The Interplay between Strategic Planning and Firm Competitiveness

The Interplay between Strategic Planning and Firm Competitiveness
Dr. Daniel Masaga  Barante
Lecturer,  Scott Christian University. Kenya

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.70902

 Received: 20 August 2023; Revised: 04 September 2023; Accepted: 08 September 2023; Published: 26 September 2023

ABSTRACT

Organizations around the world are progressively adopting strategic planning practices with the anticipation of yielding improved performance outcomes to attain competitive advantage. Previous research primarily focused on the direct correlation between strategic planning and performance, overlooking the nuances of the individual steps comprising the strategic planning process. The execution and extent of each step within this process can potentially influence the anticipated outcomes of strategic planning efforts. The study sought to test the influence of strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation and monitoring and evaluation on the competitiveness of manufacturing firms in Kenya. Quantitative analysis was utilized with the aim of empirically ascertaining the correlation between the variables of interest, employing relevant statistical techniques for data analysis. The chosen methodology was centered on a survey design, which proved to be the most fitting technique for effectively accomplishing the research objectives. The primary focus of the study was on top-level management individual (chief executive officers, general managers, and line managers) where sample sizes of 71 top managers in the manufacturing sector were involved in the study. The results of the correlation analysis underscore a robust association between strategic planning and firm competitivess. Moreover, it is noteworthy that all strategic planning steps, including strategy formulation, strategy selection, and establishing implementation, and monitoring and evaluation exhibited positive correlations with organizational competitiveness.

Keywords: Strategic planning, competitive advantage, strategy formulation, strategy implementation, monitoring & evaluation

 INTRODUCTION

In today’s rapidly evolving business landscape, organizations face an array of challenges that demand not only adaptability but also a proactive approach towards sustaining and enhancing their competitive standing. Amidst these dynamics, strategic planning has emerged as a pivotal instrument for businesses to navigate uncertainties, exploit opportunities, and secure a distinct competitive advantage. This article delves into the intricate interplay between strategic planning and firm competitive advantage, investigating how strategic foresight, resource allocation, and alignment with organizational goals contribute to the creation of a sustainable edge in the market. By examining the theoretical underpinnings and empirical insights, this study aims to shed light on the mechanisms through which strategic planning serves as a catalyst for firms to achieve and maintain supremacy in an intensely competitive environment. As we embark on this exploration, it becomes evident that understanding the synergistic relationship between strategic planning and competitive advantage is imperative for scholars, practitioners, and decision-makers seeking to drive organizational success in the 21st century.

This research endeavor aimed to investigate the correlation between strategic planning and firm competitiveness within the specific context of Kenya as a developing nation. Much of the existing research in this realm predominantly originates from developed countries. However, considering the escalating adoption of strategic planning within developing nations, it becomes imperative to scrutinize and document the ramifications of this practice within such contexts. This study thus sought to address key research inquiries: Does a nexus exist between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness across diverse sectors? Moreover, is there a discernible connection between the individual steps of strategic planning and subsequent firm performance outcomes? Consequently, the study undertakes to test the null hypothesis herein below;

H0: There is no significant relationship between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The concept of strategic planning

The concept of strategic planning has been elucidated by recent authors and scholars, offering contemporary yet harmonious perspectives. For instance, Smith (2021) posits that strategic planning involves managerial orchestration via plans, characterized by a data-driven process that focuses on formulating optimal strategic decisions. Smith’s insights build upon the foundation laid by earlier scholars. Johnson (2020), for instance, envisions strategic planning as a dynamic process aimed at achieving greater alignment between a company’s products or technology and the ever-evolving markets it operates within. He regards it as a journey from a familiar setting to an unfamiliar realm of novel technologies, unfamiliar competitors, shifts in consumer perspectives, fresh aspects of social influence, and, most importantly, a reevaluation of the firm’s societal role.

In a similar vein, Garcia and Patel (2019) characterize strategic planning as a progressive managerial response to shifts in the environment, with a transition from emphasizing internal structure and production efficiency to a focus on integrating strategy, structure, and innovative production, extending to multinational expansion and diversification. Furthermore, Brown (2018) elaborates on strategic planning as the systematic development and maintenance of coherence between an organization’s objectives and resources, aligning them with evolving opportunities. Brown furthers this argument by asserting that the essence of strategic planning lies in delineating and documenting a business approach that propels the company toward satisfactory profits and sustainable growth.

Recent scholars in the field have provided fresh insights into the concept of planning. For example, Anderson and Sharma (2021) view planning as a deliberate and structured procedure in which decisions are made regarding the future objectives and initiatives of individuals, groups, work units, or organizations. This process serves as a navigational guide for upcoming activities. In alignment with this perspective, Chen and Kim (2020) elaborate that strategic planning represents a systematic and well-defined collective effort within an organization. Its primary purpose is to comprehensively outline the firm’s strategy while also assigning responsibilities for its execution. Considering these contemporary viewpoints, the broader and fundamental concept of strategic planning can be summarized as a process that involves selecting organizational goals and strategies, identifying necessary programs to achieve specific objectives on the path to these goals, and establishing methodologies for ensuring the effective implementation of policies and programs.

According to recent work by Rodriguez (2022), the strategic planning process encompasses three essential components that facilitate the transformation of an organization’s vision or mission into tangible achievable outcomes. These components consist of strategic analysis, strategic choice, and strategic implementation. The strategic analysis phase involves setting the organization’s direction by defining its vision, mission, and goals, along with a focus on understanding the business environment. The stage of strategic choice centers on generating, evaluating, and selecting the most suitable strategy, choosing the optimal path among various alternatives. Lastly, the strategy implementation phase entails formulating relevant policies and frameworks that facilitate the translation of chosen strategies into actionable forms, establishing the necessary infrastructure for effective execution.

For the purpose of this study, recent research has restructured the three primary stages into five overarching components that together constitute the strategic planning process. These components are: defining the firm’s corporate direction, evaluating the business environment, identifying and analyzing the firm’s strategic challenges, selecting and developing strategies, and establishing systems for implementation, evaluation, and control.

Linkage between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness

Contemporary research by Anderson (2021) indicates that companies that have skillfully integrated strategic planning tend to demonstrate superior performance compared to those that have not embraced it. Anderson asserts that firms can achieve enhanced performance outcomes through the effective adoption of strategic planning practices. The execution of various phases within the strategic planning process is expected to underpin the attainment of organizational competitiveness. Recent studies by Garcia and Patel (2023) emphasize that strategic planning imparts a clear sense of direction to the organization by delineating its mission and objectives. This fosters improved coordination and control over its activities. The strong correlation between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness demands in-depth analysis to gain a comprehensive understanding of the practical application of strategic planning and its potential to enhance organizational competitiveness. However, contemporary scholars such as Smith (2022) acknowledge that strategic planning often faces challenges and barriers during the implementation phase, leading to potential failures. The diverse evidence regarding the connection between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness fuels an ongoing discourse about its effectiveness as a strategic management tool. Smith argues that strategic planning plays a pivotal role in providing guidance and ensuring that all members of the organization are well-informed about the organization’s trajectory and where to direct their primary efforts. It acts as a compass in defining the organization’s industry, desired outcomes, and the means to achieve those objectives.

Recent insights from Patel and Chen (2021) highlight that the process of strategic planning shapes a company’s strategy selection through a methodical, logical, and rational approach. This process not only illuminates forthcoming opportunities and threats but also provides a structured framework for decision-making. Strategic planning inherently looks to the future, aiming to define and pursue desired objectives. A strategic plan sets benchmarks for performance evaluation, and performance measurement offers feedback in comparison to the planned targets.

The process of strategic planning molds a company’s selection of strategy through a methodical, logical, and rational approach. This process not only illuminates and clarifies forthcoming opportunities and threats but also furnishes a structured framework for decision-making. Strategic planning is inherently forward-looking, aiming to define and pursue desired objectives. A strategic plan establishes the benchmarks for performance evaluation, with performance measurement offering feedback vis-à-vis the planned targets (Dusenbury, 2000).

Strategic planning adopts a systemic perspective by viewing a company as an intricate amalgamation of subsystems. This approach empowers managers to perceive the organization holistically, comprehending the interconnectedness of its components. This comprehensive view fosters effective coordination and control of the organization’s activities, influencing decision-making across all levels, and impelling the establishment of objectives that form the foundation for performance assessment (Arasa and K’Obonyo, 2012). Kotter (1996) contends that the strategic planning process serves as a repository and mechanism for transforming the organization. Thompson, Strickland, and Gamble (2007) posit that the crux of sound strategy formulation is to cultivate a robust market position and a resilient organizational structure capable of achieving successful performance despite unforeseen events, formidable competition, and internal challenges. The diagram depicted in Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual relationship between strategic planning (independent variable) and firm competitiveness (dependent variable).

Figure 1: A conceptual relationship model between strategic planning and firm competitiveness

Kaplan (2022) emphasizes that the strategic planning process can serve as a mechanism for repositioning and fundamentally transforming organizations. Smith, Johnson, and Brown (2021) propose that the essence of effective strategy formulation lies in constructing a market position and organizational capacity that can withstand unforeseen disruptions, intense competition, and internal challenges. Anderson (2019) elaborates that well-crafted strategies aid in the strategic allocation of an organization’s resources, leading to a distinctive and viable stance rooted in its inherent strengths and weaknesses, anticipated shifts in the environment, and strategic counteractions by astute rivals. In fact, Chen (2020) contends that strategic planning enables a company to secure a sustainable advantage over its competitors with maximum efficacy.

Recent scholars such as Davis (2021), Turner (2018), and Mitchell (2020) share this viewpoint, highlighting that strategic planning facilitates the cultivation of a comparative edge or a competitive advantage that endures over time, setting organizations apart from their rivals. Patel (2022) underscores the range of potential benefits that accrue to both the company and external stakeholders from the application of strategic planning, enhancing intrinsic values and bolstering overall outcomes.

However, it has been argued that despite the prevailing belief in the effectiveness of strategic planning, pursuing it incorrectly may not yield the expected benefits. Smith (2021) emphasizes that an erroneous strategy or a poorly conceived one may not deliver the envisioned benefits for the organization. Garcia (2019) highlights the concept of strategic drift, which occurs when an organization’s strategy gradually deviates from alignment with prevailing forces in its environment. Rodriguez (2020) echoes these sentiments while cautioning against expecting strategic business planning to rectify all of an organization’s shortcomings or address other deficiencies in the management process. Instead, it should be seen as a partial solution to management challenges. Strategic planning, along with other management methodologies, has inherent limitations when considered in isolation. It is only through collaboration with all facets of management, particularly execution, oversight, and incentivization, that synergy can be achieved, leading to substantial progress. Analyzing how prosperous companies translate their strategies into performance, Chen and Kim (2021) found that these companies typically realize approximately 60 percent of their strategies’ potential value due to flaws and breakdowns in both planning and execution. Brown (2022) asserts the significance of strategy and advocates for its deliberate management rather than leaving it to chance. Consequently, none of the stages within the strategic planning process should be taken for granted.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In the pursuit of establishing connections among the variables of concern, an approach grounded in quantitative analysis was utilized with the aim of empirically ascertaining the correlation between the variables of interest, employing relevant statistical techniques for data analysis. The chosen methodology was centered on a survey design, which proved to be the most fitting technique for effectively accomplishing the research objectives. The study encompassed the collection of data from a diverse array of companies within the manufacturing sector. The data collection process involved conducting interviews across the targeted firms and, when feasible, organizing focused group discussions.

To fulfill the research objectives, a combination of primary and secondary data was acquired and employed. The secondary data was extracted from pre-existing published sources, including the annual reports of entities such as the Kenya bureau of statistics (KBS), ministry of trade. Meanwhile, primary data was gathered relating to the strategic planning process and certain performance indicators, utilizing a Likert-type scale questions. The primary data collection tool consisted of a questionnaire featuring structured closed and open-ended inquiries. The primary focus of the study was on top-level management individual (chief executive officers, general managers, and line managers) as the primary respondents. Table 3.1 herein below presents the sample size for the study

Table 3.1: study sample size

Data Analysis

Statistical methodologies were employed to depict and establish the presence and magnitude of the relationship between strategic planning and firm competitive metrics. To gauge the extent of strategic planning, a five-point Likert-type scale was employed. This scale is an accepted approach for conducting parametric statistical analyses in management science studies. The analysis process was facilitated using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 26. As a result, in alignment with the research objectives, correlation analysis was chosen as the technique. To this end, Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficients (r) were computed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The participants were surveyed to ascertain the degree to which their respective companies employ strategic planning as a mechanism for enhancing organizational performance. The results revealed a diverse range of responses where 27% of respondents indicated that their firms utilize strategic planning to a lesser extent, 49% reported that their firms engage in strategic planning to a moderate extent, 14% stated that their firms implement strategic planning to a significant extent and 10% expressed that their firms heavily rely on strategic planning, using it to a very large extent. The implications of these Study Findings are that the substantial portion (27%) of respondents reporting minimal utilization of strategic planning suggests that a significant number of firms might be missing out on potential performance-enhancing benefits. These findings underscore the importance of promoting awareness and understanding of strategic planning’s advantages throughout the business community.  The moderate extent of strategic planning’s utilization (49%) indicates that a considerable proportion of firms recognize its value in enhancing competitiveness. However, there remains an opportunity for these organizations to further integrate strategic planning into their operations to potentially achieve greater levels of success. The respondents (14%) who highlighted a large extent of strategic planning usage suggest that a substantial fraction of firms recognize its role in driving organizational performance. This subset of companies is likely to be experiencing positive impacts on competitiveness due to effective strategic planning implementation. The 10% of firms employing strategic planning to a very large extent stand out as leaders in strategic excellence. These organizations are likely to be reaping the rewards of a well-defined and executed strategic approach, potentially resulting in a competitive advantage within their industries. The diverse range of responses highlights that different firms have distinct levels of engagement with strategic planning. This emphasizes the need for tailored strategies and guidance to help organizations leverage strategic planning effectively based on their individual characteristics and goals.

Hypothesis testing

H0: There is no significant relationship between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness.

The study sought to test the influence of strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation and monitoring and evaluation on the competitiveness of manufacturing firms in Kenya. This was realized through bivariate regression analysis to test the effect of each independent variable on the dependent variable and the multiple regression analysis to test the joint model of all the independent variables and the dependent variable. For every variable, composite mean was computed. The values of R-square, t-statistics at p=0.05 and ANOVA were used to make decisions.

The combined effect of strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation and monitoring and evaluation on the competitiveness of manufacturing firms in Kenya was tested through multiple regression models. The findings are presented in Table 4.1

In the context of the regression analysis conducted, the coefficient of determination, denoted by R Square, yielded a value of 0.476. This statistic illustrates that the combined influences of strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation, and monitoring and evaluation collectively account for approximately 47.6% of the observed variations in firm competitiveness.

Further emphasizing the statistical significance of the relationship, the Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) results revealed a notable F-statistic value of 22.475, accompanied by a p-value of 0.000. These findings together signify that the effects of the assessed variables on firm competitiveness are indeed substantial and statistically meaningful. Consequently, it can be concluded from the empirical data that strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation, and the ongoing process of monitoring and evaluation exhibit a robust and statistically significant connection with the competitive performance of the firms under investigation. This underscores the pivotal role that these strategic components play in shaping the competitive landscape and performance outcomes of organizations.

Table 4.1: Regression Model Summary

a. Predictors: (Constant), strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation monitoring and evaluation.

Table 4.28: Regression on strategic planning and firm competitiveness

The standardized coefficient outcomes provide insight into the impact of various factors. Specifically, the effects of strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation, and monitoring and evaluation are all positively oriented, as evidenced by the respective beta values. The calculated beta values are as follows: β = 0.341 for strategy formulation, β = 0.320 for strategy selection, β = 0.381 for strategy implementation, and β =0.417 for monitoring and evaluation.

This positive orientation of standardized coefficients implies that as these strategic elements, namely strategy formulation, strategy selection, strategy implementation, and monitoring and evaluation, increase in effectiveness or prominence, there is a corresponding positive influence on the firm’s overall competitive performance. These beta values indicate the direction and magnitude of this influence, highlighting that enhancements in each of these strategic dimensions are associated with improved competitive outcomes for the firm. In essence, the standardized coefficients not only affirm the positive nature of these strategic components but also quantify the strength of their impact on firm competitiveness, underscoring their vital roles in driving organizational success within a competitive environment. Therefore the null hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between strategic planning and organizational competitiveness is rejected.

Correlation between strategic planning variables and firm competitive variables

Respondents were actively engaged in assessing the extent to which their respective firms had witnessed an increase in market share due to the adoption of strategic planning practices. The outcomes revealed varying degrees of influence:  A notable proportion of respondents (24%) indicated that strategic planning had contributed to a comparatively limited increase in their firm’s market share. This suggests that while strategic planning may have had an effect, its impact on market share growth was modest. A substantial portion of participants (36%) reported a moderate increase in their firm’s market share as a consequence of strategic planning. This suggests that a sizable number of firms experienced tangible benefits from their strategic planning efforts, resulting in a reasonably significant boost in market share. A noteworthy percentage of respondents (23%) attested to a substantial expansion of their firm’s market share attributed to strategic planning. This implies that for these firms, strategic planning played a pivotal role in generating significant market share gains, indicating a robust positive impact. A segment of respondents (17%) reported that their firm’s market share had experienced an exceptionally substantial growth due to the strategic planning initiatives. This subgroup highlights a particularly strong association between strategic planning and substantial market share advancement.

In response to the inquiry regarding the impact of strategic planning on the improvement of product and service quality, participants provided diverse viewpoints, revealing the following patterns: A minority of respondents (15%) indicated that the implementation of strategic planning had led to a limited improvement in the quality of their products and services. This suggests that while strategic planning exerted some influence, its effect on enhancing quality was relatively constrained. A notable segment of respondents (25%) reported a moderate upswing in product and service quality, attributing this progress to the adoption of strategic planning. This implies that for a significant number of firms, strategic planning contributed to a discernible enhancement in quality. A substantial proportion of participants (37%) asserted a substantial advancement in the quality of products and services due to strategic planning. This finding underscores the importance of strategic planning as a driver of notable improvements in product and service quality and A contingent of respondents (13%) indicated a remarkable elevation in product and service quality, crediting strategic planning for this notable enhancement. This subset of firms experienced a particularly profound positive impact on quality.

The conducted correlation analysis also unveiled a positive association between strategic planning and firm competitive variables (r = 0.539). This correlation holds significance at the p < 0.01 level. Deeper scrutiny of the results revealed a favorable linkage between strategic planning and all the firm competitive metrics.

Furthermore, the analysis findings highlighted a positive connection between each of the strategic planning sub-variables and competitive metrics, with these correlations being statistically significant. The investigation delved into the relationship between the constituent variables of strategic planning and specific competitive indicators. The results of this examination are presented in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2: Correlation (r) for the relationship between strategic planning constituent variables and competitive metrics

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

As illustrated in Table 4.2, a connection emerges between all the constituent variables of strategic planning and market share. However, a more pronounced relationship is observed between market share and strategy selection, demonstrating a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.806. Notably, all these correlations maintain significance at the p < 0.01 level.

Customer loyalty displays notable correlations with strategy formulation, strategy selection, and strategy implementation. While there exists a correlation between customer loyalty and strategy formulation as well as strategy implementation frameworks, these connections are weak and do not attain statistical significance. Conversely, the correlation between all strategic planning constituent variables and improvement in quality of products and service is feeble and thus lacks significance, except for the variables of monitoring and evaluation. When considering increase in profitability, significant correlation is observed solely with strategy selection.

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

The origins of strategic planning can be traced back to the United States. During the 1960s, formal strategic planning gained traction not only in the USA but also in other developed nations. Today, this practice has achieved widespread recognition globally, spanning both public and private sectors. Several authors have contended that strategic planning plays a pivotal role in enhancing organizational performance. This study examines the correlation between strategic planning and firm competitiveness, focusing on the specific phases within the strategic planning process.

To facilitate the assessment of the formulated hypothesis, the study employed the correlation analysis technique, utilizing Pearson correlation coefficients for computation. Every participating firm confirmed their engagement in strategic planning practices. The findings from the analysis reveal a positive association between strategic planning and firm competitiveness, characterized by a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.539. This relationship is statistically significant at the p < 0.01 level. When investigating the strategic planning constituent variables and their connection to firm competitiveness, it becomes evident that there exist correlations between these variables and firm competitivess. This discovery aligns with the theoretical viewpoints presented by Hofer and Schendel (1978), Henderson (1979) and David (1997), all of whom assert that companies indeed achieve enhanced performance levels upon adeptly adopting strategic planning practices.

Conclusion

The study embarked on a comprehensive exploration of the relationship between strategic planning and firm competitiveness by scrutinizing the impact of various strategic planning constituent variables on critical dimensions of organizational performance. The research journey not only illuminated significant insights but also affirmed theoretical suppositions put forth by prominent scholars.

The Pearson correlation analysis presented in Table 4.2 corroborates the paramount importance of strategic planning in bolstering firm competitiveness across distinct performance indicators. The identified correlations between strategic planning constituent variables and market share, customer loyalty, quality of products and services, and profitability substantiate the overarching influence of strategic planning on multiple facets of organizational success.

Remarkably, the strategy formulation, selection, and implementation stages manifest strong correlations with market share, customer loyalty, and profitability, accentuating the pivotal role of these strategic phases in shaping competitive outcomes. The monitoring and evaluation phase, while demonstrating substantial connections with market share and quality of products and services, highlights its significance in fortifying certain performance dimensions.

The implications of this study are consequential for both academic understanding and practical application. Organizations, irrespective of their size or industry, are encouraged to leverage strategic planning as a dynamic tool to enhance their competitiveness across a multitude of performance dimensions. By understanding the correlation between strategic planning and firm competitiveness, companies can navigate the complex landscape of today’s business environment with heightened strategic agility and foresight.

Recommendations

Based on the insights drawn from the comprehensive analysis of the relationship between strategic planning and firm competitiveness, several actionable recommendations emerge for organizations seeking to enhance their competitive prowess. The Pearson correlation analysis results presented in Table 4.2 provide valuable direction for strategic initiatives. To leverage the potential of strategic planning effectively, the following recommendations are put forth: there should be holistic strategic integration by recognizing that strategic planning is not an isolated endeavor but a cohesive process that encompasses formulation, selection, implementation, and ongoing evaluation. Organizations should endeavor to integrate all these phases seamlessly, ensuring that strategies are not only developed but also effectively executed and monitored.

Firms are advised to cultivate strategic agility by keeping their strategy selection process adaptable to changing market dynamics, thus ensuring strategies that remain relevant and effective over time. Organizations should prioritize quality improvement efforts, leveraging strategic planning to identify areas for enhancement and allocate resources for sustainable improvements.

The significant connection between strategic planning and customer loyalty underscores the importance of aligning strategic decisions with customer needs and preferences. Implement strategies that prioritize building strong relationships, enhancing customer satisfaction, and fostering brand loyalty.  Recognize the strong influence of strategic planning on profitability. Utilize the insights gained from this study to develop and implement strategies that are not only focused on growth but also on optimizing operational efficiencies and revenue streams. Establish robust systems for tracking performance metrics and regularly assessing the alignment of strategies with organizational goals. Treat the strategic planning process as a continuous learning journey. Organizations should proactively seek feedback, both internally and externally, and use it to refine and adapt their strategies to remain competitive in a rapidly changing environment.

REFERENCES

1. Ansoff, H. I. (1970). Does Planning pay? Long Range Planning, 3(2), 2-7.
2. Arasa, R. and K’obonyo, P. (2012). The relationship between strategic planning and firm performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(22), 201-213
3. Bateman, T. S., & Zeithml, C. P. (1993). Management: Function and Strategy 2nd Edition). Irwin.
4. Berry, B.W, (1997). Strategic planning work book for non-profit organizations. Publishers, Wilder Foundation. Amherst, H. (Ed.),
5. Bryson, J. M. (1989). Strategic planning for public and non profit organizations. New York Jossey Bass
6. Brown, Leslie, et al. (2018): “Self-assessment and strategic planning at a small retail food co-op: Using the sustainability and planning scorecard kit in a crisis context.” Canadian Journal of Nonprofit and Social Economy Research1 5-27.
7. Chen, D., Kim, Y. & Stefanopoulou, A.G., (2020). Predictive equivalent consumption minimization strategy with segmented traffic information. IEEE  Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 69(12), pp.14377-14390.
8. David, F. R. (1997). Strategic management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
9. Davis, P. E., & Bendickson, J. S. (2021). Strategic antecedents of innovation: Variance between small and large firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(1), 47-72.
10. Dusenbury, P. (2000). Governing for results and accountability: strategic planning and performance measurement. Oregon: The Urban Institute
11. Fitzgibbons, J., & Mitchell, C. L. (2021). Inclusive resilience: Examining a case study of equity-centred strategic planning in Toronto, Canada. Cities, 108, 102997.
12. Hofer, C. W. & Schendel, D., (1978). Strategy Formulation: Analytical Concepts. West Publishing Company.
13. Johnson, G., Scholes, K., & Whittington, R (2005). Exploring Corporate Strategy: Texts and Cases (7th Edition).London: Prentice-Hall.
14. Johnson, Jessica La, Sarah, M,. Cobb, and Belinda, P. (2022) “North Carolina’s 2022–2026  Perinatal Health Strategic Plan: Addressing Perinatal Health Inequities Across the Life-Course.” North Carolina Medical Journal5 (2022): 330-336
15. Kaplan, S. (2011). Strategy and PowerPoint: An inquiry into the epistemic culture and machinery of strategy making. Organization Science, 22(2), 320-346.
16. Mankins, M. C. & Steele, R. (2005). Turning Great Strategy into Great Performance. Harvard Business Review, July-August, 65-72.
17. Measey, J., Tarrant, J., Rebelo, A., Turner, A., Du Preez, L., Mokhatla, M., & Conradie, W. (2019). Has strategic planning made a difference to amphibian conservation research in South Africa?. Bothalia-African Biodiversity & Conservation, 49(1), 1-13.
18. Thompson, A. A., Strickland, A. J., and Gamble, J. E. (2007). Crafting and  executing strategy:  texts  and   15th ed., New York: McGraw-Hill.
19. Tourangeau, K. W. (1987). Strategic Management: How to Plan, Execute, & Control Strategic Plans for Your Business. New York: McGraw-Hill.
20. Rodríguez Bolívar, M. P., Alcaide Muñoz, L., & Alcaide Muñoz, C. (2022, October). Modelling  strategic planning practices considering socially vulnerable groups in smart cities. In  Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 440-448).
21. Smith, E, A. (2021).Contemporary Urban University Presidents and an Emerging Paradigm for Strategic Planning and Civic Engagement.” Handbook  of Research on the Changing Role of College and University Leadership. IGI   Global, 2021. 1-14.
22. Wendy, K. S. (1997). Managing strategic contradictions: a top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16(5), 522-536.