Election from a vision perspective

  

Frequently management consultants are called in to develop a strategic plan for a corporation. I know the process fairly well, because I used to be a management consultant too.

 

A major step in the process is to develop a vision for the corporation. This is based on what is happening in the external world and what the stakeholders in the corporation are saying. Three to five years from now, the corporation may need to look different from what it does right now because the external environment is constantly shifting and opportunities emerge. Such vision is at the foundation of what a strategic plan would look like. It will be a roadmap for how to get there from here.

 

A corporation does not have to deal with alternate-visions. It could be that the workers in the company may feel differently from the management about where the corporation is heading, but in most cases, they have faith that those running the company to know what they are doing. They also have the ability to leave the corporation if they disagree. In an extreme situation, they may go on strike. That however, does not change the vision a great deal, only how the benefits of fulfilling the vision would be distributed.

 

It is different for democratic nations. There could be different visions and the election will give right to someone to implement strategy to achieve the selected vision.

 

What the Democrats were trying to do in the recent presidential election was to communicate a vision for US in face of changing environment, both externally and internally. There are major trends such as globalization, advanced technologies and changing demographics of this country. Their vision would recognize these changes and incorporate them in the way the country would look like.  “We look ahead”, was their mantra. 

 

However, there was a competing vision that was proposed. This vision reminded people that the country does not need to follow global changes in the environment, but can go back to the good old times. “Make America Great AGAIN” is what the opponents said.

 

There is an obvious appeal to that alternate vision. People have a myopic memory as they recall the past. It is almost always “Good old times” and not “Bad old times”.  When looking back, it feels good to remember times when inflation was low, and those pesky immigrants were few. Unlike a corporation, people of the country can change the direction of the country by a simple vote, so that the alternate vision can be achieved. 

 

To a large percentage of people, that seemed to be a much more appealing task then doing something new with no clear benefit to them. It really did not matter that the huckster pedaling the alternate vision was coming up with unworkable ideas. The force of his personality was sufficient.  The story he told was convincing.

 

So, now, hold on to your seats.