Pm Mission Vision Tenets

---
name: pm-mission-vision-tenets
description: Use when auditing, drafting, or refining Mission, Vision, and Tenets/Values statements. Applies Lencioni's four-type framework to classify existing tenets, enforces the label + 1-3 sentence best practice format, tests coherence across Mission→Vision→Tenets, and runs the "would you fire someone for this?" test. Invoke for leadership offsites, values workshops, or any tenet rewrite session.
---

# Mission, Vision & Tenets

Guides auditing and writing Mission, Vision, and Tenets using frameworks from Collins, Lencioni, and validated tech company practice (Amazon, Stripe, Netflix).

## Definitions

| Artifact | Question it answers | Lifetime |
|----------|-------------------|---------|
| Mission | Why does this org exist? | Timeless — changes only if fundamental purpose changes |
| Vision (BHAG) | Where are we going? | Finite — you know when you've achieved it |
| Tenets | How do people behave when mission is at stake? | Semi-stable — can evolve as org learns |

## Workflow

### Step 1: Classify Before You Write (Lencioni)

Run every existing or candidate tenet through the four-type test before touching language:

1. **Core** — genuinely held, you'd fire someone for violating this, you were already living it before writing it down
2. **Aspirational** — what you wish you were; belongs in strategy/OKRs, not on a values list
3. **Permission-to-Play** — ethical minimum any decent company has (honesty, respect); don't list as distinctive
4. **Accidental** — emerged from founding team personality; may or may not be worth keeping

**Fire test**: "Would you fire someone for violating this, even if their results were excellent?" If no → not core.
**Symmetry test**: "Would any legitimate company choose the opposite?" If no → baseline decency, not a distinctive value.

Only Core values belong on the final list.

### Step 2: Draft to Format

Best practice format (Amazon/Stripe validated):

1. **Label**: 3-5 words — must work as conversational shorthand in meetings
2. **Behavior sentence**: what someone who holds this value *does*, active voice
3. **Tradeoff sentence**: the uncomfortable implication, or what violation looks like
4. Optional: negative framing ("they never say X") — specificity of discomfort signals real conviction

**Rule**: 1-3 sentences. If you can't write it in 3 sentences, the team hasn't resolved it. Compression is a diagnostic.

Tone:
- Active voice ("Leaders do X" not "We believe in X")
- Specific over general ("aspire to be the world's fastest" not "we value speed")
- Include the tradeoff — good tenets make a real choice visible

### Step 3: Test Coherence

For each tenet: "Is this derivable from our Mission?"

If you removed all tenets and tried to reconstruct them from the Mission alone, would you get something close? If not — either generic (any company could claim it) or misplaced (belongs in process/strategy).

Read the full sequence aloud: Mission → Vision → Tenet 1 → Tenet 2 → ... Does it tell a coherent story?

**Collins test**: "Could a visitor drop in from another planet and infer the vision just by observing how people behave?"

### Step 4: Check Count

- Sweet spot: **5-8 tenets**
- High-credibility zone: **3-6**
- Each label must be recallable in a decision moment without looking it up
- If the full text must be read to apply the value, it hasn't been internalized

## Common Failure Modes

- ❌ One-word platitudes: "Integrity." "Innovation." "Excellence." — Lencioni explicitly names these
- ❌ Symmetric values: opposite would be repugnant = baseline decency, not distinctive value
- ❌ Lists where every item is positive and non-excludable
- ❌ Aspirational values listed as core (you aspire to be innovative but aren't yet)
- ❌ Too many: 10+ not recallable without prompting
- ❌ Too long: beyond 3 sentences loses the snap that makes tenets invokable in real decisions

## Offsite Process

**Before drafting:**
- Each leader writes independently: "3-5 things I'd never compromise on, even at competitive cost" — compare lists; convergence without coordination = discovered core value
- Collins Mars Group: "If we were rebuilding the best of this org with 5-7 seats, who goes? What do they do?"

**Time allocation (Collins):**
- 70-80% identifying misalignments — policies/behaviors that contradict claimed values
- 10-20% language drafting
- Most offsites get this backwards

## Full Framework Reference

For detailed company examples (Amazon LP format, Stripe principles, Netflix culture memo) and extended Collins/Lencioni source material, see: `reference.md`