Form time to time, the Mission and Vision statements of organizations don't always get everyone's attention. The cognitively curious and most especially practitioners of teleological, governance and principled strategy don't skip their sights.  When we visit and check organizations or teams' offices and websites or any online presence, if any, the 'not everyone' may quickly infer what those mean.  Either in reality or simply just something for spectators to see as any artifact made up there, created just like many entities do as usual, they are there, at least to serve a purpose.  The idea is that those who understand can see a mission and vision, both explicitly on display, if they are for real or for show.  For real with a vision that, with or without the mission's own texts, the vision fundamentally creates the mission coherent with what exactly is needed to be actuated and achieved. You know what's next with for show.  In a digital environment, we ca...

Do we have oversight? Do we have participation? Do we have controls? Do we have policies? We always see this at work, specifications concretized for an industry and literatures but they can only reach a level where stakeholder wouldn't be able to recognize shared value.  In technology we are used--although not very quickly admitted and corrected--to technical debt and security debt when in fact that's a compounded fidelity debt. Do you see it? Not enough then and now. Hard corrections without blame game and just a pure energy to find definitive solution? That's a possibility.