Can Success be Achieved without Vision?

Yes, people can succeed without vision but it appears to be a phenomenon of achieving success in spite of themselves rather than because of themselves. At IBM, Unisys, and the Navy I associated with people whose goal was to satisfy the minimum requirements necessary to complete their job assignment and not make a mistake during the process. In this regard, these people were successful but they rarely received promotions or earned lucrative financial compensation. Colleagues that had a clear vision to illuminate their goals, however, performed the same job functions but achieved much greater success, abundant financial rewards, and frequent promotions.

Now long ago I read an article by Clemmer (2003) in which he compared goals and vision as follows:

.

GOALS:
Appeal to our intellect
Results and timeframes
Builds a business case
Rational
Pushes performance
Targets and objectives
Solves problems
Logical progression
Written

VISION:
Engages our emotions
A desired future state
Kindles a cause
Intuitive
Inspires and aligns
Images and feelings
Imagines possibilities
Irrational "skyhooks"
Verbal

Goals are logical and vision is emotional. Goals, therefore, can exist without vision, enabling a person or organization to achieve a level of measurable success but when these goals are "supercharged" with the emotion of vision, outstanding success can be the result. For example, if a person's goal is to simply satiate their hunger, they can eat raw food until fulfilled. If their goal is coupled with the vision of a warm, well prepared, flavorable meal the results will probably be very different. The same goal is achieved but the quality of the solution is markedly different.

Clemmer, J. (2003). The Leader’s Digest: Timeless Principles for Team and Organization Success. Kitchener, ON: TCG Press

Recently, I was reading a compilation of Ayn Rand’s responses to questions submitted after she made various presentations. As I read the following response from a 1976 lecture, I was struck by the similarities between Jimmy Carter’s presidential victory and Obama’s administration (Mayhew, 2005, p.70). It is rather darkly amusing to re-read Rand’s response while substituting the word “Obama” for “Carter:"

As for Carter’s victory: The next four years will probably be hell, and I dread to think in what form. I’ve heard people say. “I’m glad to be old,” and I join them in feeling it. I’m glad I won’t have to see too much of the kind of world Carter will make. But you are young enough not to want that unspeakable, cheap, small-town peanut power luster ruling your life. He’s already talking about looking forward to flying in Air Force One. That’s a man who says he has a vision for rebuilding America. The contempt for people that he shows something totally new in American politics. He doesn’t believe people can remember his statements from day-to-day, and so he can lie, sit on every fence, and nobody will notice. If his party holds him in check, while bowing and treating him like an emperor, they can lead him by the nose. Carter is all touchy, cheap vanity. He’ the kind of man who will do something out of sheer stubbornness, if he thinks Congress has offended him. But if they flatter him, he’ll probably prevent the country from collapsing.

It’s hard to tell what to look for in Carter’s administration; I don’t think he knows. He’s been on both sides of every key issue. He’ll probably be most dangerous about spending, for example, the make-work programs. Rising inflation will result, which I hope we can survive.


Mayhew, Edward, ed. Ayn Rand Answers: the best of her Q&A. Penguin Books, Ltd. London, 2005. ISBN 978-0-451-21665-6.

Leadership Perspective

Leadership demands living by the enduring principles that produce success, and augmenting them with new qualities that enable speed, flexibility, risk-taking, an obsession with goals, and new levels of communication within an organization.

Although all managers perform the traditional management functions of planning, organizing, staffing, controlling, and directing, it seems that the higher the management level within an organization the more important it is for the manager to exhibit great leadership qualities. At executive management levels the manager’s duties are concerned less with the minutia of running the organization and more on setting strategic goals and maintaining corporate direction while listening carefully to their subordinates and responding thoughtfully .

Present management and leadership issues involve competitive strategy, leadership, creativity, teamwork and technology. The leadership paradigm, however, is shifting and managers must adapt to new issues created by a global economy and changing demographics.