Here is a position I had otb as white.  It's white to move and I couldn't think of a good plan to persue, besides wanting to push f4 at some point.  I couldn't think of a good way to make my pieces better so I played Kh1 to give myself more time to think.  I feel like this point of the game was when I started to falter, and I did go on to lose.

Now that i'm looking at it again, I'm thinking perhaps instead of focusing on f4, I could have put my rooks on the d file, and attacked d6.... 

You have a 2077(Online) rating and you don't know what the plan(s) for White and Black are in this position from the Sicilian Najdorf? 

It was actually a Kan, but yeah I guess it transposed into a najdorf.  In correspondence games I get to use opening databases, which gets me through the openings, without ever having to know plans in the opening.  Bad, I know, but I am trying to fix it now :).  I realized that I know the basic moves in most openings, but I don't always have a plan moving forward.

I get positions like this a bit and know what you are saying.  My tactic is to make solid but not board-rippling moves, and wait for my opponent to blunder.  Your position is obviously better; sooner or later, black will misstep and then POW!  Right in the kissa...

Well, I should say that I know that black usually plays for activity on the queenside, and white plays on the kingside in the Najdorf.  What I am looking for is a concrete way of doing this in the given position.

How many USCF or FIDE otb tournaments have you played in?

I don't know what the theory says about this position, but I think that f4 is a bad move at this point. It weakens white's grip on the center. I prefer repositioning my bishop to g3 via f2, Queen to f2, then King's rook to e1 or d1. Basically, I am preparing for a breakthrough while waiting for Black to make a mistake.

I think this position is actually Black to move, he plays ...0-0 and is in good shape.  I'm assuming it came about by Bc4 b5 Bd3, but if Black played an early ...a6 and ...b5 maybe White went Bd3 directly, but that isn't a usual move order that I recall.

What is the actual move order? 

If it is White to move, the traditional plan would be Qd2-e1-g3 in such a position, but here after 13 Qe1 Black has the simple ...d5 which automatically equalizes and leads to the sort of positions Black wants.

The position is equal at best for white.

My naïve beginners opinion would be to, instead of f4, play b4 and then a4 to try to open the h-file and get the play going on the queenside. For some reason that looks more promising to me than trying to force something in the center. Your pieces certainly seem well positioned for a queenside scruffle.

The space grab plan is an interesting one - but too commital I think.

@transpo - I've played in few enough tournaments that this was my first real game against the Kan.

@skewerly and hankas - it's interesting you both mention waiting for the opponent to make a mistake.  I think this is a fair point and I DO need to work on my patience instead of trying to force it.

@Estragon - In my database this position happened in about 20 games, half of which were black to move, half white to move.  None of them are GM games.

Here is the move order:

If you were playing White you had the opportunity to establish a modified Maroczy bind with 5.c4

A Quick look black is solid but his pawn at b5 can be targeted: 1.Rf1 to d1 threatning  2.Bxb5..a6xb5  3.Nd4xb5..Qmoves followed by 4.Nxd6  white has 3 Passed Pawns for the piece, How does black stop the sac at b5 ? not ..Qa5 the simple b2-b4 ,seems none of the moves at black's disposal stops the sac, i don't use engines so of course i could be dead Wrong !! 

Waiting for the opponent to make a mistake?

Sooner or later you will play people who won't make mistakes if you are waiting

I suggest you take a look at the position before making a comment, and think in terms of concrete plans.

Both sides are at a standoff. It makes no sense to force a break at the center, since there is no clear benefits from doing so. The flank attack against b5 offers a freer game that benefits both sides. However, it leads to somewhat a subjective position. My opinion is that the flank attack slightly favors black. Black has now open files to attack white's pawns. With so many pieces still on board, white's game will then be defensive. In the worst scenario, black can return the material by sacrificing his minor piece to stop the queenside pawns advance.

I think it is best to slowly improve the positions of your pieces, while waiting for the opponent to make a mistake. This is the kind of position that Karpov and Kramnik excel at. 

I think you castled too soon.  I wait to see quite a lot of development before committing, or deciding which side to castle.  Often I find the better position is not to castle.  I hardly ever castle before my opponent.  Once he commits your means of attack becomes apparent.

You are wrong if you think those grandmasters are just relying on the opponent's mistake. They do slowly improve the position of the pieces but they have a clear-cut plan in mind while doing so which is probably not to wait for the opponent to lose the game.

@guesso:

Again, you are not looking at the position concretely. Look at the position that the OP posted. Don't tell me that I am wrong unless you can show me why my suggested plan is wrong.

We chessplayers play according to the positions on the board. Improving your pieces while waiting for the opponent to make mistakes and create an opening for you IS a plan.

Sometimes people forget that chess is a game played by two people. Take a look at any chess book. Chess skills consist of identification of opponent's mistakes, and their exploitation. You may notice that there is a hole in opponent's pawn formation (identification of opponent's mistake), and you decide to establish an outpost on the hole (exploitation of opponent's mistake). You may notice that a file is about to open soon and the opponent is not in a position to control it yet (identification of mistake), and you decide to put your rook there first (exploitation of mistakes). The list can go on, but hey if the opponent makes no mistake, there is no way you can win.

Here are some quotes to ponder on:

"Without error there can be no brilliancy." - Emanuel Lasker

"Avoidance of mistakes is the beginning, as it is the end, of mastery in chess."  -  Eugene Znosko-Borovsky