Strategic planning refers to an organizational management activity that is aimed at defining the organization’s strategy and means to achieve it. Whereas contingency planning is the process of developing checks and measures to deal with anticipated adversities in the case they do happen within an organization. The two forms of planning are essential to any organization when used separately or even together. To begin with, strategic planning is very pivotal in both measuring and achieving success. It is imprudent to work without accentuating necessary and doable targets. Thus the prime importance of strategic planning is devising a strategy which gives a firm a tangible sense of direction and set of goals (Wolf & Floyd, 2017). Moreover, strategic planning can be influential in providing motivation among workers and even creating an organizational culture alongside ethical standards.
On the other hand, for any organization more so large ones adversities are always a significant probability. Hence, it is prudent to plan on how the company will react in advance. Thereby, proper contingency planning is pivotal in listing adversities and most importantly means and resources of which the organization will combat them within the case they do happen (Wolf & Floyd, 2017). Furthermore, in some cases, financers and debtors will require a proper contingency plan from an organization before granting financial aid. This is because a proper contingency planning often implicates there is less likelihood of defaulting of payment and/or a failing investment.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Despite the fundamental difference in strategic and contingency planning, they are more beneficial when used together or with regards to the other within the same organization. Strategic planning is often devised during the start of an organization or at the beginning of the year with aims of creating a direction for the firm in question as has been stated. Objective planning, on the other hand, should be seemingly done in advance to avoid major difficulties. According to Wolf and Floyd together these two forms of planning can result in a well thought out strategy that will not result in deterrence in the case of future predicaments (2017). As such it is not often frequent that organizations opt for one method of planning or the other as they go exceptionally well hand in hand.
In the human services field, why is “setting limits” at times rather difficult in a human services organization. APA style and provide details to support your claims.
Many organizations have set limits for just about anything. From employee behavior to acceptable losses and/or sales, limits are used abundantly in just about any organization. This is mainly to create an atmosphere of a magnitude of tolerable unwanted occurrences (Daley, 2012). However, when it comes to organizations providing human services setting limits is not as easy as anticipated. Take the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, for example, Red Cross (in short) as an organization cannot say that they are only limited to using a certain proportion of their budget. This is because in such an organization no amount of budget can be deemed absolute to deal with an epidemic. Moreover, most employees of the Red Cross cannot be limited or even limit themselves to a certain amount of work as it is entirely dependable on the level of assistance needed. Anyway, perhaps the Red Cross is a bit of an unrealistic example in comparison with most organizations. Nonetheless, most human service organizations share the same problem i.e. difficulty in setting limits.
There are numerous feasible reasons for this “setting limits” challenge. To begin with, human service organizations are heavily impacted by interaction with the people they serve. In retrospect, almost any firm would say that the customer always comes first or a similar adage. However, for human service organizations, such a statement is not merely an adage but an expectation. For instance, no matter the level in which a nursing home performs it will be judged mostly on the level of satisfaction among its residents. Daley suggest that in a scenario where set limits hinder customer satisfaction, a human service organization will most likely forego the limits so as to serve the individual in the best way possible (2012). Additionally, when it comes to offering services it is hard to quantify the level of service so as to be able to set limits. For example, in a rehabilitation center, it is almost impossible to mandate the level of care that will be enough to help normalize an addict. As such it is imprudent to be wary of “set limits” at the expense of satisfaction in any health service organization.
References
Wolf, C., & Floyd, S. W. (2017). Strategic planning research: Toward a theory-driven agenda. Journal of Management , 43 (6), 1754-1788.
Daley, D. M. (2012). Strategic human resources management. Public Personnel Management , 120-125.
