Strategic Planning Survey Questions to Ask Before You Plan
Twenty-two questions for the people inside your organization, answered once before the planning cycle opens. Answer it here first, or take it straight into the editor. It names who should get it, prints every scale, and carries a SWOT block and a board swap set.
- 22questions
- About 8 minto complete
- Staff and leadershipone question set
- SWOTfive lines inside it
Who a strategic planning survey should reach, and when
One decision settles whether this survey is worth sending: who answers it, and at what moment.
Send it to the people inside the organization whose view should shape the plan: staff at every level, plus the leadership and board group. Once, before the planning cycle opens, off one question set, so every answer describes the same organization at the same moment.
The guidance behind this template is blunt about it: a survey should be tailored to who is being surveyed, because questions you ask staff about internal barriers and challenges might not suit volunteers or clients.[2] So this one names its audience and writes every item for that person.
There is a reason to do the asking at all: a meta-analysis of 87 correlations from 31 studies found strategic planning has a positive, moderate and significant effect on organizational performance, strongest where the planning is formal.[1]
| If what you actually want to know is | Send this instead |
|---|---|
| Why one named workflow keeps stalling | The process improvement questionnaire asks the people who run it. |
| Whether people live the values you publish | The core values survey template tests the values, not the direction. |
| What the culture is like as a standing measure | The company culture survey is built to be repeated. |
| Whether a barrier sits between two teams | The cross-team collaboration survey asks both sides of the handoff. |
| Whether one program inside the plan worked | The program evaluation survey asks the people who were in it. |
The 22 strategic planning survey questions
Every question, the scale it is answered on, and what the answer settles.
Block 1. Where you sit
Two questions that decide how every later answer is cut.
- Which of these best describes where you sit here?The cut. There is no automatic routing, so this self-declared answer is what separates the front line from the executive in the results.
- Have you been part of a planning cycle here before?Read this beside question 21. Somebody who gave input to the last plan and does not believe this one is telling you about the last cycle, not this one.
Block 2. Whether the direction still holds
Four questions about the mission you already have.
- I could explain to someone outside what this organization is trying to achieve.Whether the direction is legible from the inside. Count the Disagree and Strongly disagree answers rather than averaging the column.
- Our stated mission still describes what we should be doing over the next three years.The mission item. A low score here is the finding that the planning day exists to act on.
- The work I see day to day matches what we say we are here to do.The gap between the stated mission and the work. Cut it by block 1: a wide gap at the front line and none at the top is worth more than either number alone.
- In your own words, what should this organization be known for three years from now?The vision line. Tag the answers, count the tags, and put the three biggest counts in front of the planning group in the words people used.
Block 3. SWOT, one line each
Five open lines. This block is the SWOT analysis questionnaire, inside the survey.
- What is this organization genuinely good at, that the next plan should build on?Strengths. Anything named by several people is a strength the plan can rest on; anything named once is a candidate to check.
- What can we do here that another organization would find hard to copy?What sets you apart, asked as a capability rather than as a market comparison, because staff can answer the first and not the second.
- What is the biggest weakness a plan would have to fix?Weaknesses. Set the tag counts here against block 4: a weakness everybody names and nobody can fund is a scope decision, not an improvement task.
- What change outside this organization over the next three years is the biggest opportunity for us?Opportunities, scoped to changes outside the organization, so the answer is not another internal wish.
- What change outside this organization over the next three years is the biggest threat to us?Threats, scoped the same way. Read the two together: an external change named under both columns is a finding worth saying out loud.
Block 4. Capacity and obstacles
Three separate resource statements, one forced obstacle choice, one open line.
- We have the people we need to deliver what we are already committed to.People. Asked on its own so it can be read on its own.
- We have the money we need to deliver what we are already committed to.Money. Report all three side by side. The size of the gap between them is the useful part, not any one of the three on its own.
- Our systems support the work we are already committed to.Systems. The one capacity item a plan can act on in a single budget line.
- Which of these would most get in the way of a new plan here?The obstacle, forced to one. A tick-all version lets everyone tick everything, which produces no ranking and no decision.
- If we had to stop doing one thing to make room, what should it be?The stop question, and the only item here that asks what to take away rather than what to add. Read it beside question 20.
Block 5. What to put first
One direction question, two forced choices off the same list, one open line.
- Over the next three years, how much should this organization change what it does?Appetite for change. Cut it by block 1: a leadership team wanting to change direction while the front line wants to stay the course is the split to report first.
- Which one of these should the next plan put first?Priority, forced to one. Report the share choosing each option, which gives a ranked list without asking anyone to rank anything.
- Which one of these has been neglected longest?The neglect question, on the same list. Put the two distributions side by side: an option high on both is the item the plan cannot leave out.
- What is one thing we should start doing that we do not do now?The start question, paired with question 16. Together they are the only two items here that describe a plan rather than a position.
Block 6. Whether the process is believed
One rating and one open line, at the end.
- I trust that answers to this survey will change what ends up in the plan.Credibility of the process. If this is low before you plan, publishing what changed because of the survey is the first thing to fix.
- Is there anything else the people writing this plan should know?The catch-all. Read every line: anything urgent has nowhere else in this survey to arrive.
The board swap set
Send these on the leadership link. The first two replace questions 5 and 14, which a director cannot answer from outside; the other two are additions, so that link runs to 24.
- I have enough information about how this organization is performing to help set its direction.Replaces question 14. A non-executive director cannot rate the systems that carry the work, but can say whether the board is given enough to steer with.
- Board discussion here spends more time on the next three years than on the last three months.Replaces question 5. The board equivalent of the mission-versus-work gap: where governance attention actually goes.
- Where can the board add most to this plan?An addition. Put the same question to the executive team separately, and read the two answers on one page before the plan is drafted.
- What would you need from the executive team to govern this plan well?An addition, and the one item here that asks the board what it needs rather than what it thinks.
Before you send. No placeholder to fill: swap "this organization" for your own name in the editor. Agreeing is the good answer on every rated item, so keep that polarity if you add any. If you would rather start blank, you can build a survey from scratch and paste in the blocks you want.
The SWOT analysis questionnaire block, inside the survey
Questions 7 to 11 are strengths, what is hard to copy, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. One line each, from everybody.
SWOT sorts what a room already knows. It cannot reach what the room does not know, which is what a survey is for. Running the four boxes as five questions first means the workshop opens with the strengths and threats the whole organization named, counted.
None of the five carries a rating, on purpose: a number cannot name a strength or a threat. Each is a one-line box rather than an essay field, which is what separates a survey a hundred people finish from a thirty-question intake form. Tag the answers, count the tags, and watch for the same external change turning up under both opportunities and threats.
Sending it to two groups, and what to do with the answers
Send one question set on two links
Nothing here routes a respondent to different questions inside a single link. Share a link with staff, and a second copy carrying the four board questions with the leadership group. Question 1 does the cutting on both.
Send it before the cycle opens
The answers are an input to the plan, not a review of one. Sent after a draft exists, the same 22 questions become a consultation on a decision already taken.
Publish what changed because of it
Question 2 finds the people who gave input last time. If question 21 is low among them, showing that group which lines of the plan came from their answers matters more than the next survey does.
| What you have | How to read it | What it will not survive |
|---|---|---|
| Seven ratings | Report the share choosing Disagree and Strongly disagree beside the average, with the response count next to both. | A small number of responses. Print the count every time. |
| Nine written lines | Tag every answer, count the tags, then publish the counts with two or three quotes in the words people used. | Being summarized without the counts underneath. |
| Six forced choices | Report the share picking each option. Questions 18 and 19 go side by side on the same axis. | Being turned into an average. A mean of eight labels is not a number. |
| Two groups | Split every figure by question 1 before anyone reads it, and say which groups answered. | Being called representative. Nothing here balances a sample. |
Strategic planning survey FAQ
Who should get a strategic planning survey?
Everyone inside the organization whose view should shape the plan: staff at every level, plus the leadership or board group. The guidance this follows is explicit that a survey has to suit who is being asked.[2]
How many questions should a strategic planning survey have?
Twenty-two here, nine of them written rather than rated. The test on each was whether a line in the planning document would be missing without it.
Should the board answer the same survey as the staff?
Mostly yes. The board gets the same set with two items replaced and two added, so the two groups still compare item for item on the other twenty. How well a board governs is a separate instrument for a separate decision.
Is a SWOT analysis the same thing as a strategic planning survey?
No. SWOT sorts what a room already knows into four boxes; the survey finds out what people know before the sorting starts. Questions 7 to 11 are that block, one line per box.
Methods and sources
What this template is based on
The case for running a formal planning input at all rests on a random-effects meta-analysis of 87 correlations from 31 empirical studies, which reports a positive, moderate and significant impact on organizational performance across private and public sectors.[1] The audience decision, and the rule that items have to suit the group being asked, follow published practitioner guidance on stakeholder surveys for strategic planning.[2] The question arc, the forced single choices and the one-line open format are design decisions made for this template.
Question licensing
All 26 questions were written for this page. There is no published, validated, reprintable strategic planning instrument, so there is nothing here to attribute and no licence to clear: copy, edit, translate and redistribute them freely. SWOT is a framework rather than an instrument and has no canonical item set, so the five items in block 3 are original.
Limits and disclosure
This is an opinion instrument, answered once, by the people inside one organization. It records what they think the organization should do and what they think is in the way. It does not measure performance, it does not establish that any priority is the right one, and it balances no sample, so it describes the people who answered and not the organization as a whole. The meta-analysis cited above reports the direction and rough size of an effect in the published literature; it says nothing about any particular organization, and no number from it is quoted here because its abstract publishes none.[1] A board assessment, a market study and a review of a plan already written are three different instruments, and none of them is this one.
SuperSurvey builds the editor this template opens in. It sells no planning service, no board assessment and no consulting engagement, so nothing above has a product behind it.
References
- George B, Walker RM, Monster J. "Does Strategic Planning Improve Organizational Performance? A Meta-Analysis." Public Administration Review 79, no. 6 (2019): 810-819. Open access, CC BY. doi.org
- Funding for Good. Strategic Planning Stakeholder Surveys: What to Ask and Why. Practitioner guidance from a nonprofit strategic planning consultancy, not research. fundingforgood.org
Send the strategic planning survey before the cycle opens
Twenty-two questions, about eight minutes, SWOT block included. Open it in the editor, put your own name in it, share one link.
Use this template