TABLE OF CONTENTS
2.3 Key Objectives
3.5 Identifying Stakeholders
3.6 Prioritizing Stakeholders According to Attributes
3.7 Prioritizing Stakeholders According to The Situation 3.8 Prioritizing Publics By Communication Strategy
“If you build that foundation, both the moral and the ethical foundation, as well as the business foundation, and the experience foundation, then the building won't crumble.” - Henry Kravis
The basis for success of the execution and running of any operation, no matter its scale or field, is almost always governed by solid guidelines of thought and intention. Such processes are not merely meant as a tool of ‘Show & Tell’, but also aid in providing its participants with a common framework to work within – each member aware of the impact of their individual roles as being the stepping stone towards the bigger picture and into greener pastures. In the world of business, this holds truer than ever before, in lieu of its complex dealings with a wide array of parties. The dilemma is thus posed by consideration of an organization’s goals and how to accomplish them when realistically they may be in direct contradiction to the individuals & groups ideologies, but nonetheless are the minds behind the potential success. The answer lies in a fusion of ‘freedom of choice’ and ‘match made in heaven’ whereby common groups are created, each in consensus with one another, and walking down a straight line. However for such a tactic to be successful, it is important to define clearly the ‘building-blocks’ of such an institution.
Broadly defined, a mission statement is a declaration of organizational purpose (Bryson, 1995). The importance of defining such a statement and having a leader who would lead as an example of these values was stressed upon by Jerome H. Want in 1986, when he explained that not only does it help provide employees with a sense of direction within the organization, but also forges loyalties in the long run allowing for maximum productivity and innovation. The factors to be considered in developing an effective Mission Statement could be summarized as follows: (Pearce & David, 1987; David, 1989) 1. Identification of Target Customers & Markets
2. Identification of Principal Products/Services
3. Specification of Geographic Domain
4. Identification of Core Technology
5. Expression of Commitment to Survival, Growth & Profitability 6. Specification of Key Elements in the Company Philosophy 7. Identification of Company Self-Concept
8. Identification of the Firm’s Desired Public Image
9. Identification of Concern of Employees
With the above points in mind, it is equally as important to note that even a good mission statement would have the potential of doing more harm than good if the values and behavior standards devised are not in conformity with those of its employees (Campbell, 1997). The performance-enhancing drivers of mission statements is thus contingent upon the following factors: (Bart and Tabone, 1998) 1. To Provide a Sense of Purpose
2. To Increase CEO Control
3. To Define Behavior Standards
4. To Enable Employees to Identify with their Organization 5. To Give Greater Recognition to the Interests of External Stakeholders 6. To Inspire and Motivate Employees
7. To Refocus the Organization During a Crisis
8. To Improve the Resource Allocation Process
Pfizer’s Mission Statement:
“We discover and develop innovative, value-added products that improve the quality of life of people around the world and help them enjoy longer, healthier, and more productive lives.”
References: Bryson, John M. (1995). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pp. 75-78.
Want, Jerome H. (1986). Corporate Mission: The Intangible Contributor to Performance
Pearce, John A
David, Fred R. (1989). How corporations define their mission, Long Range Planning, 22(1), 90-98.
Campbell, Andrew (1997). Mission statements, Long Range Planning, 30(6), 931-932.
Barrett, Richard (1998). Liberating the Corporate Soul: Building a Visionary Organization
McCann, Dick (2006)
Vidal, Pau; Valls, Nuria & Grabulosa, Laia (2008). Values as a distinguishing element in Nonprofit Organizations, ISTR 8th International Conference
Freeman, R.E., & Reed, D.L. (1983). “Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance.” California Management Review, 25(3): 88-106.
Preston, L.E., & Sapienza, H.J. (1990). Stakeholder management and corporate performance. The Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19(4), 361-375.
Rawlins, Brad L. (2006). Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations. Institute for Public Relations
Grunig, J. E. & Repper, F. C. 1992. “Strategic Management, Publics, and Issues,” In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 117-157.: 128.
Savage, G.T., Nix, T.H., Whitehead, C.J., & Blair, J.D. 1991. “Strategies for Assessing and Managing Organizational Stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, 19: 453-473
Please join StudyMode to read the full document