In this zone, we critically discuss the concept of the mission statement and examine whether it is espoused rhetoric or reflects organisational practice.
As a management concept, the mission statement has fuelled an interest in, and debate and discourse among, the academic, practitioner and business communities.
47,48 Although it has attracted a considerable amount of scepticism from numerous circles, it is often portrayed as a precursor to, and bedrock of, strategic planning and is thus utilised as an important tool to aid organisational effectiveness.49,50 According to Braun et al.,49 the utilisation of the mission statement as a multipurpose organisational tool is attributed to the work of Drucker50 and his early writings on management. Thereafter, research in, and application of, the concept increased significantly. Based on this, Braun et al. profess that there is a widespread assumption that a mission statement

a) facilitates consistency of purpose and direction within the organisation;

b) functions as a control mechanism;

c) guides organisational decisionmaking, and

d) conveys a meaning to work that motivates and inspires organisational members. Deconstructing the concept further, Bart51 defines it as ‘a formal written document designed to capture and convey a firm’s unique and enduring purpose.’ He adds ‘it should answer some fairly basic yet critical questions, such as: what is our purpose? and, why does our organisation exist?’ Bart suggests that a mission statement’s power lies in its ability to accomplish two results. First, to influence behaviour and thus encourage and enthuse the organisation’s members to achieve outstanding performance. Second, to consistently and fairly steer the resource allocation process.
Statement Braun et al proffer that a mission statement contains three key metacomponents: vision, mission and philosophy.
First, the vision chronicles the comprehensive, longterm, futureoriented perspective of the organisation’s development and predominantly focuses on presenting an emotionallyappealing portrait of its future. The vision also encompasses specific organisational goals, to which members can aspire. Second, the mission refers to the organisation’s raison d’être or reason for being in business. Within this, it defines its core tasks and duties as related to

a) its customers, such as offering high quality services;

b) its members by, for example, making sure they have job security, and

c) society at large by promoting education. Third, the philosophy affirms the organisation’s values through, for instance, its intention to offer fair, honest and sustainable products and services, the objective being to guide and shape organisational behaviour, attitudes and decisionmaking.
This aspect of the document also outlines the organisation’s internal and external ethical commitments and corporate social responsibility to customers and society. Braun et al.
caveat that although the three components are defined and espoused within the literature, they are not always differentiated and applied in practice. Arguably, the reality is incongruity between espoused theory (what should happen) and theoryinuse (what actually happens52).
Underpinning the mission statement is the organisation’s culture, which drives the philosophy, values, identity and meaning that are embedded within the document. Babnik et al.53 attest that an effective mission statement is characterised by the extent to which there is congruence between the espoused values defined within the statement and individuals’ values that shape their emotional commitment towards both it and the organisation. One could argue that this commitment is mediated within the psychological contract and whether individuals perceive that the espoused values have been translated into practice or have been breached.54,55 Evidence suggests that researchers are dissatisfied with the current field of research56 and concerns have been expressed about the lack of quality in, and insufficient content and development of, the mission statement.
Khalifa56 highlights that such critique ranges from the document being a fabrication, irrelevant and superfluous;
other unflattering descriptions include they are dull, vague and shallow. Importantly, the incongruity between what the organisation espouses in its mission statement, and what it does in reality, is explicit in the literature. Research conducted by Bart51 identified some startling and revealing findings. He noted ‘so much mendacity and misrepresentation appears to exist in the published and very public mission statements in our sample of firms’. The research also found that there was precious little quality control or inclination from senior managers to make certain that only correctly worded and formulated mission statements were produced and released. Bart51 concluded ‘in any sample of mission statements, the vast majority are not worth the paper they are written on and should not be taken with any degree of seriousness’. Arguably, this further demonstrates the gap between what is espoused and actual practice.
Following on from Bart, Nash57, also considers mission statements with a degree of disdain. She lamented ‘at their worst, these statements are ponderous or pompous, static summaries of past exploits and future inadequacies.’ She adds ‘some are nothing more than a passing fancy or a piece of corporate window dressing.’ On a more positive note, Khalifa56, hints that it is possible to produce a good mission statement, but caveats that certain conditions must be met.
He stated ‘it is proper to assume that a good mission has to be lived and committed to, that a sense of mission is essential’. He counsels that the mission should be ‘reflected in culture and translated into strategy.’
Moreover, he advocates organisations taking mission statements seriously and generating a document that is genuine, effective and affective enough to generate a unified sense of direction and meaning among its members. He caveats ‘a fabricated mission is probably worse than no mission at all’.
To conclude, evidence suggests that the mission statement is shrouded in rhetoric. There appears to be a gap between what the document espouses and actual practice, which critics claim somewhat nullifies its existence.
On this note, Bart51 stated ‘all too frequently, the mission statement is itself a promise that appears to have been broken, often before the ink is dried’, Bart caveats that a reason for this might be the lack of stakeholder engagement in its conception, development and production, to which he attaches a large amount of disappointment. He professes that ‘mission statements can be the élan vital of corporate life’ , a vital force from which the organisation can derive emotional and financial benefits. However, he claims that their abuse, misuse and tarnished reputation precludes their numerous benefits being yielded and enjoyed. Rather than producing a statement that is full of ‘fantasy, fiction and lies’, Bart concludes ‘clear and tangible benefits await those firms that have both the fortitude and foresight to invest – vigorously in their mission’.
Following her rather damning indictment of the mission statement, Nash57 identifies a glimmer of hope for the document. She notes ‘at best.Œ.Œ.Œmission statements serve important and lasting purposes’ . Managers can use it as a benchmark for success and individuals can collectively aspire to achieve its espoused goals. Arguably, it can also serve to shape aspects of the psychological contract within the people organisation relationship. She concludes ‘mission statements can help nurture loyalty, create a sense of corporate community.Œ.Œ.Œand provide a unique window through which to gain a clearer understanding of a company’s values and directions’. 

1.Bart suggests that a key purpose of the mission statement is to influence behaviour and enthuse the workforce to achieve outstanding performance.

Evaluate the implications of the mission statement for organisational behaviour in the workplace.

2.Evidence suggests there is incongruity between what the organisation espouses it is going to do and what it does. How can managers and the organisation at large close the gap between rhetoric and actual practice?

3.Critically analyse the relationship between the mission statement and aspects of the psychological contract.