Strategic Planning in Polish Municipalities and the Quadruple Helix Approach: An Analysis of the Relationship Between Local Stakeholder Involvement and Strategy Development Methods

Strategic planning at local level is a relevant topic from both an academic and a practical perspective. In the Polish context, the subject has gained significance in recent years in the light of the ongoing reform of the spatial planning system, although its academic roots go back several decades. Nevertheless, the existing literature has so far focused mainly on comparative analyses of strategy content (Mazzara et al. 2010, Ignacy, Kopyściański 2011), evaluation of strategy quality (Guyadeen et al. 2023), and research on the motivations behind strategy development (Sztando 2017), while quantitative research on the methods used to develop them is lacking. As an exception to the rule, it is worth noting the quantitative studies conducted in seven countries: France, Russia, Turkey, Romania, Hungary, and the United States (Hinţea et al. 2019). Its results, presented in the institutional and social settings, make an important contribution to discussions both on the mechanics of applying strategic planning and on the general understanding of this approach in different contexts. In Poland, the analysis focused primarily on case studies and comparative analysis (Dziemianowicz, Cybulska 2019, Martela et al. 2023). An exception is the study by Guzal-Dec et al. (2020), which examines the use of consultation methods by local authorities among residents in two regions in relation to the concept of good governance. Although there are numerous practical guides for local authorities, research on the methods used in developing municipal local strategies in relation to the quadruple helix concept is lacking, and our article fills this gap.

Strategic planning at local level has been gaining importance both in theory and in practice, particularly in the context of the ongoing reform of the spatial planning system in Poland. The current institutional and legal context in Poland makes the issue of local development strategies particularly timely. According to the binding legislation, all municipalities are required to prepare development strategies by 1 July 2026, and the new spatial planning reform strengthens the interdependence between strategic and spatial planning instruments. Although recent reforms and mandatory annual reporting have strengthened the role of strategic documents, the quality and methodological sophistication of strategies still vary significantly across municipalities.

This paper addresses a problem of relationship between the methods used by municipalities in the process of building development strategies and the stakeholder involvement in it. The main research question of this study concerns whether the level of stakeholder involvement and municipality size affect the choice of strategic planning methods in local government units. The article formulates and examines three research hypotheses:

H1. The extensive involvement of the quadruple helix in development planning processes favours the diversity of techniques for obtaining information used in the work on strategies.

H2. The extensive involvement of the quadruple helix in development planning processes favours the use of scenarios in development planning.

H3. Methods: Delphi, design thinking, and horizon scanning are statistically significantly more common in the largest municipalities than in the smallest ones.

The selection and construction of research hypotheses refer to the involvement in the strategic process and the use of specific methods, both in strategic and scenario planning (e.g. van der Heijden 1996). The first hypothesis relates to the strategic process in general. The second and third hypotheses consider the specific nature of the foresight approach as an element of the strategic process (Cybulska, Dziemianowicz 2024). The scenario method is often classified as a methodological approach, as it combines various types of techniques (van der Heijden 1996, Magruk 2012). For this reason (as the most complex), it has been identified in a separate hypothesis.

The source of the research is the results of a computer-assisted web interview (CAWI) survey addressed to all Polish municipalities in 2023. We analyse 150 responses obtained in the survey. The structure of the article is organised into an analysis of theory in a broad context, a description of methodology, a presentation of the research results and hypothesis verification, and a discussion of the results and conclusions. Overall, this study contributes to the emerging body of knowledge in the field of strategic planning in Polish municipalities, offering insights into how stakeholder engagement shapes methodological practices.

Development strategies for organisations are considered in the literature as a multifaceted issue. Beyond eclectic attempts to describe strategy as an element of strategic management (de Wit, Meyer 2010), specific issues related to strategy and the strategic process are discussed (Kaplan, Norton 1996). At least three key topics concerning the organisation’s strategy can be identified. The first is related to the role of strategy in the organisation’s development. A fundamental question is ‘whether the organisation needs a strategy?’ This fits in with the trend of strategic management and, for example, making strategic choices (Ansoff 1985), but also the proper implementation of the strategy (Kaplan, Norton 2008). The second line of inquiry concerns the various approaches to strategy. The literature on the subject refers to strategic schools (perspectives), including planning, evolutionary, positional, and resource-based (Obłój 2007). Within this line of inquiry, it allows the organisation to make its own choices regarding strategic actions. Therefore, the concept of strategy may be perceived from different perspectives, including as: a resource, a process, creativity, learning, and participation (Tighe 2019). The third topic we draw attention to concerns the role and involvement of stakeholders in the strategic process. The group of stakeholders involved in the strategic process can be very broad and diverse. The issue of the leader and leadership comes to the front here (Maxwell 2012), because leaders and their ways of operating are often seen as a key driving factor in strategic actions.

The strategy, initially adopted in the military context, found its application in business, and then in the operations of government and public administration. The evolution of a strategic approach in public administration (obviously excluding war strategies and plans) occurred with the emergence of New Public Management (NPM), that is, the transition from traditional (Weberian) administration towards results-oriented administration (Kjr 2004). The administration obviously tried to adopt good practices from the business world. This even resulted in the comparison of administrative units to companies and the respective local authorities to corporate management boards. It turned out that simply translating business principles into the principles of public institutions is neither easy nor, in many cases, even justified (Dziemianowicz 2016). Hood (1991) emphasised that increasing efficiency in administration in line with this trend may come at the expense of integrity and resilience, and the results of the literature review by Funck and Karlsson (2019) illustrate, among other things, the insurmountable diffculties in measuring this efficiency. Difficulties in implementing NPM and the clear weaknesses of this approach in administration resulted in a search for new forms of operations. The main approach that emerged in this search was governance (Mazur 2015). It addresses the dissatisfaction with public authorities acting ‘above citizens’ and, at the same time, involves various stakeholder groups in the implementation of administrative tasks. Of course, governance also has its disadvantages, but it seems to be the current leading approach in public administration, resulting in inclusion of residents and other stakeholder groups in participation processes.

This topic is directly related to the concept of the quadruple helix, which was developed as part of the theory of innovation systems involving cooperation between different sectors. The original concept of the triple helix, described by Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff (2000), involved the exchange of knowledge between universities, industry, and the government. Its evolution was proposed by Carayannis and Campbell (2009), who added to the original model a relationship with the ‘media-based and culture-based public’, which they associate with culture in general and even the creative class. In the evolution of this definition, the fourth helix can be interpreted more broadly as the inclusion of social partners, without a strictly defined subjectivity. Going beyond the innovation system, this pattern of cross-sectoral relations also becomes relevant in the general conduct of territorial development policy at various levels, where actions taken by government and local government structures benefit from the inclusion of the voices of business, science, and society representatives in the discussion on development. Taratori et al. (2021: 18) states that “the evolution of innovation ecosystems models (i.e. from Triple to Quintuple Helix) yields for the parallel to the evolution of smart urban governance approaches. (…) At the same time, the conceptualisation of most appropriate, dynamic and customised frameworks to the smart city transitions or even to the specific smart project to be envisaged”. Leydesdorff and Deakin (2011), who linked the helix model to smart urban development, believe that it is neo-evolutionary in nature and, through the creation and exchange of knowledge, has the potential to adapt to new global conditions.

However, particular attention should be paid to how different stakeholders are involved in processes based on knowledge exchange between different sectors, especially in processes requiring a long-term perspective (Schütz et al. 2019). Although the literature indicates the need to involve different stakeholders, especially citizens, in planning processes (e.g. Sanoff 2000, Meschede, Mainka 2020), some case studies indicate that this is an element that may be poorly translated in strategic documents (Guyadeen et al. 2023) and projects (Taratori et al. 2021). Depending on the course of strategic planning processes at local level, they may use different methods of analysis and information gathering techniques, which may (but do not have to) involve the participation of representatives of the quadruple helix.

The shape of the process is important for the subsequent implementation of the strategy. By design, it often includes the following: 1) analysis, 2) draft, 3) formal resolution, 4) implementation, and 5) evaluation (Meschede, Mainka 2020). Polish good practices from the scientific literature and practical guides indicate both the chronology of the individual stages of work on strategies and propose the tools to be used during the process. For example, Dziemianowicz et al. (2012) and Sztando (2013) distinguish, among others, diagnosis of the current situation and strategic analysis, setting of mission, vision, and strategic goals, or public consultations as key stages of the process. Each of these steps can be based on a number of proven methods and techniques. For the purposes of this article, it is worth distinguishing that information gathering and analysis techniques are the tools used and actions taken within the framework of more broadly outlined methods, that is, ways of proceeding aimed at achieving a given purpose (Dzwigoł 2015). This translates into the methods and techniques used in the process. Among the key methods of strategic analysis, Kałkowska et al. (2010) mention strategic analysis of the macroenvironment, competition environment, strategic potential, and comprehensive methods of strategic analysis. These include elements such as trend extrapolation, the Delphi method, environmental scenario planning, value chains, and SWOT analysis.

When it comes to information gathering and analysis techniques, a distinction can be made in terms of third-party involvement – into internal and external processes (both in relation to the person, team, and organisation) as well as in terms of the purpose of application. The first distinction depends on the nature of the process, as many of the techniques can be successfully applied with the involvement of a wider group of stakeholders (e.g. Warner 1996, Meschede, Mainka 2020), even if this is not their original mechanism. The second distinction, namely the purpose of application linked to the structure of strategic processes, also varies but appears to be more robust. Based on this, the methods and techniques can also be divided into four groups (Table 1 provides examples and descriptions of specific methods within these groups).

The first group of commonly applied methods consists of research-oriented information gathering processes aimed at diagnosing the past, current, and future conditions of development, in order to form an empirical foundation for subsequent analytical and decision-making stages (Guyadeen et al. 2023, Kilonzo, Ojebode 2023). These methods include, e.g., surveys, structured and semi-structured interviews with one person or more people, and desk research based on the literature, statistical databases, or plans and policies.

A second group of methods refers to participatory processes, which have become a central element of local development strategies under the governance paradigm, as one of the good governance principles (Commission of the European Communities 2001). These processes typically include workshops, focus groups, public meetings, deliberative forums, and stakeholder panels, designed to involve residents, local businesses, non-governmental organisations, and public institutions in shaping strategic directions. Participatory methods serve not only as a mechanism for collecting contextual and experiential knowledge but also as a tool for building consensus, legitimacy, and shared ownership of strategic goals (Quick, Bryson 2016). Such interactive formats support social learning, community building (Ruano 2019) and enhance the adaptability of strategies, although they require careful facilitation, sufficient amount of time, and resources to be productive (Sanoff 2000).

The third category encompasses diagnostic and analytical tools used to structure information, evaluate alternatives and support strategic decision-making. Among the most frequently applied instruments in local development strategies are SWOT and TOWS analyses, which enable the synthesis of internal and external factors and the formulation of strategic options (Weihrich 1982, Leigh 2010). Increasingly, more advanced multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques are employed to prioritise projects, assess policy scenarios, or compare development paths using both quantitative and qualitative criteria (Shrestha et al. 2004, Basset et al. 2018).

We can also identify methods and techniques that can be used both analytically and participatively, depending on the chosen course of action. This group includes elements of exploring the future, including visioning, building future scenarios, and their subsequent analysis (Phdungsilp 2011). In this sense, a vision “represents a view of the ideal community toward which the group is working” (Gordon 2005: 27) and scenarios are “descriptions (usually of a possible future) which assume the intervention of several key events or conditions which will have taken place between the time of the original situation and the time in which the scenario is set” (Durance, Godet 2010: 1489). This group also includes approaches to translating images of the future into actions and strategic goals, such as backcasting.

The centrepiece of the study was an online questionnaire survey (CAWI). In order to design the part of the questionnaire concerning strategic planning and management, an analysis of the literature was carried out, covering mainly handbooks on management and strategic planning in Polish municipalities, including publications commissioned by the Ministry of Development Funds and Regional Policy/Ministry of Regional Development (Dziemianowicz et al. 2012, Górniak, Mazur 2012, Hoinkis et al. 2021) and legal acts – the Act on development policy, Act on municipal self-government and Act on spatial planning. The information that contributed to the survey from these sources included the following: methods used in the strategic process, information gathering techniques, mandatory and voluntary elements of the strategic process, mandatory and voluntary inter-sectoral relations in the strategic process, and mandatory content of the new generation strategy (after the amendment under the Act of 7 July 2023, amending the Act on spatial planning and development and certain other acts).

The above sources were used to construct a part of the survey contained in the questions, which covered the existence of a strategy, the techniques used in its development to collect and analyse information, and the methods and frequency of consultation with various stakeholder groups. In this article, we discuss the findings from two matrix questions in the survey, concerning the methods and techniques used in the strategy preparation process and the frequency of involvement of various stakeholder groups (Table 2).

The first question asked was, ‘What information gathering and analysis techniques did you use during the strategy development process?’ The answer to the question consisted of responses regarding the use of each of the eight methods: internal workshops (only for office employees), open workshops (involving representatives of other entities and residents), online or stationary survey, Delphi survey (multi-stage survey with experts), statistical data analysis, design thinking, horizon scanning, and other methods. For each method, it was possible to select multiple answers from the following: ‘Analysis of external conditions – e.g. PEST/PESTEL’, ‘Analysis of strengths and weaknesses – e.g. SWOT’, ‘Trend analysis’, ‘Building development scenarios’, ‘Other’.

The second question was, ‘How often during the last two terms (since 2014) when planning and making development decisions in your municipality, did you refer to the opinions of…’. The question had six extensions: ‘…residents?’…experts?’,…‘…officials or representatives of other local government institutions?’, ‘…business representatives?’, ‘…non-governmental organisations (NGOs)?’, ‘…other public entities?’. For each of these, the respondent could choose from the following options: ‘Never’, ‘Rarely (in single cases)’, ‘Usually (in most cases)’; ‘Always’.

In addition, the part of the survey that is not discussed in this article concerned the approach to exploring the future and the perception of the future, leadership, and development among local decision-makers. These elements are beyond the scope of this paper and are therefore not described here.

The initial assumption was to survey all municipalities in Poland (2477 units). The CAWI survey was conducted using Google Forms in November 2023. The survey was distributed by email to the email addresses of municipalities listed in the public contact database of local government units provided by the Ministry of the Interior and Administration. The assumption was that one person from each municipality would respond, who held a decision-making or specialist position aimed at planning the development of the unit. The CAWI survey was used to identify municipalities that had prepared or were in the process of preparing a strategy of development. These municipalities were asked about their approach to the strategy process.

The survey was structured around 15 questions, including closed-ended questions (single and multiple choice) and open-ended questions. Four questions used a Likert scale to determine the views of local government representatives on specific issues (by their agreement with the statements provided). The questions addressed topics such as the techniques used in the strategic process and stakeholder involvement.

The hypotheses raised in the article refer to the differences between the types of municipalities that participated in the survey. In order to verify them, non-parametric tests (Mann–Whitney U, Kruskal–Wallis) were carried out to statistically evaluate the observed trends. Non-parametric tests were used due to the unequal size of the groups being compared and the lack of normal distribution in the responses obtained (Norcliffe 1986). A significance level of 95% was adopted.

In order to verify Hypothesis 1, two comparative groups of survey respondents were created. The first group consisted of respondents from municipalities with the broadest involvement of the quadruple helix in development planning processes. The second group comprised respondents from municipalities with the weakest involvement of the quadruple helix. For this purpose, a ‘helix’ and ‘anti-helix’ indicator was constructed, where weights were assigned to the answers to the survey question regarding the frequency of consultation with stakeholders on decisions. For the first group, the indicator expressed the sum of the weights assigned to the answers ‘always’ (weight = 1) and ‘usually’ (weight = 0.5). In the second group, the indicator expressed the sum of the weights assigned to the answers ‘never’ (weight = 1) and ‘rarely’ (weight = 0.5). In this way, a group of 24 respondents was selected for the HELIX TOP24 group, with a score of the first indicator from 3.5 and above, as well as a group of 25 respondents for the HELIX WORST25 group, with a score of the second indicator from 3 and above. The assigned weights were used solely to form the two comparison groups. The weights were not taken into account in the statistical tests. The groups were constructed in a way that prevented the same units from being included in both. The data for both groups were statistically analysed using a non-parametric test. The test compared the total number of techniques used per municipality in both groups.

Comparative groups were also used to test the second hypothesis, which examined whether respondents in one group more often indicated the use of scenario planning than those in the second group. To verify Hypothesis 2, a Mann–Whitney U test was performed.

In order to verify Hypothesis 3, the participating municipalities were divided into five size groups according to percentiles¹. The data described above were then statistically analysed using non-parametric tests. The tests took into account an indication of whether the municipality used at least one of the techniques mentioned. This hypothesis was tested in two steps. In the first step, a Kruskal–Wallis test was performed to compare all five groups of municipalities. To complement the above analysis, a Mann–Whitney U test was also performed. The test compares only two groups of municipalities, which allows a more accurate analysis.

The obtained results allowed us to verify the initially formulated hypotheses. In the case of the frst hypothesis, statistical confrmation was obtained. Therefore, two conclusions can be drawn regarding both practice and future research. The broad involvement of various stakeholders in the strategy-building process can obviously contribute to the diversity of methods used. At the same time, it can put pressure on the process leaders to draw on a variety of experiences. On the one hand, this can be a factor that improves the quality of work and results, but it can also disrupt previously prepared plans for strategy development processes (Dziemianowicz 2016). In Poland, Guzal-Dec et al. (2020) conducted an interesting study on this topic. The study revealed a clear correlation between the use of participatory methods and the subsequent positive perception of the quality (usefulness) of the strategic document. The scope of this study extends beyond Hypothesis 1 in this article but highlights the impact of stakeholder engagement on management approaches. It also shows a possible feedback interaction – a good perception of the document quality may influence the subsequent willingness to engage in the process. The sustained engagement of stakeholders can lead to improved relations between them and the local authority, and can enhance the quality of the process (Ruano 2019).

The literature on the subject suggests that joint deliberations on the future leading to the definition of a consensus-based vision, or at least consideration of possible future scenarios, can form the basis for work on a strategy (Government Office for Science, 2016) and its subsequent legitimisation (Fenton et al. 2016). It is also directly related to the range of techniques used (Fenton et al. 2016). Nevertheless, we were unable to positively verify the second hypothesis in this study. This raises the key question of why scenario-based approaches are so rare in municipal strategies. Cybulska and Dziemianowicz (2024), using the term ‘strategic-foresight maturity of municipalities’, point to numerous problems and factors that discourage or limit local authorities in the use of scenarios. They concern the attitude and experience of leaders, but also of the teams that are preparing strategies. A certain limitation may also be the fact that scenarios are not a statutorily required element of strategy², although scenarios are clearly preferred in business thinking about the future (Tighe 2019). It is obvious, however – and this is confirmed by research (e.g. Carlsen et al. 2013, McBride et al. 2017) – that higher stakeholder participation affects the quality of the implemented scenario method, which by definition is based on participatory methods (e.g. van der Heijden 1996). It seems that the leader’s involvement and influence on shaping the strategic process may be crucial.

The results obtained also do not confirm the third hypothesis. The lack of a relationship between population size and the variety of methods used in the strategic process may come as a surprise. The size of territorial units may determine the scope of the strategic process, the competences of teams and leaders (Carmeli 2006), and technical capabilities through economies of scale (Newton 1982), and sometimes directly influences whether given units create strategic documents at all (Řehoř 2015). Studies from other countries also provide such examples. For instance, in Hungary there is a clear positive correlation between the size of the local government and citizens’ involvement in strategic processes (Barati-Stec 2019). The example of France also shows that in small municipalities it can be difficult to undertake strategic actions at all – it is the larger local governments that have greater powers and opportunities to engage citizens (carmouze et al. 2019).

However, the process of strategy development, even if it involves cooperation with various stakeholders, can intensively engage a specific and fairly limited number of stakeholders (Dąbrowska et al. 2022). This means that it is not the number of potential stakeholders involved in the process that is important, but the actual number. Assuming that the activity may also concern those who are aware of and interested in the strategic process, the element of team competence is crucial, not the general public. In any case, this is actually what the results suggest – the use of more advanced methods is more common in larger municipalities, although the differences are not significant enough to be statistically significant.

However, when interpreting the results of our study presented in this article, it should be taken into account that we rely on the results of a survey that is subject to certain flaws. The main objection to this method in the context of the study is the low flexibility and superficiality of the topics covered (lack of opportunity to explore the topic in depth during the process) (Pandey, Pandey 2015). Another limitation is that a comparative regional analysis could not be conducted due to substantial disparities in the number of responses across regions; therefore, this aspect was not analysed in detail. Moreover, since the existence of a local strategy is a prerequisite for accessing other territorial instruments in the 2021–2027 programming period, the lack of attention to the year of strategy adoption constitutes an additional limitation of the research. It should also be noted that the study did not rely on a strictly random sample. The number of responses obtained does not meet the sample size requirements, and the responding municipalities were more likely to be those that are relatively more active and open to sharing information. Consequently, the sample may be affected by response bias (Babbie 2011), which should be taken into account when interpreting the results. Nevertheless, it allows for a contribution to the research area, shedding some light on the specificity of strategy of development methods and verifying some of the hypotheses.

Nevertheless, in summary the findings demonstrate that broad and systematic stakeholder engagement supports greater methodological diversity, but at the same time reveals the marginal use of advanced methods. This indicates a clear need to strengthen institutional capacities and strategic competences within municipal administrations, regardless of the municipality size.