Leading Change, Connection between Vision and Direction of Change

Vision is the desired state an organization wants to be in future which encompasses cognitive as well as an affective component to persuade people (internal and external ) to drive towards the common objective (Palmer, Dunford, & Buchanan, 2016). As per (Hinterhuber & Popp, 1992) it's an orientation point that drives a company in a specific direction. Vision is the reason for existence of the organization as it incorporates possibilities, desirability, actionability, and articulation for the organization. Some scholars have prioritized organization model, claiming it latter has conceptualized the vision whereas some doctrines have manifested visions resilience to foster organization progress. But whatever the argument be in hand, it's my firm conviction that there exists a positive correlation between the vision and direction of change. The manager depending upon the circumstances acts like director, navigator, caretaker, coach, interpreter or nurture  

Firstly, vision is an initiator for the change, as aligned, VMOSA (Vision, Mission, Objective, Strategy and Action Plans), vision provides clarity about mission, goals, and action plans et cetera giving company clear modality to proliferate. As per (Collins & Porras, 1996)  vision consists of core ideology and envisioned future. Core ideology is the bond that holds a company together as it grows and changes. Whereas envisioned future is all about articulating vivid descriptions of what it will mean to achieve them. As with the vision statement of Ford "People working together as a lean, global enterprise to make people's lives better through automotive and mobility leadership” has envisioned to be a global player (target market) in automobile sector (scope of work) through committed employees working together( employee focus through strategic resource mobilization) for better life (customer focus). This motivates the company to act proactively towards ever changing scenarios.

Secondly, vision plays a bridging role in driving the company to desire state in future. The incongruity that the organization comes across due to the strategic gap could be an area for innovation or persuasion, as per (Metais, 2000) through flanking, encircling and destabilizing, new strategic intent could be developed, a perfect apotheosis could be competitive advantage enjoyed by Airbus A330 against its competitor Boeing Dreamliner 787. Here Airbus enjoyed the weakness of Boeing; so, called flanking and settled with the benefit of second mover advantage, the revised model of A330 was highly fueled effective and gained greater market acceptance; so called encircling and had revised the way the commercial airlines were manufactured; called destabilizing. Here the strategic gap was converted into competitiveness by Airbus through its vision.

Whereas, often due to over exaggeration of emotional factors in the vision statement, a gap in vision statement and organization capability arises and this creates non-participative model of vision formulation which ultimately hinders the change. To take an example "Maximize our customers' ability to get their work done", the statement is too board and is ambiguous to act. In fact, due to the arrogance of management, they are seldom trapped by their success which hinders the change (Sull, 1999). Re-visioning, revisiting and evaluating the VMOSA is also equally important. As per (Lissack & Roos, 2001), the vision made from the past and present situation of the company should be evaluated along with the pace of time. The inability of Nokia Corp. to reassess its vision statement "Connecting people", Make the world a better place for everyone, led to jeopardize the company. Had company access the future trend of android system and focused on connecting the people through the easily available operating system, the company could have maintained its dominance in the telecommunicating industry.

Moreover, the direction of change is also shaped by their leaders who make or guide the vision, this assumption postulates, a heroic leader formulates energizing vision for organizational competitiveness. They can adopt incremental or disruptive change. Lee Iacocca, CEO of Chryslers’ visionary outlook saved Chrysler which was to file a bankruptcy. Richard Branson, CEO of Virgin group, UK is a radical inspirational and visionary leader; he has been an identity image that is valued by other. The Virgin group is the first of a kind to initiate space marketing in the name of Virgin Galactic. Interestingly, some organization, so to call heroic organizations has also encapsulated the change through effective vision. To take an example, the vision of Wal-Mart,” We save people money so they can live better life” focuses on customers value for their hard earn money and has promised to give maximum value addition for per unit of money spent.

Interestingly, some organization apt for revisioning, basically the one that is involved in transformational changes or in disruptive innovations (Palmer, Dunford, & Buchanan, 2016). In times due to the level of competition, changes in the desire of customers the modality of vision may change, i.e. it could be even more inclusive, progressive but the purpose of business should not be changed as it may create confusion in stakeholders. Similarly, the presence of multiple and conflicting visions also retards or halt the changes. These collisions of vision can impact organization negatively. Failure of iPhone SE model (low price iPhone sets with compromised quality) was the collision of vision between the company and customers. Apple Co. designed SE model focusing on Asian countries (India, Nepal et cetera) visioning that customer would enjoy low price iPhone but they missed to understand that the phone was linked to socio-cultural image (prestige) of the user. The variation in the vision led to retard the change in Apple Co.

Finally, it can be inferred from above-mentioned fact and illustrations that there is a correlation between the vision and change. In general, vision statements are followed by mission statements which are then aligned with goals, objectives, strategies and action plans. The vision statement is the commitment made by the company, designed for its ongoing existence and incorporates its long-term future plans along with the way it reaches there, but as environment is ever-changing, the business also changes and these changes has to be incorporated into the vision statement(revisioning). Vision are designed after careful evaluation and understanding of environmental forces which clearly layouts the strategic intent of an organization to lead the change in corrective direction. Interestingly in-between these continuums, the manager assumes director role if vision is essential to success, he depicts navigator role if the vision could be compromised, maintains a caretaker image of his organization when vision lacks major influence, behaves as a coach where he facilitates agenda and holds interpreter and nurture role depending on the situations.  

Bibliography

Collins, J., & Porras, J. I. (1996). Building Your Company's Vision. Harvard Business Review.

Hinterhuber, H. H., & Popp, W. (1992). Are you a strategist or just a manager? Harvard Business Review, 105-13.

Lissack, M., & Roos, J. (2001). Be coherent,not visionary. Long Range Planning , 53-70.

Metais, E. (2000). SEB group: Building a subversive strategy. Business Strategy Review, 39-47.

Palmer, I., Dunford, R., & Buchanan, D. A. (2016). Managing Organizational Chnage A Multiple Perspective Approach. MC GrawHill Education.

Sull, D. N. (1999). Why go companies go bad. Harvard Business Review, 42-52.