STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

Alignment of Large Capacity Building Programmes and Projects to the Strategic Intent of Government

Strategy

• Strategy is the overall process of deciding where we want to get to and how we are going to get there

• Strategic Direction describes the desired future and sets out what needs to be achieved in order to bring it about.

Components of a Strategic Approach

• In practice, strategic thinking involve the following iterative components:

• Vision: desired state of the future founded on a government’s wider values and principles

• Evidence & Analysis: understanding of the current situation and trends

• Stakeholders: identification and involvement and their role in delivery

• Delivery Capability: understanding the capacity to implement, it highlights some of the critical barriers to change

Components of a Strategic Approach

Policy

• Policy provides the means of moving in the strategic direction.

• Policy development is concerned with:– identifying how to achieve strategic

objectives, – selecting the most suitable instruments for

doing this, and– detailing how these instruments will work in

practice

The Relationship Between Strategy and Policy

• There is a very close and interactive relationship between strategy and policy

• Strategies should be developed with a realistic idea of how they will be realised

• Policies should exist within a strategic framework that explains how they contribute to desired outcomes

• In South Africa the different spheres of government play strategic roles in the greater socio-political transformation process. What they do is very relevant to strategy and policy

• Divorcing policy and strategy creates the risk of:– setting unachievable strategic objectives,– allowing policy programmes to develop

legitimacy from their longevity rather than their contribution to meeting public needs,

– different policies being contradictory,– crisis management is applied particularly

during periods of change and uncertainty,

The Relationship Between Strategy, Policy and Delivery

• Strategy and policy is like a wheelbarrow, if nobody push them they will go nowhere!

• Strategy and policy should be grounded in a realistic understanding of delivery capability

• Feedback mechanisms are needed from delivery back into strategy and policy in order to create adaptable learning systems that can evolve in the light of experience and unexpected results

• Strategy, policy and delivery should be seen as an end-to-end process of change management with constant testing, learning, feedback and improvement

Systems Approach

Maintaining Strategic Perspective

• The need for strategic thinking and alignment extends far beyond the realms of formal strategy development

• At all stages of policy making and delivery, a strategic perspective is needed to ensure that government action is focused on and capable of meeting the true needs of the public

Appraisal Criteria

The questions posed by the following three criteria form the basis of such a strategic perspective:

• Suitability - do the proposed actions address the key issues and will they be able to deliver the desired outcomes?

• Feasibility - can the proposed actions be delivered with the potential system capabilities and resources?

• Acceptability - is there sufficient political and public support to legitimise the proposed actions?

Appraisal Criteria

Suitability Gap

• Problem or need has changed

• Tensions with other strategic objectives/priorities of the government

• Change in overall desired outcomes

• Unacceptable, averse impacts

Feasibility Gap

• Underestimation or unavailability of the resources and capabilities needed to address the key issues

• Not clear how to address the key issues• Insufficient incentives for innovation,

transfer of best practice and continuous improvement in the system

• Disproportional effort to extract benefits beyond the initial quick wins

Acceptability Gap

• Lack of public engagement

• Changes in the environment leading to shifting views about the strategy

• Front-line organisations responding to public needs and evolving beyond their original remit

The South African Context• During the development stages the feasibility of strategy and policy

is only considered to a very limited extent

• The institutional implications and the associated costs are not thoroughly analysed and the outcome of the analysis does not inform high-level decision-making. The capability to implement are based on assumptions

• The strategies and policies make excessive demands on the country’s capability to deliver

• South Africa is not only suffering from a lack of capacity but also from strategies and policies that did not consider the institutional implications in the first instance

• The majority of long-term programmes/projects in the public sector are actually focusing on enhancing the feasibility of strategy and policy – especially strengthening capacity

• However, in practice they claim to primarily focus on the improvement of delivery and are in many instances divorced from the relevant strategies and even policies

• There is only a very weak link between strategy, policy and the targeted programme interventions that aim to enhance service delivery and to promote Batho Pele

• Some programmes are not anchored and are floating and losing focus. They are actually re-enforcing the crisis management mode. These programmes become part of the problem and do not offer solutions

The Design of Sustainable Programmes

• Programmes/projects are actually targeted interventions with the aim to enhance the ability of organisation(s) to execute their mandate more effectively and efficiently

• International experience indicates that the manner in which programmes start are of critical importance to their ultimate success

• Programmes/projects have a very specific lifespan with a clear start-up and close–out

• At start-up they are the “new kids on the block” and people initially view them with skepticism and even resist them.

• Because a new programme is considered to be something foreign with the intention to interfere in existing systems and relations it does not initially enjoy legitimacy and broad based support in the target institution – even if high level political support has been obtained

• It is also a challenge for a new programme to

develop the level legitimacy and broad based support that is needed because of:– its relative short lifespan– the pressure to mainly focus on its purpose and key

deliverables and even to achieve quick wins in the short-term

• The new programme needs to be based on an assessment that clearly describes:

– the institutional environment in which it will operate – inclusive of the relevant strategies and policies

– the key challenges and what the causes of the challenges are

– they key areas of leverage on which the programme should focus its support

Key Areas of Leverage

• Systems approach - not fixate on ad hoc events but to see the systems and the relationship between things and events. The public service is a system

• Identify where in the system a programme’s actions and changes can lead to significant and enduring improvements

• Focus on key leverage areas in which key actions can lead to significant improvements

• Focus on alternative solutions and new paradigms to either shorten/simplify the supply chain or increase the departmental capacity in critical points

ANC revolutionary & communists

Needmorearms

Armsbuildup &

violence

Threat to SA

Need moreweapons

Armsbuildup &

violence

Regime pose a threatto the

ANC/masses

• The design of the programme needs to be informed by the assessment

• The assessment should also inform the design with regard to the relevant government strategies and policies

• The design needs to clearly link the programme to the key strategies and policies and needs to demonstrate that the programme intends to support these and do not work against them

• Design needs to identify the specific government strategy which the programme will support

The Benefits of Programme Alignment with Strategy and Policy

• The alignment of the programme to strategy and policy has the following benefits:– It creates a measure of legitimacy for the new

programme– It anchors the programme and provides a

specific focus– It demystifies the programme – “its not outside

but inside or at least part off”

– Politicians can relate to it and they can see the benefits for them especially when it creates opportunities for them to report progress at a strategic level

– It creates a space for the programme to enter the existing organisation

– It enhances the institutionalision of the programme - by linking it to strategy it is also linked to the institutional system of the strategy

– It strengthens the review and evaluation system and more specifically the measurement of the programmes intended and un-intended impact

Framework for linking a Programme to Strategy

• Goal – The greater WHY. Relates to sector or national objectives to which the project is designed to contribute towards (but not in itself achieve or be solely accountable for). The Goal cannot change.

• Purpose – WHY the project is being carried out and what it is expected to achieve in terms of developmental impact at the end of the project life. Can only be 1 purpose. Project team not solely accountable.

• Outputs – WHAT the project must deliver. Specific results and measurable products (goods & services) produced by undertaking a series of Activities. Project team is directly accountable for Outputs.

GOAL (link to strategy)

PURPOSE(Prog. specific)

OUTPUT 1 OUTPUT 2 OUTPUT 3

ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES

If -Then Test

Programme Description

Goal : Then

Purpose:

Outputs:

Activities: If

Programme Description

Measurable Indicators

Goal: •What are the quantitative measures or qualitative judgments whether this broad goal has been achieved.

•May include targets beyond this programme

Purpose: •What are the quantitative measures or qualitative judgments whether this programme specific purpose has been achieved.

Outputs: •What kind of quality of outputs and by when will they be achieved

Activities: •What kind of quality of outputs and by when will they be produced

Programme Description Monitoring and Evaluation

Goal: •Evaluation focus on impact and sustainability

•Happens at end of programme (summative) or beyond the end (ex-post) to assess longer term impact

Purpose: •Evaluation focus on impact and sustainability

•Happens at end of programme (summative) or beyond the end (ex-post) to assess longer term impact

Outputs: •Review carried out less frequently

•Focus on effectiveness and what has changed

•Assess whether the activities have delivered the outputs

•Are Outputs contributing to purpose

Activities: •Regular monitoring of inputs being used and outputs being delivered

•Focus on efficiency