Mission Accomplished?
Why is the term ‘mission’ increasingly used in business and how can leaders apply the lessons of the best missions?
It used to be that the only people who went on missions were priests and astronauts. As a child of the 1960s the mission to land on the moon captured my imagination. Yet as a coach I increasingly find the term used more and more by business and civic leaders. One coachee in particular regularly uses ‘mission’ when either describing his own motivation or a favoured project in his business.
The origin of the term lies in evangelical journeys intended to spread God’s word and to convert the heathen. This predominantly Christian activity is now rare, though whilst on holiday I was once told in Louisiana that the local church there was planning to send missionaries to England!
The military adopted the term, and this then spread to the 60s space programmes, which had been accelerated during the Cold War with the Soviets. President Kennedy announced to the US Congress on May 25th 1961 that the US:
should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth.
Kennedy’s words encapsulate the essence of those early religious missions – travelling to an alien environment, to fulfil a single goal. They are also an exemplar of how a big idea can be expressed simply. We know that thousands of actions will be required to succeed, but the goal is clear.
In businesses the idea of a mission statement has been around for decades. I am a sceptic about these statements, as all too often they are determined by committee and combine vague aspirations, diluted with lots of parentheses. The result is usually a muddle, something that won’t offend anyone, but equally lacks a clear goal.
Mission statements which resonate are usually short and outcome focused. Indeed whether a mission statement can easily be remembered is usually a good test of its worth. For example TED Talks has the mission to ‘Spread Ideas’ whilst Google’s current mission is “to organise the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.” Both are clear.
to organise the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.
However the term mission has spread to what were once just projects. In my conversations with directors it seems to be driven by the huge growth in corporate targets and measures, causing confusion as to what is most important. Designating a project as a mission is a way of resetting the company’s main priority. After all if you have twenty five top priorities, in truth you have none.
So what makes a good mission?
So what makes a good mission and how can we apply that to leading in business or government?
Clear outcome
The first element is having a clear outcome. Quite often project managers and teams are given activities to undertake, not outcomes to achieve. Thus the speech by president Kennedy was intended to give an existing programme – the Apollo Space Programme – a clear outcome or goal.
Contrast this with the recent ESG initiatives in business. The first problem lies in the fact that three different issues are put together – environmental, social and governance policies. Each then has detailed measures, creating a complex and sometimes conflicting agenda. After the investment community promoted the ESG agenda in the real estate markets there was initially a desire to adopt them wholesale. Now there’s a growing realisation that the ESG agenda is becoming a box ticking exercise and companies are refocusing on fewer, attainable outcomes.
Firm deadline
The second element is setting a firm deadline. One of the reasons the Enterprize Zones of the 1980s made a real difference was because they had a ten year limit. I recall Reg Ward, the first Chief Executive of the London Docklands Development Corporation, installing a countdown clock in the LDDC’s office from day one. It immediately gives an organisation a sense of urgency and purpose. I hope that the current plans for Investment Zones will also be time limited, or the danger is they will drift.
Time limits need to be realistic, reflecting the whole outcome and not just initial activities. Apollo 11’s landing on the moon only just happened within the deadline – by the end of the 1960s. Would it have mattered if it had slipped twelve months? Perhaps not, but the deadline, drove NASA and its many partners forward.
I would suggest there is a third lesson for leaders, to apply across their organisation.
We need fewer targets and a greater focus on outcomes. How those outcomes can best be achieved will change and most of those detailed decisions should be led by teams, not handed down. Enabling a team, rather than directing them in each detail, encourages greater innovation and initiative. If people feel they can be part of the decision making, they usually respond well.
When I was Minister for Business in the Coalition Government it was modern manufacturers like Rolls Royce who understood this well. Every staff member was actively encouraged to bring forward their ideas, not matter how junior. It was an ethos which many service businesses could learn from.
Perhaps the term mission is overused and will in time become devalued. Yet if the principles of good missions are applied it could leave a lasting benefit.
I have coached or mentored several senior business leaders on this issue and would be pleased to see if I can help you. Go to ‘How I coach’ for more about my approach and my contact details.
