- Email: [email protected]
Zero-in: A Technique for formulating better mission statements
Zero-in: A Technique for Formulating Better Mission Statcments Craig C. Lundberg 30 Craig C. Lundberg is Professor and Department Chairman at the School of Business Administration of the University of Southern California.
Although everyone agrees that they are necessary, statements of mission do not even exist in many organizations, and are inadequate in others. Zero-in, a new technique for formulating statements of mission, derived from the nominal group method, is a structured g r o u p process which efficiently develops a consensual synthesized mission statement resulting in high commitment. t is a commonplace in management literature that statements of mission are the cornerstones upon which objectives, policies, and plans should be laid. Whether the subject is chief executive officer success, adaptation to environmental changes, implementing management by objectives, corporate social responsibility, or strategic assessment, the refrain is c o n s t a n t - a n organizational mission that remains implicit invites miscalculation, error, rigidity, and disaster. Although there is no known survey of the extent to which organizations do possess adequate and up-to-date mission statements, it is surprisingly c o m m o n not to find them at all. Top-level staff, consultants, and organizational researchers alike often discover that their clients or staff either do not
I
have a mission statement, that it is not contemporary, or that it is merely window dressing. While there are, no doubt, many explanations for this discrepancy between the espoused belief that mission statements are essential and the observed reality of modest adherence to the dictum, the difficulty of formulating such statements and the lack of guidance in the literature no doubt accounts for a good part of it. The c o m m o n approach to mission formulation seems to be for top management to delegate initial drafting to staff persons and review subsequent drafts until the chief executive is satisfied. This approach and its variants has several defects: it is time-consuming, the sequencing of inputs and modifications can result in overlooking key Business Horizons / September-October 1984
Zero-in: A Technique for Formulating Better Mission Statements
ideas, it tends to provide statements of past rather than present missions, and it seldom results in the desired general management commitment to the mission. This article describes the origins, development, and process of a technique, "zero-in," which attempts to overcome some of these difficulties. Like the nominal group technique, the zero-in technique tries to formulate a synthesized mission statement with many inputs in one structured meeting, where involvement of managers leads to a consensual commitment. The potential importance of this new technique is threefold: it is time- and cost-efficient, it offers a c o m m o n experience that can enhance the subsequent statement of objectives, and it offers a model of teamwork to top management. The Origin of Zero-in he mission of an organization is generally acknowledged to lie outside of the organization itself. "In fact, it must lie in society since business enterprise is an organ of society. ''1 A mission specifies in concrete and operational terms, not platitudes, exactly what major activities the organization performs or intends to perform and the kind of organization it is or intends to be. Even more normatively, Thompson and Strickland state that purpose "denotes what the organization should be doing and why it exists. Purpose specifies exactly what the organization's business is or is to be and the kind of organization it is or is to be.,,2 An explicit mission statement serves a variety of essential management functions. Various authors on the subject see it as the fundamental c o m p o n e n t in strategic planning
T
1. Peter Drucker, Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (New York: Harper and Row, 1974): 61. 2. Arthur A. Thompson, Jr. and A.J. Strickland HI, Strategy Formulation and Implementation: Tasks o f the General Manager (Piano, Texas: Business Publications, Inc., 1983).
or policy formation; as the starting point for rational management action; as necessary for resultsoriented objectives, strategies, and action; as basic to the design of organization structures, processes, and procedures; as necessary for effective organizational leadership, for aligning the organization to its external environment, for determining the criteria for the direction of change, and, in general, for all areas on which long-term survival and success of the organization depend. Although the utility and function of mission statements are wellestablished, the means for developing statements is essentially undiscussed. The conventional wisdom is that both acceptance and understanding are necessary for missions to be effective, and that potent psychological and political forces must often be overcome. The alternatives seem to be either reliance on somewhat slow, incremental processes or settling for a framework of broadly stated goals. Needed, we contend, are methods which directly counter conventional wisdom--methods which are, on the one hand, not slow or too general and which, on the other hand, encourage consensus. Zero-in is one such method. Like the invention of many practical tools and techniques, zero-in had its origins in a perceived necessity. A large public agency of the federal government was charged with redesigning itself in whatever way necessary to become a model of effectiveness and efficiency. This project was assigned to a redesign team drawn representationally from the system and to which several consultants were added. The diagnostic and redesign phases of the project took nearly a year. The changes were to be implemented in a series of phases over a three-year period under the guidance of a change team again aided b y consultants. One of the vital, initial steps was to formulate a new, more
adequate mission statement. Unfortunately, the organization's work encompassed a large geographic area and required management often to be away from headquarters. The formulation of the mission statement and objectives was to occur just as the organization's busiest season was getting underway. The plan clearly specified a high involvement of relevant parties in each phase of the change endeavor. Thus, circumstances were such that the top management and the change team could realistically devote only one full day to formulating the mission and system objectives. There were, therefore, several constraints: lack of time, clients who had little experience in mission formulation, and the ideal of producing a consensual document, among others. The circumstances and constraints seemed to call for a new method which was time-efficient, would generate a level of high involvement, and would build commitment. The zero-in technique was the consultant's response. The Zero-in Technique he zero-in technique for mission statement formulation is described below as a series of rounds, each containing several steps.
T
R o u n d One 1. Announcement of the meeting time and place, including a statement of the meeting's objective--to jointly produce a mission statement for the organization. a. The announcement is sent over the signature of the appropriate top manager or chief executive. b. The announcement is sent to all managers responsible for the major functions and activities of the organization. c. The announcement notes the meeting will be guided and facilitated by a third party, who is named.
31
d. Optionally, invited parties can be requested to give some thought to the organization's mission ahead of time. 2. Structure of the setting. The requisite number of chairs are arranged around a conference table with a tablet and pencil or pen for each place. A flip chart or blackboard is available. Round Two 32
1. When members are gathered together, the third party facilitator begins by outlining the purpose and importance of the meeting. 2. The following instruction initiates the formulation process: "The mission of an organization is a statement of what it is ultimately all about, that is, what business we are in. Using the materials in front of you, write several sentences that seem to you to capture the mission of [this organization]. Do not sign your sheet. Perfection is not essential; just write something that captures your first or basic ideas. Let's do this quickly." 3. When the members have finished writing, the sheets are collected, shuffled, and placed in the center of the table. 4. Members are then invited to read the stack of sheets by taking one, reading it, replacing it, and repeating this process until all sheets have been read. Members are cautioned not to talk together as it disrupts others' reading. 5. The facilitator then takes the stack of sheets, dramatically crumples them together and discards them. Round Three 1. The facilitator next says, "Now let's each write another few sentences or paragxaph that captures your ideas of (the organization's) mission. You no doubt have received some stimulus from the stack just read. As before, do not sign your sheet." 2. When members have finished
writing, the facilitator collects them, shuffles them, and places the stack in the table's center. 3. Members are then requested to read the stack as before. 4. The facilitator then repeats his or her dramatic discarding of the stack. Round Four 1. As previously, the facilitator initiates the round with an instruction: " B y now you've read a number of views as to (the organization's) mission. Some of these will have seemed more accurate or appropriate or descriptive than others. Now, write a paragraph that seems to you to capture what you now believe is the true or real mission of (the organization)." 2. When members have finished wxiting, the facilitator collects the paragxaphs, shuffles them, and places the stack in the table's center. 3. Members are then requested to read the stack as before. The facilitator, however, offers this additional instruction: "This time as you read this collection of mission statements, underline those key words or phrases that seem particularly telling." 4. When the reading and underlining is finished the facilitator asks the top manager or chief executive to select two members, and for the three of them to take the stack of statements to a separate place and produce a synthesized mission statement in the next twenty minutes or less. 5. While the synthesizing trio works, the others either take a break or the facilitator initiates a discussion on what it was like to participate thus far. Round Five 1. The synthesized mission statement is written out on the blackboard or flip chart so that it is easily visible. Then, the members are invited to read the statement.
2. The chief executive is asked to lead a discussion of the statement, phrase by phrase, making any modifications necessary, until the members are satisfied that the statement is complete and accurate. 3. The chief executive is then asked to lead a discussion about how and when and with whom the mission statement might be shared in the organization. The facilitator's task here is to be sure members are realistic and that they thoroughly examine the consequences of the alternatives considered. Round Six A discussion is initiated in which members are encouraged to express their experience with zero-in. If appropriate, lessons are asked for which seem applicable to other settings and tasks in the organization. The zero-in technique has a clear intellectual parent and several known kin. It consciously deviates fi'om the well-known nominal gxoup technique and has also been influenced by William Fox's improvements. 3 Zero-in resembles Richard Mason and I.I. Mitroff's strategic assumption surfacing and testing methodology in that it is an iterative, structured gxoup process aimed at bringing ideas to the surface and synthesizing them, while differing in its brevity, focus, and simplicity.4 Zero-in also resembles, in part, the informant panel method of Craig Lundberg and A.M. Glassman in its use of organizationally knowledgeable experts and its consensual emphasis, s 3. William M. Fox, "A New Proven Procedure for Problem-free Group Problemsolving: INGT," Working Paper, College of Business Administration, University of Florida, 1982. 4. Richard O. Mason and I.I. Mitroff, Challenging Strategic Plan~,ing Assumptions (New York: John Wiley, 1981). 5. Craig C. Lundberg and A.M. Glassman, "The Informant Panel: A Retrospective Methodology for Guiding Organization Change," Group and Organization Studies, June 1983: 249-263.
Zero-in: A Technique for Formulating Better Mission Statements
"The development of the zero-in technique proceeded from a practical opportunity and the premise that an inexpensive, brief, highly involving, and consensually synthesizing means for formulating a mission statement was needed." 33 Since the experience at the large public agency at which zero-in was invented, the technique has been applied to three other organizations: a small service enterprise, a regional VA hospital, and a professional school. Although extensive testing has not been done, tl/e several applications appear to provide positive support for the technique's feasibility and utility. Refining the Technique he development of the zero-in technique proceeded from a practical opportunity and the premise that an inexpensive, brief, highly involving and consensually synthesizing means for formulating a mission statement was needed. Inspired b y the nominal group, zero-in was invented and subsequently applied in a variety of organizations. Although our experience with the technique is still limited, it is clear that several features are essential to success. • The setting. A conference room with table and blackboard or flip chart. • Time. Our experience suggests that about two to three hours are required, and that this block of time should not be interrupted. o Meeting size. Our experience suggests that utility increases with size, b u t that after fifteen members
T
there is little gain and there are more complications. • Member criteria. Membership consists of the chief executive (or top manager of a major unit) and all of his or her immediate subordinates and key staff persons, that is, the managers responsible for the major functions and activities. • Meeting management. The facilitator needs sensitivity to group dynamics and conference leadership skills. The chief executive or top manager should be coached in discussion leadership as necessary. Two questions come to mind about zero-in. Can the technique produce the mission statements which capture the present and give direction to the future? In fact, two of the applications formulated contemporary missions and future ones. In both instances the products were seemingly equally accepted. A second question is: Do managers retain their commitment to mission statements formulated via zero-in? Here, we only have impressionistic evidence and only our general experience as a basis for comparison. Nevertheless, in speaking with managers from six months to one year later, it seems that zero-in actually enhanced managers' allegiance to the mission. Other interesting questions
about zero-in can only be dealt with speculatively. For instance, what degree of openness or trust is requisite? Once the overall mission is formulated for a very large organization, can zero-in be used to specify the missions of major divisions? This raises a related question: Is zero-in likely to be effective when themes or encompassing purposes are provided? Other interesting questions of application easily come to mind. Can zero-in be used when two organizations merge? Does it make any difference if the chief executive is either very new to the organization or only has prior functional experience? These and similar questions have yet to be adequately answered. uture development and refinement of the zero-in technique would first require many further applications in a range of settings. With the systematic gathering of clinical information, the technique can be successively refined and situational contingencies identified. Once this has occurred, more rigorous designs can be utilized and intermethod comparative studies initiated. Such work is required to take what is now only a technique based on limited experience and fulfill its promise as a tool for organizational practice, r---]
F
Although everyone agrees that they are necessary, statements of mission do not even exist in many organizations, and are inadequate in others. Zero-in, a new technique for formulating statements of mission, derived from the nominal group method, is a structured g r o u p process which efficiently develops a consensual synthesized mission statement resulting in high commitment. t is a commonplace in management literature that statements of mission are the cornerstones upon which objectives, policies, and plans should be laid. Whether the subject is chief executive officer success, adaptation to environmental changes, implementing management by objectives, corporate social responsibility, or strategic assessment, the refrain is c o n s t a n t - a n organizational mission that remains implicit invites miscalculation, error, rigidity, and disaster. Although there is no known survey of the extent to which organizations do possess adequate and up-to-date mission statements, it is surprisingly c o m m o n not to find them at all. Top-level staff, consultants, and organizational researchers alike often discover that their clients or staff either do not
I
have a mission statement, that it is not contemporary, or that it is merely window dressing. While there are, no doubt, many explanations for this discrepancy between the espoused belief that mission statements are essential and the observed reality of modest adherence to the dictum, the difficulty of formulating such statements and the lack of guidance in the literature no doubt accounts for a good part of it. The c o m m o n approach to mission formulation seems to be for top management to delegate initial drafting to staff persons and review subsequent drafts until the chief executive is satisfied. This approach and its variants has several defects: it is time-consuming, the sequencing of inputs and modifications can result in overlooking key Business Horizons / September-October 1984
Zero-in: A Technique for Formulating Better Mission Statements
ideas, it tends to provide statements of past rather than present missions, and it seldom results in the desired general management commitment to the mission. This article describes the origins, development, and process of a technique, "zero-in," which attempts to overcome some of these difficulties. Like the nominal group technique, the zero-in technique tries to formulate a synthesized mission statement with many inputs in one structured meeting, where involvement of managers leads to a consensual commitment. The potential importance of this new technique is threefold: it is time- and cost-efficient, it offers a c o m m o n experience that can enhance the subsequent statement of objectives, and it offers a model of teamwork to top management. The Origin of Zero-in he mission of an organization is generally acknowledged to lie outside of the organization itself. "In fact, it must lie in society since business enterprise is an organ of society. ''1 A mission specifies in concrete and operational terms, not platitudes, exactly what major activities the organization performs or intends to perform and the kind of organization it is or intends to be. Even more normatively, Thompson and Strickland state that purpose "denotes what the organization should be doing and why it exists. Purpose specifies exactly what the organization's business is or is to be and the kind of organization it is or is to be.,,2 An explicit mission statement serves a variety of essential management functions. Various authors on the subject see it as the fundamental c o m p o n e n t in strategic planning
T
1. Peter Drucker, Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (New York: Harper and Row, 1974): 61. 2. Arthur A. Thompson, Jr. and A.J. Strickland HI, Strategy Formulation and Implementation: Tasks o f the General Manager (Piano, Texas: Business Publications, Inc., 1983).
or policy formation; as the starting point for rational management action; as necessary for resultsoriented objectives, strategies, and action; as basic to the design of organization structures, processes, and procedures; as necessary for effective organizational leadership, for aligning the organization to its external environment, for determining the criteria for the direction of change, and, in general, for all areas on which long-term survival and success of the organization depend. Although the utility and function of mission statements are wellestablished, the means for developing statements is essentially undiscussed. The conventional wisdom is that both acceptance and understanding are necessary for missions to be effective, and that potent psychological and political forces must often be overcome. The alternatives seem to be either reliance on somewhat slow, incremental processes or settling for a framework of broadly stated goals. Needed, we contend, are methods which directly counter conventional wisdom--methods which are, on the one hand, not slow or too general and which, on the other hand, encourage consensus. Zero-in is one such method. Like the invention of many practical tools and techniques, zero-in had its origins in a perceived necessity. A large public agency of the federal government was charged with redesigning itself in whatever way necessary to become a model of effectiveness and efficiency. This project was assigned to a redesign team drawn representationally from the system and to which several consultants were added. The diagnostic and redesign phases of the project took nearly a year. The changes were to be implemented in a series of phases over a three-year period under the guidance of a change team again aided b y consultants. One of the vital, initial steps was to formulate a new, more
adequate mission statement. Unfortunately, the organization's work encompassed a large geographic area and required management often to be away from headquarters. The formulation of the mission statement and objectives was to occur just as the organization's busiest season was getting underway. The plan clearly specified a high involvement of relevant parties in each phase of the change endeavor. Thus, circumstances were such that the top management and the change team could realistically devote only one full day to formulating the mission and system objectives. There were, therefore, several constraints: lack of time, clients who had little experience in mission formulation, and the ideal of producing a consensual document, among others. The circumstances and constraints seemed to call for a new method which was time-efficient, would generate a level of high involvement, and would build commitment. The zero-in technique was the consultant's response. The Zero-in Technique he zero-in technique for mission statement formulation is described below as a series of rounds, each containing several steps.
T
R o u n d One 1. Announcement of the meeting time and place, including a statement of the meeting's objective--to jointly produce a mission statement for the organization. a. The announcement is sent over the signature of the appropriate top manager or chief executive. b. The announcement is sent to all managers responsible for the major functions and activities of the organization. c. The announcement notes the meeting will be guided and facilitated by a third party, who is named.
31
d. Optionally, invited parties can be requested to give some thought to the organization's mission ahead of time. 2. Structure of the setting. The requisite number of chairs are arranged around a conference table with a tablet and pencil or pen for each place. A flip chart or blackboard is available. Round Two 32
1. When members are gathered together, the third party facilitator begins by outlining the purpose and importance of the meeting. 2. The following instruction initiates the formulation process: "The mission of an organization is a statement of what it is ultimately all about, that is, what business we are in. Using the materials in front of you, write several sentences that seem to you to capture the mission of [this organization]. Do not sign your sheet. Perfection is not essential; just write something that captures your first or basic ideas. Let's do this quickly." 3. When the members have finished writing, the sheets are collected, shuffled, and placed in the center of the table. 4. Members are then invited to read the stack of sheets by taking one, reading it, replacing it, and repeating this process until all sheets have been read. Members are cautioned not to talk together as it disrupts others' reading. 5. The facilitator then takes the stack of sheets, dramatically crumples them together and discards them. Round Three 1. The facilitator next says, "Now let's each write another few sentences or paragxaph that captures your ideas of (the organization's) mission. You no doubt have received some stimulus from the stack just read. As before, do not sign your sheet." 2. When members have finished
writing, the facilitator collects them, shuffles them, and places the stack in the table's center. 3. Members are then requested to read the stack as before. 4. The facilitator then repeats his or her dramatic discarding of the stack. Round Four 1. As previously, the facilitator initiates the round with an instruction: " B y now you've read a number of views as to (the organization's) mission. Some of these will have seemed more accurate or appropriate or descriptive than others. Now, write a paragraph that seems to you to capture what you now believe is the true or real mission of (the organization)." 2. When members have finished wxiting, the facilitator collects the paragxaphs, shuffles them, and places the stack in the table's center. 3. Members are then requested to read the stack as before. The facilitator, however, offers this additional instruction: "This time as you read this collection of mission statements, underline those key words or phrases that seem particularly telling." 4. When the reading and underlining is finished the facilitator asks the top manager or chief executive to select two members, and for the three of them to take the stack of statements to a separate place and produce a synthesized mission statement in the next twenty minutes or less. 5. While the synthesizing trio works, the others either take a break or the facilitator initiates a discussion on what it was like to participate thus far. Round Five 1. The synthesized mission statement is written out on the blackboard or flip chart so that it is easily visible. Then, the members are invited to read the statement.
2. The chief executive is asked to lead a discussion of the statement, phrase by phrase, making any modifications necessary, until the members are satisfied that the statement is complete and accurate. 3. The chief executive is then asked to lead a discussion about how and when and with whom the mission statement might be shared in the organization. The facilitator's task here is to be sure members are realistic and that they thoroughly examine the consequences of the alternatives considered. Round Six A discussion is initiated in which members are encouraged to express their experience with zero-in. If appropriate, lessons are asked for which seem applicable to other settings and tasks in the organization. The zero-in technique has a clear intellectual parent and several known kin. It consciously deviates fi'om the well-known nominal gxoup technique and has also been influenced by William Fox's improvements. 3 Zero-in resembles Richard Mason and I.I. Mitroff's strategic assumption surfacing and testing methodology in that it is an iterative, structured gxoup process aimed at bringing ideas to the surface and synthesizing them, while differing in its brevity, focus, and simplicity.4 Zero-in also resembles, in part, the informant panel method of Craig Lundberg and A.M. Glassman in its use of organizationally knowledgeable experts and its consensual emphasis, s 3. William M. Fox, "A New Proven Procedure for Problem-free Group Problemsolving: INGT," Working Paper, College of Business Administration, University of Florida, 1982. 4. Richard O. Mason and I.I. Mitroff, Challenging Strategic Plan~,ing Assumptions (New York: John Wiley, 1981). 5. Craig C. Lundberg and A.M. Glassman, "The Informant Panel: A Retrospective Methodology for Guiding Organization Change," Group and Organization Studies, June 1983: 249-263.
Zero-in: A Technique for Formulating Better Mission Statements
"The development of the zero-in technique proceeded from a practical opportunity and the premise that an inexpensive, brief, highly involving, and consensually synthesizing means for formulating a mission statement was needed." 33 Since the experience at the large public agency at which zero-in was invented, the technique has been applied to three other organizations: a small service enterprise, a regional VA hospital, and a professional school. Although extensive testing has not been done, tl/e several applications appear to provide positive support for the technique's feasibility and utility. Refining the Technique he development of the zero-in technique proceeded from a practical opportunity and the premise that an inexpensive, brief, highly involving and consensually synthesizing means for formulating a mission statement was needed. Inspired b y the nominal group, zero-in was invented and subsequently applied in a variety of organizations. Although our experience with the technique is still limited, it is clear that several features are essential to success. • The setting. A conference room with table and blackboard or flip chart. • Time. Our experience suggests that about two to three hours are required, and that this block of time should not be interrupted. o Meeting size. Our experience suggests that utility increases with size, b u t that after fifteen members
T
there is little gain and there are more complications. • Member criteria. Membership consists of the chief executive (or top manager of a major unit) and all of his or her immediate subordinates and key staff persons, that is, the managers responsible for the major functions and activities. • Meeting management. The facilitator needs sensitivity to group dynamics and conference leadership skills. The chief executive or top manager should be coached in discussion leadership as necessary. Two questions come to mind about zero-in. Can the technique produce the mission statements which capture the present and give direction to the future? In fact, two of the applications formulated contemporary missions and future ones. In both instances the products were seemingly equally accepted. A second question is: Do managers retain their commitment to mission statements formulated via zero-in? Here, we only have impressionistic evidence and only our general experience as a basis for comparison. Nevertheless, in speaking with managers from six months to one year later, it seems that zero-in actually enhanced managers' allegiance to the mission. Other interesting questions
about zero-in can only be dealt with speculatively. For instance, what degree of openness or trust is requisite? Once the overall mission is formulated for a very large organization, can zero-in be used to specify the missions of major divisions? This raises a related question: Is zero-in likely to be effective when themes or encompassing purposes are provided? Other interesting questions of application easily come to mind. Can zero-in be used when two organizations merge? Does it make any difference if the chief executive is either very new to the organization or only has prior functional experience? These and similar questions have yet to be adequately answered. uture development and refinement of the zero-in technique would first require many further applications in a range of settings. With the systematic gathering of clinical information, the technique can be successively refined and situational contingencies identified. Once this has occurred, more rigorous designs can be utilized and intermethod comparative studies initiated. Such work is required to take what is now only a technique based on limited experience and fulfill its promise as a tool for organizational practice, r---]
F