TRANSFORMING TO AN
AGILE ORGANIZATION
by
J. Robert Rossman, Ph.D.
Leisure Service Consultant
Sedona, AZ
USA
April 18, 2012
Henderson, NV
Recommendations from an
OPEN FORUM
NRPA Congress
Nov. 3, 2011
Atlanta, GA
Published in a
White Paper, The Agile Organization;
Transforming Your Agency to Survive and Thrive in Any Economy,
by J. Robert Rossman, Ph.D.,
© 2012 NRPA
DATA GATHERNG





The Forum began with presentations by three
professionals about a variety of processes used
in the past few years to remain agile.
Round table discussions (average of 8 per
table) with a Table Facilitator.
Discussions were guided by an interview
schedule developed by Dr. Rossman.
Table Facilitators were volunteers from the
American Academy for Park and Recreation
Administration.
Sixty-five (65) conference attendees from
across the country participated in the Forum.
A PROBLEM—Constant and Dramatic
Change Due to Economic Uncertainty.
ECONOMIC
RECESSION
REDUCTION IN TAX
SUPPORT AT THE
LOCAL, STATE, AND
FEDERAL LEVELS
Can you really do more with less?
Or, is less, less?
WHAT IS
ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY?
 The
capability of an organization to
rapidly change or adapt in response
to changes in their environment.
Rapid change means more often
than a normal cycle would require,
i.e. asynchronous cycle changes.
WHAT CAN AN AGILE
ORGANIZATION ACCOMPLISH?
 EFFICIENT
REPONSE TO RAPID
CHANGE
 Adaptable
strategies and goals.
 Flexibility to allocate and reallocate all resources.
 Performance agility; the ability to
do it differently quickly.
WHAT MANAGEMENT
PRINCIPLES ARE CHALLENGED
BY THE NEED FOR AGILITY?
 Regularity
of performance
(both environmental and organizational stability)
 Goal
theory
 Cyclical decision making
QUESTIONS ASKED
at the OPEN FORUM
 Have
agencies really needed to
become more agile?
 What
strategies have been used to
implement agility?
 How
has planning been effected by
the need to demonstrate more
agility?
THE NEED FOR AGILITY IS REAL
 67%
of the agencies reported they
had to develop new operational
strategies during the past year.
 59%
of the agencies reported that
these new strategies had to be
developed rapidly; outside of
normal budget or strategic
planning cycles.
WHAT AGILITY STRATEGIES
WERE USED?
 59%
of the agencies reported they
had developed NEW COMMUNITY
PARTNERSHIPS during the past
year.
 Of the remaining agencies, 92%
believed partnerships were a good
strategy to deal with the economic
downturn.
WHAT AGILITY STRATEGIES
WERE USED?
Other
 Use
strategies reported:
of INNOVATIVE BUSINESS
MODELS
 Development of
UNCONVENTIONAL FUNDING
SOURCES
 A potpourri of OTHER
STRATEGIES
THE PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY
Comparative Use of Partnership Agreements
(Ranked by Frequency)
Type of Partner
N of Respondents
out of 63
% of Respondents
Other (excluding
the YMCA) Youth
Serving NFPs
Local School
Organization
44
70%
40
64%
Nature or
Environmental
Group
Health-Care
Provider
Private
Corporation
YMCA
27
43%
26
41%
26
41%
12
19%
DESIRABILITY OF PARTNERS
Desirability of Partnering with Specified Groups*
Type of Partner
% of Respondents
Nature or Environmental Groups
81%
Local School Organization
70%
Health-Care Provider
57%
Private Corporation
47%
Youth Serving NFPs
excluding YMCAs
24%
*From agencies who did not have this type of partnership.
PARTNER PROFILES
School Districts

POSITIVES



Valued assets schools
possess—facilities,
transportation equipment
and networks
Major effort at joint use
and development of
athletic facilities.
Joint programming—
before and after school,
environmental education,
and recycling programs

CHALLENGES




School’s own financial
struggles
Lack of historical
involvement
Often schools do not really
need park’s assets
Problems determining
economic value of
exchanged services/goods
PARTNER PROFILES
YMCA

The YMCA was NOT the primary partner in the
not-for-profit category.


The YMCA was viewed in many communities as a
major competitor of the municipal operation who
offered programs to a different profile demographic.
Yet, some communities had very successful
relationships with Ys.
PARTNER PROFILES
Not-for-profit Agencies
 Partnering
with local youth sport
organizations, many of whom were
organized under Section 503 c of the
IRS Code, was a major area of
partnership involvement.
 Joint
programs, facility development and
leasing.
PARTNER PROFILES
Not-for-profit Agencies
 Partnering
with nature and
environmental groups was a major
area of partnering activity.
Enhances the park and recreation agency’s
position as a Green organization.
 Provides a corps of volunteers to help with
clean up of parks, streams, etc.
 Engenders positive social networks that lead
to helpful political action, grants, and
educational programs and events.

PARTNER PROFILES
Health Care Providers
A relatively new, highly desired strategy that
positions the park and recreation agency as part
of the wellness movement.

POSITIVES


Serving constituent
needs—wellness
activities, serve disabled
populations, rehabilitation
activities.
Most frequently reported
activities--wellness and
health screenings

CHALLENGES


Lack of agency capacity to
provide documentation
notes about client
progress/performance.
Lack of agency capacity to
provide data about the
efficacy of programs.
PARTNER PROFILES
Private Corporations

The greatest variety of partnering agreements
of any category.




Naming rights?
Sponsorship of major events
Gifts for specific outcomes
Donation of corporate expertise
PARTNER PROFILES
Sustaining Partnerships

There are many potential issues in developing
and sustaining partnerships.




Time consuming and laborious to negotiate.
Economic downturn has cause discontinuation or
renegotiation of existing partnerships.
Competing with other organizations who are now
also seeking partners.
++Renewed interest has lead to new partners with
$$$ including law enforcement, health departments,
and transportation departments.
UNCOVENTIONAL FUNDING
SOURCES





Expanding advertising sales.
Sponsorships—discovered the value of selling
exclusivity
Revenue producing niche programming
Service Sharing with other agencies
A potpourri of other strategies
INNOVATIVE BUSINESS
PRACTICES



Redefining mission and core services to fit
resources.
Revisiting fee and cost recovery policies and
practices.
Reorganization for efficiency or to reduce the
work force.
+Implementation of entrepreneurial approaches-Cost Shifting & ROI
ORGANIZATIONAL AGILTY AND
PLANNING

46% of participants in the Open Forum
responded to questions regarding planning
practices in their agency (n = 46).
HOW LONG IS A LONG RANGE PLAN?
ORGANIZATIONAL AGILTY AND
PLANNING

SHORTER PLANNING TIME FRAMES
Duration of long-range plans
Number of
Years
Number of
Agencies
% of Agencies
3
13
28.3%
5
19
41.3%
10
8
17.4%
Some other
number
4
8.7%
No answer
2
4.3%
57% USED A ROLLING
PLAN—
5 YEARS WAS
THE MODAL
DURATION
QUESTIONS ANSWERED
at the OPEN FORUM
 Have
agencies really needed to
become more agile? YES
 What strategies have been used to
implement agility?
PARTNERTSHIPS +
 How has planning been effected by
the need to demonstrate more
agility? SHORTER PLANNING
PERIODS
SELF-ASSESSMENT OF YOUR
ORGANIZATION'S AGILITY
COMPLETE
THE INSTRUMENT
SCORING
Characteristic
Enter the total number of
entries for each category
X 3 =
Somewhat
Characteristic
X
2 =
Not
Characteristic
X
1 =
Sum your results
RESULTS
An Agile
Organization
Good Agility,
Some Areas To
Improve
Many Areas To
Develop Agility
30--36
35--24
23--12
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, and
REOMMENDATIONS




Develop organizational capacity for continuing
agility throughout the year
Re-examine mission when faced with a
dramatic reduction of resources
Develop sustainable partnerships to help
implement the agency’s mission
Build in termination and adjustment clauses in
all new and existing partnerships
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, and
REOMMENDATIONS

Before developing partnerships




Develop good background
Have definite outcomes you hope to achieve
Historically sound partners—not-for-profits and
schools
New partnerships—health care organizations,
nature and environmental groups, and selected
appropriate private corporations
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, and
REOMMENDATIONS

Business practices




Redefining core services
Rewriting cost recovery policies
Reorganization for efficiency and workforce
reduction
Unconventional funding sources




Seeking new advertisers
Promoting exclusivity
Revenue producing niche programs
Bartering services
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, and
REOMMENDATIONS

Scan your environment for partners with sound
funding



Health care organizations
Law enforcement agencies
Transportation departments
QUESTIONS and DISCUSSION
TRANSFORMING TO AN
AGILE ORGANIZATION
by
J. Robert Rossman, Ph.D.
Leisure Service Consultant
Sedona, AZ