This is an old draft, but the resources are still useful (for me at least) so I’m publishing sort of part of what I had intended to write (which would have been more targeted at my trustee work). When I was still doing stuff with Wikimedia UK I was thinking about strategy and business cases.  This was obviously for a variety of all the usual reasons (organisations change over time, need for financial management, maintain fresh ideas, keep an engaged staff and volunteer base, etc.).  It’s also something I’m interested in because my view is, if we’re doing ‘strategy’ right, then that strategy isn’t just about why we run programmes or whether we run programme a or b, it’s about having wider impact, propagating our impact through everything we do. That applied in the wmuk context, and to other work I do. What do I mean by that?  Well, my argument would be that if we get things right, we should be able to run an impactful programme, and through the way we track, report, and learn from that impact we should create other opportunities both for direct work, and indirect – e.g. through other organisations adopting or adapting resources for their own purposes. Part of that is about making it explicit what is being done and why, to facilitate other organisations in developing businesses cases (such that with minimal input, largely existing resources ideally, they could develop a business case and a programme off the back of it). For example, JISC seem to have aimed for this with regard to [open access business cases]1. I clearly need a new hobby…but I quite enjoyed reading the civil service [green book guidance on public sector business cases using the five case model]2 (phwoar, right?). My takehome is that when organisations make a case for a programme (and in particular where we should make significant investments e.g. in new programmes or staff) it should consider: 1. Indicate strategic alignment (what goals will the investment impact on) 2. Indicate strategic effectiveness – that this is the best way to maximise impact with our strategic goals including where we are now v what the investment will change 3. Where the investment will come from (e.g. current capacity, grants, gifts in kind) 4. How the investment compares to other options; how it is affordable and efficient 5. How the investment will be managed effectively, including HR and programme evaluation needs Basically, what’s the case for change, and for the proposed change being the right one? The attached is a very elaborated project planned document (PPD) modified from a form I was given from another organisation, to help frame this discussion (it’s worth noting I never anticipated it being adopted in full), it can be downloaded here.  Resources 1. []3 2.

[]4 5. []2



  2. 2