Articles - Artículos
Management - Gerenciamiento

LEADERSHIP of VISION
Don Triner, Lieutenant Commander, USCG
Ryan Watkins
James Loew, Captain, USCG

"There is no favorable wind for a rudderless ship."
-- Hopley Yeaton

What is a leader? A leader - elected, connected or recognized as powerful, the one that knows the most, the assigned or chosen one, the strongest, bravest, loudest, or the "est-est." People often perceive the leader as the person in charge. Followers view the leader as the embodiment of the characteristics that the organization values. Despite much conventional wisdom, leaders do not have to be the most charismatic people within the organization (Collins and Porras, 1993). What clearly defines a leader is vision (Peters, 1995; Collins and Porras, 1993 and Covey, 1990). Vision is where the organization, as part of society, should be headed. The "Cheshire Cat" reminded Alice, while in Wonderland, "If you do not know where you are going, either path will do." The same is true for organizations today. An effective leader must have vision. A vision is a direction and purpose. Vision is necessary, but not sufficient, for achieving organizational results that add value to society. It is the leader's responsibility to derive, communicate and exemplify the vision. This essay outlines what a vision is, describes why and how to derive and communicate a vision and explains the value of living the vision.

Deriving the vision. The members of the organization should derive their vision. Once upon a time a vision came from flaming flora; today the leader builds the vision with partners from experience, education and concurrence of the "troops."

Transformational leadership (leadership guided by a common vision) defines vision as a compelling view of the future. This sounds good; however, the definition lacks measurement. How is the leader to know if the organization, group or team attained a viable vision? A pragmatic vision focuses on results, not processes. An example of a vision statement that is process based without measurement is "Quality is job one." Conversely, an example of a vision statement that is results, or

ends, oriented is: "By 2025 there will be no death, sickness or injury on the job as indicated by reliable and valid hard and soft data." The latter does not make much of a commercial sound bite, it is ends-based and can lead an organization to useful results. A vision must be measurable. The first example tells the followers of the vision very little. How will we know when we have achieved our vision? Must we achieve our goals in any period of time? The latter example leaves no room for confusion. By 2025, we will be celebrating our achievements. A vision is more than "pie in the sky" and "academic fluff." It is practical dreaming (Wes Roberts credits Roger Kaufman for this term in Victory Secrets of Attila the Hun; Kaufman, 1992, 1995; 1998).

For decades "leaders" have been debating the operational definitions of words akin to visioning. These debates only stifle the progress of organizations. Defining the words is important; however, not as important as understanding the concepts the definitions promote. Kaufman (1992; 1995; Kaufman, Herman & Watters, 1996) provides a convenient and practical framework to end the dictionary definition battle. An Ideal Vision describes the type of world we want for tomorrow's children in results-specific and measurable terms. (See insert table 1 -- General Minimal Ideal Vision) Kaufman finds that there is very little debate across countries and cultures on what the Ideal Vision should include -- if everyone will use this definition. Great, how does a leader get from solving world hunger to running an organization? Strategic Planning.

With the Ideal Vision and commitment from planning partners and owners to continually make progress toward the Ideal Vision, the organization decides which portions of the Ideal Vision it commits to deliver and toward which to move ever closer (Kaufman, 1992). Many of the most successful organizations to date started out with little to no idea as to what products or services they would offer to society (Collins and Porras, 1993). This direction starts with the leader. The committed-to pieces of the Ideal Vision form the mission objective. Composing the mission statement is comfortable to most leaders. The mission statement is poetry and sound bites; however, this is of little use in planning for organizational success. A well-crafted mission statement can gain support for the mission. This must be accompanied by performance criteria (Langeler, 1992). An objective is measurable on an interval (an implied scale of equal increment, e.g. degrees Celsius) or ratio scale (known zero point, e.g. 0 deaths) and should present a challenge. A goal is measured on the nominal (naming, e.g. "excellence") or ordinal (rank order, e.g. "better productivity") scale. The nominal or ordinal scale of measurement is often used in a mission statement. The mission objective is the portion of the Ideal Vision the organization commits to deliver in measurable terms (Kaufman, 1992; 1995; 1998).

In summary, a mission statement is a compelling view, the part of the Ideal Vision the organization commits to get ever-closer to but lacking either measurement expressed as performance criteria or specific desired results. A mission objective is a mission statement with measurement and results built into the description. The leader's vision is an agreed upon integration of the Ideal Vision and mission objective. Communicating of the vision. Communication of the vision is vital. The vision is more than a bumper sticker slogan. It must be more than a placard for the wall. The vision must "live and breathe" with the leader and the organization. Participation in the process communicates the leader's vision (Ideal Vision and mission objective). Peter Block in Stewardship claims, "The task for each of us is to define a future we choose to create, using the workplace as a medium." Additionally, Block warns that if creating the vision is primarily a process for only senior management the intent of instilling ownership and responsibility throughout the work force is defeated (1993). By including all, or a representational group, of the stakeholders as partners (customers, suppliers, workers, owners and even competitors) in the process of deriving the vision, commitment is manifested and open communications are established. Often the board of directors derive the vision and post it liberally on bulletin boards around the work place. The vision must have value and meaning for the work force. The vision is the source of core values, direction and activities. Simply put, a well-prepared vision guides associates in all activities. If their activities do not add value to the mission objective, workers should not engage in them. If what the organization does, fails to add value to society, it should not be a part of the work of the organization (Kaufman, 1992; 1995; 1998).

There are several methods of communicating the vision: (1) post it on the wall, (2) route it for comment, (3) include the workers, as partners, in development and or (4) establish it as the cornerstone of the organization. The level of organizational commitment runs from zero to moderate corresponding to the post, route or participate methodology. When an organization establishes a vision as its cornerstone a high level of commitment will likely ensue (US Coast Guard, 1994; Triner, 1993). The methodology for communication of the vision depends on organizational size, available resources and leadership style. Active involvement in the development and communication of the vision by the leader builds creditability.

Living the vision. Most importantly, a leader must model the vision in spoken words and actions. The most eloquently composed vision is worthless if the leader does not exemplify the core values, or drivers, represented in the vision. This is where leadership can fall apart.

If the leader cannot live the vision, you do not have a vision and you cannot lead for long. "Do as I say, not as I do," will not produce long-term success. By the leader’s actions, not written or spoken words, the leader establishes morale, integrity, a sense of justice (Roberts, 1985) and vision. Actions speak louder than words written on the bulletin board. Often poor leadership surfaces as a disconnect between words and deeds. Subordinates and peers see it, recognize it and swear not to repeat it. The leadership of vision is not paternalistic. It is not a cold process of setting goals, defining progress measures and then rewarding the successes. Everybody’s task is to create a vision and translate the vision into real world practice (Block, 1993). The leader is only the seed for this growth. The growth must be nurtured. The leader is the catalyst for proactive thinking and planning. "The CEO typically should not be...deeply involved in the process, but a designer of [it] in the general sense" (Mintzberg, 1994) and a value-adding participant in the process. The leader "possess[es] the essential quality of stewardship, a caretaker quality" (Roberts, 1985). The experience, knowledge and actions of the leader add value to the process of strategic thinking and planning. The Ideal Vision provides a common guiding star. A "star" for the followers and leader to travel toward together, each contributing with unique knowledge, skills, abilities and attitudes.

Conclusion. Leadership with vision does not undermine or replace authority. It does not invite the three "D’s" of quasi-leadership - Decide, Delegate and Disappear. Leadership with vision can be a solution to a real problem of organizations. When a leader uses power and charisma to effect change, like an Ideal Vision, Mega planning or new work process checklist, what is the likelihood that change will continue after a change in leadership? Can you go back to the last place you worked and find many of the processes you improved continuing to improve? Can you find any of the processes and projects? If not, these are symptoms of a system of leadership based on power and charisma. Senge et al. (1994) highlight this point by stating, "if you rely on personal charisma and power to generate influence, you have no way to convert power to the organization. When you die or leave the organization, the field of influence will shut down." The collapse of a system due to loss of its energy source is called entropy.

A leader must have a vision, communicate the vision and live the vision. The vision is not a panacea. Leadership of vision is stewardship. Vision is necessary, but not sufficient, to reach societal and organizational objectives and goals. Organizations provide leaders the opportunity and resources to positively impact and energize working associates, teams, departments, divisions, companies, countries and, ultimately, the world. The vision, derived through participation, communicated through involvement, and modeled through action is at the heart of leader. Vision motivates the construction and use of an organization’s rudder.

A BASIC IDEAL VISION

There will be no losses of life nor elimination or reduction of levels of well-being, survival, self-sufficiency, qualify of life, livelihood1, nor loss of property from any source including (but not limited to):

Poverty will not exist, and every woman and man will earn as least as much as it costs them to live unless they are progressing toward being selfsufficient and selfreliant. No adult will be under the care, custody or control of another person, agency, or substance: all adult citizens will be self-sufficient and selfreliant as minimally indicated by their consumption being equal to or less than their production.

Key enablers2:

Any and all organizations—governmental, private sector/for-profit, public service/not-for-profit, educational—will contribute to the achievement and maintenance of this minimal Ideal Vision and will be funded and continued to the extent to which it meets its objectives and the minimum Ideal Vision is accomplished and maintained.

People will be responsible for what they use, do, and contribute and thus will not contribute to the reduction of any of the results identified in this minimal Ideal Vision. (Kaufman, 1998)

Footnote comments --

1 - Livelihood is defined as the level that an individual's consumption equal to or less than their production. Both consumption and production are defined in terms of the expenditure or intake of units of monetary exchange.

2 - These will provide building block results likely required to achieve the minimal Ideal Vision but are NOT Mega-level results.

Block, P. (1993). Stewardship. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Collins, J. and Porras, J. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies. New York: Harper Business.

Covey, S. R. (1990). Principle Centered Leadership. New York: Summit Books

Drucker, P. F. (1994, September-October). The Theory of Business. Harvard Business Review.

Kaufman, R. (1992). Strategic Planning Plus: An organizational guide. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kaufman, R. (1995, May-June). Quality Management Plus: Beyond Standard Approaches to Quality. Educational Technology.

Kaufman, R. & Zahn, D. (1993). Quality management plus: The continuous improvement of education. Newbury Park: Corwin Press.

Kaufman, R. (1998). Strategic Thinking: A guide for identifying and solving problems (revised). Washington DC: ISPI and ASTD.

Langeler, G. H. (1992, March-April). The Vision Trap. Harvard Business Review.

Mintzberg, H. (1994, January-February).The Fall and Rise of Strategic Planning. Harvard Business Review.

Peters, Tom. (1995, October 9). Still Leadership, Forbes ASAP, pp. 184, 186.

Roberts, Wes. (1985) Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun. Salt Lake City: Publishers Press.

Senge, Peter, Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R. & Smith, B. (1994). The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. Doubleday: New York.

Triner, D. R. (1993, December). How's Quality Going?, The Aids to Navigation Bulletin. Vol. 22, No. 4, Yorktown, VA, pp. 10-14.

US Coast Guard. (1994, October). Six CG Units earn 1994 quality awards. Commandant's Bulletin. Washington, DC, pp. 12-13.

US General Accounting Office (1995, August) Schools and workplaces: An overview of successful and unsuccessful practices. GAO/PEMD-95-28. Washington, DC.

Wheatley, Margaret J. (1992) Leadership and the New Science. Berett-Koehler

Publishers: San Francisco.

Zaleznik, A. (1992, March-April). Managers and Leaders: Are They Different?

Harvard Business Review.

NOTE: Add Victory Secrets of Attila the Hun; Kaufman, Herman and Watters,

1996; Kaufman P&I series.

LCDR Don Triner is a 1984 graduate of the U. S. Coast Guard Academy. He served as DWO aboard USCGC REDWOOD. He served as Operations, Training and Supply Officer aboard USCG Barque EAGLE. He served as Commanding Officer of USCGC POINT MONROE and RED CEDAR. He taught Nautical Science and Leadership and Management at USCG Officer Candidate School. He is presently assigned to post graduate instruction at The Florida State University pursuing a masters in Instructional Systems with focuses on strategic planning, program evaluation and human resource development.

Ryan Watkins is a graduate of Florida State University. He has a Masters in Instructional Systems and is presently a doctoral student focusing on needs assessment and visionary leadership. Mr. Watkins has done consulting work with Florida TaxWatch, the Florida Department of Labor, Teletronics Inc., Florida Department of Corrections and other organizations in both Florida and New Jersey.

Captain James Loew is a 1973 graduate of the U. S. Coast Guard Academy. He served as deck watch officer aboard buoytender in the Great Lakes. He served as executive officer aboard USCG Barque EAGLE during cadet deployments. He served as Commanding Officer of a 95 foot patrol boat, MORRO BAY and BEAR, as well as executive officer in VALIANT. He taught Nautical Science at the Academy. He is presently assigned as division chief, Leadership and Career Development at USCG Headquarters. Captain Loew has a masters in Management from RPI and a specialist degree in Higher Education from William and Mary.

Ryan Watkins, PhD
3500 University Center, Building C
Florida State University
Tallahassee, FL 32306
850-644-0232
850-644-1509 (fax)

[ Top of this page ] [ Articles list ] [ Home Page ]
[ Comienzo de esta página ] [ Lista de artículos ] [ Página inicial ]