Khalifa, A. S. (2012). Mission purpose, and ambition: Redefining the mission statement.
Journal of Strategy and Management 5(3), 235-251.
Regardless of location or industry, scholars, researchers, and practitioners disagree on the definition of a mission statement. Three approaches to mission statements are common. The checklist-type addresses customers, products or services, geographic markets, technology, concern for survival/growth/profits, philosophy (or values), and public image in a list format. The structured model offers several sub-structures, one a mission and the other a vision model. Both offer approaches where organizations create a framework that generally includes core values core purpose, and behaviors, encompassing its business and culture. None of these approaches, however, offer conclusive evidence of which approach is best. A proposed new definition of a mission statement is offered, one focused on authenticity of purpose that is specific to an organization and based in actual representation, a value or outcome that provides inspiration to meet a specified challenge, and a meaningful cause around which those who belong to the organization can rally and invest themselves. This type of mission statement is intended to offer business outcomes and address human needs; rationale for why this definition should be considered is provided, as well as potential threats.
This article has informed my approach to reviewing and analyzing mission statements; it has helped me to understand the approach of an organization to how they see themselves. It also allows me to ask more pointed questions of leadership in my own organization, and others where I am a stakeholder.
LO4: apply communication-centered scholarship to strengthen communication effectiveness.
LO5: critically analyze messages.
Comments