As a strategy consultant, I see clients wrestle with the exercise of creation or articulation of a "Vision" for their business on a regular basis.  In some environments, the exercise of clarifying or creating a vision is motivating and galvanizing, and for others it is futility personified.  My question for the day: How important is it for an organization to have a shared vision–a view as to what the future desired state of the organization will look like? 

Author and Professor, Michael Watkins has some interesting thoughts and observations on this issue in his recent posting at Harvard Business School Press,entitled: "Vision Decisions," including a rationale on why some organizations might just skip the creation of a shared vision.  He states:

"But there are instances, and lots of them, when formal shared visioning
is better avoided. It could be that the organization is simply not an
intrinsically inspiring place. Or it could be that the timing is wrong.
Don’t try one when a business is in the midst of a painful
restructuring, or when you are planning to make major changes in your
team." 

Watkins also cites the classic case of Southwest Airlines as an example of an organization that to his knowledge lacks a formal vision statement, but clearly was run by a visionary and inspiring leader–Herb Kelleher.

My take on Professor Watkins’ comments.  I think that he is mixing the concepts of process, timing and leadership up in the blender and pressing the button.  If you accept that an Articulated Vision can serve as a powerful, galvanizing force–fundamentally as context for an individual’s involvement in a business (beyond compensation), then I think Watkins is off base on a number of counts. 

  • A firm in crisis is exactly the firm that requires a powerful vision for people to grab hold of and help inspire, guide and propel their collective efforts.  Imagine England during the Blitz if Winston Churchill was mum on the need of the British people to persevere.  Churchill placed he hopes and dreams of the free world-including America, squarely on the shoulders of his countrymen. 
  • I don’t know what an intrinsically uninspiring workplace is.  While not every business saves lives, or performs great deeds, calling a workplace "uninspiring" is a cop-out for lack of creative effort on the part of leadership.  Humans need context for their actions, and to the extent that a business exists to serve someone, there is a need and an opportunity to formulate a purpose and direction and ideal future state that is inspirational.  At the lowest level, "crushing a competitor" (e.g. Nike vs. Addidas) can serve as a statement of the future.  I don’t care whether you sell sand or manufacture concrete, there is an opportunity and need for vision.
  • The process of creating a vision can be awkward and the results something akin to watered-down statements that communicate the best of intentions.  Watkins states: "the resulting empty exercises yield “vision statements” to which
    employees periodically genuflect, but they have no operative meaning.
    The net result is anti-inspirational."      I wholeheartedly agree on this point.  If you’ve ever been a participant in a painful Vision Creation by Committee exercise, I suspect that you will agree as well.  However…this is not a reason to forgo the development and articulation of a vision, it’s simply an indictment of a flawed process.

My own views on the Vision-Issue:

  • Humans need context for their work and vision creates context.  It is fundamental and environments without vision are truly rudderless.
  • Vision can emerge from leadership and become an intrinsic part of the DNA without being placed on a poster in every conference room.  The Southwest example referenced by Watkins is a good one.  Every B-school grad studies that organization, and few would deny that Kelleher and the team operated with a clear vision to the future and to serving customers and standing out from competition.  It did not have to be written down, it was/is bred into the organizational DNA through the adoption of values and repeated behaviors over generations of employees.
  • In the absence of a broader organizational vision, individual managers can and should create a vision for their team.  I call this "creating a cause," and even in the most mundane of functions, an effective manager will apply this approach to provide her employees context for their activities.  (Sorry to be redundant on the context issue–I truly believe it.)
  • The process of creating a vision is as much art as science, however, in my experience, it is best developed by those most passionate about the business.  A top leader that doesn’t care about vision and wonders why others might, will never be an effective participant in the process.  In working with clients run by dispassionate leaders, I work with other members of the team to identify a rallying cry that will be meaningful and inspirational to the rest of the organization.  Minimal use of the "V" word and an emphasis on identifying and defeating enemies or contributing to the  welfare of constituents or customers can produce compelling results.  Deft integration with a firm’s values and core ideologies and lo and behold, some strong Vision statements come forth.

Collins and Porass wrote the seminar work on this topic-Built to Last, and anyone interested in rethinking their view on the importance of Vision is encouraged to revisit the book.  One point I am convinced of is the creation and articulation of an effective, inspiring vision is a difficult but worthwhile task.  Don’t let the difficulty factor keep you from pursuing this potentially company-transforming activity.