Part I: Evaluate The Mission Statement From The Organization

Part I Evaluate The Mission Statement From The Organization You Sele

Part I. Evaluate the mission statement from the organization you selected for this term. Does it meet Bryson's description of a good mission statement? Why or why not? Be specific as to how they do or do not answer each of his 6 questions (number your answers to the six questions accordingly for each mission statement). If it does NOT meet Bryson's criteria, rewrite it go fit Bryson's guidelines and state how your rewrite answers the questions not addressed in the original mission statement. Here are the six questions from the mini-lecture: Who are we as an organization? What are the basic political and social needs we exist to meet, or what are the basic social or political problems we exist to address? In general, what do we do to recognize, anticipate, and respond to these needs or problems? How should we respond to our key stakeholders? What are our philosophy, values and culture? What makes us distinctive or unique, if anything? (competences). Part II. Identify the formal--and informal-mandates from the organization you have chosen for the term, and tell us what they are. What is your organization supposed to be doing?

Paper For Above instruction

The evaluation of a mission statement through Bryson's criteria provides insight into how effectively an organization articulates its purpose and guiding principles. Analyzing a specific mission statement involves examining whether it answers six fundamental questions that Bryson emphasizes: who are we as an organization, what needs or problems do we address, how do we respond to these needs, how should we engage with stakeholders, what are the organization’s core values and culture, and what makes it distinctive. Additionally, understanding formal and informal mandates clarifies the organization's operational scope and responsibilities.

In the case of XYZ Corporation, their mission statement reads: “We provide innovative technology solutions to improve business efficiency.” At first glance, this statement appears succinct but lacks specificity in several areas. When applying Bryson's questions, the first question, “Who are we as an organization?” is only implicitly addressed; the statement indicates that they are a provider of technology solutions but does not specify their identity beyond that. The second question, “What needs or problems do we address?” is also inadequately answered, as it broadly references “improving business efficiency” without specifying which social or political needs or problems they aim to tackle.

Regarding the third question, “How do we recognize, anticipate, and respond to these needs?” the mission statement remains vague. It mentions providing solutions but does not elaborate on how they identify needs or adapt to evolving problems. For the fourth question, “How should we respond to key stakeholders?” the statement fails to specify the nature of stakeholder engagement, whether with clients, employees, community, or policymakers.

The fifth question, “What are our philosophy, values, and culture?” is completely unaddressed, leaving the organization's guiding principles ambiguous. The sixth question, “What makes us distinctive or unique?” is also neglected, which is critical for differentiation in a competitive market. Consequently, the mission statement does not fully align with Bryson's criteria for an effective mission statement.

To improve this mission statement, I propose the following revision: “XYZ Corporation is committed to delivering innovative, sustainable technology solutions that enhance efficiency and address social and environmental challenges. We foster a culture of integrity, collaboration, and continuous improvement, engaging stakeholders including clients, employees, and community partners. Our core values emphasize innovation, responsibility, and inclusivity, setting us apart through our commitment to social impact and technological excellence.”

This rewritten mission statement more explicitly addresses each of Bryson’s six questions: it clarifies who the organization is, what needs it addresses, how it responds, stakeholder engagement, core values, and what makes it distinctive. The statement emphasizes social responsibility and stakeholder inclusion, which are often overlooked but vital in defining an organization's purpose and ethos.

Part II: Organizational Mandates

In addition to the mission statement, understanding an organization's formal and informal mandates provides clarity on its operational scope. For XYZ Corporation, the formal mandates include delivering technological products and services that meet specified quality standards and comply with industry regulations. Informally, the organization is expected to foster innovation, community engagement, and environmental responsibility, even if these are not explicitly mandated by policy.

The formal mandates are documented in their strategic plans and contractual obligations with clients, emphasizing quality, reliability, and compliance. The informal mandates, while not legally binding, shape organizational culture and objectives, emphasizing sustainability, social responsibility, and stakeholder engagement. These mandates influence decision-making processes, resource allocation, and strategic initiatives, ensuring that the organization remains aligned with both its explicit goals and its broader societal responsibilities.

References

• Bryson, J. M. (2018). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. John Wiley & Sons.
• David, F. R. (2017). Strategic Management: Concepts and Cases. Pearson.
• Hatch, M. J. (2018). Organization Theory: Modern, Symbolic, and Postmodern Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
• Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change. Harvard Business Review Press.
• Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2001). The Strategy-Focused Organization. Harvard Business School Press.
• Mintzberg, H. (1989). The Strategy Concept I: Five Ps for Strategy. California Management Review, 30(1), 11-24.
• Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government. Addison-Wesley.
• Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
• Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review.
• Storm, C. (2012). Strategic Management in Healthcare: Theory and Practice. Jones & Bartlett Learning.