Mission & Vision

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed individuals can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.
—Margaret Mead

Let’s begin by exploring what your organization will achieve. You may think you are clear about this. Does everyone on your team share the same beliefs about the mission of the organization?

As a consultant, I find that often when people seem to be happy doing the same things together, they are doing it for different personal motivations. Lack of common beliefs about the intended results can be a major source of misunderstanding and unhappiness when decisions are required.

Following is a novel and effective approach to articulating mission.

Why should you be clear about your mission? As I noted in the previous chapter, human resources are the most important resources you can attract. You will need an inspirational mission to attract people to your project. A well-articulated mission statement also clarifies and prioritizes all of your goals, objectives, and activities.

Before you do anything else, work on clearly articulating the mission. You do not need to hold a retreat, strategic planning session, or go through a lot of soul searching with a large group of people. Drag out that ancient copy of your constitution to read the section labeled Purpose. Go back to the original values and beliefs that caused your organization to come into being.

You are setting down in writing your first thoughts to be sure that you, and maybe your small leadership team, are in agreement about what future you want to call into existence. Writing brings clarity to what your organization must achieve, not what tasks are performed. Remember, you are not setting the mission in stone. Later, when you have elected a board, that group will revisit the wording as an important part of the business of governing. In fact, the term mission will be replaced with new language (see the section on Governance).

When I facilitate sessions on mission or vision, I watch people raise their gaze as if they are trying to glimpse something beyond the horizon. The first words that come out are usually vague, poetical, and grand. When I try to bring this down to earth and ask for precise words about what should be achieved, most people default to describing how things will get done. A big gap exists between the “why” an organization exists and the “how” the work is done. You need to be clear about the “why” before you get to the “how”.

The effective mission statement is short and sharply focused. The mission says why you do what you do, not the means by which you do it. —Peter Drucker

The mission statement (sometimes used synonymously with vision) describes the change or benefit that your organization will make in your community or in the lives of your members. This is visionary—which means this statement is about a condition that does not yet exist but can be envisioned. Your organization will be built on, and guided by, achieving this mission. A powerful mission mobilizes the forces of the community to produce that benefit or change.

A strong mission or vision statement that the community can buy into makes a big difference. Sherry met a woman who worked with a foundation in Kansas that funded a 16-county effort to find a common end or vision statement. What they came up with is: Kansas will be the best place to raise a child. Note that the wording doesn’t say, “Kansas will provide…” or “Kansas will work toward…”. The vision clearly states that parents in Kansas will have the best place to raise a child. That vision drives decision-making and resources for the Kansas Early Childhood Comprehensive System http://www.kschildrenscabinet.org.

For some action-oriented people, grasping the distinction between describing the actions necessary to accomplish something and the results is difficult. If this is difficult for you, please read the rest of this section carefully. You will gain insights from understanding the difference.

Here’s an illustration of the distinction between the action and the results. I arrange an appointment with someone in her shop. It’s in an unfamiliar part of town and I ask for the address. The response is often something like this, “Oh, you’ll be coming from the north; so you drive down Main Street past the shopping mall, go two traffic lights and turn right, then…” I explain that I have GPS. All I need is the address and maybe the major cross-streets. I asked for and address and instead I was told what to do. What if I am not coming from the north? What if I didn’t expect to be driving and took public transportation?

The point of this example is that if I’m told what I have to do, I must follow that single pipeline of instructions or become lost. I do not have the freedom to solve the problem my own way.

Notice that when I’m given the address, and maybe a description of the destination (my mission), there are no verbs. What I receive is a clear vision of my objective. I know that if I am not at that place at the specified time I have failed. Because I’m the one who is accountable for showing up, why shouldn’t I be responsible for choosing how I get there?

Look at most mission statements. You’ll likely see a list of actions to be taken: “To develop…,” “to help… ,” “to build…,” “to foster…,” etc. Verbs!

The assumption is that if the actions are successfully completed, the mission will be achieved. While it may seem to work okay, there are three disadvantages to this form of expression.

First, the real mission isn’t described, only the effort expected to achieve the mission. This results in a lack of clarity of purpose, and the associated lost opportunities for creativity.

If my mission is to paint (a verb) a wall white, it’s true that when I achieve the mission I will have a white wall. Unfortunately, the real mission, the white wall, is merely implied by this mission. The mission focuses on the act of painting, not a white wall. If the mission is stated as a smooth white wall (a noun modified with a couple of adjectives) the mission is clear. The associated thought process lets us consider the quality of the mission. Any discussion will involve such things as whether white and smooth are really necessary—or even if a wall is required.

Second, the mission statement demands a particular action: painting. The people who will do the work will focus their thinking on the variety of paints, and conditions suitable for painting, because they know they are accountable only for painting. If, instead, they were responsible for a smooth white wall, they may decide that it can be constructed of smooth white material that never needs painting.

Third, the people doing the work are held accountable for the effort expended, not for the results. How many times have you heard about someone, or a group, who “gave it 110%?” When I hear that I know that their math has no credibility and I wonder if they actually achieved anything of value. The amount of effort might make an interesting anecdote, but the thing that really matters is accomplishing the mission.

When we have to be clear about mission (the result, or benefit, or change) rather than instructing the team members what to do, our job is often much harder. Now we have to articulate something that seems obvious to us, but is grammatically strange. Many of us are pushed into leadership roles because we demonstrated that we know what to do. In our mind, we think we can see the job that needs to be done. So, when we issue marching orders, the job may be done, but the people doing the work may not really understand why they are doing it. The key words of your mission should be nouns. This is why you (as someone showing leadership) say, “I think we need a smooth white wall,” instead of “paint the wall white”.

This is a profound difference and more than just playing with syntax. The smooth white wall is visionary—it doesn’t yet exist.

Because our dedicated workers are following our instructions, they don’t have the opportunity to develop their own novel approach. We have insisted that our way is the only way. You may not realize it, but this really contributes to stifling the team’s creativity and sense of ownership.

Part of your job of leadership is clear articulation of the mission or vision. An alternative is to facilitate the process of discovering what is needed, then holding the team accountable for achieving that.

If you find that this use of language is new or awkward, please review this material until you are comfortable with it. It is much harder to visualize what is needed than it is to assign a task to address a problem. If you can be clear about the mission or vision, then many people can contribute creative ideas about how to achieve it. Although you may think you know what needs to be done, you may be surprised at the variety of other ways members of your team will attack the problem.

Once this way of looking at things is clear to you, whenever a problem arises and people start describing what has to be done to address the problem, you will find yourself reviewing the mission and asking, “Does this strategy or action address the real need? Do we know the real need? How do we know?”

Now think about the reason you are founding a new organization or revitalizing a current one. What is the need? How do you know what the need is? What is the benefit or result in your community that must be achieved by having your organization? This is your mission.

Your ability to be able to think in terms of clearly articulated outcomes instead of describing tasks, will have a profound impact your ability to motivate and inspire your team.