NCDC224: Building Capacity in Issues Management in the Land Grant System
(Multistate Research Coordinating Committee and Information Exchange Group)
Status: Inactive/Terminating
NCDC224: Building Capacity in Issues Management in the Land Grant System
Duration: 08/24/2010 to 08/24/2012
Administrative Advisor(s):
NIFA Reps:
Non-Technical Summary
Statement of Issues and Justification
The work described in this document relates to issues management. Issues management is focused on mitigating or avoiding changes, challenges, and trends political, financial, hazardous, etc. Issues management is different from, but complementary to, marketing communications, which is focused on creating awareness and increasing sales or usage. Likewise the work described here is complementary to the marketing communications work led by Podesta for ESCOP very different, but highly complementary objectives.
Land-grant institutions face an environment filled with internal and external challenges: rising costs, decreased funding, polarized communities, changing demographics and conflicting stakeholder values. Leadership experiences an issues whiplash, juggling the fallout from one issue to the next hoping to avoid a crisis that drains time, finances, energy and focus. While these issues may present unique characteristics among universities within the land grant system, they are mostly mutually shared challenges across the system.
The costs of issue whiplash are high. Constant reacting to situations compromises success, absorbs resources, and creates conflict. Performance is diminished, effectiveness is compromised and the focus on mission attainment is diverted.
Land-grant institutions need a systemic approach to forecast, identify and manage situations that threaten their viability. They need a process that engages diverse stakeholders in designing a sustainable land-grant system that continues to be relevant and successful in the future.
Issues management is an anticipatory, strategic management process to detect and respond appropriately to emerging trends or changes in the socio-political environment (Dougall, 2008). Once identified, organizations can respond to the issues either directly or sometimes preemptively when the issue is in the potential stage (Crable and Vibbert, 1985); indirectly through actions like negotiations with affected groups; or by choosing when in the lifecycle of the issue the organization should respond. Issue management is a means for an organization to work with issues offensively and to seek opportunities through that work (Jacques, 2002).
The steps involved in issues management include monitoring, identifying, prioritizing, analyzing, strategic decision-making, implementing and evaluating (Regester and Larkin, 2005).
" Monitoring includes assessing the context or environment in which work is conducted, verifying vulnerabilities, examining what people are saying through the media, interest groups, stakeholder groups, etc., and detecting if these assessments may affect the organization.
" Through identification, the focus is on recognizing trends and the massing of support, patterns and stage of the issues lifecycle.
" Prioritization identifies the scope of the potential effect of the issue, the impact itself (life, property, funding), and the probability and immediacy of incidence.
" Analysis provides greater detail for the prioritized issues, more clearly defines the potential impact, and identifies critical team members and stakeholders.
" Strategic decision making is identifying messages, response techniques, target audiences, resources, and actions, and developing a plan specific to this particular issue.
" Implementation is carrying out the plan.
" Evaluation is the assessment of results and identification of successes and failures.
This proposal operates under the following hypothesis:
Land-grant institutions will increase their effectiveness and increase their potential to respond to the ever-changing needs of their communities by adopting an issues management systemic approach and practice. By developing an inter-institutional issues management strategy, the land-grant system will create a national forum for problem solving, strengthen capacity to serve changing communities, and realize its collective mission.
Issues management offers a way to identify and address issues. It is an effective, proven process implemented by multinational corporations with a strong case study research base. But it has not yet been systemically implemented across higher education.
In addition to providing a process for managing the work, an issue management process has the potential for land-grant operations to retain their reputations and credibility as trusted, engaged servant-leaders in the greater community while enhancing their influence within higher education networks.
There is evidence that implementation of an issues management system is effective in a land-grant context. Institutions have successfully used an issues management process to reverse state funding cuts and navigate the resource allocation debate (food vs. fuel). Create 21 adopted an issues management approach in the recent Farm Bill legislative process. An issues management approach also increases the land-grant capacity to serve its stakeholders. Through training and setting an example, institutions can assist stakeholders in managing issues before they become crises.
An issues management system allows leaders to streamline the time from identification of an issue to productive resolution. It clearly defines the roles for communications strategists, administrative leadership, and faculty resources that, by working together, create a comprehensive, holistic, scientific approach to issues. The most effective issues management models adopt a team approach that engages senior management.
Adopting a multi-state methodology addresses many elements inherent to the problem. In the instantaneous communication world, one institutions problem today can immediately become another institutions problem tomorrow. This integrated approach supports the sharing of knowledge and experience. Certain universities already do this well already but there is no way to share those successes with each other and create a best practices document that works for land-grant institutions nationwide.
Because universities, like other governmental organizations, are responsible to the public, identifying and responding to issues is a natural fit to this responsibility (Chase, 1984). A recent study of 1862 and 1890 land-grant universities revealed that only about 60 percent of these universities had a central crisis communications plan (an element of comprehensive issue management systems), and nearly a third of the respondents were unaware of a plan at their university. Most existing plans are at the university level, not affiliated with extension or experiment stations (Whiting, Tucker & Whaley, 2004). It is highly likely that fewer still have issues management plans or tools.
Existing research in issue management mainly focuses on case study research. There is an opportunity to expand the research body of knowledge in applied issue management practice through survey and experimental design research. Content analysis of case studies is a potential research initiative as well as in-depth communications research that advances knowledge in the theoretical framework for successful issues management.
The expected outcomes are listed here:
1. Institutionalizing a culture of strategic issue management
a. Training program for administrators and communicators in strategic issue management
b. Develop model issue management program that could be adopted by other institutions
c. Promote and conduct hypothesis-driven research that informs institutional practices and understanding of strategic issues management
d. Provide issue management training to faculty to provide outreach to clientele
e. Conduct research and outreach on public and commodity issues management
2. Create a national repository and network of expertise on issue management
a. Establish an eXtension community of practice in the area of issue management
b. Develop and publish scholarly peer-reviewed best practices in issues management
c. Provide a best communications toolkit for use in an issues management practice
d. Create learning modules on issues management for academic programs
e. Create Extension curricula
Expected impacts include the following:
" Increased capacity and competency among scientists and administrators in land-grant universities (with stakeholder participation encouraged) to manage issues before they develop into crises
" Decreased institutional and individual liability for inappropriate response to crises
" Increased potential for success for new initiatives and response initiatives
" Increased effectiveness and clarity in stakeholder relations/alliances
" Retention of autonomy and influence of land grant institutions and land grant philosophy
" Reduced issue whiplash and crisis fatigue