Strategic Planning for Reference in a Team Environment: the Preferred Futuring Model

Preferred Futuring Workshop

A Preferred Futuring event for an organization is preceded by the leadership’s commitment to Preferred Futuring and by a preparation phase during which the futuring event is designed and other preparatory work is done.¹³ Preparation for Preferred Futuring is usually the responsibility of a small design team representing those who will attend the event from across the organization plus a facilitator who may be from within or outside the organization. This group provides necessary data on key issues and the dynamics present in the organization, develops a clear purpose and the set of desired outcomes for the Preferred Futuring event, and participates in developing the design for the event, which could last several days or take place in an abbreviated half-day format.

The primary tool used by this planning team is the Data-Purpose-Plan-Evaluation (DPPE) Model. This model provides a road map for the work of the team: collecting data about the organization or the situation, setting a purpose or goal for the Preferred Futuring event, creating a plan or agenda for the event, and establishing criteria for evaluating the results of the event.¹⁴

Figure 2: Preferred Futuring Change Process

PF Change Process PF Steps

1. Defining the Status Quo 1. Celebrating the Past
2. Assessing the Present
3. Stating Core Beliefs
4. Identifying Trends

2. Defining the Preferred Future 5. Expanding Horizons
6. Visioning Preferred Future

3. Commitment to Action 7. Action Planning
8. Celebrating Progress

Source: Richard Dougherty, Planning and Implementing Changes in Reference Services: A Workshop (Ann Arbor, Mich.: Richard Dougherty and Associates, 2002), 20.

Figure 2. Preferred Futuring Change Process

During the Preferred Futuring event, members of the design team collect data at the end of each session or day to determine if any redesign of the remaining agenda is necessary. In addition, one or more facilitators monitor the logistics of the event, including instruction and setup for workshop activities. Within a few weeks of the Preferred Futuring event, the results of these activities are communicated back to the leadership group and often to the participants as well.

The Preferred Futuring process has been customized to the library reference services environment by Richard Dougherty in his series of workshops on planning and implementing changes in reference services. Within his Preferred Futuring framework, brainstorming is a key technique for identifying creative alternatives. His purpose in brainstorming is to generate as many uncensored ideas as possible, assuming that the greater the number of ideas, the greater the likelihood of finding an outstanding solution to the problem at hand.

The focus of Dougherty’s workshop revolves around the following eight steps for transforming an organization:

1. Establishing a sense of urgency—identifying and discussing crises, potential crises, or major opportunities.
2. Forming a powerful guiding coalition—encouraging the group to work together as a team.
3. Creating a vision—developing strategies for achieving that vision.
4. Communicating the vision—using every vehicle possible to communicate the new strategies.
5. Empowering others to act on the vision—encouraging risk taking and nontraditional ideas, activities, and ac-tions.
6. Planning for and creating short-term wins—recognizing and rewarding employees involved in the improve-ments.
7. Consolidating improvements and producing still more change—reinvigorating the process with new projects, themes, and change agents.
8. Institutionalizing new approaches—articulating the connection between the new behaviors and change agents.¹⁵
By proposing these eight steps which parallel the eight steps of Preferred Futuring (see figure 2), Dougherty empowers the process of envisioning and enacting a preferred reference future; the simplicity and practicality of this approach appealed to the leadership team and reference coordinators at USC.

Preferred Futuring Operation

Preferred Futuring at USC has been used as a reference improvement tool, providing a way to gain stakeholder involvement and stimulate innovation for planning of reference services. Over a period of about a year, the reference coordinators conducted three Preferred Futuring reference workshops, which focused narrowly, and then broadly, on key reference service issues:

Virtual Reference—February 28 and March 7, 2003
Reference Services—October 17, 2003
Information Commons—June 3, 2004

The workshops were paced differently. For virtual reference, coverage of the eight steps of Preferred Futuring was divided into two separate sessions. For the other workshops, the eight steps were combined to allow completion of the Preferred Futuring process in a single three-hour session. During the three-hour session, step one (“history—how did we get here”) was discussed briefly at the beginning of the session. Steps two and three (“current state—what is and is not working” and “values and beliefs—what are our core values”) were brainstormed within a single twenty-minute session in four groups of six participants. Steps four and five (“strategic trends/development—what trends may impact us?” and “vision—where do we want to be in 1–3 years?”) and steps seven and eight (“strategic goals—how will we get there” and “action plans—what will we do”) were also batched and discussed in the groups in separate twenty-minute brainstorming sessions. Step six (“strategic goals—how will we get there) was the only step to be brainstormed separately.

For each workshop, the coordinators experimented with a different method for setting the stage for Preferred Futuring ranging from pep talks to distribution of written materials before the session to a pre-workshop orientation session. Meeting in the same attractive environment with conversational seating and appealing refreshments set a comfortable tone for all the workshops. About twenty-four participants—the four members of the library’s leadership group, fourteen library faculty members and six library staff members—participated in the workshops. There were participants from each interdisciplinary team as well as representative staff from each library center. To maximize cross-team discussion, the coordinators assigned participants to a particular discussion group at the beginning of each workshop. Some participated in more than one workshop, so special care was given to grouping participants and rotating participants between and among brainstorming groups to maximize representation and contributions. Between brainstorming sessions, library leadership members rotated among the four groups so everyone had a chance to discuss issues with each of them. For each workshop, the coordinators set up prepared flip charts with the Preferred Futuring brainstorming questions mentioned above and then acted as facilitators and timekeepers during brainstorming sessions. After each workshop, they prepared and distributed an electronic record of the brainstorming output from the flip chart records.

By analyzing USC’s current state for virtual reference, general reference, and information commons, workshop partici-pants identified what they were proud or sorry about in the current situation. Perceptions ranged from “prouds” that e-reference and the information commons were working to “sorries” that not everyone had the desktop-computing power to chat or the training needed to use chat technology. The events, trends, and developments assessment was an eye-opener because participants recognized that the skill sets for information technology are rapidly expanding and changing. There was a sense of urgent need to take action so as not to be left behind. The Preferred Futuring process of transforming vision into tangible action focused on brainstorming about all the things that currently existed that would help, and all that would hinder, to ensure successful future progress. Group consensus emerged around three agendas that would “move the USC reference needle” toward success—development of reference competencies, tiered reference training, and exporting the information commons models to libraries outside of Leavey Library. The coordinators incorporated these priorities into their action plan for subsequent semesters.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7