Vision and mentorship in graphics design

Vision Statement

Discuss the way vision was used at Mentor Graphics.

At Mentor Graphics Corporation, the created vision had several components, which might be regarded as questionable in terms of effectiveness. First, the vision was "unarticulated," meaning that, at best, the vision was not even a statement as such. Instead, it is likely that most employees and managers were not as such aware of the vision statement, but rather had little more than a vague notion of what the company aimed to do. The second component of the developing vision was to "Beat Daisy." In addition to being somewhat vague, this statement is also reactive to the products of others rather than focusing on the goals of Mentor Graphics Corporation itself.

McCarthy (2009), however, provides some good advice on creating an effective vision statement. The first requirement is to determine what the company would like to achieve in the future. This appears inherent in the initial, if vague vision statement by Mentor Graphics -- "Build Something That People Will Buy." However, McCarthy also states that this should be a clear guide for choosing current and future courses of action. Although interviews were conducted with potential customers and a relatively good product built, there is no clear guideline for specific steps to achieve the stated goal.

Also, the stated vision is singularly focused on what the company aims to gain in terms of business survival. There is no indication of what the customer will gain or how the product will be improved to meet customer demands. There is also no indication of what market gap the product aims to fill. Hence, when a similar product is developed by another company, Mentor Graphics has little choice but to adjust its vision statement in a reactive rather than a proactive way.

2. Evaluate whether the vision strengthened or weakened the company.

Because of its vague and reactive nature, the vision significantly weakened the company. The vision statement itself was not only vague and weak, but also not articulated as such. Ideally, a vision statement should connect managers and employees by means of a commonly understood vision for the future of the company. "Building Something That People Will Buy" is a good starting point for developing a strong vision, but certainly not enough to build a strong business or a strong company.

According to Constandse (2011), a compelling vision statement is one that "inspires, energizes, motivates, and stimulates…creativity." When considering the way in which the company's first products were developed and marketed, there was little creativity involved, with the second part of the vision statement simply being a reaction to the creativity of others in the market.

Constandse also mentions that a good vision statement should include a clear statement of the best potential future outcomes. At Mentor Graphics, the early forms of the vision statement were based upon the present and unforeseen occurrences, without being led by a vision for the future. In other words, the basic lack of clarity in terms of the company's goals for the present and future, as well as the reactive nature of the vision statement, weakened both the vision statement and the company.

3. Identify three reasons why vision failed at Mentor Graphics.

There are several important reasons why the vision failed at Mentor Graphics. The first important one is that it was never developed to its full potential. The initial vision was vague at best, not even naming the product to be built or the reasons why people would want to buy it. This created a lack of clarity and purpose within the organization, which ultimately created a lack of creative vision for the future.

A second reason for the vision's failure was its lack of articulation. There is no indication that the initial vision was ever a shared one. This created a lack of common goals and values within the company and concomitantly a basic lack of synchronicity when working towards this goal.

Finally, the third reason for the failing vision was its rigidity, especially during the vision's later manifestations. The vision was created according to an existing format, which was compelling for no reason better than that it was industry standard. The rigidity of maintaining this vision created a basic lack of growth and development in the vision specifically and therefore also in the company by association. In general, the vision never reflected the company's specific goals and vision for the future.

4. Discuss issues of vision content, context and process in how vision was introduced and changed at the company.

Maurer (2011) provides some very specific suggestions for creating a good vision statement. In terms of content, the author mentions the most important content element as being "Big Hairy Audacious Goals" or BHAGs. Indeed, the author notes that this is the common vision element that tends to set successful companies apart from the less successful ones.

In Mentor Graphics' case, there is the hint of goals, but hardly audacious, big, or hairy ones. This is the first shortcoming of the vision statements.

In terms of context, Maurer (2011) suggests that vision statements exist to excite and unite people to reach a common goal. This means that the vision should be communicated to all involved with the company. This was not done at Mentor Graphics; especially when the company started with a very vague vision statement.

In terms of process, Maurer (2011) offers the idea that "vision meetings" should be held and follow a specific pattern in order to ensure that the development of the vision adheres to the changing goals and needs of the company. No such meetings seem to have been held at Mentor Graphics. The first change to the vision was in reaction to the company's competition, while the second change occurred as a result of general market characteristics, but not in response to the new visions or needs of the company.

There appears, therefore, to be a divide between the changes in the vision and the communication of this vision to employees and managers. The relatively rigid method of this development then has the result of disabling change, even when change is required for the survival of the company.