Review of Mission, Vision, and Values

Review of Mission, Vision, and Values

Raj Soin College of Business

RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORT

April 2012

The RSCOB Mission Review Steering Committee

Dr. David Bright
Ms. Donna Back
Dr. Barbara Hopkins
Dr. Melissa Gruys / Dr. Kevin Duffy
Mr. Zach Beck
Dr. Berkwood Farmer
Dr. J. Michael Bernstein, Ex-officio

Raj Soin College of Business

VISION
To be a business leadership learning community, nurturing life-long education, creating positive impact on business and society
MISSION
The Raj Soin College of Business provides leadership and innovation to:
Develop studentsto be successful and ethical leaders capable of making valued contributions to organizations in the Miami Valley and around the world
Advance knowledge and business practices through research and other work
Partner with individuals, businesses, government and other organizations to enhance professional, entrepreneurial, economic, and social progress
Attract, develop, and retain committed, exceptional faculty
VALUES
We embrace and practice:
Exceptional teaching and learning, a focus on providing students with a high quality educational experience
Ethics and character excellence, a desire to cultivate awareness of the attributes that enable excellence through personal and collective efforts
Applied relevance, a focus on the practical implication of our work for the members of our stakeholder community
Collaborative spirit, a desire and willingness to initiate work across boundaries in the way we conduct ourselves
Imaginative thinking, a passion for creative, novel, innovative work across all areas of responsibility—service, research, and teaching
Global perspective, an acknowledgment that all organizational activities take place in the context of an interconnected, global society
Appreciation of differences, the willingness to embrace, leverage, and develop distinct perspectives, needs, and points of view
Service and community engagement, a focus on creating regional economic and social impact

Review of Mission, Vision and Values

RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORT

This report summarizes the outcomes of the mission review process undertaken in the Raj Soin College of Business at Wright State University. The work was carried out by an ad hoc steering committee acting under the direction of the Faculty Executive Committee.

The design of the project aimed to invite substantive faculty and stakeholder involvement through a participatory, dialogic process. The advantages of such a process include the following:

A deeply represented perspective from all stakeholders – including university administration, students, and alumni, among others – would help us to understand the full reach and impact of the college. It was also important that we explore the potential influence of the College beyond its current footprint.
By providing an opportunity for faculty to be deeply involved, they should be more likely to own the outcomes and feel that this was truly a faculty driven process.
A well-developed statement of mission, vision, and values should be long-lasting if it accurately represents the organizational identity of the College. By hearing perspectives from all our stakeholders, we were able to identify a language that connects with people in an enduring way, making it less likely that such statements will need to be significantly revised in the future.

The basic design for this process featured two stakeholder engagement events, with preliminary, interim, and summary work carried out by the steering committee.

Step One: Form a Mission Review Steering Committee.

The FEC appointed an ad hoc committee to draw participants from several of the college's major stakeholder groups. The purpose of this group was to provide overall guidance of the mission review planning process. The steering committee met at least weekly from January through March, 2012. Members of the committee included the following individuals and perspectives:

Mission Review Steering Committee Members

Dr. David Bright, Faculty
Dr. Barbara Hopkins, Faculty
Dr. Melissa Gruys, Faculty
Dr. Kevin Duffy, Faculty / Ms. Donna Back, Business Leader
Dr. Berkwood Farmer, Administration
Dr. J. Michael Bernstein, Administration
Mr. Zach Beck, Student

Step Two: Stakeholder Dialogue Sessions

Two stakeholder dialogue sessions were held on Thursday, February 23 and Friday, February 24 at the Beavercreek Hilton Garden Inn, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Stakeholders from six perspectives were invited, including faculty, students, alumni, business leaders, staff, and college and university administrators.

A total of 82 individuals participated in at least one of the two sessions, including 24 Faculty, 14 staff, 11 students, nine administrators, 19 business leaders, and five chairs.

The format for this session was designed to encourage a high level of engagement and dialogue. Every participant had an opportunity to discuss and explore the existing values and a potential vision of the future for the Raj Soin College of Business. Each session included the following features[1]:

An introduction and overview of objectives for the meeting by the facilitator.
Paired conversations, using predetermined questions to explore examples of peak moments that represent the College at its best potential, the values represented by these stories, the reputation of the college in light of these stories, and the implications of our values for a vision of the future.
Small group conversations were convened in which the initial dialogue was shared, discussed, and analyzed. The most important ideas with respect to values and vision were identified from the perspective of each small group.
A large group discussion in which the results of the small group discussions were reported. This reporting process provided an opportunity for others to provide feedback and additional reactions.
Summary discussions that highlighted key insights or ideas.

The sessions generated a number of themes for values and vision. This work provided a foundation for thematic analysis and provided the insight necessary to propose a revision of the College’s values statement.

Step Three: Interim Work

Next, the steering committee examined the data from the dialogue sessions, focusing particular attention on the themes related to values.

Thematic Analysis

A thematic analysis was performed on the data, in which the themes were sorted for similarities, resulting in eight clusters. Members of the committee examined each cluster for essential themes. Initial labels for each cluster were created and definitions were developed to represent each cluster.

This procedure resulted in the thematic clusters shown in Appendix A. The report shows the number of times a particular sub-theme within a cluster was mentioned in the dialogue. The analysis resulted in themes for exceptional teaching and learning (23), collaborative spirit (18), service (11), passion for innovative thinking (12), ethics and excellence of character (12), international perspective (6), and diversity (9).

Survey Design

As indicated in the introduction, an important objective of this effort was to create statements that actually represent the values of our College. Thus, to test the resonance of these newly developed themes, the committee crafted a survey. For each proposed value, respondents were asked to express the degree of resonance it held for them, with “I would veto this idea if I could” at one end of a continuum, and “I fully endorse this idea” at the other extreme. In addition, respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they see the idea in practice in the College, with “totally absent from practice” at one of a continuum and “practiced at the highest level” at the other extreme. Respondents were also asked to express their resonance with the existing statements of values. For each value in the survey, respondents were also asked to provide suggestions and reactions on the wording of the values. Finally, as a point for exploration, faculty respondents were asked to consider the meaning of applied versus basic research and their perceptions of the ideal mix between the two. This consideration is important, because AACSB looks to the mission statement as an indication of the appropriate emphasis for the research focus of the college.

Sample

The survey was distributed to all faculty and staff, and a limited number of other stakeholders including students, business leaders, and alum. Thirty-twofaculty and 21 other stakeholders –including one administrator, two chairs, eight students, six staff members, one alum, and three non-reports—provided responses, for a total 53 responses. While these results are not terribly representative of non-faculty respondents, the faculty are well represented in the data.

Results

The summary results of the quantitative statistics are shown in Appendix B[2]. To interpret these results, it is important to focus on the distributions, rather than overall weighting. A distribution that skews right is indicative of high resonance or practice of the value. A normal bell-shaped distribution indicates lukewarm resonance or practice of the value. A left-skewed distribution indicates non-resonance or a perceived absence in practice of the value.

The results shown in Appendix B, Part 1 indicate substantial resonance for all of the values. From strongest to lowest resonance on a 9-point scale, the values as drafted were exceptional teaching and learning (mean = 8.19), ethics and excellence of character (mean = 7.64), relevance (mean = 7.38), collaboration (mean = 7.43), innovative thinking (mean =7.40), international perspective (mean = 7.26), diversity (mean = 7.08), and service (mean = 6.94).

Qualitative comments on the above titles suggested that some of the labels were not an appropriate representation of the underlying ideas. For example, several respondents indicated that “diversity” invokes images of policies such as affirmative action that may be somewhat controversial. “Service” as it was written seemed to implicate the requirement for faculty to be engaged in service as part of their professional responsibilities. “Relevance” also caused some degree of confusion. None of these connotations was an adequate representation of the committee’s intended meaning.

In addition, the results show that while the values are all highly supported by stakeholders, there is a mixed perspective on the degree to which these values are actually practiced in the college. This finding is important, both because it indicates that we have work to do, and also, when considered in connection with the resonance of each value, it indicates that there is energy within the College to take action. The steering committee views this finding as evidence that the values have motivational potential.

As shown in Appendix B, Part 2, with respect to the current values of the college (that were on the books before this review process), the results also show that most of the statements resonated with respondents, perhaps to a lesser degree than the newly proposed values described above.

Finally, as shown in Appendix B, Part 3, the questions about applied versus basic research suggest that most faculty members view the research orientation of the College as generally balanced, with a slight preference toward applied work.

Modifications

For the most part, the steering committee determined that each of the current values fits within the framework of the newly proposed values structure. In our perspective, the proposed statements are more meaningful and substantive, representing a broader range of related concepts, whereas the current values statements tend to be more narrowly focused.

With this in mind, the committee generated the document shown in Appendix C, which shows the refined value labels and definitions, includes essential ideas from the stakeholder dialogue, and integrates the current (pre-2012) values. The current value, “broad perspective of the liberal arts” was dropped from further consideration as it was a value that resonated less with stakeholders (e.g., had the lowest mean rating).

In addition, the steering committee examined the existing mission statements in light of the insights gained to this point in the process. The conversation also included a consideration of potential ideas for a new vision statement.

A draft of the comparison document shown in Appendix D was created in preparation for the stakeholder feedback session, where the committee could receive additional feedback and suggestions.

Step Four: Stakeholder Session – Drafting

This session occurred on March 15 for two hours. Sixteen participants, including three members of the steering committee, were present, representing all stakeholder groups except students.

The agenda for this meeting included the following elements:

Presentation of work and results accomplished to this point
Small groups of 3-5 were organized to discuss specific reactions to the proposed language for mission, values, and vision statements.
Each small group provided a report in plenary discussion, first on the values and mission statements, then on ideas for a revised vision statement.
The session concluded with a lengthy discussion about the essential elements fora revised vision statement for the college, with specific recommendations for language.

Step Five: Finalize Recommendations

With this feedback in mind, the mission review steering committee met twice to discuss and craft final recommendations. The final proposed versions of the mission, vision, and values are included in the comparison document shown in Appendix D, and on the cover sheet of this document.

Reflections

The final task of the steering committee was to reflect upon the process and lessons learned. Among our thoughts are the following:

We believe that the process has provided meaningful recommendations for improving the statements of identity for the Raj Soin College of Business. As evidenced by this document, all of our recommendations are derived from the actual perspectives of a full range of stakeholder groups.
The engagement process used to generate these recommendations is as important as the actual outcomes. By opening up the process for full participation, we believe that we have created recommendations that will be viewed as a legitimate representation of the College.
The face-to-face element of engagement provided an important opportunity for various members of our college community to establish connections and understand one another at a deeper level.
This project has demonstrated that there is a capacity within the College to make important decisions through an engaged, deliberative, participatory process. We hope that similarly important matters can be addressed using similar principles in the future.

APPENDIX A

SUMMARY ANALYSIS OF EMERGENT THEMES FROM THE STAKHOLDER DIALOGUE SESSIONS

The following clusters are representative of the subthemes generated from the stakeholder dialogue sessions. This analysis focused on the ideas that emerged when participants were asked to share “peak experiences” in their history with the College and to consider what made those experiences significant and important. The figure below is a visual representation of the outcome of the initial sorting process.

Figure: Outcomes from initial sorting of themes

The label for each concept arose from the actual ideas generated in the stakeholder dialogue sessions. These ideas are summarized for each theme below. The analysis also includes the number of times a theme was mentioned during the dialogue.

THEMATIC CLUSTER:EXCEPTIONAL TEACHING AND LEARNING

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 23

students respect and appreciate professors
student-faculty interaction
passion for teaching
concern for student beyond curriculum
care for student
enriching experience
academic excellence
student commitment
students are energetic
engaged, energetic students

problem-solving foundation
prep for classroom success
critical thinking
challenging students to think
life-long learning
career enhancement
support for progress in job
opportunity for education
channeling the strengths of students

THEMATIC CLUSTER: RELEVANCE

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 12

instant application
practical application
applied focus
applied learning
combining theory and practice

stakeholder responsiveness
profs have relationships with business
meet business needs
opportunity for students to work in business

THEMATIC CLUSTER:SERVICE ORIENTATION

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 11

connection to community
community service
community involvement
service to community

social benefits
community impact
building the community
improving the community

THEMATIC CLUSTER: COLLABORATIVE SPIRIT

Number of times the subtheme was mentioned in dialogue: 18

interconnectedness
engagement
interdisciplinary connections
social decency & respect

personal connection
participation
relationship building
robust interpersonal relationships

THEMATIC CLUSTER: PASSION FOR INNOVATIVE THINKING

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 12

risk taking
innovative-creative-not bound by tradition
desire of professors to change
positive change
thinking outside the box

engaged faculty that care
energy
research
dedication of professors
knowledge of professors
openness to feedback

THEMATIC CLUSTER: DIVERSITY

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 9

diversity of thought
diversity leveraged

working through differences
valuing different perspectives

THEMATIC CLUSTER: ETHICS AND EXCELLENCE OF CHARACTER

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 12

excellence
passionate commitment to excellence
leadership
ethics
discipline
work ethic (intrinsic motivation)

integrity
honesty
loyalty
passion
positive attitude

THEMATIC CLUSTER:INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

Number of timesthe theme was mentioned in dialogue: 6

international perspective
international experience

a world view
international

APPENDIX B

Part 1: SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESPONSES TO NEWLY PROPOSED VALUES

VALUE:EXCEPTIONAL TEACHING and LEARNING
This value refers to a focus on providing students with a high-quality educational experience. Ideas include a concern for students, passion for teaching, academic excellence, engaged students, and student career development.
All responses

Faculty Responses

Other Stakeholder Responses

Part 1: Summary of Survey Results (continued)