Collectively the analysis presented earlier in this chapter can be combined into three main recommendations.

Strategic planning exercises have proceeded in an ad hoc manner, with different processes being used at different times. UWM’s experience has yielded some insights about basic parameters that need to be incorporated:

1. Establish a planning group that represents the spectrum of campus constituents, and community and external stakeholders. Such a group is not currently part of our governance structure, but this may be appropriate.
   
   
2. Plans need to be considered within the goals of the institution’s mission, the nature of the regional community, and the campus research and teaching infrastructure.
   
   
3. Plans must have a sound fiscal component. New initiatives that attract additional investments are particularly valuable.
   
   
4. An assessment process needs to be built into the plan.

 This may take varied forms, ranging from specific targets (enrollment, research activity, funding, etc.) to less quantitative engagement goals.

The recommendation is to establish the framework for such planning exercises that identifies which governance bodies and administrative offices are responsible for collaborating in the design of the planning body, which review and comment on the resulting strategic plans, which are responsible for their implementation, and which assess and review the progress of the plan’s implementation. The recommendation is to establish the responsibility for these tasks based on our experience to date. The committee does not recommend that a detailed process be codified because it would be advantageous to retain flexibility in planning procedures.

The existing resource systems are largely organized to provide annual reports and summaries of data regarding revenue, expenditures, enrollments, etc., and are generally available online. The data and the accompanying narratives contain a lot of useful information for understanding UWM’s resources. However, the reports retain the format of their “paper” heritage and are not designed for comparisons of trends over more than three years. It can also be quite time-consuming to relate the mega-campus budget picture to the more detailed record presented in the “Red Book” (the UW-System Administration annual budget). This often results in a gap between the data that are accessible and what is needed for planning and decision making.

The recommendation is to develop data systems that make resource allocations easier to understand and access. The intention is to make the realities of the budgets and resources more transparent to the UWM community. UW–Stout did this a few years ago, and it helped everyone understand their resource realities, and improved the level of their campus planning and budget discussions. The ongoing development of UWM’s data warehouse will be a great benefit in this regard.

Another suggestion is to conduct periodic campus-wide reviews or forums about the data systems with the goals of identifying the data needs of campus units, and to synthesize the critical data for making decisions and developing strategic plans.