The NCAA has embarked on a long-range-planning initiative that will be integrated throughout the enterprise. The process will be grounded in four planning horizons. The approach involves crafting a comprehensive strategic direction based on the balance between the timeless principles of the Association's core purpose and core values and what the Association seeks to become within 10 to 30 years. That vision is characterized by the articulation of an "audacious goal" and a vivid description -- what it will be like to achieve the goal.

This will guide the Association as it considers the factors that will affect its ability to achieve its goals. Building foresight about a five- to 10-year horizon -- assumptions, opportunities and critical uncertainties in the likely relevant future as well as emerging strategic "mega-issues" -- suggests critical choices about the potential barriers the Association will face. This foresight also suggests the responses the Association will need to consider in navigating its way toward achievement of its 10- to 30-year goal, or audacious goal.

A strategic long-range plan is not intended as a substitute for an annual program or operating plan. It does not detail all the initiatives, programs, and activities the Association will undertake in the course of serving its membership and the industry, nor can it foresee changes to the underlying assumptions on which key strategic choices were based. Instead, the strategic plan will articulate what the NCAA is not doing today but must be doing in the future to be successful.

To gather broad input and encourage dialogue about the Association's future, a series of strategic-thinking sessions involving key stakeholder groups are occurring this spring and summer. These "emerging themes" documents reflect discussion only. Statements do not necessarily indicate consensus or the position of the overall Association.

* Leadership Advisory Board

April 5/New Orleans

Process Step 2.4

Attending: Napoleon Brandford, Carol A. Cartwright, Kenneth I. Chenault, Thomas Curley, Karl Eller, Bradford M. Freeman, John W. Harris, Seven J. Heyer, Edward A. Malloy, Peyton Manning, Leslie Moonves, Christine J. Olson, Charles Overby, William J. Shaw, Thomas C. Stewart, Donna F. Tuttle, Gary L. Wilson. Facilitator: Glenn Tecker, Tecker Consultants.

Key discussion points/emerging themes

Core ideology discussion points: In their dialogue about core ideology, Leadership Advisory Board participants noted the following points:

The NCAA should provide a safe and fair playing field for student-athletes.

The NCAA should play a role in the development of America's leadership through athletics participation.

The NCAA is a governing body that is responsible for rules-making and enforcement.

The NCAA develops leadership by integrating sports and education.

The NCAA should service its members and the student-athletes they represent with integrity, collaboration, compassion and transparency.

Because of economic and societal pressures upon educational institutions, the NCAA should evolve to further assist student-athletes and educational institutions. But the complexity is great; can a single institution handle this?

Athletics competition amplifies academic benefits.

The NCAA should be the primary advocate for student-athletes and intercollegiate athletics.

Envisioned future

Emerging audacious-goal themes: In its dialogue about audacious goals, these themes emerged from Leadership Advisory Board participants:

NCAA membership will be critical to all constituencies: universities, media, athletics, fans and students, communities, and sport sponsors.

The NCAA structure will protect all aspects of the intercollegiate athletics experience.

Through scale, scope and expertise, we will create value through governance and structure to protect, support, nurture and educate student-athletes as they become the next generation of leaders.

The NCAA should strive to be the premier American leadership development organization.

The NCAA should become the vehicle to reinforce positive social value and leadership through sports.

Other elements of envisioned future

Graduation rates among athletes will be significantly above average (25 percent higher).

Athletes will be the preferred recruits by employers.

The NCAA will be highly respected in J.D. Power customer-satisfaction surveys.

Student-athletes will represent the demographics of society.

The public's confidence in the integrity of student-athletes and the NCAA will be at the highest levels (no gambling, highest quality officiating, no drugs, coaches' integrity).

The American sports/academic framework will be viewed from a brand standpoint.

The "model" is recognized by the world body as a tool for improvement.

The NCAA will be known as an organization that develops leaders.

The NCAA will be known for integrity that we trust.

The NCAA nurtures and inspires student-athletes. They will leave with balanced skills, leadership, as well as financial rewards.

The NCAA will execute its moral obligation to society to create positive role models.

An enhanced relationship between NCAA and the student-athlete will exist -- one in which the NCAA is not just an enforcer, but also a counselor, a supporter, an emotional protector.

Universities will have the quality of education enhanced; economics will be improved; NCAA governance will work in a world-class way.

Sports will be increasingly popular.

Fans and student will have ease of access, a great experience; they will see NCAA as inspirational. They will know that ethics matter.

Communities will have leaders, honest competition and connection.

Media and sponsors will have relevant content, reasonable return on investment and enhanced image through NCAA affiliation.

The NCAA will be a powerful brand that delivers and creates value for all of its constituents (it will be "the mailman").

The NCAA will have the scale, scope and expertise to create value through governance and structure.

The NCAA will protect support and nurture student-athletes as they become leaders of tomorrow.

The NCAA will create a system that rewards integrity of honest competition and education (create the level playing field).

The NCAA will be customer-friendly.

The NCAA will be rebranded as an organization -- toward positives rather than as an enforcer only.

The NCAA will build the fan base through improved marketing.

The NCAA will protect integrity while making it as important as the economics.

Five- to 10-year future

Key discussion points and emerging issues: In its dialogue about the five- to 10-year future, these themes emerged from the Leadership Advisory Board:

There will be increased financial pressures on institutions.

In the future structure of intercollegiate athletics, there may be the possibility of a "play-for-pay" model.

There soon may be the possibility of collective bargaining for student-athletes.

A current question relates to who the customer really is for intercollegiate athletics. Do athletics programs exist for the student body or for the alumni? To some extent, students are indifferent to sports. There is a sense of social uncertainty among students, and the need for entertainment as a release from these pressures is key.

There is a mix of diversity -- and it will continue with dramatic change.

Hispanic growth will rise significantly. The role of their culture will have a greater influence in the future.

There will be a morphing of cultures.

Female participation in sports is increasing, and this will continue.

The population in general is looking for community connection. There are smaller families, and with them is a sense of lack of connection on the part of students and others in the population. Without connection, people have a tendency to go inward.

The wealth gap is growing; there is a greater chasm between the "haves" and the "have nots."

Fans and alumni are aging. There is an increasingly factioned fan base among key sports: football has aging fans; basketball has become more mainstream.

A second tier of sports will grow in popularity. Football and basketball popularity will decrease, and second-tier sports, such as soccer, will experience significant growth.

The celebrity focus of athletics is and will continue to be driven by the media (branding of sport).

There is a growing supply of alternative and enhanced media, and this will continue. Nonrevenue sports are increasingly receiving media access, and demand for them will increase.

Among student-athletes, the value of education is growing and will become higher in the future.

The budgets in most universities are becoming increasingly tight. Endowments are down, fund-raising is more difficult, and budget reductions are causing layoffs -- resulting in poor morale around campuses.

There are continued economic losses in most athletics departments, coupled with a sense that there is a higher cost for winning; expenses such as coaches' salaries, facilities and recruiting of student athletes are factors.

There is increased pressure on corporate America to support universities.

There is increased media attention and scrutiny of intercollegiate athletics.

There is fragmentation of media -- more choices, such as local outlets, but this could generate new revenue streams through enhanced communication.

The need to win pre-empts the "student" in "student-athlete" far too often.

Compensation for student-athletes may occur in the future.

The reinterpretation of Title IX will have an impact on intercollegiate athletics.

Antitrust is still an NCAA concern and may continue to be one.

Education results for athletes will improve through the regulatory efforts of the NCAA.

There will be more regulation by Congress and courts.

Performance-enhancing drugs will alter athletes' capabilities.

The Internet will continue to have a significant impact on the NCAA and intercollegiate athletics. Enhanced communication with fans and constituents will be possible.

There will be increased fragmentation of the media.

Athletics will increase as a form of entertainment.

Compensation of coaches and athletes will be an issue.

Unionization of student-athletes is possible.

There is a continuing lack of black coaches and athletics directors.

Ethical issues in intercollegiate athletics are experiencing continued scrutiny. Negatives receive much attention. Popular values include the "deal," "get yours now" and "win at all costs."

The barrier between amateur and professional athletics is changing.

There will be changes to the delivery of sports to audience. There may be a change in the balance between television and stadiums/arena as key delivery vehicles.

There will be increased demand for accountability.

There may be more closings of small private colleges. Public institutions will attempt to absorb more students.

High-school athletes are bypassing college and going directly to professional sports. In the future, there may be alternatives to college for elite athletes.

Revenues of current intercollegiate athletics programs are somewhat maxed out. The only opportunities for new revenue might be something like a playoff for football.

Five- to 10-year planning -- mega issues

Key questions identified by the group: In their dialogue about mega issues, these themes emerged from Leadership Advisory Board participants:

What is the role of intercollegiate sports in higher education?

How will the NCAA deal with internal politics among "interested" groups? Can different NCAA membership groups keep a common-sense approach to unity and purpose?

Will the inability of the larger society to discuss the race issue prevent the NCAA from reaching its potential?

Does the military offer greater (and more competitive) opportunities for leadership?

Does the need to win preclude getting the education?

What is the balance of participation between men and women?

How can the NCAA help member institutions prepare student-athletes for meaningful roles in society?

How can the NCAA help ensure the integrity of the athletes' education?

Should the NCAA be a minor league for pros?

April 17/Indianapolis

Process Step 2.5

Attending: Edward Steeb, Rowan University; Gregory J. Naples, Marquette University; Donald VanderJagt, Grand Valley State University; Michael Miranda, Plattsburgh State University of New York; Bonnie L. Slatton, University of Iowa; Jerry Kingston, Arizona State University; Ted Monroe, Wofford University; Jerald Henderson, Chicago State University; David B. Merrell, Abilene Christian University; Bill Hudson, St. Cloud State University; Dennis Leighton, University of New England; Lorrie Clemo, State University College at Oswego; and David Goldfield, University of North Carolina, Charlotte. Facilitator: Jean Frankel, Tecker Consultants.

Key discussion points/emerging themes

Core ideology discussion points: In their dialogue about core ideology, Faculty Athletics Representatives Association participants noted the following points:

The group's initial dialogue centered on the challenges of trying to create a common definition of what the NCAA is as an organization. How does it accommodate the variety of agendas in its core ideology? How does it ensure that the core purpose enfranchises all stakeholders of the NCAA, member institutions, divisions, conferences and national office staff? The group determined that the greatest potential obstacles are finances and cultures.

Core purpose emerging themes: In their dialogue about core purpose, Faculty Athletics Representatives Association participants noted the following points:

The NCAA's role is to ensure or provide an opportunity for every student-athlete to excel; to ensure that all students have an opportunity to participate in athletics; to provide every student-athlete with the opportunity to have a positive, academic, social and athletics experience that prepares them for life beyond the ivy-covered walls; to provide an opportunity for the education of the whole self.

Student-athlete welfare also was at the forefront of a conversation about core purpose: to support all aspects of a student-athlete's life and to keep the welfare of the student-athlete central to the NCAA; to foster personal growth of student-athletes, and to build discipline and character among student-athletes.

The student-athlete experience was articulated in this manner: to provide quality athletics experiences that will help develop positive lifestyles in student-athletes; to provide students opportunities to enrich their higher education through fair athletics competition to prepare for productive citizenship. The NCAA-enabled experience is educational -- social, ethical, character, teamwork, goal-setting, etc. It supports academic goals; it is an environment in which competition should be fair -- good sportsmanship, equitable rules and conditions; it expands opportunity beyond what is available on any single campus.

Another theme was the critical tie between athletics and academics. The NCAA should ensure that intercollegiate athletics is conducted within the educational mission of colleges and universities, with educational, social and personal development of the student-athlete being among its highest goals. Intercollegiate athletics should inspire achievement; build discipline, character and educational leadership among student-athletes; and foster personal growth through physical and intellectual activities (through the NCAA's role of financing and creating a supporting culture).

The group also identified the theme of identity: that the NCAA is a product of its member institutions. Key roles of the organization are to create a positive environment for collegiate athletics; to illustrate the positive values of education, competition and sportsmanship; to provide championships, regulate competition and provide meaningful dialogue among institutions regarding intercollegiate athletics in order to obtain consistent implementations; and to provide a fair and structured environment in which college athletics can exist and in which student-athletes may prosper.

The group pondered whether, in the broad spectrum of intercollegiate athletics, the NCAA can "regulate" values. The group felt that a disconnect currently exists between the organization's values and the values of member institutions. A critical role for the NCAA is to create an environment that advocates and encourages a set of values -- for its institutional members and for itself.

Another discussion centered on whom the NCAA serves and how it executes that role. Member institutions are first, but ultimately we serve student-athletes. A leadership style called "servant leadership" was discussed.

In its conversation about core values, the group focused on integrity (the ability to distinguish right from wrong and the wisdom to do so), promoting academic honesty (unwavering honesty in all aspects of our behavior) and rigorously enforcing it, practicing ethical and moral fairness (treating student-athletes, regardless of sport, with equal care and enthusiasm), trust across the membership, being an inclusive organization with mutual respect for differences and healthy competition, dedication to pursue the common good (with a common desire to do best for the student-athlete), and shared accountability for the outcomes of our efforts.

Envisioned future

Envisioned future emerging themes: In their dialogue about the envisioned future, Faculty Athletics Representatives Association participants noted the following points:

Quality education will be provided to all student-athletes. The future will be characterized by high rates of students completing degrees and moving productively into society. Student-athletes will graduate with productive majors. The environment for student-athletes will be safe, comfortable and enjoyable.

NCAA institutions will have the highest possible level of academic and athletics integrity. There will be fewer instances of drug use and gambling. Gender equity will be fully realized. There will be a sense of pride for NCAA participants and spectators.

Another vision was that of the NCAA being publicly viewed as a successful organization. Public recognition of accomplishments of student-athletes in all sports would be accomplished. The NCAA would be viewed as a trusted, honored organization and as a stronger voice for student-athletes. Simple, easy-to-understand NCAA rules would make the regulatory process more tangible and valued. NCAA and membership programs would be financially stable.

The institutions and individuals involved in NCAA will be an "enriched tapestry" of CEOs, athletics directors, student-athletes, coaches, administrators, faculty representatives, governing bodies and staff. There will be a common commitment to basic philosophical values about academics and athletes. There will be one vote for each NCAA member institution. NCAA representatives will rotate periodically on college campuses. Academia would reach out to NCAA.

The role of faculty will be recognized as the conscience of the university, specifically in student-athletics; faculty will provide balance in decision-making and speak for the student-athlete's ultimate good. (For example, a faculty committee might approve all competition scheduling to minimize missed class time).

Power coaches will have levels of influence and salary commensurate with average tenured full professors. A fifth-year head coach will be paid the same as fifth-year professor.

Five- to 10-year future

Key discussion points and emerging issues: Participants were asked to consider five dimensions of foresight: demographics (factors likely to affect the population, such as aging, health, work/family balance, and similar issues); business/economic climate (factors affecting trade, economic issues, marketplaces, currencies, etc.); legislation/regulation (factors affecting regulation of the industry and its products, whether political or industry-driven, etc.); technology/science (factors affecting innovation, discovery, advances in relevant scientific and technological areas); and politics/social values (factors likely to affect lifestyles, values, and consumer expectations). Following are key discussion points:

There will be increased competition from other organizations to provide the value that NCAA currently provides for its members and for intercollegiate athletics. With the rise of global business, other nations may create similar organizations and compete with NCAA. Organizational decision-making will be challenged by the tendency to agree with all sides of an issue. The NCAA must find a way to sort out its strategic choices and respond effectively to both challenges and opportunities.

The population is aging, which may result in an increased demand for spectator sports and less participation in sports. There is a mix of diversity among the population, and it will impact sports as well. Gender diversity's impact can be seen as more women populate the work force, and the college campus, and also become fans of intercollegiate athletics (perhaps with different needs and priorities than the traditionally male fan population has had). In the area of ethnic diversity, there is increased immigration, changing the ethnic and racial makeup of society. Athletics interests increasingly will align with culture and ethnicity, and it is possible that the increase in Hispanic population will impact African-American athletes. The interest in diverse intramural sports will increase, and soccer will increase in popularity. The declining stock market is affecting disposable income, and a huge economic disparity is emerging -- a chasm between "haves" and "have-nots" is widening. The traditional family structure will evolve. Individuals will be more time-pressured due to the changing responsibilities of men and women.

Dialogue about factors in the business and economic climate centered on current economic conditions ("the economy is going down the tubes"), as well as decreasing state funding of education and athletes. Also, international migration is resulting in more globalization of intercollegiate athletics and more foreign athletes. Economic pressures on institutions will continue to be a challenge. There will be increased consolidation of colleges and universities. Ticket prices for athletics events will increase and student fees will rise. Budgets for event security will increase significantly. State funding will continue to decrease, and there will be increased pressure to generate revenue from academic research and to conduct research and development in partnership with corporations. For-profit colleges and universities will increase, and there will be increasing pressure on institutions to commercialize. Colleges and universities will continue to need to become more entrepreneurial. There will be less economic security. This will have an impact on public access to sports -- increased ticket prices, increased access to scholarships. There will be increased bifurcation of resources, attitudes and needs between the "haves" and the "have-nots." New employer-employee relationships suggest that there will be an increase in the "free agent" workforce. Contracts will be shorter because of more frequent shifts in market conditions.

Regarding issues of legislation and regulation, there will be less financial assistance from the federal government. Athletics departments are losing their tax status and there may be an increase in for-profit athletics departments. Government will become more intrusive and scrutiny will rise. There will be an increased need for additional accountability within college/university sports programs, and federal funding in the future may be tied to graduation rates. Initial academic requirements are becoming stricter and will continue in this direction. Legislation regulating safety will increase, including the safety of student fans. There may be a unionization of college athletics. There will be increased legislation regulating antitrust, Title IX implications and drug use in sports, all with the potential to affect the NCAA and its member institutions.

Because of increased sports science and technology, student-athletes will get increasingly stronger and bigger. Enhancements to equipment (for example, bats) are likely to lead to greater performance. There will continue to be a better understanding of the correlation between health and strength/endurance. Huge medical advances and better understanding of exercise science physiology will create more options for performance enhancement. There will be issues of safety for athletes in an enhanced performance environment. As it relates to learning, technology is having an impact in that the campus experience is moving toward a virtual university. Technology also will affect media relating to how people connect with intercollegiate athletics. There will be increased exposure to athletics events through technology, and online coverage of sports will increase. Due to increased Internet access, the public will become "overexposed" to sporting events, and this may create an assumption that access should be free. Technology will create additional challenges and opportunities, such as Internet security becoming more intrusive and more expensive.

Finally, regarding political and social values, the group noted a sense that public expectations are increasingly being shaped by media (decisions in athletics will increasingly be driven by public perception rather than what is right), world unrest and security issues (less personal freedom, threat of terrorism, increased violence at sporting events), a trend toward social conservatism [including assessment and accountability, racial and gender stereotypes (gender bias will increase)], a decline in ethical decision-making and finally, on a more comforting note, a trend toward cocooning and an attendant demand for increased entertainment options.

Five- to 10-year planning -- mega issues

Key questions identified by the group: In their dialogue about mega issues, these themes emerged from the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association participants:

How will the NCAA respond to trends in demographics? How far do we go in promoting gender equity? How will the NCAA address the changing racial makeup of college students?

How can we keep the primacy of the "student" part of "student-athlete"? How will the NCAA deal with the financial and moral pressures associated with the amount of dollars involved in college athletics? How can the NCAA balance among academic integrity, success and access? How can the NCAA monitor and regulate an increasingly complex campus environment? How can we coordinate the athletics programs of institutions with very different missions?

Whose interests are really served by NCAA's current structure? Will the Association be able to stay together (will Division I-A spin off?)? Is the NCAA the appropriate group to govern collegiate athletics? Will the NCAA even exist in 10 years? How will the NCAA better address membership concern over lack of participation (that is, empowered membership)? How can the NCAA keep its organization and constituencies intact? How can the NCAA remain (or become) relevant?

One piece of advice

Stop trying to be all things to all people. Use the core values adopted to establish priorities among competing goals, and make consistent decisions based upon those well-publicized priorities.

Remember your roots. Remember to keep student-athlete welfare as the most important aspect of NCAA.

The planning process should be open to sincere input from all stakeholders. Be inclusive. Do not assume that one group's ideas are more important or informed than another group's. Continue the basic direction in which the NCAA is going, but adjust by using more input from a broad set of interests, including faculty and students. Try to de-commercialize the enterprise -- listen to alumni, fans and money only as an ancillary result of providing educational opportunity to students.

Work to make us as proud of all student-athletes as we are of the Top VIII at the annual Honors Dinner.

For more information about the development of the NCAA strategic plan, see NCAA Online (www.ncaa.org).