Mission & Vision
Introduction
The article speaks about how a mission should be written, so it will provide a clearer and well defined purpose. It’s explained the advantages and limitations of having it. It also explore whether a standalone statement or a broader model should be a better mission statement. This is followed by proposing a new definition of a mission, demonstrating how it is rooted in good practice, and presenting its benefits and limitations. Some context of practical implication discussed as well.
Findings
The paper initially shows the inconsistent use of the concept of mission in the expanded list approach. It then proceeds to show similar inconsistencies in three of the most respected models of guiding statements in the literature.
Vision Framework (Collins and Porras (1991, 1995, 1996, and 1997)
Ashridge Mission Model (Campbell and Yeung (1991))
Model of organizational vision –Liptons Model (Lipton’s (1996, 2003))
Mission Statements Approaches
Check List Type: - The article says that to get a well-defined mission statement, it has to have the checklist-type approach. Research shows that many times companies are only setting a single line of mission statement which does not constitute all the items in the checklist which makes it a poor mission statement. This is where suggestions are being made to the organizations to redefine the mission statement by David and David (2003), They suggest the following comprehensive list of nine components that an effective mission statement should include:
Customers (the target market)
Products/services (offerings and value provided to customers)
Geographic markets (where the firm seeks customers)
Technology (the technology used to produce and market products)
Concern for survival/growth/profits (the firm’s concern for financial soundness)
Philosophy (the firm’s values, ethics, beliefs)
Public image (contributions the firm makes to communities)
Employees (the importance of managers and employees);
Distinctive
The article speaks about how a mission should be written, so it will provide a clearer and well defined purpose. It’s explained the advantages and limitations of having it. It also explore whether a standalone statement or a broader model should be a better mission statement. This is followed by proposing a new definition of a mission, demonstrating how it is rooted in good practice, and presenting its benefits and limitations. Some context of practical implication discussed as well.
Findings
The paper initially shows the inconsistent use of the concept of mission in the expanded list approach. It then proceeds to show similar inconsistencies in three of the most respected models of guiding statements in the literature.
Vision Framework (Collins and Porras (1991, 1995, 1996, and 1997)
Ashridge Mission Model (Campbell and Yeung (1991))
Model of organizational vision –Liptons Model (Lipton’s (1996, 2003))
Mission Statements Approaches
Check List Type: - The article says that to get a well-defined mission statement, it has to have the checklist-type approach. Research shows that many times companies are only setting a single line of mission statement which does not constitute all the items in the checklist which makes it a poor mission statement. This is where suggestions are being made to the organizations to redefine the mission statement by David and David (2003), They suggest the following comprehensive list of nine components that an effective mission statement should include:
Customers (the target market)
Products/services (offerings and value provided to customers)
Geographic markets (where the firm seeks customers)
Technology (the technology used to produce and market products)
Concern for survival/growth/profits (the firm’s concern for financial soundness)
Philosophy (the firm’s values, ethics, beliefs)
Public image (contributions the firm makes to communities)
Employees (the importance of managers and employees);
Distinctive