Mission vs. Vision LO26771

From: AM de Lange (amdelange@gold.up.ac.za)
Date: 06/04/01

Replying to LO26745 --

Dear Organlearners,

Felicia Stewart <ramropr@one.net.au> writes:

>Can you please contribute your thoughts re the
>following statement:
>"missions and visions are virtually the same thing".
>Do you know of any industry experts that argue for
>or against?

Greetings Felicia,

I appreciate your questioning.

I am no "industry expert". But as far back as 1980 I became aware that
there was no categorical distinction between these two concepts as they
have been used in the literature.

Since the middle eighties I decided to make use of the following
distinction. A vision is linguistically a set of declarative sentences
(statements). A mission is a set of imperative sentences (commands).

I self thought like everybody else that the logic of statements (the kind
of logic used in maths and about which so many people nowadays dispute) is
disjunct to the logic of commands. However, I discovered a logic of
commands in the middle eighties. To my greatest surprise, the logic of
statements and the logic of commands are not disjunct. In fact, as I
perceive it since that discovery, the logic of commands encompass the
logic of statements rather than the other way around.

By the way, I have given Chris Kloppers a copy of the tentative manuscript
describing it, but he never has commented one word on it. I mention this
not to pressurise him, but just to thank him for participating in a
experiment. It has brought me once again under the impression how
important the Law of Requisite Complexity (LRC) is in our learning. Swim,
Chris, swim ;-) In this logic of commands the formal distiction between
structures (beings) and processes (becomings) is vital. One thing which I
did notice, is how fast Chris is now growing in the essentiality liveness
("becoming-being"). It is a pleasure for sore eyes.

I suspect that interrogative logic (logic of questions) encompasses
imperative logic and thus declarative logic. But to formulate a logic for
questions has been out of my reach up to now. Perhaps some fellow learner
will one day try to discover a logic for questions.

It terms of the above it means that a mission will always encompass a
vision. That is why the management team of an Ordinary Organisation (OO)
has to be so careful in formulating a vision. The commands which they may
subsequently issue, may easily disrupt the vision. My observation is that
it happens almost daily in many OOs.

Have you seen what happens in a corporation when the CEO ask logical
questions, even though it seldom happens? It causes more consternation
than a mission upsetting a vision. When a member low in the hirarchy of
that organisation begins to ask logical questions, the same consternation,
if not worse, happens.

However, the Shared Vision of a LO can only emerged when all its members
are free to question anything related to that organisation in a civilised
manner. This tacit "logic of questions" of learners working together is so
encompassing that it can liberate the organisation from whatever things
which prevent its emergence into a LO. Obviously, managers of OOs fear and
hate such free, civilised questioning because it usually upsets their
carefully designed logic of commands.

I do hope that you will get responses from other fellow learners too.

With care and best wishes


At de Lange <amdelange@gold.up.ac.za> Snailmail: A M de Lange Gold Fields Computer Centre Faculty of Science - University of Pretoria Pretoria 0001 - Rep of South Africa

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>

"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.