A Concept Paper on
Planning
Management is something that all organizations need to function. It is often
described as accomplishing something through people. Theorist Mary Parker Follett
defined management as the “art of getting things done through people.” Similarly, Claude
S. George said that “management consists of getting things done through others.” Another
management scholar Harold Koontz described management as the “art of getting things
done through and with people in formally organized groups.” These definitions underline
people as an important aspect of management and from these, it can be derived that a
manager is someone who makes things happen through people. Moreover, management
has four widely accepted functions: planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. These
functions are considered to be the best way to describe the job of a manager. While these
functions are equally important and are interrelated, planning is often seen as the first
step in managing as it gives managers focus and context for the rest of the functions
(Lloyd & Aho, 2020).
Planning, although it may be described in various ways, is generally considered as
the process of setting goals and developing ways to reach these goals. In the Principles of
Management, planning is defined as “the function of management that involves setting
objectives and determining a course of action for achieving those objectives” (Bright et
al., 2019). The Management Handbook for UN Field Missions (2012), on the other hand,
does not include the establishment goals in its definition of planning. It described
planning as “the process of identifying, through the development of strategies, the right
combination of resources and activities that are needed to attain an organization’s
objectives.” Despite variations in the definition, the aspect of achieving the organization’s
goals is always underscored in planning.
Goals and objectives are usually used interchangeably, University of Minnesota’s
Principles of Management however differentiates these two terms. Goals were described
as “outcome statements that define what an organization is trying to accomplish, both
programmatically and organizationally.” Objectives, on the other hand, are “precise, timebased, measurable actions that support the completion of a goal.” To understand the
difference better, think of goals as broader and more general and objectives as more
specific. For the goal to be achieved, organizations must set objectives that will help them
achieve the larger goal.
1
Planning can be an arduous process. It not only demands time and effort but it also
requires financial commitment as it can be highly costly. It requires extensive analysis of
the organization’s external and internal environments and making educated assumptions
about what circumstances the company is most likely to face in the future by learning
from its past. Additionally, managers should look at planning as more of a cycle rather
than a one-time linear activity. It requires continuous monitoring for management to be
able to adapt to or incorporate certain changes as they would see fit. And so, for reasons
such as these, some firms forego planning. Research, however, has shown that firms that
actively plan tend to be more financially successful than those that do not. A 2010 study
on the effects of planning on new venture performance found that new ventures that
developed a business plan grew significantly faster at 34% than those that did not. The
same study also suggested that less able entrepreneurs who prepare business plans can
overtake their counterparts without business plans. Another 2010 study conducted on
“family firms” found that most fast-growing companies have written plans that detail
their vision and course of action.
Several important figures in management theory have emphasized the importance
of involving lower-level employees in the planning process as the plan's success often
heavily depends on the motivation and commitment of employees to work towards
achieving the set objectives. More and more organizations are gradually departing from
the practice that only executives and upper management are involved in planning.
Studies suggest that employees who were involved in planning have more positive
reactions about the changes planning entails because they are allowed to raise concerns.
Consequently, there is a higher probability their concerns can be heard and addressed.
Being involved in the planning process also helps employees know the reasons for the
course of action they are taking on a deeper level and it helps them understand the values
and work ethics of the company. Lastly, they can feel a sense of ownership of the plan and
are likely to accept and oblige to it. Moreover, studies have shown that lower employee
involvement is likely to result in high absenteeism, lower productivity, and a decrease in
profitability. It is important to pay attention to employee acceptance and commitment
since these are vital to the achievement of the organization’s goals. This reinforces why
management is widely described as achieving something through people.
Although having a carefully laid out plan has several advantages and has been
shown to benefit an organization, a plan does not entirely ensure a great outcome. Several
2
things can transpire from the conception of the company’s goals to the implementation
of the plan. These can include the plan being poorly constructed, competitors
compromising the rewards initially projected by the plan, or poor execution of the plan.
Naturally, planning does not only apply to private establishment. Planning is
especially crucial in the public sector. Planning and budgeting for the next year are done
as early as January of the current year. Various programs take months, even years, to
develop. Policies require numerous meetings and drafts to polish and perfect. So, it is
extremely beneficial for a public servant to understand the process and the importance
of planning. However, planning does not always guarantee goals are met and service to
the citizens is improved. According to Asian Development Bank (2013), planning has
turned into a mere event in many public sector organizations. When planning, leaders
should keep in mind the improvement of efficiency and effectiveness in providing better
service to the public. A recurring issue in government agencies’ plan for improvement is
the deeply embedded culture of not valuing quality public service amongst public
servants. There is a stereotype that government offices provide mediocre service, making
citizens wait for hours for a single transaction on end is the norm or not getting responses
through written communication within a reasonable amount of time and without
constant follow-up. Employees are not friendly and approachable and often lack a sense
of urgency. And the reality is, these are not unfounded observations. Government
organizations have become comfortable in this level of service, which is problematic
because this hinders them from seeing the need for development and improvement.
Asian Development Bank enumerated four useful steps to refine the planning
process in government organizations. First is to identify the outcome the agency aims to
achieve, where and what they want to be in the future. Second is to identify what
currently inhibits the organization to attain their objectives. Third is to identify what
causes the gaps in overall performance. And fourth is to identify how the deficiencies in
the system can be helped. This set of procedures is significantly different from the
planning processes mentioned in management books. In Robbins and Coulter’s
Management (2012), planning is a five-step process of 1) developing awareness of the
present state, 2) establishing outcome statements, 3) premising, 4) determining a course
of action, and 5) formulating supportive plans. Evidently, the former is more applicable
to the public sector as it closely considers the flaws of the existing system within the
government.
3
Working in the Regional Investigation Division of the Bureau of Internal Revenue,
I have personally handled several complaints from taxpayers regarding the service and
the general process of transacting in the Bureau, specifically the District Offices.
Taxpayers would often complain about the length of time it takes to complete their
transaction and the attitude of the personnel who cater their concern. These complaints
are corrected and addressed through verbal and written warnings and reiteration of
Republic Act No. 11032 or the Ease of Doing Business and Efficient Government Service
Delivery Act of 2018 to the employee. However, this is not a sustainable solution to this
recurring problem. The main causes of slow processing of transactions, I have found, are
the shortage in manpower and limitations of the tools used for processing. The bulk of
transactions frontliners cater on the daily is borderline unmanageable. This coupled with
technical issues they can encounter such as loss of internet can push the process time for
transactions even further. Nationwide, over 7,700 positions are unfilled in the BIR. The
employee turnover rate is also alarming. It would require intensive planning, but the
Bureau can greatly benefit from focusing on this concern and developing strategies that
would encourage Civil Service eligibles to apply and discourage BIR employees to resign.
The National Office can devise a plan to increase the salary or offer a health maintenance
organization (HMO) package, which I believe has already been proposed by the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue. Changes like these may seem minor, but in essence,
they would require laborious planning to come to fruition. As stated by Koontz and
O’Donnell (1972), the first step in planning is awareness; the upper management
recognizes that there are issues and is slowly taking the first steps towards addressing
these matters and providing long-term solutions.
Another issue I have found is the lack of budget, particularly, in my division. As
our division is in-charge of the security services in the region, most of the budget is
allotted to the acquisition of these services and very little is left for equipment and
supplies such as printers and scanners, tools used in the performance of our daily job
functions. In the beginning of this year, I attended the Project Procurement Management
Plan (PPMP) meeting with our Assistant Division Chief and have personally witnessed
how most of our requests for the year 2024 were not approved. I recognize that budget
is limited and not all aspects can be given an ample amount, however, the shortage in
equipment can slow the completion of tasks and affect productivity and efficiency. This
can be addressed through a modification in the plan, after all, a budget is a type of plan.
4
Since security services are not a discretionary expense and benefits the whole of the
region, it should be justified that it need not take almost the entire budget of the division.
The plan should also show the budget justification with the narrative that would detail
the necessity of the other areas to be allocated for.
As previously mentioned, planning can be a huge commitment, one that is
understandably daunting for some organizations to make, but it has massive benefits to
an organization if executed well. In the government sector, planning has become more of
an activity held for formality and the focus is towards making a written plan itself instead
of being taken as a step in making improvements in overall performance. Major reforms
would be required to effect change in the quality of service offered to the public and it
would accordingly require planning. And so, it is imperative that managers and leaders
understand the value of setting clear goals and planning.
References
Asian Development Bank. (2013). Corporate Planning in the Public Sector: A Guide for
Pacific Policy Makers.
Bright, D. S., et al. (2019). Principles of Management. OpenStax.
5
Brinckmann, J., Grichnik, D., & Kapsa, D. (2010). Should entrepreneurs plan or just storm
the castle? A meta-analysis on contextual factors impacting the business planning–
performance relationship in small firms. Journal of Business Venturing.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0883902608001109
Burke, A., Fraser, S., & Greene, F. J. (2010). The multiple effects of business planning on
new
venture
performance.
Journal
of
Management
Studies.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00857.x
Crimmins, C. (2023). The Importance of Engaging Employees in Strategic Planning. Spider
Strategies.https://www.spiderstrategies.com/blog/employeeengagement/#:~:t
ext=employee%20engagement%20strategy.,Benefits%20of%20Employee%20In
volvement%20in%20Strategic%20Planning,and%20a%20decline%20in%20pro
fitability.
David, F. R. (2010). Strategic Management Concepts and Cases (13th ed). Pearson College
Div.
Hecht, A, et al. (2012). The Management Handbook for UN Field Missions. International
Peace Institute.
Lloyd, R. & Aho, W. (2020). The Four Functions of Management - An essential guide to
Management Principles. Management Open Education Resources.
Ramos-Araneta, M. (2023, October 2). BIR saddled by lack of professional employees due
to low pay. Manila Standard. https://manilastandard.net/news/national/
314z376282/bir-saddled-by-lack-of-professional-employees-due-tolowpay.html
Robbins, S. P. & Coulter, M. (2012). Management (11th ed). Prentice Hall.
University of Minnesota. (2015). Principles of Management. University of Minnesota
Libraries Publishing.
6