

to a

levels

Basic Mission.

Every institution
must first determine
its fundamental
purposes and guiding principles for
behavior.
Specific
decision
issues faced
here
include: the major constituencies
of the organization and the nature of the obligation(s)
to each; the
relative emphasis
to be placed on (a) teaching,
research and service, (b) graduate vs undergraduate
(c ) career-oriented
education,
programs
vs the
liberal arts and (d) experimental
vs traditional
modes of instruction;
the institutions
role within
the local community;
the general
range
of
disciplines t o b e offered; any particular thrusts or
priorities
that will shape the nature
of the
institution;
and other decisions that represent broad
commitments
and directions
for development
of
the institution
as a whole.
Consider
statement
University

Level 2: Campus-Wide
Functional Strategies

Stretegy

Enrollment Plan
l Target Mix of Majors
l Target Mix of Demographic
Characteristics

t
Identification of
Internal Strengths

Determination of:
(1) Basic Mission
(2) Clientele
(3) Goals
(4) Program/Service
Mix
(5) Geographic Service
Area
(6) Comparative
Advantage

Admissions and
Recruitment Plan
l University Standards
l Program Standards

Human Resource Development

Plan
. l Strategies for Program
Development
l Strategies for Individual Dev

Evaluation of Human
Financial, and
Physical Resources

Organizational Plan
l Strategies for Program
Consolidation/Restructuring
l Strategies for Program
Development or Termination

Facilities Plan
l Strategies for Expansion of
Facilities
l Strategies for Reallocation o
Facilities

2. Levels of strategy

in a college

the
and

Level 4: Program-Level
Functional Strategies

Development of
Plans by Strategic
Academic Units
(Programs or
Program Clusters):
l

Figure

1
1

Level 3: Program
Strategies

Financial Plan
l Strategies for Expansion
of Resources
l Strategies for Reallocation
of Resources

Environmental
Assessment

The Matching
recess: Relating
ixternal Opportunitie
rnd Constraints to
nternal Strengths
rnd Values

from the
Villanova

Given its character and resources, Villanova is committed

to offering such undergraduate
and graduate programs
as
will best serve the needs ofits constituencies.
As a mediumsized comprehensive
university,
it offers programs
in the
humanities,
in the natural
and social sciences and in

Strategy
Institutional
strategy focuses first and foremost on
the strategic directions of the institution as a whole.
The six strategic
decision
areas listed earlier

dentification of
ixternal Opportunitie
ind Constraints

as an example these excerpts

of mission
developed
by
in 1979:

As a Catholic institution
Villanova
both emphasizes
values of the Judaeo-Christian
humanistic
tradition
concerns itself with all value systems . .

1: Institutional

Level 1: institutional

represent the major foci of concern here, and the

specific
decision
each area are
issues within
discussed briefly below.

of

Level 1 has been labeled institutional

strategy and
corresponds
to Vancil and Loranges
corporatelevel planning. Level 2, campus-wide
functional
includes
major
implementation
strategies,
strategies established
for the total institution
in
order to provide the context and parameters
(e.g.
financial, enrollments)
for lower-level
planning.
Level
3 contains
program
strategies,
those
strategic plans developed
by individual
programs
and/or program
clusters in order to effect the
overall
institutional
strategy.
Finally,
Level 4
functional
strategies,
contains
program-level
those action steps in curriculum,
recruitment,
fundraising,
publication
and other
areas that are
necessary to implement
program-level
strategies.
Thus Levels 1 and 2 are institution-wide
in nature,
while Levels 3 and 4 contain strategies developed by
the various
subunits
(colleges,
schools, departments) of the enterprise.
Each of these levels is
discussed in more detail below, including attention
to why four levels are necessary rather than only
three as proposed by Vancil and Lorange.
Level

1983

or university

Strategic Profile
Action Priorities
Resource
Requirements

Strategic Academic
Supporting Services:
+

Admissions
Curriculum

Recruitment

Identifying

the Levels of Strategy

professional
areas such as business, education,
engineering,
law,
library
science
and
nursing.
The
University
emphasizes undergraduate
instruction
and is committed
to
a liberal arts component
in each of its undergraduate
programs.
In all academic departments,
it encourages such
research and scholarly work as are compatible
with the
facultys other obligations
to the University.
Villanova
stresses
the disciplines
of philosophy
and
religious studies. Moreover,
it seeks to add its influence to
the search for world peace and justice by means of both its
academic programs
and the pastoral ministry
it provides
for the members
of the University
community.
In like
manner,
the University
has always
encouraged
and
supported its faculty, students and staff in providing
public
service to the community.
Ultimately,
all these programs
and support are seen as a means of developing
the total
person: intellectually,
emotionally,
spiritually,
culturally,
socially and physically.
Villanova attempts
to enroll students with diverse social,
economic
and educational
backgrounds.
geographic,
Furthermore,
in utilizing its financial aid resources to help
achieve this diverse student body, Villanova recognizes its
responsibility
to use part of those resources to assist the
economically
and educationally
disadvantaged.
Villanova welcomes
students who consider it desirable to
study within
the philosophical
framework
of Christian
humanism.
Similarly,
the University
seeks to employ on
all levels those who are sympathetic
to and supportive
of its
character and identity . . .
Finally, this community
seeks to reflect the spirit of St.
Augustine
by the cultivation
of knowledge,
by respect for
individual
differences
and by adherence
to the principle
that mutual love and respect should animate every aspect of
University
life.

While focusing on broad purposes,

this mission
statement nonetheless conveys specific decisions that
have been made about the high priority given to
undergraduate
programs, the types of programs to
be offered, the strong liberal arts component
to be
built into all programs,
the basic character of the
institution
and the expectations
of support for the
mission by faculty, staff and students. As indicated
above, these guiding principles of behavior set the
tone and direction for the institution
as a whole.
Clientele.
Given
the context
provided
by a
statement of mission, a college or university
must
next make specific decisions
about
the target
population(s)
to be served, and these populations
should be described in terms of their needs and
demographic
characteristics.
It should
also be
remembered
at this stage that while students
represent
the principal
clientele for most institutions, the roles played by foundations,
granting
agencies, government
and other external entities
continue
to increase in importance.
For strategic
purposes,
it is useful to define the needs and
characteristics
of these entities along with more
traditional
student markets.

In defining

its student

clientele,

a small college

on

for a College

95

or University

the east coast of the United States segmented

its
student markets along the following
dimensions:
Geographic
Washington,

origins
(with emphasis
DC metropolitan
area).

on

the

Age (with emphasis

on the 18-24 age group).

Marital status (with

on single students).

almost

exclusive

emphasis

Preferences
for large vs small school (with
emphasis on those who a priori preferred smaller
institutions).
Preferred
course of study (with emphasis on
those who wanted
a degree in one of the
traditional
liberal arts disciplines).
Social orientation
(with emphasis on those who
preferred on-campus
living arrangements
and a
serious, quiet college life).
Academic
origins (with emphasis on students
graduating
from private
high schools in the
Washington,
DC area because of past neglect of
this group).
This example illustrates the need for institutions
to
specifically identify their target clientele as a guide
to admissions planning, to be sure, but also as an
essential input to curriculum
design, student life
activities
and
other
aspects
of institutional
functioning.
Goals

and Objectives.
What are the end results that
the institution
seeks to achieve in order to fulfill its
mission and meet the needs of its clientele? It is
generally useful to identify three goal categories for
the typical college or university:
goals for student
development
(the learning
outcomes
sought to
facilitate intellectual, emotional, moral and physical
development);
goals for societal development
(the
results sought in the areas of research and public
service); and goals for institutional
development
(the resource-related
ends that are sought in order
to facilitate goal attainment
in the other two areas).
Decisions must be made in each of these categories
in order to further identify the unifying themes of a
complex college or university.

As an example of goals for student development,

consider three (of ten) decisions made about desired
student outcomes
at Hood College in Maryland
(1976) :
The student [should] develop as fully as possible her ability
(1) to read accurately . . and to listen carefully enough to
do justice to what others say; (2) to speak and write with
precision,
clarity,
organization
and point;
and (3) to
generate significant questions and to know how to find and
evaluate answers for herself.

These broad goals must be translated

into more
specific curriculum
objectives,
of course, but it is
extremely
important
that the initial goals establish
unity of direction
for the total institution
during

96

Long

Range

Planning

Vol. 16

June

Level 1 planning. Similarly, consider the following

overall goal for institutional
development
established at Trinity University
in Texas:
Trinity is a private university
with a strong undergraduate
curriculum
and carefully chosen graduate programs.
The
goal of the university
is clear-to
remain
primarily
undergraduate
with a liberal arts program that is premier
in the Southwest
and one of the leading in the nation. To
that end, Trinity is shaping all of its policies and programs:
improving
its faculty,
strengthening
its student
body,
multiplying
its library resources,
and providing
enrichment
projects
that
increase
cultural
and academic
opportunities.

As in the case of Hood Colleges goals for student

development,
Trinity
University
(as indicated)
is
shaping its policies and programs
to achieve the
ambitious
goal that has been established,
i.e. the
institution
has developed
more
specific
programmatic
objectives
consistent
with the overall
goal.
Program/Service &fix. The next step is to define the
to be offered
by the
programs
and services
institution
in order to accomplish
its goals and
objectives
and thereby
serve the needs of its
clientele and fulfill its mission. The three strategic
decision
issues here are: (a) the instructional,
research and public service programs to be offered;
(b) the relative emphasis (priorities) to be placed on
the programs
and (c) targets for new program
time horizon.
development
over an extended
Colleges and universities
have typically
focused
only on issue (a); the changing
nature of the
environment
is now demanding
that increasing
attention be given to (b) and (c) as well.
The State University
of New York at Albany is an
example of an institution
which-consistent
with
its mission, clientele and goals-completely
reevaluated its program
offerings and set priorities
Based on criteria such as
among the programs.
demand, quality, costs, centrality
to mission and
comparative
advantage, that university
eliminated
approximately
15 per cent of its degree programs
and divided the remaining
programs
into three
priority
groupings
to guide
future
resource
allocation
decisions. Thus the strategic decisions
made here under the heading
Program/Service
Mix constituted
a critical element of the overall
Level 1 strategic plan for the institution.
Geographic

Service Area. The fifth strategic decision

area requires identification
of the physical boundaries of the institution,
as well as the geographic
areas to be served
by its various
programs.
Depending
on the program, a college or university
may be participating
in national, regional, state or
local markets in varying degrees. All the strategic
decision areas are highly interdependent,
of course,
but the issue of geography
will be particularly
tied
to the target group(s) of clientele identified by the
institution.

1983
Comparative
Advantage. Finally, the institution
must
seek to identify
how it will gain a differential
advantage over other institutions
offering similar
programs
to similar
target
markets.
The key
decision
here revolves
around
the grounds
on
which the institution
will compete, i.e. the basis on
which it will strive to differentiate
itself from
competitors.
The basis for differentiation
may well
be in one or more of the other strategic decision
areas, e.g. the particular types of programs which
are emphasized by the institution
or the uniqueness
of its particular goals and objectives. On the other
hand, the basis for differentiation
may be nonstrategic in nature, e.g. the attractiveness
of oncampus
living arrangements
or an innovative
academic calendar that has recently been adopted.

The University
of Tampa,
for example,
has
developed
a unique
bimester
plan whereby
students study two courses intensively
for a period
of2 months, then move to two more courses for the
next 2 months, and so on throughout
the academic
year. This approach was grounded
in educational
(learning) theory to a large extent, but it is also
hoped that the new plan will enhance Tampas
students
in
relation
to
attractiveness
to
competitors.
Decisional
Interrelationships.
Before moving to the
next level of strategy, it is important
to emphasize
the interactive
nature of decision making along
these six strategic dimensions
at the institutional
level. Even though a definite sequencing
has been
postulated, there will be much revision and change
across all areas before final decisions are made along
any single dimension. In this connection,
note that
decisions on goals and objectives are not formulated
as a separate, first step. The goals and objectives
established for a college or university
(indeed, even
for a business firm) are contingent upon the types of
clientele (customers) being served, the nature of the
programs
(products)
to be offered
and basic
mission. This is tantamount
to saying that the nature
of the industry may severely constrain
the types of
objectives that can be established for a specific firm,
a point often overlooked
by those who assert that
goal-setting
is the first step in strategy formulation.
Thus all six decisions are interdependent
in this
conceptualization,
and where one enters the circle
for strategic evaluation
is often dictated by the
needs and circumstances
of the institution
in
question.
For example,
in the case of a longestablished
organization,
it may well be that the
nature of the clientele
traditionally
served will
determine
the specific goals and objectives
to be
pursued,
rather than the reverse being true. It
simply may not be feasible to consider changing the
definition of the target market in order to put a new
set of goals and objectives into place.
Level

2: Campus-wide

Functional

Strategies

The six decision areas which constitute

level strategy
are the first-order,

institutionformulative

Identifying

the Levels

decisions of the organization,

i.e. they identify who
we are and what we intend to do in a collective
sense. The next set of strategies shown in Figure 2
begins to address the how questions for the total
institution
in a systematic way. Thus campus-wide
constitute
the initial steps
functional
strategies
toward
implementation
of overall institutional
strategy and address critical issues related to finance,
enrollments,
admissions
and recruitment,
human
resource development,
organization
and facilities.
Stanford
University
represents
an excellent
example
of an institution
which
has developed
sophisticated
functional
strategy models in the
sense described
here. In particular,
Stanford
has
become known as the leader in financial planning
through
its (1) long-range
financial forecast,
(2)
dynamic
budget
equilibrium
model
whereby
sustainable
budget
levels and growth
rates are
identified, and (3) transition-to-equilibrium
model
which develops
a plan for converting
budget
deficits into a position of long-run budget balance.
It should be emphasized that these various financial
models are used at Stanford as tools for implementing
the overall institutional
strategy related to mission,
goals and other Level 1 decisions previously
made.
Hence
Level 1 strategies
must drive Level 2
decision-making
on finance, facilities and the like.
The inclusion of functional
strategies at this level
represents a significant modification
to the Vancil
and Lorange approach. It is tantamount
to saying
that functional
strategies
exist at the corporate
(institutional)
level as well as at the business
(program) level. Further, these functional strategies
should be formulated
in advance of program
level
strategies to ensure that the latter are guided by an
internally consistent set of planning parameters. For
example,
the strategy formulated
by a School of
Business must take cognizance
not only of the
decisions
made as a part of total institutional
strategy
(Level 1) but also the overall financial
outlook for the institution,
projected
enrollment,
availability
of facilities, campus-level
admissions
and recruitment
policies
and other contextual
variables.
Level 3: Program Strategies
The third level of strategy corresponds
to Vancil
and Loranges business strategy, i.e. it includes the
strategies formulated
by individual
programs
or
clusters of programs. What is proposed here is that
each school and department
(and perhaps even each
degree program)
should formulate
a competitive
strategy for the future that encompasses
the same
dimensions
included
in the Level 1 institutional
strategy (basic mission, clientele and so on). The
strategic plans for individual programs should also
include a statement
of resource requirements
in
order to facilitate
the review process by higher
levels of administration.
As indicated

above,

program-level

decisions

on

of Strategy

for a College

or University

97

basic mission, clientele and the like are constrained

not only by institutional
strategy (Level 1) but also
by the functional strategies (Level 2) that permeate
all parts of the enterprise. In this sense, the programs
or program
clusters identified
as planning
units
correspond
closely to the strategic business unit
(SBU) concept. Perhaps the term strategic academic
unit (SAU) would be more appropriate
for the
higher education
setting. Note that the identification of SAUs should actually occur in Level 1
strategy-making
when decisions related to program offerings
and priorities
are made for the
institution
as a whole. Because of their dependence
on Level 1 and Level 2 decisions,
however,
individual SAU strategies are not developed until
Level 3.
Level 4: Program-Level Functional Strategies
The fourth and final level of strategy includes those
action steps that each SAU intends to implement in
order to effect its overall strategy. For example:
what kinds of recruitment
strategies
should be
developed
to attract the target clientele?
What
curriculum
changes are necessary in order to serve
the needs ofnewly identified target markets? Will it
be necessary to hire a new Associate Dean in order
to give leadership
to new graduate
programs?
What financial strategies
must be employed
in
order to increase outside funding
for research?
Given a new statement
of program
priorities,
is
there a need to re-evaluate
the present distribution
of funds among the departments
of the college?
These and other implementation
strategies at the
SAU level are analogous to the functional strategies
of production,
marketing,
engineering
and so on
that one would
find within
a division
of a
diversified
firm.

Summary
This paper
concept
in
identify the
system. The
the strategy
direction
to
factors.

and Conclusions
has attempted
to define the strategy
the higher education
setting and to
principal layers of a strategic planning
need for a decision-driven
definition of
concept was stressed in order to give
the analysis of internal and external

Four levels of strategy were then identified for a

college or university,
rather than the three levels
typically ascribed to complex, diversified business
firms. The major decisions to be addressed at each
level were identified
and interrelationships
across
the four levels were briefly discussed.
Several interesting
avenues
of research
can be
identified
within
this overall
framework.
For
example,
what conceptual
and methodological
adjustments are necessary in order to adapt the SBU
concept to the university setting? Can such units be
identified on a generic basis in higher education, or
will the criteria for definition vary across different

98

Long

Range

Planning

Vol. 16

June

types of institutions
(e.g. community
college, 4year undergraduate
institution,
complex
university)? How are institutions
now subdivided
for
planning purposes and what appears to be the most
effective (and efficient) patterns of organization?

1983
(9) W.

E.

Rothschild,

Development

References
(1) C. W.

Hofer

Analytical

and

Concepts,

D. E. Schendel, Strategy
Formulation:
West Publishing, St. Paul, Minnesota

(1978).

(2) R. F. Vancil and P. Lorange, Strategic planning in diversified

companies,
(1975).
(3)

(4)

(5)

Harvard

Business

January-February

Review,

H. I. Ansoff, Managing surprise and discontinuity:

strategic
response to weak signals. In Strategy+Structure=
Performance, H. 8. Thorelli (Ed.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington,
Indiana (1977).
H. I. Ansoff, Strategic
York (1979).

Management,

H. Mintzberg,
Patterns
May (1978).

in strategy

John Wiley & Sons, New

formation,

Management

Science,
(8)

H. Mintzberg,
Management

(7)

(8)

Strategy-making
in three
Winter (1973).

modes,

California

Review,

S. Schoeffler, R. D. Buzzell and D. F. Heany, The impact of

strategic planning on profit performance, Harvard Business
Review, March-April
(1974).
W. E. Rothschild, Putting it All Together:
Thinking, AMACOM,
New York (1976).

A Guide

to Strategic

Alternatives:

Selection.

AMACOM.

New

York

(1979).

(10) L. J. Bourgeois,
integration,

Strategy

Academy

(11) C. E. Summer,

Aside from questions related to the definition

and
organization
of planning
units, much attention
needs to be given to (a) the process of strategic
decision
making
in higher
education,
(b) the
analytical techniqtres that are (or may be) necessary to
support that process, and (c) the appropriate
content
of institutional
strategy under varying
environmental conditions.
Hopefully,
the framework
for
strategy formulation
that has been presented in this
paper
will provide
an impetus
for further
conceptual
and empirical efforts in the non-profit
sector.

Strategic
Implementation,

and

and

environment:

of Management

Strategic

Behavior

a conceptual
January (1980).

Review,

in Business and Government.

Little, Brown & Co., Boston (1980).

(12) W. F. Glueck,
McGraw-Hill,
(13)

Strategic

Management

and

Business

D. E. Schendel and K. J. Hatten, Strategic planning and higher

education:
some concepts,
problems
and opportunities,
Proceedings
of the Fourth Annual Meeting
Institute for Decision Sciences (1972).

(14)

of the American

R. G. Cope, Strategic Policy Planning: A Guide for College and

UniversityAdministrators,
The Ireland Educational Corporation,
Littleton.

(15)

Policy,

New York (1980).

Colorado

(1978).

S. B. Parekh, Long-Range
Planning,
New Rochelle, New York (1977).

Change Magazine

Press,

Bibliography
In addition
to the references,
the following
sources are
suggested for those who wish to pursue the subject of strategic
planning in more depth:
H. lgor Ansoff, Corporate

Strategy,

McGraw-Hill,

New York (1965).

J. M. Higgins, Organizational
Policy and Strategic
Dryden Press, Hinsdale, Illinois (1979).

Management,

Larue Tone Hosmer, Academic

Strategy,
University of Michigan
Graduate School of Business Administration, Ann Arbor, Michigan
(1978).
Philip Kotler, Marketing for Nonprofit Organizations,
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (1975).

Prentice-Hall,

Robert C. Shirley, Michael H. Peters and Adel I. El-Ansary, Strategy

and Policy Formation, John Wiley & Sons, New York (1981).
George A. Steiner and John 8. Miner,
Strategy, Macmillan, New York (1977).
Bernard Taylor and David
Pergamon Press (1981).

Hussey,

A. A. Thompson and A. J. Strickland,

Publications, Inc., Dallas (1978).

Management

The

Realities

Strategy

Policy

of

and Policy,

and

Planning,

Business