138 Strategic Leadership
one of its subcommittees offers the most likely context for a continuous strategic
conversation on mission. It brings leaders of the faculty and administration
together around the same table. Whatever group or groups actually undertake
the task, by whatever process, the following kinds of questions will help to bring
an institution’s mission to explicit form as a pattern of self-definition that places
a claim on its members. To articulate a mission as lived, we must ask of ourselves
(cf. Hunt, Oosting, Stevens, Loudon, and Migliore 1997; Sevier 2000):
- Where did we come from? (the issue of legacy, of the founders and the founding,
of decisive events, and of notable leaders) - What really matters to us? (the question of values)
- By whom are we governed? (the issue of sponsorship by state, church, profession,
or independent board) - Why do we exist? (the essence of the purposes we serve)
- What do we do? (the question of the range and type of the institution’s educa-
tional programs and services) - How do we do it? (the issue of the specific ways we create value and quality in
executing teaching, research, and service programs) - Whom do we serve? (the size and scope of our activity by types of programs,
clientele, and geography)
Although they represent a place to start, serial answers to separate ques-
tions do not produce an effective sense of mission. Criteria that emphasize the
differentiation of the institution should wind through the process of inquiry and
self-definition, producing a coherent sense of purpose. For example, which of the
proposed defining characteristics in the mission rise to a level of effective strategic
differentiation? What are the things that set a place apart from others, that make
it what it is? What special educational or administrative capacities does it possess?
What particular economic, social, and political challenges define its past and its
future? The notion of core competencies (which we explore in depth in the next
chapter) asks us to look at the distinctive, creative capacities in an organization
that may cut across departments and programs. Have any competencies risen to
a level of consistent distinction, so that they have become legitimate defining
characteristics of achievement and quality? In the language of business strategy,
we ask how educational value is created and competitive advantage is achieved
(Alfred et al. 2006).
The process of strategic differentiation has other criteria to guide it, including
the test of effective measurement. As purposes are articulated, an organization must
have some way of knowing that it does what it claims to do. The measurement
need not be quantitative but can be substantive. The purpose of “student transfor-
mation” is not verifiable by quantification alone but may be evaluated by a large
variety of other forms of analysis and assessment. So, as an institution considers
its mission in a strategic context, it tests itself continually by asking, “In terms of
what measure, indicator, or evidence can we advance this claim?”