Mission, vision, values, and goals: An exploration of key organizational statements and daily practice in schools

D. Keith Gurley • Gary B. Peters • Loucrecia Collins •

Matthew Fifolt

Published online: 26 February 2014

� Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract This article reports findings from a study of graduate level, educational leadership students’ familiarity with shared mission, vision, values, and goals

statements and the perceived impact these concepts have on their practice as leaders

and teachers in schools. The study is primarily qualitative and uses content analysis

of responses to open-ended questions. Researchers adopted a limited quantitative

analysis technique, however, in order to report frequency of responses to survey

questions. We used the literature base regarding strategic planning and school

improvement as conceptual frameworks to guide the analysis. Findings revealed that

educational leadership students had limited ability to recall the content of key

organizational statements. Further, respondents reported that these key organiza-

tional statements had only minimal impact on their daily practice. Implications are

presented for university preparation programs designed to equip school leaders to

effect meaningful school improvement and organizational change centered on

D. K. Gurley (&) Department of Human Studies, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 210B Education Building,

901 13th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

G. B. Peters

Department of Human Studies, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 203 Education Building,

901 13th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

L. Collins

Department of Human Studies, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 223 Education Building,

901 13th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

M. Fifolt

Center for the Study of Community Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 112 912

Building, 912 18th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA

e-mail: [email protected]

123

J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242

DOI 10.1007/s10833-014-9229-x

development of shared mission and vision for improvement. This research confirms

similar findings reported by Watkins and McCaw (Natl Forum Educ Adm Superv J

24(3):71–91, 2007) and adds to the research by exploring respondents’ reports of the

impact of mission, vision, values, and goals statements on their daily practice. It

further extends the discussion by presenting a content analysis of key organizational

statements, comparing mission, vision, values, and goals statements to models of

strategic planning and planning for continuous school improvement from the

organizational improvement literature.

Keywords Goal-setting � Organizational change � Organizational values � School culture � School improvement � Shared mission � Shared vision

Introduction

Articulating and nurturing widely shared ownership and commitment to purpose in

organizations (i.e., mission, vision, values, and goals) has long been identified as

essential to effective, strategic planning for organizational improvement (Bryson

2004; Kaufman 1992; Mintzberg 1994). Bryson (2004) stated, ‘‘Clarifying purpose

can eliminate a great deal of unnecessary conflict in an organization and can channel

discussion and activity productively’’ (p. 38). Unity of purpose, or mission, within

an organization provides a means by which organizational members can work

together toward a common set of objectives.

The purpose of the research presented in this article was to explore how familiar

graduate students, enrolled in educational leadership programs at a southeastern US

university, were with the mission, vision, values, and goals statements in their

schools. We also explored the perceived level of impact that these statements had on

educational leadership students’ daily, professional practice. The article concludes

with a discussion of the findings as well as some implications for university

preparation programs designed to equip future school leaders to effect meaningful,

organizational change in their schools.

Background

While discussion of strategic planning finds its roots in business management

contexts, much of what has been presented within this literature has migrated into

the research and discussion regarding school improvement models over the last two

decades (Quong et al. 1998). Development of a clear school mission, shared vision,

articulated values, and specific goal statements has also been applied more

specifically to the fundamental processes of school improvement focused on

increased levels of learning for all students (DuFour and Eaker 1998; DuFour et al.

2008; Perkins 1992; Renchler 1991; Teddlie and Reynolds 2000; Wiggins and

McTighe 2007). Yet, despite a longstanding and consistent admonition in the

literature regarding the purpose and power in developing these foundational

218 J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242

123

statements, the practice of clearly articulating such statements continues to be

effectively ignored by many school leaders (DuFour et al. 2008; Watkins and

McCaw 2007). In an insightful piece on vision-guided schools, Pekarsky (2007)

stated, ‘‘… thoughtful, systematic attention to larger questions of purpose is rarely at the heart of American social and educational discourse’’ (p. 424).

The current authors contend that, among school leaders, there exists a lack of

understanding of exactly what mission, vision, values, and goals statements are and

the value such foundational statements offer to the development of shared

commitment among stakeholders to the process of school improvement. Citing

evidence from a recent survey of our graduate-level educational leadership students,

we point to the presence of an implied disconnect between the widely established,

best practice in the first steps of school improvement (i.e., development of key

organizational mission, vision, values, and goals statements) and the daily,

professional practice of educational leaders charged with demonstrating continuous

improvement in school achievement and student learning.

In the first section of the article, we provide clear definitions of the terms and

then research-based evidence for the value of school mission, vision, values, and

goals statements. Next, we describe findings from the research conducted in an

educational leadership program at a university in the southeastern United States. We

conclude the article by presenting a discussion of the findings as well as some

implications for further research into the topic. The article begins with a description

of the two key conceptual frameworks adopted to guide the research, i.e., strategic

planning and continuous school improvement. We based the content analysis of

mission, vision, values, and goals statements recalled by our students on the models

of strategic planning and continuous school improvement.

Conceptual frameworks

The research project was guided by two frames of thought regarding organizational

and school change. The first of these frameworks is strategic planning, developed by

authors and researchers primarily outside the field of education. The second

framework, that is continuous school improvement, stems from the strategic

planning literature, but applies its concepts specifically to the process of increasing

the capacity of schools to effect high levels of learning for students and adults in a

school context. Discussion of continuous school improvement comprises a broad

framework developed by a wide variety of school improvement experts. Strategic

planning and continuous school improvement frameworks are described in more

detail in the section that follows.

Strategic planning

We first adopted a conceptual framework of strategic planning to guide the project.

Strategic planning finds its roots in the work of Lewin (1943) on organizational

change (Burnes 2004). Lewin described three stages of organizational change

claiming that, in order to solidify meaningful change within an organization,

organizational members must first unfreeze or become aware that the current

J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242 219

123

mindset within the organization must change in order to meet new demands from

the external environment. Next, organizational members, now aware of the need for

change, actually experience a state of confusion or become unsettled as they recreate

and redefine the new norms for the organization. Finally, once new norms and

expectations have been defined, the organization experiences a state of freezing in

which they establish, commit to, and become comfortable again with the new set of

organizational norms, goals, and expectations (Lewin 1943).

Based upon an extensive knowledge of historical literature on planning in

American and European corporations, Mintzberg (1994) sought to define the elusive

construct of strategic planning. Mintzberg asserted that planning has been conceived

of historically as merely ‘‘future thinking’’ by many planning experts, while others

define planning as actually ‘‘controlling the future’’ (p. 7). Finally, Mintzberg

asserted the possibility that planning is simply a process of ‘‘decision making’’ (p.

9). In an effort to define strategic planning, Mintzberg clearly pointed to the

complex nature of the process and the need for organizational actors to define what

it is they mean by ‘‘strategic planning’’ and how that process will be fleshed out in

the organization. Other strategic planning experts have focused specifically on

aspects of organizational change in the nonprofit sector, including the second phase

described by Lewin (1943), wherein organizational leaders and members focus on

developing a new set of organizational norms and commitments in order to enable

the change process (Bardwell 2008; Crittenden and Crittenden 1997; Moore 2000).

Describing a successful strategic planning process in their nonprofit organization,

McHatton et al. (2011) stated, ‘‘…strategic planning has been shown to be beneficial in gaining stakeholder consensus for organizational objectives and future action’’ (p.

235).

In this second stage of strategic planning described by Lewin (1943), confusion,

members engage in a process of developing organizational purpose statements

intended to guide the change process. Purpose statements include statements of

mission, vision, values, and goals, and become the cornerstones upon which

organizational change is built (Bardwell 2008; Crittenden and Crittenden 1997;

Moore 2000). McHatton et al. (2011) identified common elements of effective

strategic planning emergent from the literature and from their own experience,

including the development of clear mission and vision statements, a commitment to

organizational values (e.g., leadership, collaboration), and development of a

systematic way to monitor progress toward organizational goals.

School improvement

Out of this dialogue of strategic planning for organizations in general stems the

discussion of organizational improvement specifically for schools. Researchers for

the current study adopted this conceptual framework of school improvement to

further guide data analysis and reflection.

In the seminal work on the problem of change in US schools, Sarason (1971)

clearly explicated many problems that school leaders often encounter in their efforts

to effect meaningful, modal change in educational settings. Among these problems

was an insufficient understanding of the context of schools and the regularities, or

220 J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242

123

common practices of school personnel. Without a thorough understanding of these

regularities, change agents have traditionally found it difficult, if not impossible, to

implement and sustain desired changes in schools.

Rooted in the work of Sarason (1971); Fullan (1993, 1998, 1999) extended the

discussion of the complexity of the change process in school improvement. Fullan

observed that schools are not only complex organizations, but operate in constantly

changing, fluid contexts. School improvement leaders are challenged, at best, to introduce

and support change efforts within organizations that experience ongoing, dynamic

external and internal change forces, most of which may be hidden and unexpected.

Fullan (1993) explained that, while developing a shared vision among school

personnel is essential, it is important that this vision remain fluid, especially at the

point of introduction of substantial change in a school. Fullan recommended that

school improvement leaders remain open to reflection within and about the

organization in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the context

before establishing an organizational vision. Fullan wrote, ‘‘Under conditions of

dynamic complexity, one needs a good deal of reflective experience before one can

form a plausible vision’’ (p. 28).

Many other authors have contributed to the school improvement knowledge base

over the last two decades, offering a wealth of research-based practices in school

leadership, change agency, instruction, curriculum development, and organizational

planning (Danielson 2007; DuFour et al. 2008; Marzano et al. 2005; Reeves 2000).

In presenting an increasingly popular model of school improvement, professional

learning communities (PLC), DuFour and Eaker (1998) identified the articulation,

implementation, and stewardship of mission, vision, values, and goals statements as

fundamental building blocks to effective school improvement. For the current study,

researchers adopted the PLC guiding framework due to the more extensive

articulation of the definitions of these foundational, organizational statements.

These definitions are explained more clearly in the following section.

Review of literature

Although strategic planning and school improvement literature bases are replete,

even saturated, with discussion about organizational mission, vision, values, and

goals, there remains a widespread misunderstanding of exactly what each of these

terms means, as well as an apparent lack of understanding of the value of establishing

such statements to the process of school improvement (DuFour et al. 2008; Watkins

and McCaw 2007). It is imperative, then, that we carefully define each term and

provide background regarding how well-articulated, foundational terms can

contribute to the evolution and improvement of organizations and schools.

Defining a mission statement

Often in leadership discourse, a mission statement is used synonymously and

interchangeably with the vision statement of an organization. However, the two

statements are distinct from one another (DuFour et al. 2008). A mission statement

J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242 221

123

is, most simply, a statement of why an organization exists, a statement of its

fundamental purpose. In the context of continuous school improvement, DuFour and

Eaker (1998) described a mission statement as ‘‘stating the business of our

business’’ and answering the question, ‘‘Why do we exist?’’ (p. 58). Lunenberg

(2010) argued that leading an ongoing, community-wide discussion about the

purpose of the organization’s existence is essential to the function of school

leadership and to the process of building unity and shared commitment to the work

to be done in an educational organization.

Stemler et al. (2011) conducted a comprehensive content analysis of high school

mission statements from a sample of schools from ten states across the United States.

These authors noted that, despite the presence of an allegedly unifying school mission

statement, the reasons that stakeholders assign for a school’s existence may vary

widely from school to school, and even among stakeholders within the same school.

For example, faculty and other community members may perceive the mission of a

school as ranging from preparing students to function as mature civic, emotional,

cognitive, and social adults to preparing students to assume vocational functions,

physically healthy habits, and even local and global integration (Stemler et al. 2011).

Stemler et al. (2011) argued that, while each of the perceivedmissions or purposes of

schooling are indeed important and laudable, the fact that such a wide variety of

individually held or perceived purposes for schooling exists, even among faculty

members operating within the same school unit, results in a lack of unity of mission and

shared effort toward a common set of objectives. This lack of unity in defining a shared

mission may result in a breakdown of mutual understanding of the primary purpose for

the school’s existence and eventually lead to fragmentation of effort among

organizational actors. The purpose of developing a widely shared organizational

mission, therefore, is not conducted to limit other, important functions of schools, but

rather to focus members’ efforts in order to reach clearly articulated and specific goals

(Bryson2004;DuFour et al. 2008;Kaufman1992;Mintzberg 1994, Stemler et al. 2011).

According to Boerema (2006), the mission statement of a school actually

articulates a set of values that answer fundamental questions about the purpose of

education and how the educational program should be carried out. Boerema pointed

out that, ‘‘The school mission provides the context for governance, decision making,

and the way the school is managed’’ (p. 182). Boerema further explained that a

school mission statement provides key direction to those individuals performing the

core technology of a school, namely teaching and learning.

The process of articulating a clear and concise mission statement is imperative in

order to solidify a shared understanding of what the primary work of the school

actually is. Without careful examination, discussion, articulation, and clarification

of the school mission, educational professionals who work together closely on a

daily basis may interpret their purpose very differently, each assuming a different

reason for why they do the work that they do.

Defining a vision statement

A vision statement is qualitatively different from a mission statement. A vision

statement is an articulation not of purpose, but of a preferred future for the

222 J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242

123

organization. According to DuFour and Eaker (1998), a vision statement answers

the question, ‘‘What do we hope to become?’’ (p. 62).

A vision statement provides stakeholders with a picture of what their ideal school

and students will look like if educators are successful in working together to achieve

that vision. Though a vision statement should be clear and meaningful to all

stakeholders, effective vision statements are concise and provide lofty, yet

measureable, language so that school personnel know when the vision has been

achieved or when it should be adjusted to better meet the needs of the organization

(Pekarsky 2007).

Pekarsky (2007) stated that a vision statement is far more than a mere slogan. A

vision statement enables school community members to assume a desired state of

heart and mind with which to carry out their daily functions in the school.

Stakeholders in a vision-guided organization, through the function of a clearly

articulated and supported vision statement, are explicit about where they are headed,

what they are about, and how they will know when they have arrived.

Kose (2011) stated that a shared, articulated vision is characteristic of effective

schools, is a vehicle for building more inclusive and equitable schools, and can

influence positive change in school improvement efforts, hiring, evaluation,

professional development, and other key school functions. According to Kose,

principals can use a well-crafted and supported vision statement to effect powerful

change in the school on many different levels.

Defining values statements

Perhaps the least understood and under-implemented of the four foundational

statements is the statement of core values. As the name suggests, core values

statements articulate the shared beliefs of an organization. Again, DuFour and Eaker

(1998) claimed that core values statements answer the question, ‘‘How must we

behave in order to make our shared vision a reality?’’ (p. 88).

In describing their work with business organizations, Blanchard and O’Connor

(1997) argued that, ‘‘When aligned around shared values and united in a common

purpose, ordinary people accomplish extraordinary results and give their organi-

zation a competitive edge’’ (p. 144). Though their work and research was conducted

in a profit-driven context, key concepts may arguably be applied to non-profit

organizations, as well. Blanchard and O’Connor wrote of the importance for

contemporary organizations to adopt key values, such as honesty, fairness, and

integrity, in order to survive in the current economy.

Blanchard and O’Connor (1997) further contended that organizations, centered

on powerful, shared values, report better service to their clientele, higher profits, and

a higher quality of working environments for their employees. The authors stated

that it is these shared values that act as the primary authority within an organization,

the authority to which all organizational members answer.

In order for statements of organizational values or belief statements to be

effective and meaningful to a school community, however, they must be translated

from esoteric statements of stakeholder beliefs into clear and succinct statements of

observable behaviors. In other words, statements of core values do not merely

J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242 223

123

answer the question, ‘‘What do we believe?’’ but also address the question, ‘‘Based

upon our core beliefs, how will we behave within our organization in order to

achieve our vision?’’

For example, if a school community identifies a core value of safety for its

school, it is not enough merely to state, ‘‘We believe our school should be safe.’’

Instead, the value becomes much more realistic and observable when a statement of

safety as a value is translated into behavioral statements such as, ‘‘Because we value

keeping our community safe, we will each assume responsibility to keep school

doors locked at all times.’’ Or, ‘‘Because we value safety for all staff and students,

we will each approach and greet strangers to our building and offer our assistance.’’

Such behavioral statements, added to a stem statement of a basic value, makes the

core values statements come alive within the organization and allows leaders to

observe when and if the espoused core values are actually at work or if they are,

rather, mere words on a document.

Calder (2011) extended the understanding of the importance of values statements

by claiming that values statements provide an important foundational pillar for how

business is to be conducted. Calder wrote, ‘‘Values shape much of the work

processes and, as such, influence how an institution moves forward in a positive

way’’ (p. 24).

Defining goals statements

Perhaps the most clearly understood of the four terms is the statement of goals. In a

goal statement, educators spell out precisely what level of performance is to be

achieved in the selected domain (e.g., student learning, professional development)

and what steps are to be taken, by whom, in order to achieve the goal. Clearly, in

this era of increased accountability for student learning and professional practice,

setting clear, measurable performance goals has become common practice for

school leaders and other school personnel. DuFour and Eaker (1998) stated that

statements of learning goals address the question, ‘‘Which steps will we take first,

and when?’’ (p. 100).

A widespread trend across the United States in school improvement efforts,

especially in light of increased accountability, is the development of organizational

goals that are Strategic, Measurable, Attainable, Results-oriented, and Time-bound

or SMART goals (O’Neill 2000). The connection between effective goal setting and

student achievement has been clearly established among researchers (Moeller et al.

2012).

Summary of literature review

A clear definition of the meaning of each of the four foundational statements

(mission, vision, values, goals) is imperative for members of the organization,

especially leaders, to understand the purpose of statement development. Further-

more, a deep understanding of the value of each type of statement, not merely the

development of the statement, but the organization-wide ownership and investment

in the principles asserted in the statement, is also imperative if school leaders are to

224 J Educ Change (2015) 16:217–242

123

make important and significant progress toward school improvement. In other

words, the purpose and value of developing foundational mission, vision, values,

and goals with stakeholders within an organization is not merely to have done so,

and to check these tasks off of the ‘‘to do’’ lists. Rather, the purpose of developing

these statements is to bring organizational stakeholders together to share in a

common understanding of and commitment to the school’s purpose, preferred

future, behavioral expectations, and next steps toward school improvement and

increased levels of student learning.

Methodology

We used a primarily qualitative methodology (i.e., content analysis) in order to

explore the level of familiarity educational leadership students had with their

school’s mission, vision, values, and goals statements and the level to which the

statements impacted their daily practice. We also, however, employed the use of a

quantitative technique in reporting the frequency of responses to survey questions.

While not strictly a replication of research, the project described here follows-up on

and extends research conducted by Watkins and McCaw (2007).

Reporting findings from a similarly designed study, Watkins and McCaw (2007)

discovered a lack of ability by their educational leadership students to articulate

their own school or district mission, vision, and values statements. These authors

discovered that the mission, vision, and values statements that their students recalled

were largely not aligned between school and district levels and that only a small

percentage of recalled statements (8–15 %) were reflective of identified criteria for

what the content of vision, mission, and values statements should reflect.

We patterned the current investigation after the Watkins and McCaw (2007)

study by surveying our current educational leadership students, asking them to recall

key organizational statements. We also followed the Watkins and McCaw design by

conducting a content analysis of the actual statements that respondents could recall.

Our study departs from the Watkins and McCaw study in that we added students’

ability to recall school goals statements to the survey. Further, at the suggestion of

Watkins and McCaw, we explored our students’ perception of impact that school

mission, vision, values, and goals statements had on their daily practice as

professional educators.

Study sample

The individuals who comprised the convenience sample for this study were enrolled

in one of three graduate-level, educational leadership preparation programs at a

university in the southeastern part of the United States during the fall of 2012. All

participants were employed as teachers, principals, or central office administrators

in schools within the university service area and were enrolled in either an

educational master’s, educational specialist, or doctoral program at the university.

Educational leadership students were selected to participate in the research based on

their experience working in schools and on their demonstrated interest in the stu

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?

Order Plagiarism Free Answer Here

About Wridemy

We are a professional paper writing website. If you have searched a question and bumped into our website just know you are in the right place to get help in your coursework. We offer HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE Papers.

How It Works

To make an Order you only need to click on “Order Now” and we will direct you to our Order Page. Fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Are there Discounts?

All new clients are eligible for 20% off in their first Order. Our payment method is safe and secure.

Hire a tutor today CLICK HERE to make your first order

Related Tags

Academic APA Writing College Course Discussion Management English Finance General Graduate History Information Justify Literature MLA