The Hidden Gap: A Journey to Discover the Missing Link Between Institutional Mission and Actual Performance
By Dr. Ali Yilmaz
Financial and Administrative Development Consultant
Institutions, particularly older ones, strive to define ambitious missions; however, they frequently face a significant gap between these aspirations and practical reality. This "hidden gap" between what the institution proclaims and what it truly practices reflects the essence of the Almighty's saying: "O believers! Why do you say what you do not do? How despicable it is in the sight of Allah that you say what you do not do!" This verse is not an accusation of hypocrisy but a call for alignment between words and actions, between what is planned and what is accomplished—something that our institutions urgently need today.
Identifying this gap is significant because an organization aware of its deficiencies can translate its mission and plans into a tangible reality, enhance productivity and job satisfaction, and earn greater stakeholder trust.
In this article, we will explore a deeper understanding of this gap, examining its manifestations, causes, and consequences so that those responsible can recognize its shortcomings and fulfill their duty to address them.
When we dissect this gap, we discover that it manifests itself on multiple interconnected levels:
At the strategic level, a gap arises when leaders do not effectively translate ambitious visions or overarching missions into realistic, actionable plans. This disconnect between vision and implementation leads to strategic confusion, where the institutional compass points in one direction while the ship sails in another.
At the organizational level, the gap widens when structures, systems, and procedures become obstacles rather than supporting mechanisms for fulfilling the mission. The organization evolves from a tool that enables the vision into a bureaucratic barrier that reinforces the disconnect between ambition and reality, hindering the flow of information and resources in ways that support the mission.
At the values level, a gap arises from the inconsistency between stated values and everyday behaviors within the organization. When an organization advocates for certain values, such as transparency, empowerment, or collaboration, while its actual practices foster a starkly different culture, a values rift develops that undermines credibility and creates a sense of moral ambivalence.
At the cognitive level, the gap is reflected in the disparity between the organization's self-image and its stakeholders' perceptions. This cognitive dissonance illustrates a condition of institutional blindness to reality, where the organization exists in a bubble of idealized self-perceptions, disconnected from the genuine views of partners, affiliates, and society.
These various levels of the gap do not function in isolation. Instead, they interact and intertwine within a complex system that reinforces the gap's persistence and resists efforts to bridge it. Understanding and dismantling these gaps is the initial step toward creating more consistent and effective organizations.
From another perspective, a gap exists between strategy and implementation, where written strategic plans are present but not translated into practical steps. Additionally, there is a gap between declared values and actual practice, where an organization adopts official values that are not reflected in the behaviors of its leadership and employees. Furthermore, a gap exists between promises and achievements, where an organization makes commitments to stakeholders that it cannot fulfill.
There is also a gap between image and reality, where an organization presents itself in a way that does not align with its actual performance. Additionally, there is a gap between words and actions, where an organization's leaders speak of principles and directions that are not evident in their actual decisions.
There is also a gap between responsibility and accountability, where responsibilities are assigned without being tied to a system that holds individuals accountable for results. Additionally, there is a gap between knowledge and application, where an organization has the knowledge and understanding of what needs to be done but fails to put it into action.
The repercussions of the gap: This hidden gap has consequences and effects. If it continues, it will be the first nail in its coffin. The most significant of these repercussions are:
Weak impact, failure to meet goals, and limited results compared to stated ambitions demonstrate the organization's inability to achieve targeted performance indicators despite a clear message. An organization that claims to "create positive change in society" struggles to make a tangible impact, while one that espouses a vision of "leadership and excellence" risks regressing from its previous achievements. Even more concerning is the organization's continued repetition of the same mistakes year after year without learning or actual development. Slogans and titles may change, but the core problems persist, contradicting the guidance of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): "A believer is not bitten from the same hole twice."
Deteriorating satisfaction among all parties. When the gap between message and implementation widens, this is directly reflected in employees' frustration and loss of motivation. The work environment becomes a repellent to talent as institutional loyalty declines, shared identity erodes, and membership in the organization is viewed as a source of purely illusory satisfaction.
An employee who joins an organization with enthusiasm for its mission soon encounters a starkly different reality. They may become disillusioned, gradually resorting to mocking the once inspirational slogans. This dissatisfaction can extend to external stakeholders, who notice the gap between the organization's promises and its actual accomplishments.
Loss of trust and rifts in relationships create a persistent gap that leads to a severe confidence crisis at various levels of the organization. When the disparity between promises and reality, as well as between plans and results, recurs, trust begins to decay. This crisis manifests as a constant apprehension of leadership decisions and skepticism regarding their intentions, interpreting every change as a sign of hidden agendas. In response, leadership tends to tighten oversight, withdraw authority, and remove specific competencies, resulting in a negative spiral of mutual mistrust. In this environment, a culture of "fault-finding" and "blame games" dominates instead of a culture of cooperation and integration.
The roots (causes) of the hidden gap seem to stem from several factors, the most significant of which include: The disconnection between senior leadership and executive levels, where senior leadership inhabits an ivory tower, far removed from the realities of daily operations. This results in unrealistic decisions and visions that clash with executives' challenges in the field. Additionally, there is a lack of strong capabilities among leadership in fulfilling their roles, which cannot be compensated for by others.
Complex and bureaucratic organizational structures, multiple administrative levels, and intertwined lines of authority and responsibility create barriers that hinder the flow of information and the implementation of initiatives, resulting in slow responses to change.
Inadequate accounting and accountability systems, weak mechanisms for monitoring implementation and evaluating results, and the lack of effective accountability regarding the extent to which mission-related objectives are achieved permit deviations to persist without correction.
Weak internal communication and poor information transfer, limited effective communication channels between various levels and departments, and the distortion of information as it moves through the organizational hierarchy lead to differing understandings of priorities and objectives.
Weak feedback and institutional learning mechanisms, along with the organization's absence of systematic processes for collecting and analyzing information about its performance and impact, as well as its limited capacity to learn from experiences and adjust its course, all contribute to the repetition of its mistakes and the ongoing gap between its ambitions and achievements.
The role of leadership seems to widen the gap. This diminishes its belief in the significance and impact of planning, causing it to address issues disorganizedly. The situation is worsened by a lack of leadership interest in evaluation and follow-up, insufficient essential leadership skills like strategic thinking, change management, and effective communication, as well as a focus on operational tasks at the cost of its fundamental responsibilities, resulting in a "firefighting" approach instead of systematic planning. This fosters an environment dependent on urgent reactions. Management paralysis, when it occurs, deepens the gap when leadership restricts its communication to a small circle of close associates. With poor communication among members, divergent interpretations of decisions arise, and a shared understanding of how to implement them is lacking.
Organizational members contribute to widening the hidden gap due to a lack of enthusiasm and commitment to implementing the mission. Many are satisfied with temporary excitement when they receive some motivation, only to quickly lapse into their previous indifference. The situation grows more complicated as they immerse themselves in daily concerns, pushing the organization and its mission to the bottom of their priorities.
Members' tendency to adopt a "brain-boosting" approach is evident in their disregard for practices that contradict the mission, as they claim these are not their direct responsibility or that change belongs solely to the leadership. This fosters a culture of indifference.
The problem intensifies as members grow accustomed to the disconnect between mission and implementation, which becomes normalized and unjustified. This disconnect deepens as they share stories of frustration and failure, reinforcing the belief that efforts to change will inevitably fail and that adjusting to a reality detached from the mission is the most practical course of action.
How can organizations bridge the hidden gap?
To bridge the hidden gap between mission and reality, several requirements align with its causes and roots, which will be discussed in a later article, God willing.