For Langeler the constant changes in vision statements represented the inability to act a director of change and instead focused on the caretaker image of change directives. The fundamental difference is the proactivity of the director vs. The reactivity of the caretaker model. Question V

The vicissitude nature of Mentor's vision statements changes highlights the question of whether change can be managed via models such as the director or navigator or whether inexorable forces shape decisions and change. Clearly Langeler was not able to utilize the director image in which change is influenced by the management team, directive, initiatives, and outcomes are clearly spelled out, and a process of steps for change is laid out. There is a plethora of change models: 7-S, Kotter's eight step, and Burke-Litwin (Burke, W. 2008) however, the underlying principle is that change can be controlled and managed; understanding that "vision is something that is essential to producing successful organizational change; and it should be articulated early on, and it us up to leaders to do this" (Palmer, I. 2008). Mentor's vision statements flow from change which occurs around them and is not capable of being controlled. This is a marked departure from the director model in which vision produces a change dynamic. Vision can certainly help and even define potential organizational change; this is true even with Mentor and the "Beat Daisy" statement. Despite its relevance as more of a rallying slogan the effect was to focus employee and company energies on a specific goal, and as such can be viewed as in part helping to define change for the company. As a proponent of the director image of change there is a favorable bias toward heroic leaders who either through charismatic, transformational, or servant leadership are able to "inspire followers to commit to a shared vision and goals…challenging them to be innovative problem solvers…and achieve extraordinary outcomes" (Hickman, G. 2010).

Question Six

The Mentor case study explicates the differences between intended and unintended change and how leaders are able to construct mission and vision statements in that context. Langeler as posited earlier was the definitive caretaker in...

The concatenation of Porter's Five Forces on Mentor defined how the company would proceed and how it would operate. Succinctly, change beset restructuring of the vision statements over time, absent was any planned change and the incorporation of an overriding vision to push the directive forward. The director model exemplifies the leader as able to confront the changing dynamics of competition, economies, and innovation. Change then flows from a leader's vision for the future direction of the company and how employees can be inspired and motivated to implement change and cement positive outcomes within the organization. The director image for a leader incorporates the "optimistic view that intentional change can be achieved" (Palmer, I. 2008).
Mentor Graphics is an excellent example of an organization that confuses mission and vision statements and compounds the problem with disconnecting core competencies of their business model from their long-term outlook for the company. This problem though is not a unique one as many companies often encounter difficulty in identifying the purposes of why they are in business and the future the company will ultimately achieve. Mentor throughout the case study attached a new vision to the current realities of the moment, and as such the result was an unfocused organization that moved from directive to directive without any clear purpose or vision for the future.