In coming up with solutions to address the challenges, instead of inventing them from scratch, parliaments should conduct research beyond their “confines” and consider experiences and solutions in other related institutions and sectors. One example would be to look at local or regional e-Government initiatives, where similar challenges may be (or have been) faced and solutions may be (or have been) developed that are also applicable to the parliamentary context.

More valuable however are the experiences of other parliaments, both at the regional and global level. In this light parliamentary knowledge networks such as the Africa Parliamentary Knowledge Network (www.apkn.org) are extremely valuable platforms where relevant issues are discussed among senior staff from other parliaments. Centres of excellence that conduct research and provide technical assistance and direction on best practices and guidelines on ICT in parliament should also be approached in this regard, including the Global Centre for ICT in Parliament (www.ictparliament.org) and Africa i-Parliament Action Plan (www.parliaments.info).

Addressing the challenges

Based on the list of challenges presented at the end of Step 3 the process can be initiated to address these by formulating a set of possible solutions in response to each challenge. The evaluation of these solutions includes assessing their feasibility by taking into consideration what the parliament “wants to do” (strategic goals and objectives) versus “can do” in terms of availability of resources and its ability to execute. In this stage it also should be clear “how” and “who” could implement solutions. The process of formulating, evaluating, considering interdependencies, investigating constraints and eventually ranking solutions may take several iterations. To provide more structure to this process solutions can be grouped on different levels i.e by “process”, “people” and “ technology”.

After selection of the solutions from the entire “menu of solutions”, recommendations for each functional area should be described. In the strategy document a one-page introductory overview may be dedicated to listing the recommendations. The style for writing should be brief and concise (executive summary style); the recommendations are best listed as bullets, each not longer than 4-5 sentences.

Mapping recommendations with challenges

After the introductory overview of the recommendations a more elaborate justification may be provided as to why they address the challenges. This justification should include clearly the link between the challenges and recommendations. This type of mapping should be seen as a checkpoint in the analysis i.e. to demonstrate that all the challenges are “covered” and vice versa, that the recommendations are not “coming out of the blue”. Another important check is that the recommendation's priority level should relate to the impact level of the challenge (as derived in Step 3) Template 4.1 provides a table format for this type mapping.

Describing the activities related to the recommendations

After presenting the recommendations and demonstrating how they address the challenges, each recommendation should be presented in full detail.  The rationale for the recommendations should be provided (why certain choices are made); what activities (actions) should be undertaken for their implementation; what the specific outcomes will be. All of this should be written in a narrative style where each recommendation is described in maximum 1 - 1½ page.

Actions (or activities) are tasks within the scope of the recommendation that need to be accomplished within a defined period of time and with a certain amount of resources. A task in turn may consist of one or more assignments that need to be executed under the responsibility of stakeholders. Actions may be dependent on each other and as such it is important to understand their dependencies, in particular for planning.  
Actions each need to deliver outcomes that must contribute to the realization of the recommendation (that in turn addresses the challenges). Outcomes must be measurable e.g. “implementation of a library management system”, or “three staff members trained in digital collection management”.

Actions need to be implemented with the support of stakeholders. Looking at the “service-process-system maps” from Step 1 will provide information on the relevant stakeholders. The priority of the actions should correspond to the priority level of the recommendations.

It is useful to conclude the recommendation descriptions with a summarizing overview using Template 4.2, listing the action, key stakeholders, outcomes and priorities.

Having worked through describing the recommendations and their related actions, key stakeholders outcomes and priorities, and having justified how these will address the challenges, the Action Plan can next be drawn up. This will provide an overview of how the actions will be carried out over the next three to five years. The Action Plan – together with the signed-off vision statements – is the most tangible deliverable of the entire strategic planning process.

It is the Action Plan that will guide the parliament in implementing the activities that will eventually lead to the realization of the vision and the strategic goals and objectives. It is recommended to start formulating the action plan using Appendix Template 4.3. To see how the template is used the following sections on functional areas provide examples of action plans.

There is no “straightforward formula” for getting the planning completely right; it is a matter of iterative analysis, considering and reconsidering activities and questioning their benefits in the grand scheme of trying to close gaps, and so to reach the strategic goals and objectives. The presentation of the Action Plan, in the strategy document, should be accompanied by a complete narrative that thoroughly explains why one activity is scheduled before another activity, at the beginning of the first year (and not at the end etc)

In the examples (of next sections) per recommendation the actions, priority, resources and stakeholders are listed, as well as the time of execution (year, quarter). Sometimes resources are not yet in place and might have to be produced by other activities; as such the “resources required” might reveal interdependencies among activities. The “years and quarters” are indicative of when an activity would have to be executed. Determining the quarter in which an activity needs to happen is the result of a thorough analysis of the priorities and dependencies of actions.

In combination with formulating the Action Plan a budget also needs to be produced. In the end it will be about the availability of time and resources versus priorities that determine whether the leadership will commit itself to the action plan. Each parliament may have its own methods for financial accounting and calculating the cost of activities. The treasury or budget office of the parliament should also be consulted in producing the budget of the action plan.

A method that is worth considering is Activity Based Costing, especially since it departs from “activities” (actions), and would thus complement the action plan. The method for activity based costing is simple:

Define cost pools: where cost pools are groups or categories of individual expense items; the parliament's financial accounting may categorise expenses by spending code such as: salaries, fringe benefits, utilities, travel, communication etc;

Identify activities: we already have a comprehensive overview of actions through the Action Plan;

Map resource costs to activities: each activity should be looked at in terms of  the “ingredients” that are needed e.g. a workshop might need: location, meals, travel etc;

Define activity cost drivers: i.e. indicate how much of each ingredient will be required for such an activity (action);

Calculate cost: which is the sum of all “ingredients” times their unit cost.

In presenting the budget of the action plan overviews may be created “by recommendation and activity by year” and “by category of expenses per year”.

Once the documentation is complete, the action plan(s) must be submitted by the committee responsible for the strategic planning process,for review to the stakeholders who initially provided information and input in Step 2. This will give them an opportunity to review how the vision and strategy are planned to be realized. Also here they should be allowed ample opportunity to request clarification of actions proposed, costing and other planning and resources issues. This element of engagement and participation in the planning process is an important for receiving early warnings of possible issues.

Finally once the review process is satisfactorily completed, the action plan should be signed off by the highest parliamentary leadership. In the next chapter we will discuss the tools for executing, overseeing and evaluating the action plan in more detail.

• Process and System Mapping:
  http://www.bpm.com/streamlining-e-government.html
  http://www.businessballs.com/business-process-modelling.htm
  http://accounting.smartpros.com/x33396.xml
• Service Oriented Architecture:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-oriented_architecture#Business_Process_Maintenance
• Action planning:
  http://managementhelp.org/plan_dec/str_plan/actions.htm
• Activity Based Costing:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activity-based_costing http://www.businessofgovernment.org/pdfs/GranofReport.pdf