Engaging the Campus Community through Participatory Sustainability Strategic Planning

Introduction

During the 2008−2009 academic year, Macalester College, a small liberal arts college located in urban St. Paul, MN, embarked on an ambitious participatory sustainability strategic planning process. From a student body of 1,900 and a faculty and staff total of about 560, over 400 people across the campus were engaged and provid-ed input into the Macalester College sustain-ability plan, which was adopted in Septem-ber 2009. The goals of the strategic plan were to create a set of actionable priorities for the college and to gain buy-in from students, staff, and faculty on campus.

Abstract

During the 2008−2009 academic year, Macalester College engaged over 400 students, staff, and faculty in sustainability stra-tegic planning. Located in urban St. Paul, MN, Macalester is a small, liberal arts college with an educational program known for its high standards in scholarship and its special emphasis on internationalism, multiculturalism, and service to society. Using a highly participatory approach, the campus generated a sustainability plan with specific, measureable priorities in 2009. Making use of several cross-college teams, the strategic planning process engaged the campus community in several planning phases: capacity building, practical vision and obstacles, data collection and stakeholder input, strategic directions, and implementation. Lessons learned include how to provide for appropriate and constructive participation, multimodal communication strategies, the importance of staff capacity, leveraging college resources for tasks such as data collection, and the importance of connections to senior college leaders.

Research and Solutions

Engaging the Campus Community through Participatory Sustainability Strategic PlanningBy Suzanne Savanick Hansen,1 Jonathan Bucki,2 and Justin Lee1

1Macalester College, St. Paul, Minnesota. 2Dendros Group, St. Paul, Minnesota.

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC. • Vol. 4 No. 2 • April 2011 • DOI: 10.1089/sus.2011.9707 Sustainability 75

The strategic planning process grew out of a need to develop a comprehensive sustain-ability plan that included a climate action plan. When Macalester College President Brian Rosenberg signed the American Col-lege and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) in 2007, a num-ber of sustainability projects were already underway at the college. Recycling and energy efficiency projects had been ongo-ing since the 1960s and 1970s; the college is a signatory of the Talloires Declaration. The college is also the site of the first LEED platinum building on a Minnesota college campus and the first urban wind turbine in the city of St. Paul; it also has two green

roofs, a campus prairie and rain garden, and an EcoHouse student residence. A sustain-ability manager was hired to shepherd the ACUPCC process on campus and advance sustainability issues at the college.

Because of the long history of commitment to sustainability on the campus and numer-ous projects already in place, the sustainabil-ity office in consultation with senior college leadership decided a sustainability plan that looked at the topic holistically would be the best fit for the college. The required institu-tional climate action plan for the ACUPCC would fit into this larger, comprehensive sus-tainability plan.

Hansen-Peer 4.2.indd 1 4/13/11 11:24 AM

76 Sustainability MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC. • Vol. 4 No. 2 • April 2011 • DOI: 10.1089/sus.2011.9707

While the strategic planning process was developing, Environmental Studies classes at Macalester worked on the requirements of the ACUPCC for climate action plan-ning. In the spring of 2008, the sustainabil-ity manager co-taught the Environmental Studies senior seminar, which created the Macalester College greenhouse gas emis-sions inventory from 1990−2006. A second Environmental Studies senior seminar, also taught by the sustainability manager, drafted climate neutrality recommendations for the college in 2009.

A strategic planning consultant was hired to assist in the sustainability strategic planning process. Funding was provided by the 2008 senior class gift, which had set up a sustain-ability fund.

Participatory Strategic Planning Process

Design phase

The original plan called for three teams working to move the strategic planning pro-cess forward.

Guiding team. This senior administrative-level team was envisioned as responsible for positioning the project to be success-ful. They helped develop opportunities and resources to support the process and helped align the process with other strategic efforts and priorities at Macalester. They focused on building a credible, useful process.

Planning team. This team was envisioned as responsible for implementing the process and focusing on the content of the plan. In the consultant’s experience, separating the responsibility for creating a useful process from focusing on the content allows for flex-ibility and for different planning stakehold-ers to focus their contribution appropriately. The planning team consisted of faculty, staff, student, and administration representatives. All members of the newly created Sustain-ability Advisory Committee were invited to participate as well as other interested parties. Staff ranged from department heads to office assistants, with the highest-ranking member being the Vice President of Administration and Finance.

There was overlap between the member-ship planning team and the guiding team. This was critical from the perspective of the consultant so that there was a strong link between the two teams’ efforts and if any problems arose there would be the capac-ity to address them quickly. Such a strong connection allowed the planning team to ask questions of college senior administra-tors in the moment rather than waiting for a response; it also gave the leadership of the college the assurance that the process was on track and that adjustments could be made as needed.

Facilitation team. This team was envi-sioned as comprising student volunteers and other staff members who were willing to be trained and willing to facilitate participatory

stakeholder meetings during the data collec-tion phase of the process.

The sustainability office worked with senior college administrators to craft a project-phasing plan and to align its efforts with other campus-wide priorities. After the intended results of the process were articu-lated, different roles were established, and the phases were finalized, the sustainability office worked to fit the process into the limi-tations of an academic calendar.

Phases of Participatory Strategic Planning

Phase 1: Capacity building

The capacity-building phase included meet-ing with the Sustainability Advisory Com-mittee, training volunteer facilitators, and launching the communications plan. Senior college administrators by this point had the chance to review the plan. As part of the first phases of the project, the sustainabil-ity office drafted a white paper that offered a definition of sustainability at Macalester. The intention of the white paper process was to provide a vehicle for discussing disparate opinions on sustainability, allowing the col-lege to have a “good-enough” definition and not get entangled in academic hair-splitting. Different versions of the white paper were published on the sustainability office website with requests for comments.

Phase 2: Developing a practical vision and identifying obstacles

In the vision and obstacles phase, the plan-ning team first met to orient members to their roles and the phases of the project. The first version of the white paper was dis-cussed and the planning team offered com-ments and suggestions on how to improve it. A few weeks later, the planning team met again to review some initial information collected by the sustainability office and to begin drafting practical vision. The planning team focused on the question, What do we want to see in place at Macalester College in the next two to three years to advance our vision for sustainability? The Sustain-ability Advisory Committee, many of whose members were part of the planning team, reviewed the draft and finalized the practical vision the following week. Throughout the process, the planning team was facilitated by participatory methods that encouraged

Markim Hall, home of Macalester’s Institute for Global Citizenship, is a LEED Platinum certified facility.


Ma

ca

lest

er C

olle

ge



participants to listen to the diverse perspec-tives offered in the planning process and to contribute their best thinking. For each facilitated workshop, participants were asked to reflect on the focus question for each meeting before arriving; at the meet-ing, previous work was reviewed and the context was set for the day’s work. Using a consensus workshop approach, participants were given some time to formulate their ideas independently. Then, in small groups, participants heard and recorded everyone’s ideas. These ideas were then reviewed by the larger group, which clustered the ideas by in-tention and assigned names to each cluster, giving a response to the focus question for the meeting.

Next, the planning team wrestled with its understanding of the obstacles prevent-ing the college from achieving the practical

vision. The focus of the meeting was, What prevents us from achieving our practical vision? The planning team struggled to avoid simplistic language to describe the predicaments, such as lack of money, lack of staff, or lack of time. Instead, they worked hard to understand, from their diverse per-spectives, what dynamics and behaviors were present that prevented the college from achieving its vision of sustainability.

Phase 3: Data collection and stakeholder input

During this phase, stakeholder input was collected through consensus workshops and brainstorming sessions. Open-ended data were collected in both visioning workshops and brainstorming sessions. Recurring themes in the data were identified.

Stakeholder visioning workshops. In these small, facilitated workshops, participants were asked to answer the question, “How does sustainability advance the core mission of Macalester?” Each of these workshops ran approximately 1.5 hours and collected responses from participants. In addition to 25 workshops with different affinity groups across campus, the sustainability office host-ed an open workshop where all students, staff, and faculty were invited as part of Campus Sustainability Day. The participants ranged across academic disciplines and staff departments.

Data from each of the stakeholder visioning workshops were aggregated by the sustain-ability office. The ideas from the participants were synthesized and categorized into five main patterns.

Brainstorming sessions. To engage as many people as possible, staff from the sustain-ability office also attended 12 staff meetings and facilitated brainstorming sessions. The groups were asked, What are the sustain-ability issues in your department? What have you already done in this area? Where would you like to see the college in this area in the next two to three years? The data were synthesized by sustainability office staff and recurring themes were identified.

Data summary. All of the data were compiled and summarized by the sustainability office. This summary and the supporting data were then presented to the planning team to affirm their prac-tical vision and to help with strategy development.

Phase 4: Strategic directions

As the second semester began at Macal-ester, the strategic planning process was relaunched, this time with additional stake-holder data and greater connection to some of the college departments and student groups. The planning team now focused its efforts on strategy development: What are innovative, substantial actions that we can take to eliminate the obstacles and advance our practical vision? After much work, the planning team articulated three strategies that were reviewed and approved by the Sustainability Advisory Committee and the senior administration. An overview of the strategic directions is shown in Figure 1.

Demonstrating Leadershipby Encouraging Innovationand Action to FosterSustainable Communities

Realizing Our Miission byDesigning, Implementing,and Improving Our Process

Educating CampusCommunity to Build a Coalition

Strategic Directions Obstacles

Uncertain Macro-Environment

Ingrained Incomplete Information

FragmentedPlanning & Complex

Communication

Competing, Multiple, Unclear

Priorities

Personal Commitment to

Sustainability Blocked

Risk Aversion

Individuals Are Not Motivated

Practical Vision

Better Operating Practices

Dedicated Resources/Funds

for Priorities

Behavior Change Through

Communication

Integrated Planning Processes

Individual and Institutional

Support

Integrate Sustainability Into

Learning

Macalester College Participatory Sustainability Strategic Planning-Summary

Figure 1. Summary of participatory sustainability strategic planning process.


78 Sustainability MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC. • Vol. 4 No. 2 • April 2011 • DOI: 10.1089/sus.2011.9707

Phase 5: ImplementationIn a final meeting, the planning team dis-cussed priority milestones for the next couple of years. It was understood that these milestones would need to be refined.

Putting It Together: The Sustainability Plan

Final reviewWhen the semester ended in the spring of 2009, the process was not complete. The priority milestones needed additional review, as did the student recommendations for the Institutional Climate Action Plan. During the summer of 2009, task forces of the Sustainability Advisory Committee reviewed the strategic plan outcomes, as well as the recommendations for the Institutional Climate Action Plan developed in the spring of 2009. The sustainability office edited the final document, requested internal reviews, and invited external review by experts in the community.

The result is a comprehensive sustainabil-ity plan that also meets the requirements of the ACUPCC. The sustainability strategic directions also form the backbone of the sustainability plan, which was adopted on September 15, 2009.

Lessons learned

Provide for maximum participation. The planning process was very successful in that it did include many staff and student groups that are not usually involved or consulted in strategic planning. This was due to a con-scious effort to identify and reach out to people and groups not usually represented in “environmental” conversations. We were able to include nearly 20 percent of the cam-pus in this process in some manner.

However, the amount of participation posed logistical issues. Although college opera-tional departments have regular meetings, students and faculty rarely hold such meet-ings, and there is rarely anyone with enough authority to require their attendance. Several efforts of varying success were made to enlist student participation through student orga-nizations.

We trained student and staff volunteers to facilitate workshops and collect informa-

tion from brainstorming sessions. However, students have a very different schedule than the faculty and staff have. While faculty and staff are more available during the workday, particularly during the lunch hour, it was extremely difficult to schedule any sessions with students during the day. In the end, the sustainability office staff facilitated most of the data collection meetings.

It was extremely difficult to persuade faculty members to participate in the planning pro-cess. Other than a few who participated in the planning team, there was little additional faculty representation, despite repeated attempts to gain their participation. In retrospect, the sustainability office should have identified and found ways to support faculty champions and developed a peer-to-peer communication strategy before the process was launched.

The planning team consisted of members who were not required to participate and were not necessarily able to include their time as part of their normal job. This is particularly problematic for part-time staff and for students. As a result, sched-uling three to four hour sessions with everyone was extremely difficult, so the planning team regularly rotated mem-bers. This revolving attendance made it difficult to pinpoint who exactly was responsible for what and who would carry out the directives and priorities being created.

Build capacity of sustainability office. Undertaking a campus-wide participatory planning process represents a significant investment of staff time and capacity. The expertise and capacities of the sustainabil-ity office were supplemented by contracting with an outside consultant. Even with the additional capacity of the consulting firm, sustainability office staff often struggled with competing priorities. When develop-ing large planning processes, it is important to pay attention to the substantial limits of capacity found in small offices.

In addition, hiring a professional facilitator allowed the sustainability office staff to par-ticipate in discussions and to advocate for their particular positions and ideas without other participants feeling that the sustain-ability office was dominating the discussion and pushing only one agenda forward on the college.

Strengthen communication. Throughout the process, the sustainability office strug-gled to maintain effective communication about the planning process. It was difficult to present up-to-date information in all the formats expected by different stakeholder groups, and it was even more difficult to ensure that those who had access to the information actually reviewed it, given the staffing level of the new sustainability office.

During the data collection phase from October to January, which coincided with a break in the academic calendar and a Janu-ary term, there was a perception from some students that “nothing was happening”; for a variety of reasons some participants wrongly perceived that their participation was not valued. When people are highly engaged in a participatory process, it is important to develop ways to keep them apprised of the progress. In retrospect, we could have developed a more complete communication structure.

Leverage data collection. The sustainability office is frequently approached by students wishing to complete a project for a class or because they are interested in sustainability. At the start of the sustainability plan process, we imagined leveraging these opportunities and reviewing additional relevant data. In reality these projects did not materialize, but the opportunity to do so remains there for fu-ture planning and implementation processes.

Strengthen connection to senior college leaders. The plan originally called for the creation of a high-level guiding team to pro-vide overall direction for the planning team on matters concerning the institution’s pri-orities and acceptable suggestions. Unfortu-nately the 2008 economic crisis hit during this process, relegating the sustainability strategic plan to a lower priority and a guid-ing team was never effectively formed. As a result, the process remained a bottom-up approach, with senior staff and trustee guid-ance at the end of the process. In retrospect, more direction and regular communication with high-level administration could have assisted with gaining input to the process.

Conclusion

Macalester College’s sustainability strategic planning process provided the backbone of the college’s sustainability plan, which was adopted in 2009. The process was designed to gain input from as many people as pos-




sible with the understanding that broad participation would lead to buy-in and implementation of the sustainability plan and other sustainability projects on campus. The project engaged over 400 people on the campus and provided a framework for implementing sustainability projects on campus in the future.

The project successfully engaged students and staff, although connecting with faculty proved difficult. Lessons learned include finding ways for effective faculty partici-pation, strengthening communications, realizing the limitations of a small sustainability office, working to identify

possible student research projects, and strengthening connections to high-level college leadership.

For a college with a history of implement-ing sustainability projects, additional plan-ning momentum can be developed using a participatory strategic planning process. Such an approach may allow for a broader consensus to form among students, staff, and faculty about the direction for sustain-ability going forward. In the future, we hope that the buy-in generated through a partici-patory approach increases the effectiveness and campus engagement in the implemen-tation of sustainability projects on campus.

Address correspondence to:Suzanne Savanick Hansen, Ph.D.Macalester College1600 Grand AvenueSt. Paul, MN 55105

E-mail: [email protected]

Jonathan BuckiDendros Group, LLC413 Wacauta StreetSt. Paul, MN 55101

E-mail: [email protected]


Documents

Engaging the Campus Community through Participatory Sustainability Strategic Planning