Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

User acceptance of strategic planning: Evidence from Northern European municipalities

  • Bert George
  • , Dag Ingvar Jacobsen
  • , Jan-Erik Johanson
  • , Åge Johnsen*
  • , Elias Pekkola
  • *Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Journal Publications and ReviewsRGC 21 - Publication in refereed journalpeer-review

24 Downloads (CityUHK Scholars)

Abstract

Strategic planning is core to public administration at all governmental levels. Evidence suggests that when conducted well strategic planning impacts several performance outcomes. Yet, public administration and strategy scholars have argued that strategic planning is not only a technical procedure. Its success is contingent upon the people involved in strategic planning. This study investigates strategic planning using user acceptance theory. It identifies whether formal and participatory strategic planning associate with ease of use and usefulness of strategic planning and, in turn, whether ease of use and usefulness associate with commitment to strategic plans. Results from PLS-SEM analysis of survey data from 327 municipalities in three Northern European countries or regions (Flanders, Finland, Norway) corroborate the perspective of strategic planning as organizational behavior where design choices shape attitudes and behaviors. These findings support calls to consider strategic planning from a 3Ps perspective, namely connecting people–process–plan, to achieve outcomes. © 2024 The Author(s)
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)752-767
Number of pages16
JournalPublic Administration Review
Volume85
Issue number3
Online published1 Sept 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2025

Publisher's Copyright Statement

  • This full text is made available under CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'User acceptance of strategic planning: Evidence from Northern European municipalities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this