Before moving into suggesting a new definition it may be appropriate to
acknowledge the descriptive basis of the two types of logic that were described above.
Researchers do make sense of what they observe in practice and translate that intomodels, frameworks, or theories. These can then be used for making prescriptions.
Researchers, however, take different paths in moving from description to prescription.
The point is that when there is considerable diversity in practice, as Bart and
Baetz (1998) already observed, researchers will have different ways as how they deal
with such diversity. The paper presents the two dominant schools of thought in
tackling this diversity and argues for an alternative way of thinking about the way
forward.
As can be seen so far the early definition of a mission (see, e.g. Drucker, 1986, 2007)
as the fundamental purpose of business that explains its reason for existence, is
expanded in two ways: in checklists of compiled items and in well-structured and
coherent models of synthesized elements. This paper argues for going back to basics
and offers definitions of the mission and the mission statement in that spirit.
A simple and focussed definition of the concept of mission is suggested to serve two
objectives: to add theoretical clarity and rigor in defining mission and mission
statements, and to help practitioners make good use of the concept. The first objective
may help find a common ground for the various definitions of the concept in the
literature and ease the divergence in views. The second objective may free practitioners
from the dictates of “checklist” mission statements, and give them confidence in
their judgment of what is really salient in developing effective mission statements
for their organizations.
Before moving into suggesting a new definition it may be appropriate to
acknowledge the descriptive basis of the two types of logic that were described above.
Researchers do make sense of what they observe in practice and translate that intomodels, frameworks, or theories. These can then be used for making prescriptions.
Researchers, however, take different paths in moving from description to prescription.
The point is that when there is considerable diversity in practice, as Bart and
Baetz (1998) already observed, researchers will have different ways as how they deal
with such diversity. The paper presents the two dominant schools of thought in
tackling this diversity and argues for an alternative way of thinking about the way
forward.
As can be seen so far the early definition of a mission (see, e.g. Drucker, 1986, 2007)
as the fundamental purpose of business that explains its reason for existence, is
expanded in two ways: in checklists of compiled items and in well-structured and
coherent models of synthesized elements. This paper argues for going back to basics
and offers definitions of the mission and the mission statement in that spirit.
A simple and focussed definition of the concept of mission is suggested to serve two
objectives: to add theoretical clarity and rigor in defining mission and mission
statements, and to help practitioners make good use of the concept. The first objective
may help find a common ground for the various definitions of the concept in the
literature and ease the divergence in views. The second objective may free practitioners
from the dictates of “checklist” mission statements, and give them confidence in
their judgment of what is really salient in developing effective mission statements
for their organizations.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
