Georgia Center Quarterly (GCQ): Over the past 10 years, the Environmental Scanning program has been an integral part of the Georgia Center organization. How would you define the concept for the Quarterly reader who is unfamiliar with the program?

McGinty: In somewhat technical terms, Environmental Scanning is a futures research technique that has been adopted as a component of strategic planning. It's a way to engage faculty and staff in grappling with external trends and issues that could bring threats and opportunities to the organization.

Simpson: To me, Environmental Scanning is the key element that informs the strategic planning process. In higher education particularly, people tend to look inside at what's going on in the academy and less frequently include in their thinking a world of significant external influences. Scanning is a way to organize systematically all the information that bombards from outside. It's a way of classifying and reviewing many areas of rapid change so that you can develop an intelligent strategic response.

GCQ: How did the program get started here at the Center?

McGinty: My recall of that is very clear. Dr. Simpson came in 1983, about the same time I read an article in The Futurist magazine, written by James Morrison and William Renfro, describing something called "Environmental Scanning." I was intrigued by their outline of a system by which people could pool their reading and dig out social, technological, economic, and political implications for strategic planning. Soon afterwards, Dr. Simpson brought in Chris Dede who was then at the University of Houston-Clear Lake, to conduct a workshop that, in part, dealt with Environmental Scanning. At that point, two plus two equalled four: our new director was going to do something with Environmental Scanning. When I offered to help with the effort, he said something like, "Fine, you can take the lead in setting things up."

Simpson: That's right. The key was that we were trying to initiate a new, systematic strategic planning process. After Chris Dede's visit, I asked James Morrison from UNC-Chapel Hill to lead a workshop for staff. Jim was an early advocate of incorporating Environmental Scanning into higher education planning. His workshop gave us experience in scanning various media, preparing abstracts, and in finding and discussing implications of the trends and issues we unearthed. It was immediately apparent to me that Environmental Scanning would be essential to our planning process but, also, that it would be labor intensive and require a high level of organizational discipline. I can remember saying that if we do this, the management team will have to commit for the long haul. And that's the way it's been for the last 10 years.

GCQ: In the beginning, did you find that there were models for Environmental Scanning that could be used more or less as is? In higher education?

Simpson: In the early 1980s, Environmental Scanning was not much in vogue or widely used and understood in higher education circles. The book Academic Strategy, by George Keller, which is a classic in the field of strategic planning, came out in 1983. Keller stressed the need for organizations to look at both internal and external environments as a means of navigating turbulent change. His is probably the one book that had the widest distribution in the higher education community that talked about Environmental Scanning. And he took what we now view as the Nike approach: don't procrastinate, "just do it." As for full-blown, documented scanning models in higher education, there weren't any. James Hearn and Richard Hydinger at the University of Minnesota had organized an experimental Environmental Scanning group to monitor selected issues and submit ad hoc reports to the administration. This was an important early contribution.

McGinty: I remember feeling that there were no specific scanning models we could pick up and run with. Big business and some large non-profits, like the United Way of America, were heavily invested in Environmental Scanning. However, they also had large, dedicated staffs and different goals. So for the Georgia Center, it was a "start-from-scratch" operation. We had to decide how to organize the initial 60 or so scanners into a team. And there were umpteen process questions. How would we identify and route scanning materials? How would we receive and store the scanning abstracts? How often would we stop to discuss scanning input? And how would we organize what would be a flood of essentially random information into manageable information?

Simpson: Yes, that was a crucial concern for busy managers and staff, not to mention the strategic planning process. In essence, how would we bring order to a chaotic flow of information? Our environment is just like white noise. Harlan Cleveland, who wrote The Knowledge Executive, asks how do you get to knowledge from this blizzard of data and information we're increasingly buried under? And even more importantly, how do you translate knowledge into wisdom, a question we can't answer in this short interview? For us, the challenge was to organize scanning information in a coherent, systematic way to say "Is there something we ought to be doing or not doing as an organization? Are we missing a great opportunity? And, on the other hand, are we in danger of hitting the iceberg?"

McGinty: Fortunately, by our second scanning round in early 1986, I had hit on the idea of bringing the random scanning input (the 100+ submitted abstracts) together in patterns under what we call "strategic thinking stimulators." This meant that all scanners looked at the same 10-14 stimulators, backed up by the abstracts, and voted on which strategic stimulators they thought deserved concentrated discussion and action. This focused our attention and reduced the chance of reacting randomly to the information. We could take this winnowing approach because, by design, all Environmental Scanning input was distributed to the entire Georgia Center staff, not just scanners, via our in-house newsletter Lookouts. This protected against an important issue or trend being lost; it could be taken up somewhere in the organization as a programming idea, a means of improving customer service, or what have you.

Simpson: I'm convinced that our Environmental Scanning program has benefited from Donna's long involvement. As a member of the Georgia Center's Strategic Planning Executive Committee, she has been able to synchronize scanning and planning in an evolutionary pattern. If you're going to implement change, you have to have sponsors for change and the people who are change agents. So all I can say about Environmental Scanning as director is that I'm a sponsor. Donna has been the change agent.

GCQ: Can any employee of the Georgia Center participate in Environmental Scanning? How does it work?

McGinty: Employees are involved in any way they want to be. Managers of the Georgia Center are involved because it's part of their job; it's mandatory. Everyone else at the Georgia Center is the pool for the volunteers we seek each year to be scanners. These can be people from any segment of the organization. Participation follows three tracks. You can submit scanning abstracts. You can vote on the strategic thinking stimulators, once identified. You can attend the trends/issues discussion meetings. Do all three and you have fully participated. Sometimes, workload and travel schedules preclude doing all three things. Still, whatever you can do, you're considered to have participated. Staff and department heads can also serve as discussion co-chairs of their separate committees.

GCQ: Obviously, in addition to complementing strategic planning, Environmental Scanning performs important educational and professional development functions. Could you elaborate on the impact of this for the organization?

Simpson: Environmental Scanning provides an opportunity for people who truly wish to show initiative to be a part of this organization in a proactive way. They can join in shaping what the organization does and how it will respond in the future to its changing environment. By participating, faculty and staff refine their powers of persuasion, their writing skills, and critical thinking skills. In the scanning discussions, we all use our powers of analysis and persuasion to convince colleagues that this trend or that issue is what we ought to take action on. There are benefits throughout the organization from such improvement in professional skills. Having wide participation also helps me in my role, giving me valuable information from different levels of the organization in a non-threatening way.

McGinty: I agree. On numerous occasions through the years, scanners have told me that Environmental Scanning is the closest they have come to experiencing participatory management.

GCQ: What, if any, impact has the Center's Environmental Scanning program had on the field of continuing higher education?

Simpson: I'd say that the primary impact on the field is the fact that we have done it, as George Keller urged, and that we have shared our 10-year experience with colleagues across the country and internationally. We have drawn attention to the organization and to The University of Georgia that has, I think, shown us as a leader and an innovator in management and strategic planning. By virtue of this, we've gotten wide circulation of what we do. We receive a steady stream of inquiries regarding the program based on the "Quarterly Quiz" feature in the Georgia Center Quarterly. And in my travels, I am somewhat amazed at the number of people who indicate knowledge of and interest in our scanning program. I got an e-mail recently from someone on the NUCEA (National University Continuing Education Association) board, asking permission to copy and circulate Lookouts.

McGinty: Literally hundreds of higher education people from around the country and the world have contacted me personally, seeking details of how we have structured and how we run our scanning program. Many of them state that they are going to establish their own scanning programs. Unfortunately, I have no way to accurately track how often this actually happens or how parts of our model may eventually be incorporated into programs elsewhere.

GCQ: Some readers may be curious, what have been some unusual or surprising findings from 10 years of scanning?

McGinty: Three things come to mind. They are issues that are not surprising now, because we live with them daily, but as they were surfacing they were definitely surprising. Technology, and the speed and depth of change is at the top of my list. The other day, browsing in our database, I found out that in 1986, the VCR became a mass medium. Just think how "old-hat" the VCR is now. Today, we're reading about new, superfast desktop computers that could be powered by DNA! A second trend that surprised us was the profile of Workforce 2000 with its incredible diversity. A third consistent and surprisingly stubborn issue has been the poor image of higher education in the eyes of the public. We can't seem to connect with the public in significant fashion, at least in some minds.

Simpson: I believe we have anticipated a number of trends and issues in higher education, for example, the distance learning phenomenon which is currently gripping the entire world, it seems. However, what has been a bit disappointing, and a lesson in human behavior, is that sometimes we haven't responded to the issues in as timely a manner as I would have liked. One thing we hit early was the problem of unrelated business income in operations such as the Georgia Center or universities generally. We have also anticipated the evolving and changing nature of organizations and the attitude of the employee in the 1990s, as well as of management. Watching that evolution has been interesting.

GCQ: You have covered many of the advantages of the program? What about disadvantages?

Simpson: Disadvantages are what people always say: "I'm too busy. I don't see any difference this makes." But clearly, I think, the people who have truly participated in scanning, especially the discussions, do see the benefits. You've got to commit some time and resources. And this requires self-discipline.

McGinty: I worry, strangely enough, about the tremendous amount of information we have processed and acted upon in 10 years. If it's a significant trend or issue for continuing higher education, we've talked about it, sometimes several times. We need to guard against creeping complacency regarding the external world. It's important to keep an open mind and a sense of curiosity and wonder about our joint futures.

GCQ: What is the vision of the program for the near future?

McGinty: I would like to see the program continue and maintain vitality.

Simpson: I second that. To think of terminating Environmental Scanning leaves this question: If you can get along without it now, what does that say about its validity in strategic planning over these past 10 years?

McGinty: The program will survive and thrive as long as it continues to be supported at the top, that is, sponsored by the director. This is supported in the literature of Environmental Scanning; the leader cannot delegate this responsibility. Dr. Simpson has given 100 percent for the entire 10 years. For instance, he has never missed an Environmental Scanning meeting. That is an outstanding record and clearly demonstrates the value he has placed on giving the Georgia Center a futures orientation.

Simpson: I appreciate the vote of confidence. And I agree that strategic planning and Environmental Scanning cannot be delegated to planners. As director, I can't say "You're in charge of planning and I'm going to delegate the fate of the organization to you." I may have the responsibility, but, done right, it has to involve everyone at the Georgia Center.

GCQ: One last question: Is the program today where you thought it would be 10 years ago?

McGinty: I would say that the whole experience has surpassed my expectations. As part of their leadership responsibilities, Dr. Simpson has required participation of Georgia Center managers, most of whom do so enthusiastically. But you don't require others to participate; each year you recruit for these volunteer scanners. Year in and year out, we've seldom failed to round up 40 scanners to form the pool for the Evaluation Committee. There are people out there who appreciate the opportunity to get together and address some of pressing trends and issues for continuing higher education, as well as the nation.

Simpson: Well, we wanted to be successful. To sustain a comprehensive, systematic Environmental Scanning program, which is what we have, imposes a tremendous organizational discipline. We can look back at a rich documentation of our teamwork -- more than 2,000 scans in the database, minutes of our meetings, recaps of strategic actions we said we would take, and progress reports on how well we performed. Without a doubt, we did surpass reasonable expectations of the program. Now, we have to keep on keeping on, renewing the program for all us veterans and for newcomers to the process.