Discussion: View Thread

Andy Crawford, Rick Corcoran and others have brought interesting
perspective to the notion that a leader's vision may be a hallicination.

It seems a vision must pass some tests.
One, does it "make sense" to those who will be involved in implementing it?
Two, do the constiuents want to go there?
Three, although the path to the vision does not have to be clear, are at
least some beginning steps clear and seem to be in the right direction?
Four, are there no demonstrably impossible barriers (such as the need for
zero gravity, unlimited funding, no competitors,etc.)?

I have been amazed many times by listening to leader's visions that can't
pass the last test.
Many, when challenged with facts, then move to Delusion -- A false belief
strongly held in spite of invalidating evidence.

So let's encourage visioning as a means for inspiring and guiding those
charged with making progress but let's also teach how to avoid
hallucinations.


Jack Ring
32712 N. 70th St.
Scottsdale, AZ 85262-7143
602-488-4615

Jack, et al.

I agree with your comments and criteria for a workable vision.
Nonetheless, I am also a firm believer that an organization (and its
leaders) can face enormous obstacles that may never be overcome. They can
only, relentlessly, keep pushing against them. As I've written in the past
("Demystifying the Organizational Vision"- Sloan Mgt Review, Summer, 1996)
the visions most "followers" seem to embrace are those where these
difficult challenges are clearly articulated within the context of the
vision itself. It makes the vision both real and challenging. Visions
should not be practical and achievable; that's the job of a strategic
plan.

Mark Lipton
Chair, Dept of Human Resources Mgt
Director, The Leadership Center
Milano Graduate School of Management and Policy
New School for Social Research
80 Fifth Avenue - Suite 800
New York, NY 10011
212.229.2814
lipton@newschool.edu

Mark, Jack, et al.

I've really appreciated this discussion on visions, hallucinations, etc, and
agree with its direction to a large extent. But I, along with Ralph Stacey
in England (his book, "Managing the Unknowable" is where he addresses the
issue) have been argueing for 10 years that the concept of visioning is
outdated. Ralph suggests that it is used by executives as a way of ignoring
the more important issues of what is happening in the here and now.

My position on visioning starts with a recognition of three types being
practiced: 1) visions which attempt to be predictive of the future (What do
you predict your environment will look like in 10 years and what do you need
to adjust to fit in?); 2) wisions which really are value statements of how
people would like to work together; and 3) visions which attempt to create
the future (the post-modern, constructivist approach that is currently the
most popular).

The problem with the first type is that, as we've learned from studies of
chaos/complex systems theory, the future is unpredictable.

There are many problems with the second type. The most obvious is that the
history which allows it to be called a vision is based on the role of the
later biblical prophets and the later interpretation of calvinist theology:
if you follow these values, you will be rewarded. That is a prediction which
does not hold up in reality. Value statements do function well when they
represent the social contract concerning behavior within a group. But most
research that I've seen linking vision/values to successful organizations
are faulted - they are based only on a review of those organizations which
succeeded, and they ignored the many organizations following the same path
which failed.

The third type is what I see as the basic, entreprenurial model.
Statistically, it fails for the same reason as type two. The best
description of the end of this model is from Jurassic Park, in which the
Park's entreprenur states: "I grew up believing that if you believe strongly
enough in something and work hard enough, you can make it happen," while the
whole park is collapsing around him.

So the question becomes, what can we replace vision with in the strategic
process, instead of just redefining it all the time?

Mark Michaels
President, People Technologies
Michaels@ipat.com
To move a mountain, start with one pebble at a time.