Manager’s Choice

Feuding Fiefdoms
Readers Respond

Here are readers’ ideas for coping with this month’s Manager’s Choice dilemma. To post your own ideas, see the instructions at the bottom of this page.

MISSION, VISION AND VALUES

The creation and communication of an agency’s “mission” does provide for some alignment. It points everyone in the right direction. With a mission that everyone knows and understands, you create a situation where everyone is now facing in the same direction. This is the first step in providing the leadership that is needed in this situation. But how do you get from where you are to where you want to be? A “mission” without a “vision” is uninspiring. To further inspire all employees in the agency, you need to go further than just the development and communication of a mission. Employees at all levels need to know not only the direction they are going, but also how far they have to go.

A vision provides them all with this information. Although you may ever reach your vision’s destination, progress toward that end can be made. How about “The West Dakota Department of Labor Security will be the nationally recognized leader in providing employment security services for the qualified customers among the citizens of West Dakota”? Again, it doesn’t matter to me what the statement says as long as it provides inspiration and everyone in the agency can sign on.

The italicized text below is taken from the state of Arizona Office of Strategic Planning & Budgeting Managing for Results manual:

A Vision Statement is a compelling, conceptual image of a desired future. The test for a true Vision Statement:

1.) Does it provide a clear picture of an ideal future?

2.) Is it inspiring & challenging?

3.) Is it brief & memorable?

4.) Will achievement of the mission help make the vision a reality?

Finally, we can accomplish the mission and move towards the vision in many ways. Interpretations and judgments will be necessary in the central office and in the field offices. We need to provide some further structure here too. The agency needs to develop some values to be used by all in accomplishing the mission while moving toward our vision.

Values and principles are the core values and philosophies that describe how an agency conducts itself in carrying out its mission.

Test for values and principles: Do they?

1.) Serve as a guide for decision-making at all levels of the agency?

2.) Express values that can be embraced by everyone?

3.) Motivate employees by expressing beliefs about conditions under which people work best?

4.) Steer leaders toward creating an infrastructure and system to make the vision a reality?

EMPLOYEES: We care about each other, encourage growth & recognize accomplishments

CUSTOMERS ... Our first priority is to satisfy our customers

QUALITY ... We do the right things right the first time

IMPROVEMENT ... We do the right things even better the second time

INTEGRITY ... We are committed to the highest standards of ethical behavior

TEAMWORK ... TOGETHER, We make it happen

LEADERSHIP ... Leaders are inspiring & lead by example. Leadership exists at all levels

MANAGEMENT ... We manage by fact

Here’s how the three (mission, vision and values) all fit together.

Without a Vision there is no inspiration.

A Vision without a Mission is an impractical notion.

A Mission without values can lead to an “ends justifies the means” credo.

With clearly articulated mission, vision and values, we all know the direction of our agency’s movement, our destination and how we are going to get there.

William Novi
Deputy Director, Court Operations
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch
Superior Court
New London


BE MORE VISIBLE

This case study seems to demonstrate the point that even the best laid plans of men sometimes goes astray. Just look at this situation: The actions of Burton Willoughby appear to be having an impact, and then all it takes is a crusader in the form of a Lynn Rice to roil the waters between the centralizers at headquarters and the decentralizers in the field. It appears that the truce in affect was a fragile one, not able to withstand the assault of one passionate dissident. In short, an eruption waiting to happen.

It appears to me that Burton Willoughby is taking too much of the heat, when it should be laid on the shoulders of the secretary of labor security instead. I say this because it should be the secretary who sets agency policy, and it should be the secretary who is the chief spokesperson for the agency. Willoughby’s role should be to advise the secretary and then to carry out his directives. Under the present situation, Willoughby appears to be responsible for both formulating and communicating policy, while the secretary remains out of sight. This situation, in part, is serving to weaken an already fragile relationship between the field people and the staff at headquarters.

If I were the secretary, I would prepare for next week’s meeting as follows: At the beginning of the meeting, I would announce that as secretary of the agency, the power to issue or revise policy directives was mine. I would also remind everyone that while Willoughby was our legal counsel, he was only responsible for carrying out policy or procedural initiatives as promulgated through my office as secretary. I would stress that it was my job to set agency goals and objectives, and that Willoughby’s job was to serve in a support capacity in helping to clarify answers to questions and problems that, if not correctly resolved, could get the agency into trouble with the state legislature. I would then apologize for my lack of visibility in the past and promise to be more visible and vocal in supporting their concerns before the governor and state legislature. I would stress that as one agency, we were all committed to the same mission statement, to help injured individuals within statute and agency policies.

With respect to Lynn Rice, I would point out that while her actions on behalf of Bernie Lee were noble, she did create a problem for our agency, a problem that leaves us vulnerable with respect to future actions of the legislature, who may now define our agency mission in more narrow terms — and appropriate less funds for future operations next year. Therefore, while noble, it is imperative that we not allow anyone to repeat Lynn’s action in the future.

There is undoubtedly more work that needs to be done here. Hopefully, this initial action at next week’s meeting will serve as a beginning toward closing the schism that appears to have developed within the Department of Labor Security.

Perstein R. Cave
Fiscal Manager
Connecticut Department of Banking
Hartford


FOCUS ON JOB DESCRIPTIONS

Here at my agency, and more specifically in my program, we have the very problem that is highlighted in the example: Headquarters staffers frustrated by their inability to determine program tactical objectives to meet what they perceive is the program strategic mission, and regional personnel who don’t trust headquarters personnel to make program policy decisions.

The solution seems simple to me and yet is apparently so elusive. Each individual position must have its own job description that includes the specific responsibilites assigned that are within the overall strategic goals of the organization. Accountibility is the key. If done correctly, there will be no waffling of program policy, no question as to where to go to get the right answer, and no inconsistency.

The risk here is great. Leaders have to be willing to make difficult decisions, provide detailed guidance on all matters within the realm of the program or department, and then impart philosophies in the form of formal, big-picture written documents, face-to-face discussions, and periodic reviews. Here’s the real tough part: If a particular individual who is assigned very specific responsibilities either fails to do the homework necessary to make sound decisions or consistently makes “bad calls,” the leadership must take action to fix the problem or get someone else to do the job.

The issue of decentralization is not black and white. There must be some level of decentralization to avoid the “micromanagement,” problem but the most productive answer isn’t total regional control, and finding the right balance between the two is the holy grail of managing a large organization.

Robert Siddall
Facility & Maritime Compliance Coordinator
Texas General Land Office
Austin (512) 463-8530

Agree or disagree? If you think you have a better way to deal with this month's Manager's Choice dilemma or would like to expand on the approaches presented here, share your thoughts with other readers. Send your solution to mailbox@governing.com. Please include your name, location, government or business title or job description, and a daytime phone number (for verification purposes).

Copyright © 2002, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are registered trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.