“Our Visions Aren’t What They Used To Be”

“You don’t have to be faster than the lion; you only have to be faster than the slowest guy.” –Zimbabwe saying

Organizational vision statements are fascinating to read. They become even more interesting when we can read a large number of them. Many are inspirational, many are “tummy warming” and many look like they followed a recipe that required a few blanks to be filled in. I have not read many visions that explicitly stated that the enterprise wanted to be the second or third best. Yet, second or third best would have been a transformative stretch and a fantastic motivator, since nobody bought the number one language.

How many vision statements have we read? How many have we participated in developing? How many of these did you feel were honest, anchored in reality, and believable? How many visions were defined by a desired position or description rather than by a targeted level of achievement or performance?

I believe in the power of vision. In fact, a few weeks ago we discussed the transformative nature of John F. Kennedy’s “Man on the Moon” speech and the vision it articulated. It was moving and it moved a nation. I also believe that many visions are written such that they sometimes conjure images of looking good, feeling good and being thought of as good, rather than achieving good, or even, surviving a storm. What I mean is that a vision should be grounded on where we are and what is essential we become. In enterprises, what is essential to what we become must be translatable into dimensions of execution. We measure the enterprise by how it executes and delivers outcomes, and, so should, the vision for the enterprise lead to measurable verification in terms of execution and achievement. It should evoke a dynamic response (action, process, project, response) relative to the targeted or desired static end state (position, market share, etc)

If a ship is sinking, the vision should focus and energize the crew and passengers to what truly transformative and requires aligned energy and effort. It may not be to be the best looking cruise ship in the world, but rather, executing with discipline the rescue and safety of the living aboard.

So, our questions:

• How should we think our approach to developing our enterprise visions?
• Are the more or less useful and relevant if they are contextual?
• In times of disruptive change, should they be more evolutionary or multi-generational?
• Should they be weighted to performance levels or end states?
• Create inclusiveness for the enterprise through relevance to the present?
• Should they have a bias toward hope or toward focus, or neither?