Good ideas fail automatically. In a competitive environment with limited resources, political parties need robust strategies to maximise their chances of success. In everyday routines, there is often an overwhelming focus on action and reaction, with little to no direction due to an unclear or non-existent strategy.
As the Friedrich Naumann Foundation notes, “Strategic planning is a key competence for political parties and their leadership personnel while in government or in opposition. Strategy development cannot be delegated or outsourced. Nor can single strategy elements be copied from other successful political players. Political leaders must develop their own competences in strategic planning, including the processes, tools, and concepts needed to form unique strategies. When in government, parties are often forced to focus on short-term crises at the expense of medium- and long-term development. However, good governance does not sacrifice long-term objectives for short-term gain.”
The absence of strategic plans contributes to a situation where medium- to long-term goals lose focus, both within government and in the public domain. Many feel that the current Sri Lankan government lacks clear and precise strategy development and implementation, appearing to rely on ad hoc responses to short-term crises.
With elections hopefully concluded for 2025, the six-month-old NPP government can and should now present a comprehensive strategic plan for the remainder of its term. The public needs a clear roadmap outlining the administration’s aspirations over the next five years. Ideally, this plan should align with their political vision as outlined in the Presidential election manifesto, alongside any newly identified priorities. This will help avoid feeding growing public dissatisfaction over unkept promises and provide the government with a framework for delivering on its commitments. A visionary speech is not enough; it must be followed by a detailed strategic plan that incorporates all its components.
The apparent absence of a strategy to address road safety—highlighted by the recent fatal accident in Gerandiella, which claimed 22 lives, and the subsequent bus crash in Aladeniya, which injured 20—demonstrates a troubling pattern of inaction. Despite public outcry and repeated commentary, including past articles by this writer on the issue, no meaningful action has been taken. Stricter enforcement of traffic laws and improved driver education are obvious solutions. Yet, the lack of urgency in addressing this crisis suggests road safety has not been prioritised. The public will await the promised ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ initiative announced by the President, though this programme should have been implemented long ago.
Governments today, including Sri Lanka’s, face multiple decision-making challenges, particularly around transparency and inclusivity. The lack of openness to diverse perspectives and the necessary expertise to manage complex policy issues remain significant barriers to the much-discussed system change. The second major challenge is institutional weakness. While politicians may be responsible for policy on paper, bureaucracies are expected to implement these policies. If neither possesses the expertise or capacity required, the outcome is a series of reactive, short-term measures that prioritise political expediency over long-term results.
It is time for the government to develop its own strategic plan and establish a framework for strategic action planning at various levels. This should include mechanisms for more inclusive decision-making and strengthen governance capabilities. As the National Democratic Institute states, strategic planning is about intentionally mapping a path from the present to the future, defining options, and identifying the means to achieve them. It involves rigorous analysis and rational allocation of resources to meet defined goals and adapt to a changing environment.
Strategic plans are detailed documents that outline long-term goals, priorities, and actions. They serve as roadmaps, ensuring resources are effectively allocated to achieve the desired outcomes. The current government, which has pledged systemic change, must lead by example by publishing strategic plans for its ministries, making them publicly available, and tracking progress. This could shift the prevailing short-term governance mindset and embed a culture of long-term planning and accountability.
Developing a strategic plan starts with a SWOT analysis to assess current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. Planning should be grounded in this reality.
Key elements of a strategic plan include:
- Vision: A clear picture of where the government or entity wants to be in five years.
- Mission: A concise statement of purpose and the path to the vision.
- Goals: Broad, measurable outcomes to be achieved.
- Objectives: Specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) targets.
- Strategies: High-level approaches to achieve objectives.
- Action plans: Step-by-step methods for executing strategies.
- Budgets: Estimated costs associated with actions.
- Responsibility: Designating persons or entities to lead each component.
Some Sri Lankan government agencies do have strategic plans, though many are outdated. Notable exceptions include the Digital Sri Lanka 2030 strategy and the Sri Lanka Customs Strategic Plan 2024–2028. The Urban Development Authority’s plan (2018–2022) was strong but is now outdated. The Department of Agriculture has a plan for 2022–2030, but it appears incomplete. The Export Development Board is working on a five-year plan to grow exports to USD 31.3 billion by 2027. The Tourism Development Authority’s plan ends in 2025, and if a new one isn’t already underway, one of the country’s critical economic sectors may be left directionless.
Beyond tourism, the country needs to enhance exports, pursue import substitution, and explore unconventional initiatives like health tourism, golf-related tourism, and expanding its IT industry. These require medium- to long-term planning and must be embedded in ministerial strategies.
While many strategic plans pre-date the current administration, there’s no evidence of a consistent or mandatory approach to strategic planning across ministries. The government should require each ministry to develop a five-year plan within three months, given that six months have already passed since its formation. Existing but outdated plans should be updated within the same timeframe.
Governance based on strategic planning promotes professionalism and accountability and can help reshape the political culture of the country. It encourages politicians to make more realistic promises and facilitates public trust. With Sri Lanka’s debt repayments resuming in 2028, the next three years are critical. The country must either earn more or spend less—and strategies must be formalised into action plans with measurable outcomes.
A change in management culture is essential for true system change. Business as usual will not bring about transformation. As the government models successful strategic planning, other political parties will be compelled to follow with structured alternative governance models.
Albert Einstein is often quoted as saying, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” In governance, this could be interpreted as “repeating unsuccessful strategies without change is unproductive behaviour.” Sri Lanka’s bankruptcy is proof of the consequences of unmodified, failed strategies. Without embracing system change and modern governance methods, the country is destined to repeat its past mistakes.
