The simple
answer is that an organization’s mission, vision, and values are answers to the
questions, “What business are we in?” and “Why are we in this business?” There
is no reference that corresponds to my opening sentence because after more than
25 years of reading books from Tom Peters, Mark McCormick, Zig Ziglar, John
Maxwell, Andy Stanley, Stephen Covey, Lee Iacocca, Peter Drucker, Jim Collins,
Al Reis, Harvey McKay, Ken Blanchard, John Kotter, Dale Carnegie, and many,
many others this concept is so ingrained in my mind I could not begin to know
if it is a synthesis of many ideas or something one of these men have written. Mission
statements are very often platitude-like ideas such as this one from American
Standard Company, "Be the best in the
eyes of our customers, employees and shareholders" (Fortune 500 Companies, 2012). This company needs
to invest heavily in their strategy while trying to fulfill this mission.
Strategy, in their case for sure, is something that will hopefully take them
from saying they want to “Be the best,” to actually formulating priorities and
determining how to address each one to make sure they reach their “Ideal.” When
they write the mission statement and express their goal in terms of the big
picture, it is strategy that will specify the general directions and priorities
(Kaplan, 2001). There is a great contrast to American
Standard that comes from the Walt Disney Corporation,
“The mission of The Walt Disney Company is to be one of the
world's leading producers and providers of entertainment and information. Using
our portfolio of brands to differentiate our content, services and consumer
products, we seek to develop the most creative, innovative and profitable
entertainment experiences and related products in the world” (Fortune 500 Companies, 2012).
I really
like the specificity of their statement, “one of the world's leading producers
and providers of entertainment and information” because it seems to be a much
better platform in which to launch a strategy. When forming a strategy to
determine how an organization will achieve, or live up to, its mission
statement, having one that already points to a tangible objective is helpful. I
am not sure how someone might measure which organization is the “best” in their
field. Is it through profits, shareholder dividends, market penetration, brand
recognition, customer satisfaction, or employee relationships? I am not sure. Some
might be stronger than others in different areas, and then it seems to leave us
with a subjective decision as to who is really the “best.” However, measuring
who “produces and provides the most entertainment,” could be measured in
concrete ways. For example, which movie company delivered the most movies, most
television programs, sold the most merchandise relating to their brand, or who
has acquired a larger audience share are some of the tangible ways to measure.
Saying that
to say this, when an organization is trying to develop a strategy it becomes
immensely more relatable to the mission and vision of the organization if they
offer some tangible goal to help the leadership determine concrete goals and
outcomes (Kaplan, 2001).
2. What is meant by strategy as
hypothesis?
The strategy that an organization follows is somewhat of an
uncertain proposition, and this being the case traveling down the path is done
through studied guess-work so to speak. What the organization does, as we would
say in East Texas, is to plow new ground. Having not plowed the ground before,
a farmer would be making an educated guess (hypothesis) about whether or not
plowing the ground and planting (strategy) will produce a profitable harvest
(outcome).
However, the key for the farmer would be to clearly
understand, and make sure the hired hands understand what he is trying to
accomplish. He would also need to align his resources with his strategy to work
the new ground. It would not make much sense if the farmer bought the new
field, formed a strategy to produce enough to make a profit, but only committed
a small riding lawnmower to work the ground. He would need to align everything
he had that would enable him to fulfill his goal. Finally, he would need to
watch the production and make necessary changes at the time they need to be
made. Once again, if he plants a crop requiring X amount of water to yield the
best results, he would need to monitor the field and introduce water, or drain
water away in order to reach the optimal production level of the field.
My whole scenario is based on the Kaplan idea that strategy
implies the movement of an organization from its present position to a
desirable but uncertain future position (Kaplan, 2001). The hypotheses occur because the organization
has never been to this future place (Kaplan, 2001), and getting there requires making a
decision about getting to this place, although based on somewhat on existing
knowledge, is still an educated guess (hypothesis).
No comments:
Post a Comment