John Constantine states the following:
"I believe it is helpful to point out the Mission Statement and its source.
We can only hope it is true. And that, we can only know by doing, not by a
mission statement. That is the essential problem with mission statements in
general, that they tend to be a bit of over-kill (no pun intended) with
little chance of "being" what the organization offers as a mission, unless
the organization uses the rear view mirror as it goes along to see whether
it has fulfilled the mission . . . Such statements if amended offer promise
of constantly improving the organization using tools such as the Shewhart
Cycle to better the organization and its members. The danger is in the
belief that it has already succeeded."
The questions below were asked offline:
"My question to you though, is who do you involve in your mission statement
development exercises? And do you re-visit the mission frequently.... or
is it, like in many organizations, an occupier of pious wall space? If
you LIVE the mission statement ( and my guess is that in the military there
is a greater focus on purpose ) what is done to keep it alive."
Following is my response that I think applies to what John was talking
about:
Our Quality Improvement Council (QIC) here at Headquarters Twelfth Air Force
are the individuals that determined the mission statement. The QIC is made
up of the unit commander (CEO), vice commander (senior vice president),
director of staff (chief of operations), and 15 other senior leaders that
are head of each of their agencies (divisions). There usually is only about
10 to 12 of these at any meeting. The meetings to work these kinds of
issues are facilitated by the "quality office". The QIC just recently
reviewed and updated our mission statement (26 Mar 96). Due to changes in
commander's and a renewal of the focus of the QIC the mission statement had
not been reviewed since early 1994. The usual review and rework, if
necessary, is done on an annual basis.
The next step in our strategic planning process is to review/revise our list
of KEY Customers, Outputs, Processes, Inputs, and Suppliers (what we call
the COPIS). During this process the mission statement is constantly
referred to as the guiding principle. Most of our agencies have developed
their own mission statements that tell what they do and tie into the
headquarters mission statement. Wall posters are usually developed (and
probably ignored). The mission statements from Air Combat Command, Twelfth
Air Force, and each agency are used as guides for most things. When there
is a problem to solve or question about what to do, the mission statements
have a tendency to surface and are used as "How does this relate to the
mission statement?"
This is the general process we use, however, as in all organizations, the
process is not always smooth and "on time". There are many factors that
influence the process to include commander changes, mission changes, and a
host of other influences.
Our current commander does not care for all of the "quality speak" but is
focused on the bottom line, which for us is "mission improvement". He
coined the term "dynamic improvement" to replace continuous improvement,
etc., but always with the focus of taking steps to improve the overall
mission.
Sorry for the length of this message, I hope it was useful.
Kim Wilson
wilsonk@hq12af.dm.af.mil
--Wilson K Maj 12AF/QI <wilsonk@hq12af.dm.af.mil>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>