Those in leadership roles ensure that as many members of the organization as possible buy into the values, mission, and broad organizational goals. There are two components to this function. First, leaders manage the perceptions of staff with respect to the planning process. Remember that most people have experienced the “plan-in-the-drawer” syndrome, where effort expended in planning is seen as wasted when the plan is ignored. Prior to the planning process, leaders must emphasize that THIS TIME, things will be different. Second, leaders manage the planning process so that staff feel that they have adequate input into the process, that they are heard, and their values and visions are incorporated into the final plan and its implementation. Specifically, leaders arrange things so that the process is open, and conforms to accepted rules of communication. That may mean hiring an external consultant to orchestrate the planning sessions. It will certainly mean that rules get established to guide participation. Everyone who wants to participate should have the opportunity, and even reticent staff should be gently encouraged to involve themselves.

The traditional way for government organizations to plan is for a group of people, usually executives/management, but sometimes including employees, to get together for some period of time each year. Generally, inadequate time is allocated to the exercise, but if it is completed, it results in a document that contains a mission statement, broad organizational goals, and other elements as is deemed appropriate. Then, the plan is usually hidden away somewhere, never to be seen again. Traditional methods yield traditional results. As a wise man once said “If you keep doing what you have been doing, you will get what you have always got”. Planning should be considered as a blueprint for change. The plan should be the basis for introducing controlled change into an organization so it can adapt to changing times. By anticipating shifting demands, the plan serves the purpose of allowing the organization to control its own direction, rather than waiting until political forces demand change (and demand change NOW). In addition, the plan allows for consistent monitorin~ofsuccess,~nd re-examination of the degree to which organizational resources should be structured and allocated to achieve future goals.

In an organization where there is faith in the abilities of formal leaders, employees will look towards the leaders for a number of things. During drastic change times, employees will expect effective and sensible planning, confident and effective decision-making, and regular, complete communication that is timely. Also during these times of change, employees will perceive leadership as supportive, concerned and committed to their welfare, while at the same time recognizing that tough decisions need to be made. The best way to summarize is that there is a climate of trust between leader and the rest of the team. The existence of this trust, brings hope for better times in the future, and that makes coping with drastic change much easier.

In organizations characterized by poor leadership, employees expect nothing positive. In a climate of distrust, employees learn that leaders will act in indecipherable ways and in ways that do not seem to be in anyone’s best interests. Poor leadership means an absence of hope, which, if allowed to go on for too long, results in an organization becoming completely nonfunctioning.