The planning process at a major public university over a 10-year period is examined. Planning is conceptualized as a political process, and attention is directed to comprehensive, institutional academic planning. The institution undertook three distinct planning efforts, and each of the three chronological periods was distinct in approach, principal characters, and outcome. Each period is evaluated in relation to product and process dimensions. Attention was focused on institutional mission, the level of faculty participation, and the quality of academic leadership. The case study method was used, and data for each analysis were developed in three steps: interviews, document analysis, and informal discussions. The institution made no progress in developing a consensus on institutional mission as a result of initial planning. The effort was further characterized by almost no faculty participation until late in the process, and there was disagreement on what the role of the faculty in academic planning should be. During 1972-1974, the Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) was unable to serve as an effective leader due to personal style and the official's concept of administrative responsibility and view of the college. During 1975-1976 the college president retained control over the planning process and selected a blue ribbon committee of faculty, which studied the university. This planning process also lacked a clear sense of institutional mission. Although the planning committee was mostly faculty, it was a small group and did not adopt a widespread consultative or participatory process. No recommendations resulted from the plan that was produced. During 1976-1980, a new VPAA came to the campus and was responsible for developing an academic plan, which resulted in fairly wide consensus. However, the VPAA did not remain at the university to implement the plan. (SW)