Carrie Ott-Holland, Stanton Mak , Kevin Ford, Shawn Riley Michigan State University

1. Moving toward more collaborative and adaptive management of wildlife: Changing perspectives of state wildlife agency personnel Carrie Ott-Holland, Stanton Mak, Kevin Ford, Shawn Riley Michigan State University Patrick Lederle State of Michigan, Wildlife Division

2. Acknowledgements • Michigan State Government • Michigan Department of Natural Resources • Wildlife Division Leadership Team • Wildlife Division Planning and Adaptation Section

3. Big Picture Question • When making strategic changes to create • more adaptive, collaborative wildlife management • how can progress be monitored?

4. Overview: Michigan DNR, Wildlife Division Mission To enhance, restore and conserve the State’s wildlife resources, natural communities, and ecosystems for the benefit of Michigan’s citizens, visitors and future generations.

5. Challenges Changing stakeholders • Decline in hunters, trappers • Increase non-consumptive stakeholders • Changes in land use patterns Needs assessment • Need for new direction • Need for more adaptive supervision • Need for enhanced accountability at the management level • Need for enhanced trust with stakeholders

6. Goals of strategic effort Provide clear direction and help set priorities Make Division more proactive, adaptive and appropriately responsive to contemporary and emerging wildlife issues Increase the efficiencies of the Division Address priorities through enhanced engagement with partners, stakeholders, and the general public

7. Increase Collaboration • Entering into partnerships with other agencies, organizations, and stakeholder groups • Collaboration on projects and activities by other agencies or organizations • Using volunteers to assist in division efforts • Relating to the unengaged public as a potential to build support for Division programs

8. Strategic Planning Process Design team to create strategic plan Information Gathering GPS Education Initiative Implementation team Operationalize the GPS across the Division Identifying barriers

9. Tracking and Monitoring Progress Given change in organizations…. …is slow …requires continuous effort …requires understanding different perspectives External stakeholder survey Longitudinal internal stakeholder survey Assess trust and satisfaction throughout strategic planning process Three consultants from MSU lead effort

10. Internal Survey Methods • Went to management meetings around state to collect data • 20 minute survey • Entire population was sampled 148 employees 1st year 140 employees 2nd year • 99 employees could be linked between year 1 and year 2

11. First year internal survey findings

12. First year internal survey findings Perceiving management as being committed to the success of the GPS significantly correlated with... r=.56* r=.53* r=.53* Perceiving the work culture as open to new ideas Feeling personally committed to the GPS Overall job satisfaction

13. First year internal survey findings Viewing the Division as a whole rather than focusing on one’s work unit was positively related to… r=.29* r=.50* r=.35* r=.40* Perceived employee accountability Satisfaction with communication Overall job satisfaction Satisfaction with coworkers

14. Positive change between 1st and 2ndyear

15. Positive change between 1st and 2ndyear

16. Next steps Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Perceived Managerial Support for GPS Perceived Managerial Support for GPS Perceived Managerial Support for GPS Partnerships with External Stakeholders Partnerships with External Stakeholders Partnerships with External Stakeholders

17. Implications • Change… • …requires understanding different perspectives (internal) • …is slow, requires more than a “snapshot” • …necessitates on-line data for continuous learning and adaptation

18. Thank you! Contact Information Carrie Ott-Holland ottholla@msu.edu Stanton Mak makstant@msu.edu