I have come to believe that chief executives should have a complete charter in order to guide their own thinking and the activities of those they want to lead. In my worldwide consulting experience, I have been shocked at how many executives don't have a charter. They seem to lead just by addressing problems as they arise. But letting your agenda be driven by problems is living and leading outside-in. It is a reactive way to live and attempt to lead. Effective executives in my view live and lead inside-out. They have a sharp view of what they want to create. And the clarity of that view is what inspires others to follow.
A charter (see Chapter 8 of Level Three Leadership 5th edition) has six elements: a mission statement, a vision statement, a values statement (perhaps including a feel statement), a strategy statement, related short-term operating goals, and finally--someone (leadership) who is going to make those decisions.
I think all chief executives--leaders of countries, of industries, of companies, of divisions and departments, of teams, and even of one's self--should have a complete charter and that if they don't, they and their organizations are likely to drift.
Consider a nation. The first element of a national charter would be a one-sentence statement of purpose. Ridiculous, you say? Hmm. What is the purpose of your nation? What is the mission of your country? In the absence of that clarity, politicians and governors will focus on other agendas.
With regard to my country, the United States, I think its purpose is "to provide and protect freedom and tranquility." I mentioned this to a good friend and he said, "well, you have to add some things like
Many would argue with this mission statement. They might assert that America's treatment of Native Americans, for example, is evidence of some other mission such as "conquer the continent." Whether the westward expansion was "manifest destiny," economic greed or some other motivation, others have opined voluminously. In my view, all of the things the American government has done historically have not been in concert with this distilled mission, "to provide and protect freedom and tranquility." That is true it seems to me of all governments. Sometimes they inspire, sometimes they disappoint. But what do they stand for? What are they trying to accomplish in the world? What is the purpose of the United Kingdom? Of Germany? Of France? Of India? Of China? Of Russia? Of Israel? Of Egypt? And on and on. Does your country have a core mission in the world?
When members of our political parties declare that they will oppose anything and everything the other party suggests, they are disavowing a national mission and putting forth a narrower, self-centered mission that is inconsistent with an inspiring national mission statement. Such statements apall me. These executives are espousing a smaller, divisive mission that does not encompass nor include the whole country.
The same may be said of presidents of industry associations or CEOs of corporations who spend their careers extracting as much revenue as they can from the world around them. Who wants to work hard to make other people rich?
What motivates people deeply is something noble that they can devote their lives to. Consider the following corporate mission statements:
A charter (see Chapter 8 of Level Three Leadership 5th edition) has six elements: a mission statement, a vision statement, a values statement (perhaps including a feel statement), a strategy statement, related short-term operating goals, and finally--someone (leadership) who is going to make those decisions.
I think all chief executives--leaders of countries, of industries, of companies, of divisions and departments, of teams, and even of one's self--should have a complete charter and that if they don't, they and their organizations are likely to drift.
Consider a nation. The first element of a national charter would be a one-sentence statement of purpose. Ridiculous, you say? Hmm. What is the purpose of your nation? What is the mission of your country? In the absence of that clarity, politicians and governors will focus on other agendas.
With regard to my country, the United States, I think its purpose is "to provide and protect freedom and tranquility." I mentioned this to a good friend and he said, "well, you have to add some things like
- to manage and foster a healthy USA economy by tax policies to help create jobs in the country vs in other countries,
- and a lawful immigration policy that is enforced,
- and law and order in the country
- and use of intelligence and global partnerships to eliminate the threat of ISIS"
Many would argue with this mission statement. They might assert that America's treatment of Native Americans, for example, is evidence of some other mission such as "conquer the continent." Whether the westward expansion was "manifest destiny," economic greed or some other motivation, others have opined voluminously. In my view, all of the things the American government has done historically have not been in concert with this distilled mission, "to provide and protect freedom and tranquility." That is true it seems to me of all governments. Sometimes they inspire, sometimes they disappoint. But what do they stand for? What are they trying to accomplish in the world? What is the purpose of the United Kingdom? Of Germany? Of France? Of India? Of China? Of Russia? Of Israel? Of Egypt? And on and on. Does your country have a core mission in the world?
When members of our political parties declare that they will oppose anything and everything the other party suggests, they are disavowing a national mission and putting forth a narrower, self-centered mission that is inconsistent with an inspiring national mission statement. Such statements apall me. These executives are espousing a smaller, divisive mission that does not encompass nor include the whole country.
The same may be said of presidents of industry associations or CEOs of corporations who spend their careers extracting as much revenue as they can from the world around them. Who wants to work hard to make other people rich?
What motivates people deeply is something noble that they can devote their lives to. Consider the following corporate mission statements:
- We protect those who protect us. (BAES)
- We make education affordable for everyone. (Sallie Mae)
- Refresh the World (Coca-Cola)
And the three-word purpose of the Virginia Department of Transportation:
- Keep Virginia Moving.
Each of these statements carries clarity, power, and force. People in any part of those organizations can link and relate their daily activities to that core kernel--and if they cannot, perhaps they are in the wrong organization.
Idealistic malarkey you may say. What about a company who makes concrete sewer pipe? Aha. Well, if the president of such a company cannot declare an inspiring mission for his people, they will become mercenaries, working for pay and pay alone. Does anyone in the company see how valuable concrete sewer pipe is? Have you been to Rio and seen the favelas? I have. They need concrete sewer pipe in a big way. The purpose of such a company could be "to build durable, disease-free communities." Then, one could talk about cholera, dysentery, and any of a dozen other water born diseases against which a good sewer system provides protection. Then, it matters that the pipes are strong, durable, don't leak, and the joints are done properly. If the workers are there just for their wages and nothing else, whose fault is that? I say, it's management's fault for not clarifying and asserting a powerful purpose.
Now, if you assign the writing of a mission statement to a committee, they will come up with, after months of deliberation, "we deliver world-class goods and/or services that delight our customers beyond their expectations and give our investors an above industry average return on their investments." True or not true ("world-class" slips off the tongue much more easily than it is achieved), this statement is vanilla, non-differentiating, and uninspiring.
I have come to believe that any executive who cannot state and believe in a one-sentence mission is negligent; he/she is not doing his/her job. Lou Gerstner once noted that "the most common cause of corporate mediocrity is lack of focus." It is the executive's job to provide clarity to his/her associates.
This extends to the national level on the macro end and to the individual level on the micro end of the scale.
What do you think the purpose of your country is? How would you state it? Does that purpose reflect the values of your countrymen? Does it respect the rights and views of others? Is it to conquer the world? To impose your views on others? To provide
What do you think the purpose of your company or organization is? Can you state it in one sentence? If not, what are you working toward?
What is your department's purpose? Can you state it in one sentence? Is it inspiring? Is it clear?
What is your purpose in life? Have you figured that out yet?
Here are my answers, for better or worse.
I believe the mission/purpose of the United States of America is to provide and protect freedom and tranquility. This includes the freedoms of speech, religion, economic endeavor, education and more. It also means that people are not free to harm others. This element embraces police departments, fire departments, and laws of social and environmental responsibility. This statement implies a respect for the desires of citizens, of other countries and other peoples. It also implies a primary desire to seek peaceful means of cooperation and using violence as a last resort to achieve and protect domestic and global tranquility. This statement also decries corruption and taking advantage of people unfairly.
The purpose of my school (I'm retired now) was "to better society by preparing principled leaders in the world of practical affairs." That was a mission statement that I could relate to, that inspired me, that guided my daily and annual activities. I was and am proud of that statement. (although it has been gradually modified and changed)
The purpose of my Leadership and Organizational Behavior Area was to be "a hub of leadership stimulation." I might have phrased it differently, perhaps, "to prepare people to lead effectively." If that requires primary research to discover how to do that, great. If that requires publishing to help more people learn to lead effectively, great.
The purpose of my life is "to help people find themselves." This grows out of my having had three last names and wrestling with what that meant to me, out of my wife having been abused as a child and helping her to grow out of her tiny self, out of my desire to help my children grow and become self-reliant productive citizens, out of my teaching, writing, publishing and academic activities among MBA students, Executive Education participants, consulting clients and anyone who reads what I have written. Everything I have done--and do--revolves around that core purpose. That's my mission in life.
What do you think?
What do you think the purpose of your country is?
What is the purpose of your company or organization?
What is the purpose of your department?
What is the purpose of your life?
What do you think the purpose of your country is?
What is the purpose of your company or organization?
What is the purpose of your department?
What is the purpose of your life?
Have you figured that out yet? If not, I say, it is a sign of negligence.
Of course, settling on a purpose or mission is only the first step. Many people live their whole lives or spend their whole careers and never clarify this one thing. Once you have settled on a mission, you must then decide what kind of future you want to create. That's a vision statement and it will likely be ten to fifteen pages--not a one-sentence, vacuous platitude like "be the best we can be."
I encourage executives at every level to clarify the purpose of their nation, industry, organization or company, division or department and even themselves. I assert that continuing to attempt to lead without a clear purpose is both ineffective and negligent. And that's only the first step in creating a complete charter.
