Critical Events Affecting the Future of Virginia Community Colleges

by James L. Morrison
School of Education
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

from VCCA Journal, Volume 10, Number 2, Summer 1996, 36-43

© Copyright 1996 VCCA Journal


We are being bombarded by tumultuous forces for change as we go into the 21st Century: Virtual classrooms, global communications, global economies, telecourses, distance learning, corporate classrooms, increased competition among social agencies for scarce resources, pressure for institutional mergers, state-wide program review and so on. In order to plan effectively in this environment, community college leaders must be able to anticipate new developments and the effects on their institutions and curricular programs.

Wayne Gretzky once said, "I skate to where the puck will be." For strategic planning to be successful, we must anticipate "where the puck will be."

The external analysis component of strategic planning is the anticipatory component whose task is to ascertain where the puck will be. This component consists of scanning the environment to identify changing trends and potential developments, monitoring specific trends and patterns, forecasting the future direction of these changes and potential developments, and assessing their organizational impact. Merged with an internal analysis of the organization's vision, mission, strengths, and weaknesses, external analysis assists decisionmakers in formulating strategic directions and strategic plans.

The objective of the 1996 annual meeting of the Virginia Community College System Institutional Research Group's workshop, "Developing Foresight Capability," was to assist participants to develop competency in establishing and maintaining an external analysis capability on their campuses. Although the description of how to do this is available in earlier publications (Morrison, 1992; Morrison & Mecca, 1989; Morrison, Renfro, and Boucher, 1984), the workshop offered an opportunity to use several techniques (e.g., identifying and forecasting potential events and their impacts) used in anticipatory strategic management. Moreover, the intent was that this experience would enable participants to replicate the workshop.

This is a report of the proceedings of the workshop. It is intended to summarize the outcomes of exercises and put these exercises in the context of a strategic planning process, so that they may be used as a guide in conjunction with the references cited above to implement a similar workshop.

In the workshop we focused on (a) identifying events, (b) selecting the most significant events, (c) identifying the signals that indicated these events could occur, (d) drawing out the implications of each selected event if it were to occur, and (e) concluding with a set of recommendations for community college leaders. To do so, we used the Nominal Group Process (NGP).

The Nominal Group Process

The Nominal Group Process is an efficient small group process that ensures balanced participation. It requires participants to first think about the question (i.e., what potential events can affect the future?) and write down their thoughts on a sheet of paper. After a suitable time, the facilitator uses a round robin approach where each participant in turn is asked to nominate an event. Only one nomination is given by each participant. Participants are asked to nominate those events that could be most critical to community colleges. Each statement is written on the flip chart so that all can see the nominations. The next person is asked to submit their "best" candidate. During this time the only person talking is the person nominating a statement; all others are requested to think about the statement to see if it stimulates an idea that they had not had before.

Under normal circumstances this process goes on until there are no more nominations, at which time the facilitator guides the group in a discussion of each nomination to clarify, discuss, edit, and remove redundancies. The value of this process is first to have participants think before talking, and then to get the thinking of all people in the groups. Given the severe time constraints, we limited nominations to one round, with the provision that other nominations could crop up during the clarification and discussion phase.

Events

The first exercise was to identify potential events that could affect the future of Virginia community colleges if they occurred. Events are unambiguous and confirmable. When they occur, the future is different. Event identification and analysis is critical in anticipatory organizational planning.

It is important that an event statement be unambiguous; otherwise, it is not helpful in the planning process because (a) it is unclear what may be meant by the statement (i.e., different people may understand the statement differently) and (b) we have no clear target that allows us to derive implications and action steps. For example, consider the following event statement: There will be significant changes in political, social, and economic systems in the U.S. Each person on a planning team may agree with this statement, but may also interpret it differently. It would be far more useful in analysis for a statement like: In the next election, the political right gains control of Congress and the presidency. Or Minorities become the majority in 10 states. Or The European Community incorporates Eastern Europe in a free trade zone. The latter statements are concrete, unambiguous, and signal significant change that could impact community colleges.

Another point. We should not include an impact statement in the event statement. Consider the following event statement: Passage of welfare and immigration reform will negatively impact higher education and the community college sector. First, we need to specify each welfare reform idea and each immigration reform idea as an event. Second, it may well be that an event can have both a positive and a negative impact. For example, there may be signals that within five years 30% of college and university courses will use multimedia technologies in instruction. This event could have both positive and negative consequences on your community college. If, for example, the faculty are not currently oriented to using multimedia technology, the event may adversely affect the competitive position of your institution. On the other hand, distributing the signals of this event in a newsletter to faculty may bring about an awareness of what is happening and assist in developing a desire to upgrade their set of teaching skills.

Identification of Critical Events *

Each group was given 20 minutes to identify potential events and 30 minutes to discuss, clarify, and select their five most significant events. What follows is a list of the most critical events.

Social

University of UK delivers 50% of college-credit courses in Virginia through telecommunications
Large percentage of VCCS faculty retires
Over 50% of entering students are special needs population (ESL, LD, etc.)
Dramatic increase in enrollments in the VCCS

Technological

The information superhighway is complete
Courses offered on Internet or via non-traditional delivery systems

Political

Republican consolidation of power at the Federal and state level
Tuition agreements with neighboring states allow "in-state" tuition
Performance based funding takes place
Republican/Democratic split balance maintained
Retirement age increases to 70
Federal money decreased and shifted to states
Jim Gilmore is selected governor; both House and Senate (General Assembly) go 2:1 Republican
Decrease in funding for higher education
US Department of Education is eliminated
Shift in political sense of educational elitism (i.e., Virginia legislature says no funding for remedial education in higher education)
Demise of federal student loan program
Democrats recapture US House and Senate

Event Analysis

The second exercise was for each group to select one event, identify the signals that indicated that the event could occur within five years, the implications for Virginia community colleges if the event occurred, and their recommendations to community college leaders based on these implications. The results are recorded below.


Event: The Open University (United Kingdom) delivers 50% of college-credit courses
in Virginia through telecommunications

Implications

Community college enrollments drop
More courses available to Virginia students
VCCS offers distance learning courses to UK
People come from the UK to take jobs in Virginia
People from Virginia go to UK to take jobs
VCCS requires less faculty
Partnership formed between VCCS and the Open University

Recommendations

VCCS institutions open testing centers for Open University courses
Surviving institutions develop multimedia instructional packages
VCCS instruction and administration becomes more centralized
VCCS instructional delivery is decentralized
Community college mission reexamined to meet unique local business and community needs
VCCS institutions offer more cross-cultural training (at what level? to which audience?)
VCCS institutions mediate conflict between those benefiting and those disadvantaged by new situation.
VCCS institutions provide faculty more professional development in the delivery of distance education
VCCS standardizes the curriculum to ensure consistent outcomes
VCCS institutions face the problem of how to meet student needs within the constraints of FTE-based revenue and accreditation requirements, degree curricula

Event: The Information Highway is Complete

Implications

Increased need for equipment
Less need for space/buildings
Major shift in funding/faculty ratio (double in every ratio)
Loss of program students
Territorial confusion statewide
Increase student access to various programs
Shift from lecture model to interactive model of facilitator/coach
Decline in socio-economic distinctions
Procurement of state of the art equipment becomes a priority
Increased business/education partnerships
Increased emphasis on technology training
Shift in enrollment patterns

Recommendations

Define technology driven FTE allocation among the colleges
Begin forging partnerships with business
Increase technology training
Share faculty and curriculum across the state
Restructure VCCS system
Streamline curricular response time
Re-prioritize technology budgets
Refocus facilities planning
Standardize admissions, evaluation/assessment, state/federal reporting
Redefine retention
Focus on quality of learning

Event: The election of Jim Gilmore and a Republican General Assembly;
both House and Senate go 2:1 Republican

Implications

New VCCS Chancellor appointed
New VCCS State Board appointed
Micro-management instituted
Turnover in college presidents
SCHEV (State Council for Higher Education in Virginia) is eliminated
Increased power in the Virginia Secretary of Education's office
Diminished financial and human resources (personnel) in Virginia community colleges
Increased bureaucratic red-tape
Accountability and justification

Recommendations

Work extensively as a system with local legislators
Involve business/industry advisory boards
Lobby community (business/industry leaders, alumni, students)
"Get in bed" with four-year colleges in order to speak to general assembly as one voice from Virginia higher education
Expand "information dissemination" to targeted groups
Encourage political activism in community college staffs

Event: Classroom walls and service areas abolished

Implications

Change in current criteria for hiring, promotion, and evaluation of faculty
Facilities utilization standards and productivity would change; current practices would be obsolete
Could promote cooperation and/or competition as never before
Resource distribution/budgeting model will need to change
Professional development funding must increase to train faculty
Measuring student performance
Student support service for those who don't come on campus
Greater links between business and industry vis a vis delivery of instructional services and training
Faculty work load redefined
Concept of student enrollment redefined

Recommendations

Create a 24th college in the VCCS--college without walls
Provide funding for faculty development
Create a student outcomes committee tied to the 24th college
Create a common applications and records system for distance education

Discussion

Establishing a comprehensive environmental scanning system on a campus to inform planning requires a good deal of time from everyone involved in the process. Fortunately, we can take advantage of the information highway and can share resources via Horizon List and Horizon Home Page. Horizon List offers the opportunity to respond to draft articles focusing on emerging trends and potential events (for example, I will insert these proceedings on the list and home page to stimulate discussion when I get home). Horizon Home Page has a futures planning database of abstracts describing signals of change in the macroenvironment that can affect education; please review this section and please add to it. You may subscribe to Horizon List by sending the following message to listserve@unc.edu: subscribe horizon <yourfirstname> <yourlastname>. You may view and contribute to Horizon Home Page by turning your browser to the following URL address: http://sunsite.unc.edu/horizon. And these services are absolutely free to those who have access to the Internet.

To stimulate and focus discussion of the implications of emerging tends and potential events on your campus, recommend to the chair of your planning committee that she/he order a site license subscription to On the Horizon. View each issue of On the Horizon as a pump-primer to organizational planning. For example, the chair's cover letter to the first issue should urge planning committee members to consider how the content of particular items in the newsletter affect the institution and to write down their thoughts (or send them to the group via e-mail); their collective thoughts would be used to begin discussion at the next committee meeting.

Before the meeting, the chair could compose a questionnaire identifying those articles in On the Horizon that may affect either the organization as a whole or particular curricular programs. He/she should ask committee members to rank-order the most important ones, and follow this rank order for the discussion agenda.

As the committee becomes accustomed to this process, the chair should request members to send articles, notes, or commentary that they encounter in their reading and at conferences about potential developments that could affect the organization. They should use the structure of the newsletter: send information about signals of change in the STEEP (i.e., social, technological, economic, environmental, and political) categories, particularly on the local and regional levels (On the Horizon tends to focus on the national and international levels). The reason for using this structure is that developments in one sector affect developments in other sectors (i.e., a war in the Middle East affects fuel prices everywhere); therefore, in order to anticipate change, we need to look for developments that may have direct or indirect effects on the organization.

Committee members should examine sources for change in relevant variables (e.g., immigration, price of computers, mood of voters). What change is already taking place? Is there a movement upward or downward? What are the projections? What are the emerging trends (i.e., what combinations of data points-past trends, events, precursors-suggest and support the early stages of a possible trend)? What external events, policies, or regulatory actions would affect or be affected by the projections? They should look for forecasts by experts, and append their own implications section to the emerging issues, critical trends, or potential developments when they send their information items.

The chair should summarize the articles and their implications in the cover letter when sending the next issue of On the Horizon, and include a questionnaire asking each committee member to rank the five most important items submitted by the committee or included in the newsletter.

The agenda for the planning meeting should include the top items. At the meeting, focused around these items, committee members should draw out the implications of the potential developments for ongoing organizational and program planning. They may want more information about a particular trend or potential event. In this case, enlist the aid of a research staffer or librarian (who should be on the planning committee anyway).

Regularly circulating information about potential developments and asking committee members to think of their implications reinforces a future-oriented posture in our colleagues. They will begin to read, hear, and talk about this information not only as something intellectually interesting but as information they can use in practical organizational planning.

Conclusion

The workshop was conducted in a restricted time frame. It was, however, sufficient to give participants experience in using several basic approaches to transform information into strategic intelligence for your institution. This experience, in conjunction with the references cited earlier, should help participants establish and maintain an environmental scanning capability on their campuses.

Other resources are available. One of the major reasons for publishing On the Horizon is to bring the expertise and foresight of an exceptional and diverse editorial board to the attention of educational leaders. Our objective is to alert educators to potential developments and emerging trends that may affect their organizations so that they can plan for the future more effectively.


Notes

* I am indebted to the following colleagues for providing me with a report of the proceedings of their groups: John Curtis, Lisa Kleiman, Marian Lockard, and Mary Wilson.



References

Morrison, J. L. (1992). Environmental scanning. In M. A. Whitely, J. D. Porter, & R. H. Fenske (Eds.), The primer for institutional research (pp. 86-89). Tallahassee: The Association for Institutional Research.

Morrison, J. L. & Mecca, T. V. (1989). Managing uncertainty. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research in higher education: Vol 5 (pp. 351-382). New York: Agathon.

Morrison, J. L., Renfro, W. L., & Boucher, W. I. (1984). Futures research and the strategic planning process: Implications for higher education (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 9). Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 259 692)


James L. Morrison is Professor of Education at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the editor of On the Horizon. He is the author and coauthor of over 90 publications focusing on the application of futures research techniques in planning and policy analysis.