This worksheet will help you evaluate successes and weaknesses in your planning framework and process. It can lead to practical improvements for the rest of your current planning cycle, or for the design of the next one.
|
1. Which skills (i.e., knowledge and capacities) have been strongest and weakest in the planning? (Consider leadership, technical knowledge in forestry, communications, participation, and conflict negotiation.) What are your recommendations to build up the weakest areas while not compromising your strengths? 2. If the planning has been carried out in different groups or teams, which groups have realized the most success? What factors separate the successful planning groups from the others? What lessons can be learned from this? 3. Are you satisfied with the contributions of your technical and citizens advisory committees? If not, what should you do to make them more effective? 4. Which participants have been most central in your planning, and which have been less involved or overlooked? (Consider subordinate offices of your agency, other government agencies, private enterprises, NGOs, community and indigenous groups, and interested citizens.) What factors explain this pattern of participation? What improvements do you suggest, and what is the best way to work towards them? 5. To what extent have the views of the participants shaped the procedures and content of the planning? Conversely, what is still lacking in this interaction? How can you improve next time? 6. How well has your agency been able to negotiate conflicts over "Trees and forests for whom and for what?" What negotiating approaches have you relied on? What can be improved, and how? 7. How good or bad were the estimates of budget and time requirements to complete the planning tasks? What were the greatest sources of error? What adjustments should you make for the future? 8. Regarding the planning tools (see CH 2), which have been the most useful? Least useful? How can you use these tools more effectively? 9. What have you done to recognize and reward good performance in planning? Should you continue with this type of recognition, or is there an alternative that you should try? 10. In view of your responses to the preceding questions, what actions will help you build up the institutional strength of your agency to carry on strategic planning in the future? (Consider agency organization, personnel mix and responsibilities, training possibilities, and the like.) |
