20
Tarakanita is now in between; some people worry about its financial
strength
but still
others worry about whether
the foundation
should
uphold
its core
values,
vision,
and
mission.
Those
who
worry
about
the
financial
strengths
argue
that some
potential
business
units
(schools)
should
be put on a high
priority
while
some
critical
ones
should
be
shut
down.
However,
those
who
still
preserve
the
core
values
inherited
from
the
founding
mothers
of
the
congregation
(the
owner)
put
the financial matters on the second priority. The
most
important thing
for them
is the mission completion.
This
is
a
complicated
plight
for
a
non-profit
organization
like
Tarakanita.
The
think-tank
at
the corporate
level found
out
the
fact
that
foreign
investment
on
education
undertakings
started
to
show
up
significantly
after
the
economic
crises
gradually
got
recovered.
More
and
more
national
schools
have
also
been
running
faster
in
gaining
competitive
standing.
It was
then
very
ironical;
the
country’s
economic
condition
got
better,
but
Tarakanita
found
it hard
to
maintain
its
conventionally
perceived
customer
loyalty.
If
no
breakthrough
and
revitalization
is initiated, the corporation with
its more than 60 SUs is definitely declining.
The
2007/2008–2009/2010
strategic
planning
was then
formulated
and
implemented
until
today.
Among
the breakthroughs
are fostering
parents’
involvement, encouraging students’ learning motivation, and
improving the
teaching
and learning
quality
hoping
that students
achievements,
believed
to be the
very
core
selling
price
of
schools,
would
increase.
Some
attempts
have
also
been
dedicated
to change
both
corporate
and
school
cultures.
However,
almost
no
significant
result
has
come
out
of
the exhausting
efforts
until
today.
Even
if
some
strategic
initiatives
are fruitful,
it
is still unclear
about
the extent to which
they
are
beneficial
because
no
objective
measurement
has
been
set
up in
monitoring
and
evaluating the programs. Besides, the same balanced scorecard was taken for
granted
into
departmental
planning,
district
offices,
and
SUs
homogeneously.
The
resulting corporate strategy map is shown in chart 2.2.
 |