Opinions are divided on whether or not managers should articulate vision. However, vision is necessary if managers are to be able to formulate consistent and coherent desires for employee behavior. The vision should not be a broad 'citizen/customer-centric' vision. Instead, it should have realistic alternatives so that it truly sets a direction for the work of your organization.
A vision is your organization's picture of a desirable, long-term future. Your organization's vision says something about your future ambitions - about the extraordinary things you strive to achieve in, say, 1, 3 or 5 years. In other words, it describes what the future will look like if you succeed in what you're passionate about.
But is a vision a superficial and unnecessary management lingo when you want to influence your employees' behavior in a certain direction, or is it a potent tool from your management toolbox that can help clarify how your employees should act in their daily lives?
In recent times, opinions have been divided on this - as the two statements below illustrate.
Divided opinions on the necessity of vision
'All public sector leaders must be able to set meaningful direction for their organization through a clear vision. If you can't and won't do that, you shouldn't be a leader.'
This was the message from the Danish Leadership Commission when, in 2018, they came up with a number of recommendations on how public leadership in Denmark could be improved. They pointed out the importance of leaders being able to set the direction for what their organizations should achieve by formulating visions that they, in dialogue with their employees, translate locally in their daily management.
But Morten Münster was far from so positive in his bestselling book 'Jytte from Marketing has unfortunately left for the day'. In it he writes:
'There is a (...) kind of kryptonite for behavioral change. And that is 'The Vision'. But just between you and me: It's ok that you don't have a vision.'
Under the heading 'Fewer visions, please', he refers to the fact that visions are typically platitudinous, abstract sentences about, for example, 'putting the citizen first', and that this kind of thing does not create value when you as a manager want to influence the behavior of your employees. He points out that if you as a manager want to influence your employees' behavior, you should instead provide concrete and actionable descriptions of what behavior they should exhibit in everyday life.
The article continues in the next section.
Want to be even better equipped to manage processes?
Action statements are insufficient - a vision is also needed
As the author of a book on vision leadership, it should come as no surprise that in my view, there is a need for both a vision and a set of derived action steps.
Because a vision is a prerequisite for you as a leader to be able to formulate consistent and coherent instructions for action. Or to put it another way: How can you as a leader tell your employees what behavior you want to see from them if you don't have an overall idea of the direction you want your organization to move in?
A real-life example can illustrate the point.
Imagine you're the head of a university department where you haven't formulated a vision for the department, but only concrete instructions for action.
At the coffee machine, you're talking to a researcher. She is unsure whether to write her next research paper in Danish or English. You suggest she writes it in Danish. But why should she?
During your lunch break, you're talking to another researcher. He is unsure whether he should go to an international academic conference next month to get feedback from other researchers on a research paper in progress, or whether he should go to Folkemødet and participate as an expert in a series of panel debates. You suggest he goes to Folkemødet. But why exactly?
In the late afternoon, you meet another researcher. She is in the process of creating the syllabus for the course she will be teaching next semester. She is unsure whether she should fill the syllabus with English-language research articles or whether she should add Danish, practice-oriented literature. You suggest the latter. But why?
