Content area
Full Text
Keywords
Vision, Strategic planning, Management attitudes
Abstract
Managers are divided in their allegiance to their firms' mission statements. Some managers swear by their mission statement while others swear at theirs. Evidence from two firms, as well as existing research, indicates that part of this disagreement originates in the manager's view of mission statements. Managers who see mission statements as tools that can influence the inner workings of their organizations are likely to understand the mission's usefulness. Managers who put their mission statements on display and expect them to magically transform organizational behavior are likely to be frustrated and see them as an exercise in futility. In this paper, insights from two managers who take the first view provide specific steps managers can utilize to harness the benefits of their mission statements.
Most firms have a mission statement. With some exceptions, companies create, post, rely upon, and defend this document of stated beliefs. Yet few management tools evoke as strong an emotional response from executives, managers, and academics as results from a discussion of mission statements. Bring up the mission statement, and this otherwise benign tool creates conflict among the most seasoned business minds. Is it sinner or saint? Is it useful for practical, day-to-day operations, or simply an archaic document that takes up space on the wall?
This paper answers both of those questions with a resounding "Yes!" The mission statement is what the top executive and supporting managers choose to make it. With the understanding that a mission statement can be used incorrectly and be basically useless, this paper focuses on two beneficial uses of mission statements in two organizations. General conclusions for the use of mission statements as strategic tools will be drawn from interviews with an executive from each of these companies.
The debate
Several works have delineated what should be included in a mission statement (Abell, 1980; Pearce and David, 1987; David, 1989). However, it is not the contents of the mission statement that stirs debate, rather it is the process used to prepare the document and how the finished document is employed in the organization that comes under question. Goett (1997) parsimoniously summed up the view of the anti-mission statement camp:
Every last one of them (mission...