Mission and Vision Statements...

Last week’s discussion revolved around “Mission and Vision.” Contrary to what most people think, a mission is something that is never finished. It is a timeless value. A mission statement is a brief description of a company’s fundamental purpose. A good mission statement should answer the question “Why do we exist?” It focuses on the company’s present state and acts as the compass that drives decision making. It can also act as a very strong motivational statement. It guides the employees in making critical decisions that affect the direction of the company. Mission statements remind the company of their ethics and values. A good mission statement acts as a moral compass, and is the center of being for an organization.  It articulates to the customers what is of value to the organization.  The mission statement should explain why the vision statement is what it is. The aspirations of the company should show why the company even exists. We discussed the mission statements of a few different airline companies. Southwest Airlines mission statement is “Dedication to the highest quality of Customer Service delivered with a sense of warmth, friendliness, individual pride, and Company Spirit.” This mission statement does an adequate job of describing the company’s driving force and intentions. The company does demonstrate all of these characteristics. This mission statement is unique for an airline. The mission statement of Delta Airlines is “We—Delta's employees, customers, and community partners together form a force for positive local and global change, dedicated to bettering standards of living and the environment where we and our customers live and work.” I think that this mission statement has much room for improvement. I would have never guessed that this was the mission statement of an airline before the name of the company was disclosed to me. U.S. Airways mission statement is “Customer service has always been a priority at US Airways, and we are committed to making every flight count for our valued customers. Our promise to you: The safety and satisfaction of our customers is a top priority for our airline.” They have held true to this mission statement so far, and while it is not the most comfortable way to fly, I have never made second thoughts about their concern for safety. These are just a couple examples of mission statements. They are concise and should effectively describe the ongoing values of the company. The difference between a mission statement and a vision statement is that the mission statement deals with the present, while the vision statement deals with the future. A company should be able to draw inspiration from its vision statement. It answers the question “Where do we want to go?” Instead of articulating what you want to do in the present, you are articulating what you want to happen in the future. A vision statement paints a picture of the dream of an organization. Like mission statements, vision statement have a huge impact on decision making and the allocating of resources.

Followership

Followership is the capacity or willingness to follow someone. There are different types of followers. The first type discussed in the reading was the “isolators.” Isolators are completely detached from the group. They do absolutely nothing to aid the group. They are the ones who are secluded and don’t have anything to say at meetings. They are not interested in receiving constructive criticism and don’t care about fellow employees or the leader. They never have any idea about what is going again, which can’t be said for “bystanders.” Bystanders usually know what is going on, but fail to act. They only go along with what everyone else is doing, and usually act out of self-interest. “Participants” put it a little more effort than bystanders and are more engaged. However, they are free agents and only care somewhat. “Activists”, the most ideal type of follower, in my opinion, are the ones who are engaged, active and energetic. They have strong opinions about the leader (they can be good or bad) and can either do a really good job at boosting the leader, or do a really good job at bringing the leader down. “Diehards” are, as the name somewhat suggests, the people who are willing to take anything on in the name of the leader or the entity with which they are affiliated. They are deeply devoted to their leaders, but the opposite can be true as well. Diehards can hate the person/people who are in charge and will stop at nothing to get what they want. After doing the activity that was aimed at helping the class determine whether or not they were good followers, I learned that I could work more in that area. I’m not as supportive as I could be, I don’t really do more than what is asked, and I don’t ever council people who are in positions that are higher than mine. My group and I had to come up with tips on how to council and coach the person in the leadership position. One thing I remember coming with was “be conscious of how you start conversation.” Going up to someone and saying “Here’s what you’re doing wrong” is a lot less effective than “May I make a suggestion?”  We then talked about LMX, or “Leadership Member Exchange.” This theory helps to explain the quality of the relationship between the leaders and the followers as it is assumed that leaders do not interact with and distribute resources, time, energy, and attention to followers equally. We then discussed high quality LMX relationships as having things such as higher levels of leader support and guidance. I formed a study group before one of my midterms and I did notice that some people were more engaged than others. Some people were eager to study the material, while others were there simply to copy answers off of people. One girl sucked all the information she could out of me and then left, without even sharing any of her information. She would be considered an isolator. One of the guys in the group, however, took time out of his day to help formulate a study guide with me. He, on the other hand, would be considered an activist.

Process Theory

Last week we discussed the “Process Theory”, or “Reciprocal Theory” of leadership. This is a much more inclusive style of leadership.  There is frequent engagement between leaders and followers.  We discussed the “Relational Leadership Model”, which encompasses all of the qualities of the Process Theory. The Relational Leadership Model is composed of four standards: ethical, inclusive, empowering, and purposeful. To be ethical is to live in accordance with the rules of right conduct. It is basically making moral decisions. For instance, if you as a leader happen to know that one of your workers is struggling to make ends meet and is having a difficult time at work, it would be more ethical to sit down with that individual and discuss options of improving the situation, rather than firing him or her on the spot. To be inclusive is to embrace different points of view. To run things in an inclusive manner ensures that there is much collaboration, which will ultimately be beneficial to the group. To be empowering is to lift the spirits of not only yourself, but those around you. It is using your words and actions to enable people to perform at their best. Coming into work and criticizing everyone is not the best approach if one is seeking improvement. To motivate your group, you would need to find a different way to go about it. To be purposeful is to know what the goal is. It is to be determined and set on a particular accomplishment. If the group knows what is significant and what they are working towards, the chance that they will be successful is indefinitely higher. Having no clue what the goal at hand is can greatly hinder a group’s ability to function well. These principles have three dimensions: knowing, being and doing. These are all self-explanatory so I won’t elaborate on them. We then talked about the Social Change Model revolves around the individual, the community and the group. It needs to be inclusive, and in this model, leadership is viewed as a process and not a position. It promotes things such as self-awareness, citizenship social justice and service to name a few. Social change is aimed at altering a social structure in some way. Social change touches on many different fields in society. Regarding the individual, one needs to be conscious of self, meaning that they need to know their own convictions, values, ideas, emotions, attitudes, etc. They need to understand how to interact with others. They also need to be congruent, or consistent in their behavior. He or she needs to be authentic. Lastly, he or she needs to be committed. The group needs to be able to collaborate, have a common goal and get through issues in a civil manner. The group needs to show citizenship, in that they have a connection to the community. I just recently signed up for the Relay for Life. I found out about it through HOSA, a group on campus that is certainly showing citizenship by addressing this issue in society: cancer. They have been working together to raise money for this cause. I’m going to participate in the Relay for Life in April. It’s nice to see so many people come together to make a difference.