• /
    • Archives / June 2011

Archives For June 2011

Strategic Planning Alternatives: Mission Discernment

Tim Vanderpyl —  June 30, 2011

I recently wrote two posts criticizing strategic planning. It’s always easy to deconstruct the status quo; it’s tough to reconstruct a viable alternative. I’ll propose some alternatives in my next few posts and I am very interested to hear your thoughts on them.

Consider this quote:
“Executive summaries of requests for decisions are useful tools to consolidate our thinking, but they are not an end in themselves, intended to replace the substantive analysis that normally accompanies such high level summaries. If we begin framing all our thinking and communication in briefing note formats and bullet point analyses, there will inevitably be a tragic erosion of deep engagement with the issues” (Self, 2010a, p.18).

While Self wasn’t directly critiquing strategic planning (SP), that “tragic erosion of deep engagement” is an articulate description of many strategy plans as well.

John Bell wrote a great post called “Why Mission Statements Suck”. I agree, but only because most organizations write the mission statement, post it on their boardroom wall and then forget about it (until the next SP retreat of course). Mission is usually figurative, not integrative. The fault is not in the mission statement itself, but in the discernment of the mission and utilization of the mission in decision-making. But how exactly does one ‘discern’ the mission?

My colleague Dr. Gordon Self has developed a Mission Discernment Tool for use within Covenant Health (Disclaimer: I also work for Covenant Health). In a nutshell, the tool allows leaders to ‘discern’ which path to take as they inevitably face crossroads of decisions, using their mission as the guide.

SP assumes we know all the paths ahead, and that if we try hard enough, we can map our organization’s linear path through the future. But it becomes useless when those paths inevitably change or end up as deadends or cliffs. Mission Discernment assumes the future is blurry and somewhat unpredictable. It assumes leaders will face really tough decisions that can’t be predicted in detail. It is not for petty decisions like what colour of pencils you should buy. Rather, it is for organization-altering decisions such as: Do we expand into this market? Do we lay-off part of our workforce? Do we bribe our way into this country or not? Do we outsource part of our organization? Do we invest in this new service/product? These are tough decisions that make or break leaders and organizations. The Mission Discernment tool gives a framework to wrestle with them.

Mission Discernment also gives us a framework to wrestle with moral decisions our organizations inevitably face. I wonder if Niko Resources would be paying a $9.5Million bribery fine if they had discerned their decisions before bribing foreign officials?

The tool was developed for a Catholic healthcare organization, but I foresee it being adapted to any organization that has a strong, thoughtful and unique mission, and wants to thrive in the future through that mission. It won’t replace strategic planning, but can definitely be a great resource for any leader facing a formidable labyrinth of decisions ahead of him/her.

The Mission Discernment Tool can be viewed here.

Self, G. (2010a). Mission Discernment: A preventative ethics strategy for leaders in Catholic health care organizations. Doctoral Dissertation at St. Stephen’s College.

Self, G. (2010, Nov-Dec). Put values Up front: New discernment tool makes sure values aren’t left to chance. Health Progress. Download article here.

Continue Reading…

In Strategy , , ,
permalink

Why Missions Statements Suck

John Bell —  June 29, 2011

I’m not arguing against a clear definition of where a company is going and what sets it apart. My beef is with the way the particular corporation’s guiding principle is expressed; it is generally verbose, convoluted and incapable of resonating with employees or inspiring them. I’m not the first person to say this. Yet, companies large and small from start-ups to blue chippers continue to err in crafting compelling, single-minded mantras.

Exxon Mobil Corporation’s mission is an example of a poor statement. “We are committed to being the world’s premier petroleum and petrochemical company. To that end, we must continuously achieve superior financial and operating results while adhering to the highest standards of business conduct. These unwavering expectations provide the foundation for our commitments to those with whom we interact.” How many of their 86,000 employees will remember something like that? Exxon Mobil might as well have said, “We want to make tons of money, honestly.” The statement may be true, but it sure as hell isn’t motivating.

Then there’s Barnes & Noble, who seem to know what they are selling but are unsure how to express their differentiation. “Our mission is to operate the best specialty retail business in America, regardless of the product we sell. Because the product we sell is books, our aspirations must be consistent with the promise and the ideals of the volumes which line our shelves. To say that our mission exists independent of the product we sell is to demean the importance and the distinction of being booksellers . . .” That leads into another 100 words of blah, blah, blah.

Now for three good ones: “Brothers First, Business Second” is the caption under a faded framed wall photo of two youngsters who look to be six or seven years old. The picture hangs in one of my favorite Italian eateries run by the now-adult brothers. Instantly, I feel good about the proprietors and their food. “2000 by 2000” was Starbucks’ mission twenty years ago. CEO Howard Schultz wanted 2000 stores up and running by the new millennium. Starbucks achieved the target two years early. Every employee knew the purpose and they worked hard as a team to reach the goal. I also like, “Saving People Money So They Can Live Better.” Who better than Wal-Mart to make this claim, although a Google image search for “People of Wal-Mart” makes me wonder if these particular customers are living better.

A tip on writing good missions is to limit the statement to no more than ten words. Do that and you will have made the tough decision about what the company really stands for. Strategic sacrifice brings clarity and focus. Simple, single-minded missions bring results.

Continue Reading…

In Leadership ,
permalink

About That Bus

David Burkus —  June 27, 2011

Running a great organization is simple. All it takes is the execution of a few simple fundamentals – like get the right people on the bus. Find really great people and bring them into your [now] really great organization.

Um, about that bus…

Recent research into the portability of talent is suggesting that this fundamental isn’t all that simple. Researchers, lead by Harvard Business School’s Boris Groysberg, studied close to 1,000 of Wall Street’s star analysts – the right people. They flagged and followed those who had a career change from the firm they were a star in to another, often competing firm. More often than not, the outstanding performance that led them to a lucrative signing bonus did not follow them to this new firm. In fact, one average star analysts experienced a decline in rankings and performance that typically lasted 5 years.

The idea is this: star performers are important. However, performance is an amalgam of factors – not least of them being the capabilities and collective knowledge of the firm an individual is employed in. (Something Deming likely already knew).

If you want star performers than, plucking them away from other firms can be costly. In addition to the high compensation, you’ll also have to ensure you provide them with similar capabilities and resources as the firm they were a star performer in. Perhaps is more cost effective strategy is to focus on growing the people you do have, ensuring as you do that you’re supply new resources and capabilities just in time for their upticks in performance.

Getting the right people on the bus isn’t that simple – especially if the people were right for some other bus.

Continue Reading…

In Leadership , ,
permalink

The End of Teams as We Know It

David Burkus —  June 23, 2011

Interesting short video I cam across the other day: Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson talks with Professor Karl Moore about teams. Edmondson argues that the future of teams is also the end of traditional teams.

In Leadership ,
permalink

Book Review: Full Steam Ahead

David Burkus —  June 21, 2011

You don’t need to dig too deep into the literature to realize that vision is a big deal. Almost every research, theorist and guru agrees on that. Where most part ways is just what that vision looks like, how develops it, and what to do with it. This is where I started to side with Jesse Lyn Stoner, who, with Ken Blanchard, just released the second edition of Full Steam Ahead.

Full Steam Ahead is about vision. More specifically, Full Steam Ahead tries to tackle the specifics of what makes a good vision and how it should be implemented. Drawing from Stoner’s doctoral dissertation work on vision in organizations, Full Steam Ahead tells the story of Jim and Ellie and how their chance meeting yielded wonderful discussions on developing an organization’s vision.

While it’s tempting to dismiss the book as just another business parable (easy to read but doesn’t teach much), there’s a lesson in this book I believe all leader’s need to catch. Mainly, that a properly developed vision doesn’t just specify what the organization’s impact on the world will look like, but also outlines how that vision is going to become a reality. I suspect that one of the primary reasons behind a vision or mission statement hanging nicely on a wall but not being acted on is that people don’t know how to implement. Full Steam Ahead reveals not only that how is a vital component to vision but also how to develop a how.

In Leadership , , ,
permalink